banasikdrummer Posted March 31, 2007 Share Posted March 31, 2007 I'm new to the Klipsch forum, but my friend has gotten me on the subject of buying Klipsch to replace the crap I have now. I was looking for RF-3s or RF-35 but then started looking at the possibility of some F-3s, under the assumption one of my friends can get me a pair for about $350. I've read some other posts and most of you guys have said your partial to the reference series as opposed to the synergy. Maybe you could tell me what would be the better choice between F-3s for $350 or RF-3s/RF-35s for $400. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamesV Posted March 31, 2007 Share Posted March 31, 2007 Welcome to the madness, Just a few questions back to you first. What size room are you looking to put these in? Are they going to be for HT or HT/music? Are you planning on getting 5.1 or 7.1? Or are you just looking for a 2 channel system? Can you listen to the three different speakers at one location? These questions will help the people answer your questions. James Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
banasikdrummer Posted March 31, 2007 Author Share Posted March 31, 2007 As of right now, I'm going to use the speakers in my bedroom which is 10'x13' I believe. I mainly use the speakers for music (I probably have music playing ten hours a day), but I also watch movies in here. The speakers will be incorporated with my crappy Philips surround sound that I have until I move into a house next year with my friend, at which point they'll be moved into the living room and I'll buy the respective center and rear speakers for the 5.1 set-up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erickoegle Posted March 31, 2007 Share Posted March 31, 2007 The F-3's (Synergy) might be the way to go. If you can get them at that price, it is a steal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shane_0_mac Posted March 31, 2007 Share Posted March 31, 2007 If you can get a nice pair of RF-35's for $400.00 I would do that. I have RF-35's at my house in the boxes as they do not work for my theater room, but I would not sell them for $400 as to me they are worth more than that just in case I need them in the futer. F-3's for $350.00 would be a good deal as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tommyboy Posted April 1, 2007 Share Posted April 1, 2007 If you can get RF35's for $400, that's an absolute steel. Both F3's, and RF35's have 8' woofers in them. If it was me personally, I'd drop the extra 50 bucks for the RF's. And one more question. You said you have music playing for 10 hrs a day in your room. Do you ever get out of bed?? And i'm gonna warn you about something. If you buy Klipsch, you will want to listen to music even more than you do now. So beware!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
banasikdrummer Posted April 1, 2007 Author Share Posted April 1, 2007 Haha, yes tommyboy, I get out of bed. But during the course of my day (watching TV, watching movies, doing homework, etc) my surround sound is blasting me through the day. Now...all of you guys saying getting RF-35s for $400 is an absolute steal, but my friend tells me I should be able to buy them for between $350 and $400 used, and there's a pair on audiogon.com for $379, so I don't see how this is such a steal... But my question for you hardcore Klipsch guys..what makes the reference series so much better than synergy? Why are you all willing to drop the extra money to buy the RFs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rsp1068 Posted April 1, 2007 Share Posted April 1, 2007 But my question for you hardcore Klipsch guys..what makes the reference series so much better than synergy? Why are you all willing to drop the extra money to buy the RFs? Sound. I began with SF 2's as that is what BB had. Found a used set of RF 3's, (will not part with) and worked into the RF 7's (again will not part with) Its not apples to apples, but the RF 3's were much closer to where I was after sound wise than the SF 2's. Bigger, more dynamic sound, better sensitivity. Why buy the 69 malibu when you can get the SS for even money? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamesV Posted April 1, 2007 Share Posted April 1, 2007 I would get the RF-35's, they are more speaker then the F-3. Plus you stated that you are going to be moving in a year and these speakers will then be placed in the main room. And of course everyone likes to spend someone else's money for them..... [] Do you have a stereo store that you can listen to both of these with your own music? That will be the best thing to do, we can tell you which is better, our opinion, but which ever sounds good to you is the deciding factor. James Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
banasikdrummer Posted April 1, 2007 Author Share Posted April 1, 2007 There's a Best Buy around here and an Ultimate Electronics, so I know I can hear the F3s, but I'm not sure if either would have RF-35s... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
el jopez Posted April 1, 2007 Share Posted April 1, 2007 Another vote for the RF-35's. They are a lot of speaker for 400 USD and it would be a crime to buy the F-3's for 50 dollars less. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
masterxela Posted April 1, 2007 Share Posted April 1, 2007 hey, i think it's 350 a piece for those f-3's new, w/ the bb discount, not 350 together. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
banasikdrummer Posted April 2, 2007 Author Share Posted April 2, 2007 I read that guy's post Alex, and he said, "(pair) F-3 $340." Maybe he just didn't understand the concept of a pair, though... 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.