or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › Klipsch owner thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Klipsch owner thread - Page 704

post #21091 of 35259
Quote:
Originally Posted by HAljaberi View Post


Thanks for your reply ,,,, I know Mr. "Browninggold" was joking and I liked him to elaborate ,,,,

Luckily ,, I set the volume between -20 to -5 and there's not any distortion or clipping at that level. My mains are setting as small , since I have HSU Sub ,,,
But ,, will class D or AB amplifier will differ or not? I really like to hear Klipsch users experience, because today I went to audition NAD amplifier. Lucky me ,, it was connected to RF82 II , I listened to Adele "Rolling in the deep" track and the sound was NOT really great in comparison with my marantz. I told the seller this isn't how RF82 II sound ,,, I always enjoy listening to Adele Album with my setting, while at shop, the sound was harsh and loud.
So I start to believe in how Amp may impact the way that I can enjoy my music/movie.

I've used Adele cd as a reference when listening to my rf82ii when comparing different receivers. After sometime I realized that on all receivers I tried (Yamaha marantz onkyo and pioneer) that her CD seems very bright, borderline piercing. As a test I went to magnolia and listened to the same CD through Martin Logan's def tech B&W and energy and it sounded bright on all of them. I've decided I need a new reference CD
post #21092 of 35259
Quote:
Originally Posted by cdub5 View Post

I've used Adele cd as a reference when listening to my rf82ii when comparing different receivers. After sometime I realized that on all receivers I tried (Yamaha marantz onkyo and pioneer) that her CD seems very bright, borderline piercing. As a test I went to magnolia and listened to the same CD through Martin Logan's def tech B&W and energy and it sounded bright on all of them. I've decided I need a new reference CD

That is good information to know, but I have 2 thoughts:
1) Does the Adele CD sound bright on your RF-82II HT?

2) If not:
A) it may have been the room where you auditioned those other speakers/AVRs
B) It could be settings on the various AVRs...There shouldn't be that much difference between them.

3) Sarah Maclachlan sounds excellent on any quality speaker system. cool.gif
Edited by Zen Traveler - 1/24/13 at 8:37pm
post #21093 of 35259
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zen Traveler View Post



3) Sarah Maclachlan sounds excellent on any quality speaker system. cool.gif
That's a biased statement if I ever heard one ! smile.gif
post #21094 of 35259
The new Motörhead bluray sounds really really good on my klipsch setup. Diana Krall and the like are good for checking the detail of a speaker. But eventually you'll want something meant to be played loud.

Motörhead's motto is "Everything louder than everything else". The new BluRay is mixed really well, with great instrument separation especially Lemmy's Rickenbacker bass.
post #21095 of 35259
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zen Traveler View Post

That is good information to know, but I have 2 thoughts:
1) Does the Adele CD sound bright on your RF-82II HT?

Yes. To me it does. Even using all those different receivers. Maybe it's the CD or maybe it's just her voice. It definitely sounds brightest on the Klipsch compared to the other speakers, but it was bright, sharp on all. As I said I think I need a new reference CD. I just decided to use Adele because my wife listens to it a lot so im familiar with it
post #21096 of 35259
Anyone ever bi-amp their KF-28 towers or the like? My new Onkyo 717 can bi-amp but that would be pushing 200W to a 150W RMS speaker and I play mine loud sometimes so I am a bit worried about giving it a try. What do you guys think?
post #21097 of 35259
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajstrider View Post

Anyone ever bi-amp their KF-28 towers or the like? My new Onkyo 717 can bi-amp but that would be pushing 200W to a 150W RMS speaker and I play mine loud sometimes so I am a bit worried about giving it a try. What do you guys think?

