jephdood Posted March 20, 2004 Share Posted March 20, 2004 Was just wondering what the difference was between the original RF-3's and the RF-3 II's, if anybody knows. I've got an RC-3 II center and I assume the original RF-3's would match to it just as well as the II's would.. but if there was a major "fix" between the two, I'd rather keep searching for a pair of the II's to buy. What I've been able to tell so far, monster cable wiring and maybe a different crossover in the II's.. Thanks everybody. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yromj Posted March 21, 2004 Share Posted March 21, 2004 As far as I know the only difference betweent the two speakers is that the RF-3 IIs are internally wired w/ Monster wire. Therefore, there's not much difference. John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOSValves Posted March 21, 2004 Share Posted March 21, 2004 I belive John hit the nail on the head its the monster cable Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael hurd Posted March 21, 2004 Share Posted March 21, 2004 The port tube is attached better, as some owners detatched them on the rf3 by simply lifting the speaker with a hand in the port opening, also I think the grill is designed slightly different. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jephdood Posted March 21, 2004 Author Share Posted March 21, 2004 If the wiring was re-done with Monster in series II and beyond, I wonder if the wiring they had always used up to that point was determined to be sub-standard? Or if that was just a marketing thing. I've seen other speaker companies boast a switch to internal Monster Cable wiring as well. But by most accounts so far, if I've located a good source for a pair of the original RF-3's, I shouldn't feel the need to hold out and search for series II for any appreciable reason..? That said, anybody have or have HAD the original RF-3's? Opinions on them for an almost 100% home theater use? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nicholtl Posted March 21, 2004 Share Posted March 21, 2004 I owned the RF-3's before trading them back in and paying a little more for the RF-3II's when they came out, which I later traded in for the RF-35's. The RF-3 and RF-3II's are beautiful speakers indeed, but with an A-B (and C) comparison you'll discover that the RF-35's do infact, sound better than it's two predecessors. They're just more...shall I say...open, wider, airier, and fuller. All would be satisfying purchases, and they truly shine with HT use as you said you'd be using it for completely, but if you're able to, I would highly recommend demoing the RF-3's, RF-3II's, and RF-35's which without a doubt in my mind, sound the best out of the three. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jephdood Posted March 21, 2004 Author Share Posted March 21, 2004 Cool nicholtl.. I'll give the RF-35's a listen today. Another thing I'm considering (since I've got a good HSU VTF-3 MKII sub on order that SHOULD ship any day now) is four matching bookshelves all around. I've got two cats that might mistake a nice pair of RF-35's or RF-3's for rather expensive scratching posts. Does anyone have an HT setup like this? Would I be sacrificing sound for peace of mind? One of the reasons I'm going with Klipsch is because I really think the horns shine for HT and present a very detailed image that most other speakers can't match. That, and their high sensitivity and high power handling allows them to get LOUD. But maybe bookshelves might be too.. wimpy? Am going to have a listen to the RB-5's and RB-35's today. The 75's are a little pricey, but I'll have a listen to them also. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nicholtl Posted March 22, 2004 Share Posted March 22, 2004 I had a cat too, before she jumped out of the window. Once she began scratching my RF-7's and RF-35's, I promptly removed the grills. But that was cool, since all my friends that came over from then on took one look and said, "holy sh!t dude, those speakers look hella hardcore." I was like, "thanks. just like me." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juba310 Posted March 22, 2004 Share Posted March 22, 2004 ---------------- On 3/21/2004 1:30:51 PM jephdood wrote: But maybe bookshelves might be too.. wimpy? Am going to have a listen to the RB-5's and RB-35's today. The 75's are a little pricey, but I'll have a listen to them also. ---------------- Wimpy??? These bookshelves might not be as bold or as full as their fullsized counterparts, but they are anything but wimpy! Just add a decent sub, and any of those bookshelves will prove that! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nicholtl Posted March 22, 2004 Share Posted March 22, 2004 He just means they can't be referred to as "towers of power." