Tough decisions, tough questions

[Raider]

First, some context...

I am considering Klipsch for two applications. First I am doing an HT room in my bonus room. I will be using a 50-60" DLP and I want a sound system that will leave as little compromise as possible. The room will receive acoustic treatment as necessary. I will be building my own subs, most likely Rhythmik servos or possibly TC or Dayton based designs. I could consider Klipsch subs, but haven't yet found as much performance for the dollar ($500-600) as the DIY route can buy.

The second application is a set of monitors for my office/studio, which will be an extension of my Mac G5's capabilities. I want uncompromising reference quality for this application. I have considered studio monitors from JBL, Mackie, Dynaudio, and Blue Sky for this application, and will use a sub.

The HT application will also be used for music. I am also considering alternatives from DIY designs using world class drivers from Scan Speak, Seas, Morel, and Fountek. Also considered are commercial designs from Monitor Audio, ERA, Aerial Acoustics, and B&W.

I am in the proces of locating and auditioning various choices, including the Klipsch Reference line. So I have some tough choices ahead, since this expenditure is the highest of any audio investment I have made. I have a respect for Klipsch that dates back to the 70's when I worked in studios as an intern and got to hear Paul Klipsch speakat the opening of a studio featuring his Klipschorns. You had to respect the end result, and PWK's no-BS attitude. However, frankly, I stopped following Klipsch for a while having been disillusioned by the earliest mass-market offerings, which I felt were not consistent with the earlier spirit of the company. The return of my interest in Klipsch began with the audition of an RF63 against a B&W tower.

I have spent several hours researching Klipsch here and on the 'net. The Heritage line is not compatible with my HT room in size or cost. The Synergy line, while very competitive at its price class, is not as refined as I would prefer. So my questions are confined to the Reference line.

While I know by definition I would expect a certain bias here, I have found from reading past posts that there still is a fairly high level of honesty and objectivity here.

So my questions:

How does the Klipsch Reference line compare to the alternatives listed, in your experience?

How happy are Reference owners post purchase? How is brand loyalty as a function of owner satisfaction?

Has Klipsch compromised Paul's original vision, philosophy, and work ethic since his passing? Or is the current corporation a logical extension of the way Paul would have continued to develop product, in the context of new technology and manufacturing opportunities?

How is the build quality and reliabilty of the Reference line as compared to peer product? Some posts in this regard have given me pause, though they seem to have diminised somewhat in recent past. Is the build quality of the Hope based products (apparently the RF83, RF63, and RC64 at this point, I think) as good as those produced in China, better, or worse?

Are any of the current line unequivocably considered best of the bunch? Which speakers in the line if any represent an outstanding value, regardless of price?

For each of my applications: Cost no object what would you recommend? Highest value for the dollar, what would be your choice?

Unless my auditions yield a speaker that is clearly superior, I am inclined to go with Klipsch by virtue of what the efficiency gets you. It's hard to forget Paul's compelling demonstration years ago on the value of system headroom.

Any objective, and positive, input of feedback into my decsion process is appreciated. While some of my questions may be controversial, I know that Paul certainly had no fear of an objective presentation of his product in a competitive environment.

Thanks in advance.

A fellow music lover.

[Jay481985]

First, some context...

I am considering Klipsch for two applications. First I am doing an HT room in my bonus room. I will be using a 50-60" DLP and I want a sound system that will leave as little compromise as possible. The room will receive acoustic treatment as necessary. I will be building my own subs, most likely Rhythmik servos or possibly TC or Dayton based designs. I could consider Klipsch subs, but haven't yet found as much performance for the dollar ($500-600) as the DIY route can buy.

The second application is a set of monitors for my office/studio, which will be an extension of my Mac G5's capabilities. I want uncompromising reference quality for this application. I have considered studio monitors from JBL, Mackie, Dynaudio, and Blue Sky for this application, and will use a sub. Studio monitors are not really meant for listening to music the way to enjoy it. Studio monitors as name implies are for studies to listen to recording flaws and have a flat system void of any fun. That does not mean its a bad speaker but many find it to be lackluster. The HT application will also be used for music. I am also considering alternatives from DIY designs using world class drivers from Scan Speak, Seas, Morel, and Fountek. Are you sure you are looking at them, only because some tweeters cough scan speak are around the price of one RC-64 (600 dollars) paired match speakers. Also considered are commercial designs from Monitor Audio, ERA, Aerial Acoustics, and B&W.