It won't be doing what you think it will be doing and if you search this thread using "bi-amp" (actually you will be bi-wiring) you will get various opinions--Most will suggest you will be better off using one set of wires for each speaker.
post #21098 of 35259
I plan on going to the umc-200 or sc-series pioneer in the future, feel like my rf-7 rc-64 combo with in ceiling surrounds could use more power, or a nice upgrade.
post #21099 of 35259
I have the same fronts and center (mark 2) as you and have really enjoyed my Pioneer SC-61,more than enough volume for any sane person plus another 20db volume adjustments past that I have never seen. Runs very cool too.
post #21100 of 35259
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zen Traveler View Post

It won't be doing what you think it will be doing and if you search this thread using "bi-amp" (actually you will be bi-wiring) you will get various opinions--Most will suggest you will be better off using one set of wires for each speaker.

I will be bi-amping, not bi-wiring. I already have them bi-wired, but the Onkyo 717 allows me to hook the fronts up to four separate pairs of speaker outputs on the back, using up 4 of my 7 channels of power on just the front speakers. If done, I have to go into the options menu and set it to bi-amping so the receiver sends the proper signals to those 4 channels used on two speakers. I now can only run 5 different speakers, but that is all I have anyways. So I feel pretty certain this is going to do what I think it is going to do and push 200W to my front towers, 100W to the horn and 100W to the dual woofers.
post #21101 of 35259
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajstrider View Post

I will be bi-amping, not bi-wiring. I already have them bi-wired, but the Onkyo 717 allows me to hook the fronts up to four separate pairs of speaker outputs on the back, using up 4 of my 7 channels of power on just the front speakers. If done, I have to go into the options menu and set it to bi-amping so the receiver sends the proper signals to those 4 channels used on two speakers. I now can only run 5 different speakers, but that is all I have anyways. So I feel pretty certain this is going to do what I think it is going to do and push 200W to my front towers, 100W to the horn and 100W to the dual woofers.
Horns are the most efficient drivers between woof & HF sections so you really need to understand what your doing before you do it . And you not knowing that the 717 will not output 100 watts over &/0r 5 channels speaks volumes on where you are in learning curve of understanding how that 717 really works in a real world

your Onk is rated 100 watts per channel of 2 channels driven .

That AVR will not push 7 even 5 channels @ 100 watts . Your drinking the AVR MFGer's KoolAide if you think it will . . . rolleyes.gif
post #21102 of 35259
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajstrider View Post

I will be bi-amping, not bi-wiring. I already have them bi-wired, but the Onkyo 717 allows me to hook the fronts up to four separate pairs of speaker outputs on the back, using up 4 of my 7 channels of power on just the front speakers. If done, I have to go into the options menu and set it to bi-amping so the receiver sends the proper signals to those 4 channels used on two speakers. I now can only run 5 different speakers, but that is all I have anyways. So I feel pretty certain this is going to do what I think it is going to do and push 200W to my front towers, 100W to the horn and 100W to the dual woofers.
It would push power to the separate speakers like that if you opened up the speaker and got rid of the internal crossover. All you will be doing is sending more power to the speaker, but as said above, not as much as you think. It can't hurt, but from everything that I've read, it really doesn't make any difference either.
post #21103 of 35259
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajstrider View Post

I will be bi-amping, not bi-wiring. I already have them bi-wired, but the Onkyo 717 allows me to hook the fronts up to four separate pairs of speaker outputs on the back, using up 4 of my 7 channels of power on just the front speakers. If done, I have to go into the options menu and set it to bi-amping so the receiver sends the proper signals to those 4 channels used on two speakers. I now can only run 5 different speakers, but that is all I have anyways. So I feel pretty certain this is going to do what I think it is going to do and push 200W to my front towers, 100W to the horn and 100W to the dual woofers.

The only way you would be bi-amping is if you were using an external crossover instead of the ones that are in your speakers--Taking off the jumper between terminals and connecting two sets of wires is bi-wiring (insofar as your speakers are concerned).

