Jump to content
The Klipsch Audio Community
Sign in to follow this  
LesHalles

rp3 vs. rp5

Recommended Posts

The rp3 and rp5 seem to have the same tweeter driver and horn, but they have different crossovers. The rp3 is 2750hz, the rp5 is something like 1980hz (I forget exactly).

On the RF3 and RF5 the crossovers are, as I recall different than this. So the RP3 and RP5 do not seem to be just RF3 and RF5 with subwoofers added.

I read that the higher crossover actually can give smoother mids somewhere else on this board (maybe a comparison of the RF3 and RF5).

Also, RP3 seems to have an unported subwoofer, the RP5 seems to have a ported subwoofer. In general, doesn't unported tend to be tighter?

The 6.5" woofer on the RP3 is smaller than the 8" on the RP5- but for midrange, wouldn't a slightly smaller woofer be better, even if the power handling would be less?

Question: what is the sound difference between the RP3 and RP5?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All good questions LesHalles.

I think the crossover is based upon the size of the driver and the cubic volume of the box that the low frequency driver is housed in. Though I also suspect that the 8" cerametallc driver's performance drops considerably above 1950 to 1975 hz. Not sure why Klipsch decided to use it again in the RF-5 when they already used it in the RF-3 (RF-5 is essentially the same speaker with a greater cubic volume box, larger mouth of tractrix horn and higher crossover). It is as if they wanted to improve the design of the RF-3, but didn't want to remove a surprisingly good selling speaker from the market.

I bought my RP-3 because I preferred the sound of the sealed bass to the ported RP-5. I can't say that I heard much difference between the two in the mid and upper range. The Rp-3 (sealed sub) seemed to have fewer ugly excess resonances and seemed quicker than the Rp-5 (though this also has a lot to do with the room). I have read somewhere that a ported sub gives better response and is typically quicker. I believe that the response of a ported sub is better (it can reach deeper and is often more uniform), but I would be surprised if the sealed sub is not usually quicker and tighter than the ported sub.

Another difference between the RP-3 and the RP-5 (beyond the difference in the size of the woofer) is the amplifier. The Rp-3 has a 440 peak watt MOSFET amplifier while the RP-5 has a 550 peak watt "digital hybrid" amplifier (I assume this is much different from a MOSFET amp). Someone who knows more about electronics should discuss these differences. I suspect that these two types of amps have different response times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what I have read:

Ported bass enclosures gain 3db at the resonant frequency, but rolloff below that at 24db/octave. I have also read the port worsens the transient response, which makes sense.

Sealed bass enclouseres only rolloff at 12db/octave, so they reach lower for the same speaker design.

Generally, I have heard that sealed enclosures give greater depth and precision; I would guess this is partly because the sound escaping the port is likely to be out of phase or otherwise distorted, and also the physical dimensions of the port and enclosure would tend to create resonant frequencies. I have certainly heard some pretty boomy ported woofers. But I have also heard some tight sounding ported subwoofers.

It seems designs with a port require greater care in speaker placement within a room, to give the port sufficient airspace and avoid reflections.

Why did they choose a ported design for the RP5, sacrificing quality and simplicity to gain efficiency in a version of the speaker that already has a larger subwoofer, amp and cabinet?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/12/2001 at 4:04 PM, LesHalles said:

The rp3 and rp5 seem to have the same tweeter driver and horn, but they have different crossovers. The rp3 is 2750hz, the rp5 is something like 1980hz (I forget exactly).

On the RF3 and RF5 the crossovers are, as I recall different than this. So the RP3 and RP5 do not seem to be just RF3 and RF5 with subwoofers added.

I read that the higher crossover actually can give smoother mids somewhere else on this board (maybe a comparison of the RF3 and RF5).

Also, RP3 seems to have an unported subwoofer, the RP5 seems to have a ported subwoofer. In general, doesn't unported tend to be tighter?

The 6.5" woofer on the RP3 is smaller than the 8" on the RP5- but for midrange, wouldn't a slightly smaller woofer be better, even if the power handling would be less?

Question: what is the sound difference between the RP3 and RP5?

 

The reason for the lower crossover point on the RP5 is because of the 8 inch woofer. The 8 inch woofer simply will not play well as high in frequency as the smaller 6.5 inch woofer in the RP3. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...