I am in the proces of locating and auditioning various choices, including the Klipsch Reference line. So I have some tough choices ahead, since this expenditure is the highest of any audio investment I have made. I have a respect for Klipsch that dates back to the 70's when I worked in studios as an intern and got to hear Paul Klipsch speakat the opening of a studio featuring his Klipschorns. You had to respect the end result, and PWK's no-BS attitude. However, frankly, I stopped following Klipsch for a while having been disillusioned by the earliest mass-market offerings, which I felt were not consistent with the earlier spirit of the company. The return of my interest in Klipsch began with the audition of an RF63 against a B&W tower.

I have spent several hours researching Klipsch here and on the 'net. The Heritage line is not compatible with my HT room in size or cost. The Synergy line, while very competitive at its price class, is not as refined as I would prefer. So my questions are confined to the Reference line.

While I know by definition I would expect a certain bias here, I have found from reading past posts that there still is a fairly high level of honesty and objectivity here.

So my questions:

How does the Klipsch Reference line compare to the alternatives listed, in your experience? For B&W prepare yourself with a very powerful amp or not get the results you might like.

How happy are Reference owners post purchase? I am Very. How is brand loyalty as a function of owner satisfaction? We are Klipsch fans because they do something right.

Has Klipsch compromised Paul's original vision, philosophy, and work ethic since his passing? I do not think you can fully determine it. I mean he was a lover of classical music and stated that he hated rock music which was ironically so due to Klipsch being known for Rock and Roll speakers. Or is the current corporation a logical extension of the way Paul would have continued to develop product, in the context of new technology and manufacturing opportunities? They have horns still right?How is the build quality and reliabilty of the Reference line as compared to peer product? Still made in Hope for the higher models (rf83, rf63) Some posts in this regard have given me pause, though they seem to have diminised somewhat in recent past. Is the build quality of the Hope based products (apparently the RF83, RF63, and RC64 at this point, I think) as good as those produced in China, better, or worse? To be honest probably the same but atleast I know the Hope workers are at the end of the day earning just wages and are not in a sweat shop working 20 hour days living at the factory. Are any of the current line unequivocably considered best of the bunch? Which speakers in the line if any represent an outstanding value, regardless of price? RF82

For each of my applications: Cost no object what would you recommend? Jubilee Highest value for the dollar, what would be your choice?

Unless my auditions yield a speaker that is clearly superior, I am inclined to go with Klipsch by virtue of what the efficiency gets you. It's hard to forget Paul's compelling demonstration years ago on the value of system headroom.

Any objective, and positive, input of feedback into my decsion process is appreciated. While some of my questions may be controversial, I know that Paul certainly had no fear of an objective presentation of his product in a competitive environment.

Thanks in advance.

A fellow music lover.

[oldbuckster]

Why limit yourself to one Klipsch line, Heritage is a nice line of speakers too, look and compare all of them, or have you made up your mind on the Reference series?

Cost no object.........REALLY...............Klipsch Horns..........or if you got the hair.................the JUBILEE...............End of Comment...........

[DrWho]

Hi Raider,

Welcome to the forum if you haven't been formally welcomed yet already [] I did get your private message.

As far as subwoofer I would agree it's an arena where DIY usually

results in more bang for the buck. As far as servo is concerned - I

have read/heard that there are very real tradeoffs to be considered

with such an approach. The one thing that frequently comes up is

power-compression (heating of the voice coil) which is a result of the

extra power required for the function of the servo. In most cases you

can achieve the same decrease in distortion offerred by servo simply by

doubling up the number of drivers (which may or may not be a trivial

solution). But in the end, you end up with much much less power

compression. Is "infinite" baffle an option in this room? One of my

favorite solutions is a false front wall that can house flushmounted

speakers, inset screen / TV, and of course housing the insane IB. The

size of the enclosure is the ultimate limiting factor (Hoffman's Iron

Law) and servo seems to be a solution geared more towards small

cabinets.

For your office/studio - do you mean "studio" as in "recording studio"?

I've had great results with the Mackie's, not a fan of JBL but they are

definetly popular, I've never heard of Blue Sky and have yet to hear

any of the Dynaudio lineup. Just keep in mind that you need to pick a

monitor based on its ability to help you translate your mixes - picking

monitors that make music enjoyable tend to be ineffective.

