Klipsch RF-83 vs. RF-63 differences and suggestions?

[Johnny Canuck]

Hi, I am trying to decide between the RF83 and RF63 to be my front channel (left/right speakers) in a 5.1 speaker system I am putting together.

I was wondering if anybody could tell me the differences between the 2 and suggest what I should use based on my setup and requirements below:

(Specs wise, the RF83 seems to be better but someone mentioned that isn't neccessary so in all applications.)

Here are some particulars of my setup:

--------------------------------------------------

My living room size is 3000 cubic feet (ceiling is 8 feet high).

The listening position (e.g. my ears on the couch) will be 10 feet away from the front speakers.

The room is 13 feet wide.

*****Listening preferences:

I RARELY listen to music on CDs. I occasionally listen to music on

satellite/digital cable but the primary use of my system will be for

High definition movies , Xbox 360 or Playstation 3 gaming and some high

definition television programs so the vast majority of my sources will

NOT be 2 channel stereo sources but rather 5.1 sources.

My sound preferences seem to be geared towards warmer more natural

sounding speakers. I dont care for loud-thumping unnatural (and

muddied) base, I prefer clear base and warm (not bright) sound.

I will be hooking up either the Klipsch RT-12D subwoofer or JL Audio F113 subwoofer so the RF83 or RF63 I buy will only be running frequencies above 60hz to 80hz (depending on the crossover I use) since I will be pretty much exclusively using sources with a .1 subwoofer track (via DVD, Xbox360, HD-DVD, etc.). I will also be buying the RC-64 center channel...

Thanks!

JC

--------------------------------------------------

RF-83 Specifications

http://www.klipsch.com/products/details/rf-83.aspx#specifications

frequency response 29Hz-21kHz +/-3dB

power handling 250W RMS / 1000W Peak

sensitivity 100dB @ 2.83V / 1m

nominal impedance 8 ohms compatible

high frequency drivers 1.25" (3.2cm) Titanium diaphragm compression driver mated to 90x60 square Tractrix® Horn

high freq crossover 1650Hz

low frequency drivers Triple 8" (20.3cm) High-output Cerametallic cone woofers

enclosure type Bass-reflex via triple rear-firing ports

height 49.6" (126cm) (w/feet)

width 9.25" (23.5cm)

depth 20.5" (52.1cm)

weight 100lbs (45.4kg)

RF-63 Specifications

http://www.klipsch.com/products/details/rf-63.aspx#specifications

frequency response 30Hz-21kHz +/-3dB

power handling 175W RMS / 700W Peak

sensitivity 99dB @ 2.83V / 1m

nominal impedance 8 ohms compatible

high frequency drivers 1.25" (3.2cm) Titanium diaphragm compression driver mated to 90x60 square Tractrix® Horn

high freq crossover 1700Hz

low frequency drivers Triple 6.5" (16.5cm) High-output Cerametallic cone woofers

enclosure type Bass-reflex via triple rear-firing ports

height 46.1" (117.1cm) (w/feet)

width 8.5" (21.6cm)

depth 19.5" (49.5cm)

weight 81lbs (36.8kg)

[Ou8thisSN]

I just bought a pair of the RF-83s and I think they are just awesome. Having said that however, I havent heard the RF-63s, so I dont know how they sound. My room is considerably bigger than yours (by about 32%) and I listen to the RF83s at around 18-19 feet back or so. at that distance, these speakers keep up flawlessly and really fill the room with sound. Before I got the RF-83s, i had the RF-7s, and my basis for comparison was the RF-7s. Before we moved to the house we are currently in, I had the RF-7s in a room that was 14 x 15 x 8 and that was definitely more speaker than the room ever needed. I think that you should be very pleased with the RF-63s, and it should work well for your room, but do what i did, take your favorite music (or movies scenes) to the store and audition them. You cant rely on specs that a manufacturer posts and decide that way, but in any case, i dont think you are wrong in your line of thinking based on my *flawed* anecdotal experience.

[Johnny Canuck]

I just bought a pair of the RF-83s and I think they are just awesome. Having said that however, I havent heard the RF-63s, so I dont know how they sound. My room is considerably bigger than yours (by about 32%) and I listen to the RF83s at around 18-19 feet back or so. at that distance, these speakers keep up flawlessly and really fill the room with sound. Before I got the RF-83s, i had the RF-7s, and my basis for comparison was the RF-7s. Before we moved to the house we are currently in, I had the RF-7s in a room that was 14 x 15 x 8 and that was definitely more speaker than the room ever needed. I think that you should be very pleased with the RF-63s, and it should work well for your room, but do what i did, take your favorite music (or movies scenes) to the store and audition them. You cant rely on specs that a manufacturer posts and decide that way, but in any case, i dont think you are wrong in your line of thinking based on my *flawed* anecdotal experience.

