Dedicated HT - RB-35s or RF-35s?

[chs4]

First post here and I'd like to start off by commending everyone for the wealth of information you are providing. I've spent the last couple of days searching, reading and absorbing as much info as I could, and think I'm in a position to ask a (hopefully) intelligent question.

I am currently in the middle of a dedicated HT project (Fox Path Theater) and with the drywall finishing up am in a position to start seriously thinking about and auditioning equipment. It pains me to say this, but though I've been a longtime member of several HT forums (AVS, HTF, etc.) I've never spent much time researching speakers and only recently started to learn about Klipsch. Sure I knew the name, but for whatever reason I never seemed to give them a second thought when contemplating the speakers I would put in my system.

O.K., enough of the Mea Culpa...on to my question which will be brief, I promise.

For a dedicated theater (17W'23'Lx9H - 3500 cu.ft.) used almost exclusively for movie viewing (99%) would I be better served by the RB-35s or the RF-35s? I plan to audition both if necessary, but if there's a strong consensus for one over the other I'd like to know going in. Balance of the 7.1 system would be RC-35 and RS-35s. I am planning dual SVS 20-39CS+ subs so please factor that in as well.

Bear in mind that I am as far from an audiophile a you will ever meet and most any speaker setup will probably sound "good enough" for me. My concern is having an adequate system to "fill" the room I'm building while providing the best possible movie viewing experience. (I don't think I could tell the difference between a "bright" speaker vs. a "warm" speaker if you hit me in the head with them!)

So that's my story. I have spent a long time designing the HT (shameless plug - it's actually a Design Cinema/Dennis Erskine design) and don't want to make a critical mistake on something as important as the speakers setup so I'm looking for input. If I've left out any critical info that would help please let me know.

Thanks in advance for any and all comments/suggestions and I promise this is the longest post I will ever burden you with.

[MrMcGoo]

Both configurations will work well. When you are calculating the cost, be sure to add the price of stands for the RB-35s.

Personally, I like the floorstanders. The larger cabinet has a different tuning point and will blend with the subwoofer a bit better.

I would look at the RF-5s also.

Bill

[meuge]

I think that my sentiment can be approximated by the expression "bigger is better". RF-35s will give the front sound more of a presence.

[D-Rex]

I have some experience with Bookshelf speakers and floorstanders. I used a pair of RB 5s as my main speakers for a few months until I purchased my RF3IIs. The RB 5s did an admirable job but the RF3IIs were superior to my ears and my wife's ears. She questioned why I was buying the floor standers at the time but now she agrees it was the best move to make.

So, if you have the space and the funds, I would go with the largest floor standers I could afford.

Good luck and congrats on finding this board!

D-Rex

[chs4]

Thanks for the input guys.

Money really isn't the issue...it's alway an issue, just not the deciding one if we're talking RF-35s vs. RB-35s.

One of the reasons I was looking at bookshelves was the fact that they are going to be located on a shelf behind a proscenium wall and I was concerned about the height of floorstanders.

I'm going to take a closer look at the RF-35s as well as the other models mentioned.

Thanks again and I'm sure I'll be back with more questions.

[marksdad]

the rb's arent near as good as the rf's, for any application. unless you are limited in space. the rf's in all sizes have a better all around voice, they have a better soundstage. and better low end.

[streyle]

I agree with everyone about the RF-35s.....I'd go out and demo them for yourself though......