As far as DIY mains for your audio room...I would be rather hesitant

unless you've got decent measuring capability. I'm not saying that any

of

those options will sound bad, rather quite the contrary, but targeting

the next level of finess you are simply shooting in the dark

without decent measuring equipment in your toolbag. And for someone

interested in a more high-end sound I would be much more comfortable

relying on the extensive labs and expertise of the guys building stuff

everyday. I know that takes away the entire thrill and learning

experience of DIY, but you're talking about a lot of money with a lot

of expectation. Ultimately this hobby is about enjoying yourself so

you'll have to decide if the end product or building of the product

is going to bring you more enjoyment in the end.

How does the reference compare to the rest of the market? I must

confess that I'm always on the lookout for something that sounds better

than a klipsch product in the same price range. So far the only place I

can see that happening is with the outdoor speakers (hardly a situation

of high-fidelity anyway). I was just saying in another thread that when

I'm out with my buddies there are occasions where someone (sometimes

myself) comment on out of the ordinary good sound quality. At least 75%

of the time we find the Klipsch label. I don't think it's coincidence

either - horns have so many advantages to audio and in my opinion

Klipsch makes the best ones - though I might consider them tied in some

regards with Tannoy until you consider the price difference [] If you

get the chance, I would definetly throw Tannoy into your audition list

(even for the studio monitors too...).

As far as PWK's original vision - it is still very much a driving force

in the engineering departments. If you get the chance, partake in one

of the Klipsch Pilgrimages where you will quickly discover a great

legacy being continued. Heck, read a few of the threads in the Klipsch

Pilgrimage section of the forum. The market has of course changed since

PWK's passing and likewise Klipsch has needed to change with it. PWK was never good at the business side of things, but even

with the mass markets they are still trying to maintain the same

engineering philosophies. PWK was always talking about how effiency and distortion

are inversely proportional - notice that Klipsch is always on top in

that category.

On the forum there seems to be a little contention between the

reference and heritage crowds and I feel the differences between the

speakers get a bit blown outta proportion. They definetly sound

different, but choosing one as superior seems a bit extreme. I've heard

the RF-83's and would without a doubt take them over khorns. Yet I'd

take the new Cornwall 3's over the RF-83's. But if you're doing home

theatre then it's a no brainer to go Reference because of the

importance of timbre matching the rest of the system (unless you plan

on having 7 cornwalls or lascalas in your room). So all that to say,

the Reference lineup was designed to be the best of both HT and music.

I don't have much listening experience with the new reference lineup so

can't comment on best performer and best value. However, with the older

reference lineup I very much preferred the sound of the RF-3II's and

RF-35's over that of the RF-7's. The reason being a lack of power in

the midrange on the RF-7 (which can be attributed to dual 10" drivers

trying to play higher than they should). I know it's a minority opinion

shared amongst a few of us, but apparently it's a moot point because

Klipsch tried to address that issue with the new RF-83. Triple 8's have

the same surface area as dual 10's which means same punchy bass with

cleaner mids - further enhanced by a lower crossover point and more

capable tweeter (that also happens to go higher too). Compared directly

to its heritage brothers the RF-83 is still a bit weak in the mids, but

the overall presentation is much smoother. I'm not a huge fan of the

cerametallic woofers and think paper drivers distort nicer, but without

them Klipsch wouldn't be able to maintain the same crazy sensitivity

specs. But that's about all I can think of on the negative list. Build

quality is good, dynamic as heck, great tonal balance, etc etc...

Anyways, enough rambling...in light of PWK's ideals I would challenge

you to let your own ears be the judge. Do you already have speakers in

this room and are simply looking to upgrade? The reason I ask is

because you want to have an idea of what the speakers will sound like

in your room - not the dealer's room. Since you'll be dropping a lot of

cash you might even find the dealer willing to allow some demos in your

own room as well. It can't hurt to ask.

Btw, what kind of music do you listen to?

[sunburnwilly]

5 fully horn loaded and matching speakers + 1 B@d@ss 18" sub =

Hard to beat !!!

[Jay481985]

further enhanced by a lower crossover point and more

capable tweeter (that also happens to go higher too).