Unfortunately I couldn't find a place near me that had both the RF-63 and RF-83 on display so I could compare.

I was hoping though that perhaps one of the Klipsch personnel on here (or someone with insider knowledge) got the skinny on the difference between the 2 models and could advise me...

Thanks

[Jay481985]

I own the rf-83 in a room of 1200 cubic feet so it is extremely large speakers for the room but I do like them and sound fine.

[Johnny Canuck]

I own the rf-83 in a room of 1200 cubic feet so it is extremely large speakers for the room but I do like them and sound fine.

They both are priced similar but have different specs, etc. suggesting they were engineered slightly different for a purpose and that's why I was wondering if anybody knew the differences between them so I could make a decision as to which speaker is more suitable for my purpose...

Thanks

[Jay481985]

the 63 goes down to 30 hertz while the 83 goes down to 29 there is no real difference. But size is one factor.

[Johnny Canuck]

the 63 goes down to 30 hertz while the 83 goes down to 29 there is no real difference. But size is one factor.

I heard it suggested that the smaller drivers on the RF63 give it better sounds in the mids and highs, while the RF83 has better low-end, however, for those of us using mostly material with .1 subwoofer sound tracks (And utilizing a good sub) the RF63 paired with a good sub would provide better all-around sound... (whereas people not running a sub would want to use the RF83's) and I am just trying to verify that point...

[Ou8thisSN]

i think, for your room, you'll be fine with an rf63. I have my RF7s, but I send all the LFE sub to the sub, since its a dedicated theater room. Now, if you were doing 2 channel only, it would be nice to have full range speakers where you wouldnt need a sub necessarily which can overemphasize or distract but in your case i'd get the rf63s and not look back.

[Jay481985]

the 63 goes down to 30 hertz while the 83 goes down to 29 there is no real difference. But size is one factor.

I heard it suggested that the smaller drivers on the RF63 give it better sounds in the mids and highs, while the RF83 has better low-end, however, for those of us using mostly material with .1 subwoofer sound tracks (And utilizing a good sub) the RF63 paired with a good sub would provide better all-around sound... (whereas people not running a sub would want to use the RF83's) and I am just trying to verify that point...

thats not really true....

[Johnny Canuck]

the 63 goes down to 30 hertz while the 83 goes down to 29 there is no real difference. But size is one factor.

I heard it suggested that the smaller drivers on the RF63 give it better sounds in the mids and highs, while the RF83 has better low-end, however, for those of us using mostly material with .1 subwoofer sound tracks (And utilizing a good sub) the RF63 paired with a good sub would provide better all-around sound... (whereas people not running a sub would want to use the RF83's) and I am just trying to verify that point...

thats not really true....

which part of it ... could you explain please Jay?

Thanks.

[Jay481985]

the difference between speakers should not be so clear cut. How can you be sure that the 8 inch woofer (really 6.5 inch cone) is better at lows then the 6.5 inch (really 5 inch cone) and the 6.5 is better at mids. If there is any difference, the engineers would have changed it to make it more uniform. Put it this way, not everyone has the room or budget for the 83 so the 63 gives more options. But the sound should be nearly identical, if you have the money go for the 83 if you don't get the 63.

[Johnny Canuck]

the difference between speakers should not be so clear cut. How can you be sure that the 8 inch woofer (really 6.5 inch cone) is better at lows then the 6.5 inch (really 5 inch cone) and the 6.5 is better at mids. If there is any difference, the engineers would have changed it to make it more uniform. Put it this way, not everyone has the room or budget for the 83 so the 63 gives more options. But the sound should be nearly identical, if you have the money go for the 83 if you don't get the 63.

Ok so what you are saying is that, in consideration to performance, the RF63 in no way offers any better sound (in the low, mids, or high frequences) than the RF83?

[jrios212]

it's too bad you can't listen to them.

if i was you i'd say go with the 63 since you'll be using them with a sub. my guess would be that the 83 has a fuller sound (sans sub), but since you have a sub you should be fine.

use the $700 you save to buy something else fun.

