twisted1272 Posted June 5, 2004 Share Posted June 5, 2004 Have decided to go with floor speakers for front but cant decide on either rf-35 and sf-3. Am going to use the Quintet system for rears and center for now, but cant decide on the reference or synergy series for fronts. Have heard not to mix series but better than mixing brands. Any feedback would be appreciated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pistol Pete Posted June 5, 2004 Share Posted June 5, 2004 I personally would take the SF-3/SC-3 over the RF-35/RC-35 ..but you'll have to listen to them for yourself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
om13934 Posted June 5, 2004 Share Posted June 5, 2004 ---------------- On 6/5/2004 9:05:44 AM Pistol Pete wrote: I personally would take the SF-3/SC-3 over the RF-35/RC-35 ..but you'll have to listen to them for yourself. ---------------- WHAT!?! NO WAY! The synergy series doesn't even come close to the performance or quality of the reference. If you have the money, don't even hesitate. GO REFERENCE! The rf-35's are amazing speakers. You will not be dissapointed with the reference. Even the cosmetic looks alone are worth the extra $ over the synergy. But combine that with the amazing upgrade in sonic quality, and you've got yourself a definate winner. There should be no dilema here. If the extra money is not an issue, then the reference is the way to go. end of discussion. EDIT: To pistol pete's credit, as his setup includes the RF3's and RC3, maybe he mixed up the model numbers? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juba310 Posted June 5, 2004 Share Posted June 5, 2004 I agree, there should be no question between going to the RF-35s rather than the Synergy series. The only way I would possibly figure it the other way, would be if you did not plan on upgradeing your other speakers for a very very very long time, as the SF's would probably match your other speakers better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swampcat Posted June 12, 2004 Share Posted June 12, 2004 The SF-3's are the same as RF series other than woofer material and tweeter is aluminum. Cabinets are same tech. They sound the same very little difference. The Sf-3 is not as cool looking thats it! I guess everyone who has bought Klipsch in the past and don't have pretty gold woofers and titanium tweeters should get rid of them and buy the RF series? There are alot better speakers by klipsch made well before the RF series and use what the RF owners I guess would call sub standard materials. Could you imagine owning a paper composite cone? Worked well for years I thought? Listen to the speakers with an open mind. Pretend there at a fancy store maybe that will help. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NormanB Posted June 17, 2004 Share Posted June 17, 2004 Twisted, I would not worry about the mix between the reference and the synergy lines. I started with a 5.1 Quintet system to begin with (KSW-10 as the sub) and it was enjoyable until I could upgrade. My 1st upgrade was to replace the the front L/R with RF-35's. That was a year later. Now that was a sweet upgrade for me. At that time I was still using the Quintet center, sub and surrounds. Four months after I added the 35's I replaced the center with the RCX-4. There was a huge difference with vocals over the Quintet center. Now here I am 8 months since the center channel upgrade I am still using the Quints as my surrounds. This system still works well for me. Granted I would like to upgrade my surrounds, but it will have to wait. So, the bottom line is go for it and let your ears tell you know what works! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swampcat Posted June 18, 2004 Share Posted June 18, 2004 Klipsch took the RF-3 and made the SF-3 out of it using speaker materials used in older Klipsch models such as the legend series. They are identical in every way except speaker cones. When you listen at best buy Your hearing the lousy sony rec. Compare the sf-3 and rf-3 using same amp. The SF-3's cones are good quality just older technology. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kstrat Posted June 23, 2004 Share Posted June 23, 2004 Hello, I agree about using your own ears to make the decision. The SF-3 and RF-35 are really the same speakers except for the alluminum tweeter and the material used in the woofers (which was mentioned above). The RF-35's are considered more high-end because of these materials used. The sensitivity on both speakers is the same. Actually, the SF-3 is rated better on their HF crossover: 1975Hz compared with 2600Hz on the RF-35. Also, using the specs on this site showed that the SF-3 has more power too: The SF-3 has 150 watts (continuous) maximum input power compared to the RF-35's 125 watts (continuous) maximum input power. The SF-3 weighs 56 LBs compared to the RF-35 which weighs 54 LBs. So for the money, and looking at the specs, I feel that the SF-3 is a better buy. Then again, I own the SF-3's, and have not heard the RF-35's. I have heard the older Klipsch RF-3's many times, and like my SF-3's just as much. 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.