I find it subjective to base a tweeter more capable on hertz that are mostly out of human range or near it as the rf-7 did up to 20000 and the rf83 can do 21-22000. Maybe the bats can hear a distinct difference but I think to most its not a "deciding factor"

[oldbuckster]

Damn Sunburn, still a fine set-up............REAL FINE...........So raider, small speakers are what your after, too...............TOTEM's.........pricey.........but the finest small speaker line I've ever heard...............plenty of clean punch with those guys..............When I made the mistake of looking for Klipsch speakers in the Albany, N.Y. area, I stopped at this one place, and the guy had me sit and listen to them, very impressed,but NOT Klipsch......but very nice indeed...................

[rplace]

...First I am doing an HT room in my bonus room. I will be using a 50-60" DLP...

Welcome to the forum and stick around for a while and enjoy the madness.

I looks like you are already getting good advice on the sonic end of things. I want to chime in on the video side.

If you don't already have the display device I would try and persuade you to consider a projector and screen, over any sort of "TV" if your application will support it. Having already built a dedicated HT and explored several options I found that a projector and screen is the only way to get that "movie house" feel.

There are a million things to consider and surely there is no universal answer. Cost, room lighting/darkening, cost, video quality, cost, connections, cost and cost[] are all factors. At the very least check out some projector/screen combinations that would be in the same price rage. Projector prices have dropped drastically over the last few years.

You are on the right track with room treatments. The have made a bigger impact on my listening enjoyment then any, perhaps all of my equipment changes.

[DrWho]

Human hearing isn't a brickwall stop at 20kHz, nor is 20kHz the actual

threshold of hearing for everyone. The current threshold is also

determined by the steady state, but there are reasons to believe this

doesn't hold true in the transient state.

But my comment about the extended response was intended more towards

the indication that the tweeter is going to be a better performer over

the audible range. There is also the correlation between frequency and

impulse response that indicates the higher frequency capable device

will respond faster (though that's pretty much saying the same thing

twice). We do see a slight loss in efficiency, but that is a direct

correlation to the increased bandwidth of the tweeter (nearly double

the range results in nearly a 3dB reduction. It's not quite double so

it's only 2dB). As a result there will be increased intermodulation

distortion on the tweeter, but the system as a whole should exhibit

less IMD overall because the woofers are now covering a smaller range.

I would imagine that THD which is less audible would remain about the

same. Power compression should be less with 3 versus 2 woofer motors,

but slightly increased on the tweeter, but again the overall system

should see less because the horn isn't likely to be the limiting factor.

I know that's a lot to infer based on a few Hz and dB, but it's just

how the physics work out. It was more of a passing thought anyway

trying to quantify some of the reasons that I think the 83 sounds

better than the 7.

[Raider]

I'm familiar with studio monitors; I'm looking for a speaker that offers both the accuracy of a monitor and is also good to listen to for general purposes. I'm looking at Klipsc RB61 or RB81 for this purpose, compared to other monitors out there. Low level sensitivity for late night use is also a concern. The Scan Speak tweeter I'm looking at is the new AirCirc at about $225. A set of Scan Monitors would price out at about the same point as a pair of RF63's. Thanks for the heads up on the B&W efficiency. Glad to see you are a loyal fan, people aren't enthusiasts without good reason. Klipsch was indeed difficult to quantify. Thanks for the input!

[Raider]

I am limited to the Reference line for these reasons. The Synergy line does not meet my preferences for refinement in sound quality. My room is not quite large enough for the Heritage line, and they are out of reach for my budget in an HT application. As far as cost no object, I meant within the Reference line; I'm trying to nail down if there standouts within the line independent of price. Thanks.

[Raider]

Wow Sunburn. That has to be a great sounding system. That's some TV stand! Not too far off of oldbuckters recommendation. I'm glad there are those like you who have the room and re$ource$ to take this route.

[Jay481985]

I'm familiar with studio monitors; I'm looking for a speaker that offers both the accuracy of a monitor and is also good to listen to for general purposes. I'm looking at Klipsc RB61 or RB81 for this purpose, compared to other monitors out there. Low level sensitivity for late night use is also a concern. The Scan Speak tweeter I'm looking at is the new AirCirc at about $225. A set of Scan Monitors would price out at about the same point as a pair of RF63's. Thanks for the heads up on the B&W efficiency. Glad to see you are a loyal fan, people aren't enthusiasts without good reason. Klipsch was indeed difficult to quantify. Thanks for the input!

With the scan speak stuff it equals cost of the rf-63 but you forgot about buying a crossover and then make the enclosure which if you add cost of labor or time it will be more.

