cbfrish Posted August 27, 2006 Share Posted August 27, 2006 I'm about to buy my first new system in 35 years (believe it or not, my Pioneer pre-amp/amp/tuner purchased in 1970 is finally getting replaced). I've pretty well settled on a Denon 2807. I've heard the Kipsch RB25/RC25/RW10 combination (which will cost about $1,500) and a similar set-up consisting of Boston Acoustic speakers, which I didn't get the model numbers of, but are the same size as the Klipsch's and will cost about $1,000. I really like them both and can't decide between them. My interest in music is mostly Beatles, Grateful Dead, Pink Floyd, Allman Brothers, Led Zepplin type stuff. The other main use for the speakers will be "home theater" consisting mostly of TV, some DVDs, many baseball games. I have size and budget limitations that are leaning me toward the Bostons. Can somebody here help me justify the extra $500 for the Klipsch set up? Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Me Loves Khorns Posted August 27, 2006 Share Posted August 27, 2006 You could consider getting slightly used Klipsch gear instead. It still sounds great. Read some of the posts here. We all obviously love Klipsch just a bit. Paul Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Me Loves Khorns Posted August 27, 2006 Share Posted August 27, 2006 Oh yeah, Klipsch just sound better and are cooler and are prettier and are sweat and are cool and look pretty and sound better. Paul Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SynergySystem Posted August 27, 2006 Share Posted August 27, 2006 One plus for the klipsch is their sensitivity. They are very easy to drive, my synergy SF-1 mid-tower has 94d sensitivity. Which means you dont need as powerful of amp to drive them loudly and clearly. So the klipsch will give you more output and play louder. The main reason id say the go with klipsch(i havent heard Boston acoustics full speakers, only car audio) is the horn sound. It is more authentic to the theater, and is tough to match for the level of detail it will reveal in a 5.1 track. Not saying the bostons wont. But go to your theater and look at the speakers...Im betting they use horns as most theaters do. There IS a reason for that other then they sound better[6]. And that reason is nothing can match horns for detail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators dtel Posted August 27, 2006 Moderators Share Posted August 27, 2006 If you like the sound of Klipsch better, than go with them . $500. is not much in the long run, and they will sound better at your house, that's almost guaranteed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cbfrish Posted August 28, 2006 Author Share Posted August 28, 2006 My thanks to everyone who replied. I have to go back and listen to them all again to decide. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldbuckster Posted August 28, 2006 Share Posted August 28, 2006 Boston Acoustic are fine speakers, many can testify to that, but the $500. difference; Let your EARS make that decision.........not your wallet...........used Heritage, a good thought............ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilMays Posted August 28, 2006 Share Posted August 28, 2006 Welcome, I would tend to go used with your budget and get in the RF-3 or RF 35 range. Those are awsome speakers for the money, new or used!!! I've not heard the boston accoustics though. Phil 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.