[JetJockey]

Howdy all, I wanted to audition the 63's as well when I was looking to buy 6 weeks back. They only had the 82 and 83's....There was no comparison and besides I really wanted the 83's anyway, LOL. Just to let you know I love the 83's. If the budget allows go for the 83 but if not I doubt the 63's will dissapoint. If the bass that comes out of my rc62 is anything to go by they will be very nice too. Enjoy and let us know what happens.

Regards, Chris.

[Johnny Canuck]

Hmm I went and searched a bunch of posts in the forums having to do with RF63 and RF83.

(a number of the messages included posts from Raider and DrWho).

Seems

the RF63 is the sucessor to RF5's, and RF83 successor to RF7 (and

RF75's) and differences among them are not unlike the predacessor's, so

seems like RF83 is the way to go...

Thanks guys, I geuss this thread is CLOSED?!?

[Ou8thisSN]

one thing i've discovered with my rf 83s, is that it needs a lot of space to really open up. I have it about 18 inches from the back wall and that even seems like its not enough I may have to move them even further forward. (on some low frequencies it sounds a bit muddy, because 3 of the rear ports on the left speaker are firing into heavy silk curtains.) So that could be a consideration. Seriously, these are big speakers and they really need a big room to get the most out of them. If you plan to move to a bigger space, then definitely plan for the future, but if you are set where you are, definitely consider the rf63s, i still think they maybe a better fit for your room. I think to get the most of the RF83s/RF7s you really need a 18 x 20 --20 x 20 room, at the least.

[Johnny Canuck]

one thing i've discovered with my rf 83s, is that it needs a lot of space to really open up. I have it about 18 inches from the back wall and that even seems like its not enough I may have to move them even further forward. (on some low frequencies it sounds a bit muddy, because 3 of the rear ports on the left speaker are firing into heavy silk curtains.) So that could be a consideration. Seriously, these are big speakers and they really need a big room to get the most out of them. If you plan to move to a bigger space, then definitely plan for the future, but if you are set where you are, definitely consider the rf63s, i still think they maybe a better fit for your room. I think to get the most of the RF83s/RF7s you really need a 18 x 20 --20 x 20 room, at the least.

Hmm the problem I have is that I can't really take these things home then audition them, I have to listen to them in the show room.

My room is 13 X 26 (8 feet high) but I will be only 9 feet away from the speakers .... hmm dunno am going to have to stew over that one...

[JetJockey]

Hi all, just my 2cents again. my HT is 15.5'x25'. Sound is excellent and bass is not muddy by any stretch, in fact they just pound the bass out, clearly and cleanly with beautiful rich mids. In fact In my case its the highs that can get a bit unruly but have fixed that problem with tweaking the very adjustable EQ on my Yamaha receiver. I /we sit about 15' from the mains on the second level of raised seating. The horns are right at ear level and I think this is why I had to tame down the high freqs a little.

One thing to remember also is the breakin period. I honestly noticed a big difference in SQ after the 50 hour mark and they just seem to get better with each hour.

[xdetroitx]

I have the rf-82s for reason of price. I sit about 10 ft away and I have no problem hearing what I am listening to by any means. I have auditioned the 83s and 63s and I plan on upgrading to 83s soon. But, let me say the reason is I have no respect for my hearing. I listen to alot of music and the louder the better. At 10ft. away the 83s will double as a hair dryer. I auditioned the rf-7 and the rf-83 recently because if I liked the rf-7 I was going to buy them before they were no longer available new. The 83s mid range is IMO far superior to the rf-7. So, I have decided to wait and purchase the 83s once I am done with school. But, keep in mind as far as 110 rms goes, I have a yamaha receiver that is rated 110rms and rf-82s and my neighbors 3 doors down complain(I live in a house), I can crank it out with great clarity far beyond what anyone can stand for more than my 15 seconds of showing off my system in my 11ft by 17ft. room. But, as the saying goes....Bigger is Better!!!!

[Johnny Canuck]

Ya sounds like I will need to break in the speakers for a bit, and at 10 feet away I am pushing the boundaries of how close the RF83 speakers should be to me, however since they have a little better clarity then the RF-63 they are the one's to get.

However xdetroitx I can't help thinking that since your YAmaha amp only offers 110 RMS, you are still missing a bit in terms of sound. For peeks, say like when the dinosaur yells in Jurrasic Park, wouldn't your receiver lack a little bit of juice to supply the very highest peaks in sound? (Hence the need for a seperate amplifier?)