[Raider]

Hi Raider,

Welcome to the forum if you haven't been formally welcomed yet already [] I did get your private message.

As far as subwoofer I would agree it's an arena where DIY usually

results in more bang for the buck. As far as servo is concerned - I

have read/heard that there are very real tradeoffs to be considered

with such an approach. The one thing that frequently comes up is

power-compression (heating of the voice coil) which is a result of the

extra power required for the function of the servo. In most cases you

can achieve the same decrease in distortion offerred by servo simply by

doubling up the number of drivers (which may or may not be a trivial

solution). But in the end, you end up with much much less power

compression. Is "infinite" baffle an option in this room? One of my

favorite solutions is a false front wall that can house flushmounted

speakers, inset screen / TV, and of course housing the insane IB. The

size of the enclosure is the ultimate limiting factor (Hoffman's Iron

Law) and servo seems to be a solution geared more towards small

cabinets.

The subject of compression, heat buildup, and distortion is discussed on the Rhytmik site. I'd be interested in your comments on that data. The servo also allows a .5 q overdamped alignment which I like in a relatively small enclosure. I am considering this option for the studio/office application where less output will be required and accuracy and low distortion is premium. I am actually looking at the multiple driver option for the HT apllication, for just the reasons you cite. I am finding that the bass response is so solid and low on the Klipsch alternatives I am considering that I'm having to reconsider options. What will be needed is solid response only on the lowest octave, with no distortion, and crossover flexibility to allow seamless integration with the excellent bass response of the mains. Such output in this octave requires power and displacement, or a horn the size of my second floor. I've ruled out IB due to noise considerations in the neighborhood, but an attic space adjacent to the HT area will allow large sub enclosures to be built into the wall. Would it not be best to fire suc a sub into the corner of the room?

For your office/studio - do you mean "studio" as in "recording studio"?

I've had great results with the Mackie's, not a fan of JBL but they are

definetly popular, I've never heard of Blue Sky and have yet to hear

any of the Dynaudio lineup. Just keep in mind that you need to pick a

monitor based on its ability to help you translate your mixes - picking

monitors that make music enjoyable tend to be ineffective.

I anticipate the Garageband application already being used on my G5 by the kids may someday expand to Logic or ProTools. I'd also like to have the ability to do more serious video/audio editing. These speakers will also be used for general purposes, such as downloading music, entertainment, etc. Are there any speakers in the Klipsch line that are recommended.

As far as DIY mains for your audio room...I would be rather hesitant

unless you've got decent measuring capability. I'm not saying that any

of

those options will sound bad, rather quite the contrary, but targeting

the next level of finess you are simply shooting in the dark

without decent measuring equipment in your toolbag. And for someone

interested in a more high-end sound I would be much more comfortable

relying on the extensive labs and expertise of the guys building stuff

everyday. I know that takes away the entire thrill and learning

experience of DIY, but you're talking about a lot of money with a lot

of expectation. Ultimately this hobby is about enjoying yourself so

you'll have to decide if the end product or building of the product

is going to bring you more enjoyment in the end.

In the immortal words of the great philosopher Clint Eastwood, "a man's got to know his limitations". Mine are just as you say; I lack the time and resources for detailed design, as interesting as it is for me. Rather I would be assembling designs developed by those with such talent and resources. Some of the DIY designs I am looking at are those at Selah Audio, a well respected designer/builder who builds using a variety of driver lines and who also builds line arrays. The main reason I am having difficulty with this alternate is that it is difficult to find designs that meet the THX specs. Common sense tells me that best results would be easier to attain if the drivers matched all around, as would be the case with Klipsch. Its difficult to find DIY designs that use the same drivers in different configurations (floor, bookshelf, dipole, etc).

How does the reference compare to the rest of the market? I must

confess that I'm always on the lookout for something that sounds better

than a klipsch product in the same price range. So far the only place I

can see that happening is with the outdoor speakers (hardly a situation

of high-fidelity anyway). I was just saying in another thread that when

I'm out with my buddies there are occasions where someone (sometimes

myself) comment on out of the ordinary good sound quality. At least 75%

of the time we find the Klipsch label. I don't think it's coincidence

either - horns have so many advantages to audio and in my opinion

Klipsch makes the best ones - though I might consider them tied in some

regards with Tannoy until you consider the price difference [

] If you

get the chance, I would definetly throw Tannoy into your audition list

(even for the studio monitors too...).