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yromj Posted March 22, 2004 Share Posted March 22, 2004 jeph, 4 (or 5 or even 6) bookshelves all around would be great. First, the bookshelves go almost as low as their floorstanding counterparts (37Hz for the RF-35, 45Hz for the RB-35.) Since you're getting a sub, which you'll probably cross-over @ 80Hz, the slight difference in bottom end performance will be unnoticeable. Secondly bookshelves can be placed more flexibly, especially regarding height. Third, and finally, the bookshelves, even when including stands, are considerably cheaper which means you may be able to upgrade to the next step in speakers or electronics, or go to 6.1/7.1 for the same money. A bookshelf HT would not be "wimpy". John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cjgeraci Posted March 22, 2004 Share Posted March 22, 2004 ---------------- On 3/21/2004 1:30:51 PM jephdood wrote: Another thing I'm considering (since I've got a good HSU VTF-3 MKII sub on order that SHOULD ship any day now) is four matching bookshelves all around . . . Am going to have a listen to the RB-5's and RB-35's today. The 75's are a little pricey, but I'll have a listen to them also. ---------------- I highly recommend listening to the RB-75s. Based on my experience with HSU and SVS subs, your VTF-3 MKII should provide plenty of bass unless you have a very large room. Yromj is right; with the right sub, an all bookshelf array would be awesome. I recently ran RF3IIs up front and alternated a RC3II or a RC35. I really wanted to upgrade to a seven series front, but I did not want to spring for the RF7s (just yet). I ended up demoing some RB75s with a RC7 (and a decent sub) and noticed a considerable difference over the 3II/35 series in the quality of the horns, etc. My RC7 is now in the house, and I am waiting for new RB75s to arrive. For a little more than you would be paying for your RF35s, you could start out with RB75s. Then, if you ever plan on getting the RF7s, simply move the RB75s to the rear. That's my plan. ----------------- Carl. Samsung TXN3245FP, Harmon Kardon AVR 7200, Denon DVD-2900 RB75s(ordered), RC7, RFIIs, RC3II, SVS PB2-ISD, SVS 20-39PCi Yamaha RX-V1300, Onkyo SKS-HT500, Axiom QS-8, HSU VTF-2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jephdood Posted March 23, 2004 Author Share Posted March 23, 2004 Does the RB-75 use the same tweeter and horn as the RF-7? I wouldn't want a speaker that was too fatiguing in the high-end. The RB-75 seems kind of expensive for a bookshelf. Maybe I need to have a listen to them (I didn't get to this past weekend) to understand their value in comparison to the RF-35 and the RB-35. Is it night and day? Especially compared to the much cheaper RB-35? What about the RB-5II? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cjgeraci Posted March 23, 2004 Share Posted March 23, 2004 ---------------- On 3/23/2004 12:31:05 AM jephdood wrote: Does the RB-75 use the same tweeter and horn as the RF-7? I wouldn't want a speaker that was too fatiguing in the high-end. The RB-75 seems kind of expensive for a bookshelf. Maybe I need to have a listen to them (I didn't get to this past weekend) to understand their value in comparison to the RF-35 and the RB-35. Is it night and day? Especially compared to the much cheaper RB-35? What about the RB-5II? ---------------- The RB-75 and the RF-7 both use 1.75 inch tweeters and the same size horn but different model tweeters. The difference is in the size of the magnets (14 oz vs. 22 oz). That being said, Klipsch claims the RB-75 is a perfect voice match for the RC-7, and the trio I demoed did match in what I listened to. The sound is much smoother than the tweeter/horn used in the RF-35/RB-35 in the upper and midrange - what you might expect from an upgraded tweeter and horn. Continually trying to avoid fatiguing on the high end is part of the reason I upgraded from the horns used in the 35 series to the 7 series. I was getting a pretty smooth sound with upper and midrange with my Harmon Kardon receiver, but I wanted an even smoother sound with upper/midrange at very high volume levels. If you are leaning towards towers instead of bookshelves, another option worth considering is going with a pair of RF5s instead of RF35s, and then pairing those up with a RC7. With respect to towers, I like the new reference 35 series, but I think the RF5s are still smoother on the top and mid-range due to an upgraded 1 inch tweeter and horn and upgraded internals. However, finding a pair of RF5s to demo locally may not be that easy. ------------ Carl. Samsung TXN3245FP, Harmon Kardon AVR 7200, Denon DVD-2900, RB75(ordered), RC7, RF3II, RC3II, SVS PB2-ISD, SVS 20-39PCi Yamaha RX-V1300, Onkyo SKS-HT500, Axiom QS-8, HSU VTF-2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cjgeraci Posted March 23, 2004 Share Posted March 23, 2004 It also depends on what you are looking for. Another question is whether you are going to primarily listen to music in two channel (plus your sub) or watch/listen to movies or listen to multichannel music. Depending on your preference, you have to factor in the choice of a center channel into the mix. If you go with the thirty-five series, you will end up with a RC35. I own both a RC3II and a RC35, and in my opinion, the RC3II is a better center than its replacement, the RC35. I am just not a big fan of front porting in a center speaker. That being said, the upgrade from a RC3II or a RC35 to my RC7 was "mind blowing." So if H/T and multichannel music is a consideration, you may want to think about your choice of a center and what matches with it .....My advice is to do some searching on this site (and other forums) regarding people's experience with the various centers and factor that into the mix (again, if applicable). -------------- Carl. Samsung TXN3245FP, Harmon Kardon AVR 7200, Denon DVD-2900, RB75(ordered), RC7, RF3II, RC3II, SVS PB2-ISD, SVS 20-39PCi Yamaha RX-V1300, Onkyo SKS-HT500, Axiom QS-8, HSU VTF-2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.