EDIT:
Quote:
Originally Posted by djPerfectTrip View Post

It would push power to the separate speakers like that if you opened up the speaker and got rid of the internal crossover...
+1
Edited by Zen Traveler - 1/26/13 at 11:55am
post #21104 of 35259
Quote:
Originally Posted by djPerfectTrip View Post

It would push power to the separate speakers like that if you opened up the speaker and got rid of the internal crossover. All you will be doing is sending more power to the speaker, but as said above, not as much as you think. It can't hurt, but from everything that I've read, it really doesn't make any difference either.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zen Traveler View Post

The only way you would be bi-amping is if you were using an external crossover instead of the ones that are in your speakers--Taking off the jumper between terminals and connecting two sets of wires is bi-wiring (insofar as your speakers are concerned).
Bi-amp is having a direct connection to each speaker's driver (woof,horn assy ) to separate channels Bypassing the speakers internal crossover .
One can Quickly (think less than a heartbeat) FRY the driver in the horn assy if you do Not have a bypass of the lower frequencies
HF sections need very little power at all , the woofs are the main consumers of wattage .
post #21105 of 35259
I concur that the receiver is definitely dropping below that power when all channels are driven, but not calling this bi-amping makes no sense. I have a dual pair of binding posts on the back of the speaker, I have removed the jumpers, and one pair is labeled highs and one is labeled lows (I am bi-wiring right now so jumper is removed) which leads me to believe there is a SEPARATE crossover network for each binding post pair internal to the speaker. The receiver lets me use the normal front output and the front high/wide channels to bi-amp a pair of front towers as specifically spelled out in the instruction manual, but I obviously waste 4 channels of amplification on 2 speakers, which I only have a 5 speaker setup and the receiver is a 7 channel receiver. How is this not bi-amping. Even Klipsch's website says the pair of dual binding posts is for bi-amping and bi-wiring. I have two separate channels of amplification going to each speaker, sure sounds like bi-amping to me?
post #21106 of 35259
There aren't two separate internal crossovers. How would the crossovers know when the bumpers are removed?
post #21107 of 35259
+1
post #21108 of 35259
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajstrider View Post

...but not calling this bi-amping makes no sense. I have a dual pair of binding posts on the back of the speaker, I have removed the jumpers, and one pair is labeled highs and one is labeled lows (I am bi-wiring right now so jumper is removed) which leads me to believe there is a SEPARATE crossover network for each binding post pair internal to the speaker. ..

This is my last post on this topic--If you had an external crossover and did as you suggest, that would be" biamping." Imo, the reason you (and I) have dual binding posts is because it's a gimmick--BUT if you wanted to use another crossover you would be set up for it. That said, the crossover is the circuitry on the other side of those binding posts and unless you manipulate that when you attach 2 sets of wires (bi-wire) the tweeter still gets what it needs to deliver the highs above the crossover point (not much compared to the woofers) and the LF drivers (woofers) gets what it needs to stay in balance.

Fwiw, I don't think you would hurt anything bi-wiring (although I am not guaranteeing it), but at the most you will get 2-3 dB of volume which you probably can achieve by just raising the Main Volume. Good Luck and enjoy your speakers.smile.gif
post #21109 of 35259
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zen Traveler View Post

This is my last post on this topic--If you had an external crossover and did as you suggest, that would be" biamping." Imo, the reason you (and I) have dual binding posts is because it's a gimmick--BUT if you wanted to use another crossover you would be set up for it. That said, the crossover is the circuitry on the other side of those binding posts and unless you manipulate that when you attach 2 sets of wires (bi-wire) the tweeter still gets what it needs to deliver the highs above the crossover point (not much compared to the woofers) and the LF drivers (woofers) gets what it needs to stay in balance.