I'll try to find some Tannoys.

As far as PWK's original vision - it is still very much a driving force

in the engineering departments. If you get the chance, partake in one

of the Klipsch Pilgrimages where you will quickly discover a great

legacy being continued. Heck, read a few of the threads in the Klipsch

Pilgrimage section of the forum. The market has of course changed since

PWK's passing and likewise Klipsch has needed to change with it. PWK was never good at the business side of things, but even

with the mass markets they are still trying to maintain the same

engineering philosophies. PWK was always talking about how effiency and distortion

are inversely proportional - notice that Klipsch is always on top in

that category.

I find this manifests itself most with dynamic transients, where exponential power needs are at play. And these make the difference between a pleasant listen and portrayal of lifelike sound, a Klipsch hallmark I am finding.

On the forum there seems to be a little contention between the

reference and heritage crowds and I feel the differences between the

speakers get a bit blown outta proportion. They definetly sound

different, but choosing one as superior seems a bit extreme. I've heard

the RF-83's and would without a doubt take them over khorns. Yet I'd

take the new Cornwall 3's over the RF-83's. But if you're doing home

theatre then it's a no brainer to go Reference because of the

importance of timbre matching the rest of the system (unless you plan

on having 7 cornwalls or lascalas in your room). So all that to say,

the Reference lineup was designed to be the best of both HT and music.

Well said.

I don't have much listening experience with the new reference lineup so

can't comment on best performer and best value. However, with the older

reference lineup I very much preferred the sound of the RF-3II's and

RF-35's over that of the RF-7's. The reason being a lack of power in

the midrange on the RF-7 (which can be attributed to dual 10" drivers

trying to play higher than they should). I know it's a minority opinion

shared amongst a few of us, but apparently it's a moot point because

Klipsch tried to address that issue with the new RF-83. Triple 8's have

the same surface area as dual 10's which means same punchy bass with

cleaner mids - further enhanced by a lower crossover point and more

capable tweeter (that also happens to go higher too). Compared directly

to its heritage brothers the RF-83 is still a bit weak in the mids, but

the overall presentation is much smoother. I'm not a huge fan of the

cerametallic woofers and think paper drivers distort nicer, but without

them Klipsch wouldn't be able to maintain the same crazy sensitivity

specs. But that's about all I can think of on the negative list. Build

quality is good, dynamic as heck, great tonal balance, etc etc...

The classic tradeoff. Hard to make a larger, relatively heavier cone respond fast enough to overcome inertia for accurate midrange; hard for a smaller cone to displace enoug air for bass.

Anyways, enough rambling...in light of PWK's ideals I would challenge

you to let your own ears be the judge. Do you already have speakers in

this room and are simply looking to upgrade? The reason I ask is

because you want to have an idea of what the speakers will sound like

in your room - not the dealer's room. Since you'll be dropping a lot of

cash you might even find the dealer willing to allow some demos in your

own room as well. It can't hurt to ask.

I spent some time auditioning Reference's at a local dealer tonight. Took a favorite CD, "Out of the Grey" which I have used to tweak many systems in vehicles. I basically went in with an open mind. I heard the RF52, RF62, RF82, RF63, RF83, RB51, RB81, and RC62 and RS52. Of the floor models in one room, I emerged with the RF62 as my favorite. It projected a lifelike image with excellent spectral balance. I was most surprised that I liked the RF62 better than the RF63. I also found the RB81 to be an excellent value, projectig a very good soundstage with surprising bass depth. I could ave been exquisitely happy with an RF62 based system. Except this mean dastardly salesman took me to the high end room to hear the RF83. We went back and forth, playing the same cuts back to back. I think you could be extremely happy with the RF62. If you had never heard the RF83. I found the 83 to have all the good attributes of the other speakers in the line with none of the lesser traits. Holographic bass detail. Natural lifelike midrange. Detailed highs. Excellent dynamics. Three dimensional soundstage. In a few words, the RF83 has that special intangible quality I remembered from hearing Klipshorns in a studio control room years ago. They just seem to go away, and let the music be. Now I have to re-access, and decide whether or not to step up. Affordable excellence, or stretch to exceptional.

Btw, what kind of music do you listen to?

I like all music, anything done well. I find I listen most to Contemporary Christian, Rock, Country, Jazz, swing, big band, bluegrass, just about any expression.

