Best surround match for RF-3II if I don't want WDST--RB-5II?

[Snails_Pace]

My dad is trying to put together a Reference series-based HT and has asked for my help--I, in turn, am asking for yours as my HT is Legend-based. Figure his use is about 95% DVD and TV, only 5% music (if even that much for music). He's settled on the RF-3II, but he's got a really tricky basement for surround acoustics. The room is about 12 feet deep by 45 feet wide. The couch is pressed up against the back of the longest wall. The opposite long wall will have the TV, center and mains, but they'll be pulled in a bit from the edges as each end of the long front wall has an opening into another part of the house (stairwell or hallway to other rooms).

/ Stairs --------- L ----- C ------- R ----- Hallway /

/ /

/----------------------- Couch ----------------------/

I know the matching surrounds for the RF-3II are the RS-3II, but I'm concerned that he won't get good directionality from the surround channels since his primary use will be 5.1 DVD. If he mounts the surrounds on the far side walls, they'll be so far from the listening position that he'll lose some of the impact in the rear channels as the sound will be diffused over such a large area. There's no room to mount the surrounds behind him as the couch is pushed up against the wall, so the only option on that wall would be to mount them directly above his head...not ideal either. He's not averse to the idea of speaker stands, but then he'd be losing at least 50% of the soundfield from each speaker if they are placed facing outwards on either side of the couch (i.e. half of each speaker array would be facing completely away from him and radiating towards the outer walls:

/-\____ couch____ /-\.

If he mounts them on stands facing into the couch, he has to mount them so close to each arm of the couch (given other furniture constraints) that the diffuse nature of the WDST array will essentially be lost and he might as well have direct radiaiting speakers aimed at his head instead (or so it would seem to me).

Given the discrete nature of so many DVD soundtracks, I was thinking that maybe a more capable bookshelf speaker as a surround on the far side walls might be good. I have 4 KLF-C7s as side and rear surrounds in my HT setup and honestly find the soundfield more coherent and seamless than I did when I was using the KSP-S6s as surrounds. He has heard my setup and likes the sound it produces, so I think he would probably enjoy a similar setup as well. But, this is not my setup, it's his, so I just want to be able to give him some options.

What are your thoughts? If he was to go the route of direct radiating speakers as surrounds, would the RB-5II be a good timbre match, or maybe even a pair of RC-3IIs? Can some Reference owners chime in here? Thanks!

[skonopa]

How about another pair of RF-3 IIs for the surrrounds? Being floorstanders, he would not need any stands for them. He could probably easily position near the couch like was mentioned. Since it appears that he will be watching/listening to DVDs most of the time, I would think a second pair of RF-3 IIs would be the best bet.

[Snails_Pace]

Thanks for the reply, and I totally agree, a second set of RF-3s would be the best option--if only I had the money or space for two more KLF-20s for our surrounds! However, budget constraints and aesthetic concerns (there are other furniture issues at each of the corners I didn't go into which would make floor-standing towers problematic, and he's not going to set two RF-3IIs 3 inches from each end of the couch! :-) limit his "flexibility" to smaller speakers for the surrounds. Any other suggestions in the meantime?

[Jolly Roger]

Rf-3 or Rb-5 would both be fine. But I don't see why if a Rb-5 on a stand will work, why wouldn't an Rs-3 in the same spot. First of all, the 50 percent you say you lose isn't meant for you. Its meant for someone in a different location. Thats the point of wdst speakers, multiple listening posistions get the same effect. Rs model should be easier to place. Rb will be more descrete. Second, there is no rule that states you must have them (rs) with their back against the wall. I toe mine in, on stands, so that one of the tweeters is aimed right at my main listening posistion. Good luck...

[Snails_Pace]

Thanks for all the speedy replies! You're right, a RS-3 probably would work just fine, I was just giving him some other options to play with (this is his first major and probably last HT purchase for a long time--retirement looming close--and he's kind of enjoying the shopping around and trying things out in different configurations). As for the benefits of the WDST, my dad is by himself (unfortunately), so multiple listening positions isn't really a factor for him which was why I was throwing out the RC or RB possibility in the first place. In the end, he may well opt for the RS-3 simply because they provide great surround sound in a small package, but I was hoping to give him some good alternatives to try out for himself before he plunked down the money.

[marksdad]

you are right, the rs 3's would work fine, but you will lose alot in every aspect, in regards to another set of rf 3's, this is the best sat set up for your fronts, they just have more of everything, plus they are the perfect timbre match

[imasndtek]

I agree with the others, that another set of RF-3's would be excellent for surround, and as MarksDad stated: "A perfect timbre match to the other speakers". Although, I also think that the RB-5's would be a good match, you really aren't saving yourself any money or space by going with them. If you think about, by the time you buy stands for the RB-5's, they cost almost exactly the same if not more than the RF-3's, and the footprint is pretty close to the size of the RF-3's as well, so you might gain a matter of inches compared to the RB-5's. So really the best choice is another set of RF-3's. Whichever speaker you chose, I know it will work out.