Fwiw, I don't think you would hurt anything bi-wiring (although I am not guaranteeing it), but at the most you will get 2-3 dB of volume which you probably can achieve by just raising the Main Volume. Good Luck and enjoy your speakers.smile.gif
I chalk it up as another person who buys everything that a audio MFGer says in their sales information as the gospel truth .
If you want to believe then Keeping drinkin' that KoolAide . Nothing we can say will change your mind wink.gif
post #21110 of 35259
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajstrider View Post

I concur that the receiver is definitely dropping below that power when all channels are driven, but not calling this bi-amping makes no sense. I have a dual pair of binding posts on the back of the speaker, I have removed the jumpers, and one pair is labeled highs and one is labeled lows (I am bi-wiring right now so jumper is removed) which leads me to believe there is a SEPARATE crossover network for each binding post pair internal to the speaker. The receiver lets me use the normal front output and the front high/wide channels to bi-amp a pair of front towers as specifically spelled out in the instruction manual, but I obviously waste 4 channels of amplification on 2 speakers, which I only have a 5 speaker setup and the receiver is a 7 channel receiver. How is this not bi-amping. Even Klipsch's website says the pair of dual binding posts is for bi-amping and bi-wiring. I have two separate channels of amplification going to each speaker, sure sounds like bi-amping to me?
they remove the jumpers when bi-wiring to keep the separate channels from shorting themselves out in case a user has the polarity reversed of the 2 different channel leads . The high/low is so you can differentiate the separate channels on each speaker , that way you can make sure the same channels are in the same place on Right/Left speakers .
This has all came about due to buyers insisting on bi-wiring ( a urban myth I M O ) so the MFGers now use it as a selling feature & jack the price up some saying it's very usefully item that you must pay $ more for .
Edited by Fastslappy - 1/26/13 at 4:54pm
post #21111 of 35259
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zen Traveler View Post

3) Sarah Maclachlan sounds excellent on any quality speaker system. cool.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fastslappy View Post

That's a biased statement if I ever heard one !

Guilty--Sarah Maclachlin will sound excellent on even a crappy sounding speaker system.smile.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fastslappy View Post

I chalk it up as another person who buys everything that a audio MFGer says in their sales information as the gospel truth .
If you want to believe then Keeping drinkin' that KoolAide . Nothing we can say will change your mind . wink.gif

If you are saying this to the OP then we are in agreement...Fwiw, it's not my mind that needs to be changed.cool.gif
Edited by Zen Traveler - 1/26/13 at 6:56pm
post #21112 of 35259
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zen Traveler View Post



If you are saying this to the OP then we are in agreement...Fwiw, it's not my mind that needs to be changed.cool.gif
Yep the OP mislead , that happens when the KoolAide is soooo sweet rolleyes.gif
post #21113 of 35259
Will setting my tv on top of my rc 52 hurt the speaker?
post #21114 of 35259
Quote:
Originally Posted by e84cooper View Post

Will setting my tv on top of my rc 52 hurt the speaker?

Not unless it's too heavy.
post #21115 of 35259
It's a 55 inch LG LED
post #21116 of 35259
not a chance
post #21117 of 35259
could try this was in my old rc-62 rf-62 system


new klipsch rc-62 center channel speaker 009.JPG 1335k .JPG file
post #21118 of 35259
here are my pics of new setup those in klipsch forums on their website have seen them already.

003.JPG 2072k .JPG file
post #21119 of 35259
001.JPG 1402k .JPG file

also running r-3800 and r 5800 in ceiling and side surround wall speakers, with pioneer elite vsx-60 7.2 receiver.
post #21120 of 35259
Quote:
Originally Posted by madturbosnake View Post

here are my pics of new setup those in klipsch forums on their website have seen them already.

003.JPG 2072k .JPG file

Nice custom cabinets! I'd love something like that, but it's hard for me to justify the cost. My RC62 II is currently sitting in front of my TV stand on a stand that I threw together out of scrap wood. I've considered building a box to sit on top of my TV stand (similar to your first picture but more sturdy), but I'm not sure if I'll like having my TV 8 to 10" higher than it is now.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Speakers
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › Klipsch owner thread