[fini]

Raider,

Are you interested only in new products? A line Klipsch produced several years ago (KSP) might fit your bill. I own the KSP-400s (built-in subs), and they're terriffic for HT. You won't get too many recomendations on these, as not many folks have heard them. When they pop up on eBay, they're usually bargains (the 400s listed for $3500/pr., but routinely go for under a grand on eBay).

[sunburnwilly]

Wow Sunburn. That has to be a great sounding system. That's some TV stand! Not too far off of oldbuckters recommendation. I'm glad there are those like you who have the room and re$ource$ to take this route.

Thanks man ,

Gotta love a center channel that you can place your TV on !

If your ever down this way give me a holler , I'm not shy about showin' it off ! "That goes for any of you fellow Klipschsters out there ."

[Jay481985]

If your ever down this way give me a holler , I'm not shy about showin' it off ! "That goes for any of you fellow Klipschsters out there ."

Better not do it in public as I think there are indecency charges that might follow with it []

[sunburnwilly]

If your ever down this way give me a holler , I'm not shy about showin' it off ! "That goes for any of you fellow Klipschsters out there ."

Better not do it in public as I think there are indecency charges that might follow with it []

Jay ,

I live in South Carolina ,

as long as your polite , it's all good ...

[DrWho]

The subject of compression, heat buildup, and distortion is discussed on the Rhytmik site. I'd be interested in your comments on that data. The servo also allows a .5 q overdamped alignment which I like in a relatively small enclosure. I am considering this option for the studio/office application where less output will be required and accuracy and low distortion is premium. I am actually looking at the multiple driver option for the HT apllication, for just the reasons you cite. I am finding that the bass response is so solid and low on the Klipsch alternatives I am considering that I'm having to reconsider options. What will be needed is solid response only on the lowest octave, with no distortion, and crossover flexibility to allow seamless integration with the excellent bass response of the mains. Such output in this octave requires power and displacement, or a horn the size of my second floor. I've ruled out IB due to noise considerations in the neighborhood, but an attic space adjacent to the HT area will allow large sub enclosures to be built into the wall. Would it not be best to fire suc a sub into the corner of the room?

Hmmm...interesting discussion on their website. I don't disagree with anything they said, but they did seem a bit narrow minded talking about the same 3 distortions over and over. I would very much be interested in what they think is their biggest limitation/tradeoff. Though it definetly sounded like it was written by an engineer that absolutely believed in what he was talking about. Does their system only work with their driver, or does it have the flexibility to work with other drivers too?

But if you have free attic space for building large enclosures then I would definetly recommend going that route. All the fancy tricks aside, the bigger the box the better it will perform.Something like a few Dayton IB15's powered with a Crown XTi (built in DSP) sounds like an awesome setup. Put a 16x16 manifold just above each corner with the drivers firing at each other on opposite sides (so that the mechanical vibrations cancel themselves out). 10 cubic feet per driver. You can expect a peak around 130dB with good extension down to 10Hz.

[Raider]

...First I am doing an HT room in my bonus room. I will be using a 50-60" DLP...

Welcome to the forum and stick around for a while and enjoy the madness.

I looks like you are already getting good advice on the sonic end of things. I want to chime in on the video side.

If you don't already have the display device I would try and persuade you to consider a projector and screen, over any sort of "TV" if your application will support it. Having already built a dedicated HT and explored several options I found that a projector and screen is the only way to get that "movie house" feel.

There are a million things to consider and surely there is no universal answer. Cost, room lighting/darkening, cost, video quality, cost, connections, cost and cost[] are all factors. At the very least check out some projector/screen combinations that would be in the same price rage. Projector prices have dropped drastically over the last few years.

You are on the right track with room treatments. The have made a bigger impact on my listening enjoyment then any, perhaps all of my equipment changes.

I agree that projection screens are by far the most bang for the buck, and give the movie house feel. Unfortunately, my room precludes such an approach. One end of the room is windows. The adjacent wall is an open railing that opens into a two story stair well and hallway. So control of ambient light is not really manageable. For the same reasons, the room precluded me from seriously considering the Heritage line. I am hoping that a really good sound system may help to gain back what I lose in the theatre experience by having to use a smaller screen.

I have been researching acoustic design, reading a white paper recommended somewere on this forum. I am willing do do what is needed with this including minor architectural modifications. Thanks for your suggestion.