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

Klipsch owner thread - Page 894

post #26791 of 35212
I don't have experience with the combo but the Yammy 3030 has a very solid amp (it is just a solid all around avr). I think you don't need an amp.
post #26792 of 35212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cowboys View Post

I don't have experience with the combo but the Yammy 3030 has a very solid amp (it is just a solid all around avr). I think you don't need an amp.


Thank you


I appreciate the fast responses!

Bob
post #26793 of 35212
Bob I think you'll want an amp, eventually. Did you see my post on the deal on the B stock RF-7II?
post #26794 of 35212
Quote:
Originally Posted by SanchoPanza View Post

Bob I think you'll want an amp, eventually. Did you see my post on the deal on the B stock RF-7II?

Yes, I spoke to them and I may either go with B stock or new for 200 more.

I need to sell my RF-82s first.

Thanks
post #26795 of 35212
I understood the B stock are New, just darker than normal cherry finish.
post #26796 of 35212
At 150w/channel and 40lbs, I think the 3030 is a nice unit.

I was considering a 2030 at one point, heard good things about the higher end yamaha amps
post #26797 of 35212
Bob can you use the 82s for Surrounds, or do you need to sell to help fund?
post #26798 of 35212
Quote:
Originally Posted by SanchoPanza View Post

Bob can you use the 82s for Surrounds, or do you need to sell to help fund?

Unfortunately have to sell.

Thanks
post #26799 of 35212
Quote:
Originally Posted by bad1550 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by SanchoPanza View Post

Bob can you use the 82s for Surrounds, or do you need to sell to help fund?

Unfortunately have to sell.

Thanks

Sure is nice to have a good reason to do so (up-grade)!
post #26800 of 35212
Reversing the Rear Feet On a Klipsch RF-7 II


This past week, I posted a short novella in this thread about my recent acquisition of a pair of new RF-7 IIs at a wonderfully discounted price... and about how one of the speakers' rear-foot-assemblies was missing. The replacement assembly that Klipsch sent out to me arrived yesterday... and because I intend to put these feet on the speakers in "reversed" position -- so that the rear feet do not stick out to the sides -- I thought I'd post my own rendition of a photo-illustrated "How-To", in case anyone else might want (or need) to try this.

The reason I'm calling this "my own rendition", is because it's a rip-off re-write of a post by Reference_head, that he has in the Klipcsh.com Forum's RF-7II Owners Thread. That post still exists, of course, but Fastslappy's recent notice in this thread that all photos in that forum will soon disappear -- coupled with the fact that I'm about to do this to my own RF-7 IIs -- caused me to decide to totally plagiarize Ref_head's post, completely without his permission wink.gif or sanction. tongue.gif

So here ya go...

Like Ref, I personally really like the rather elegant looks of the copper-colored feet. I happen to prefer the look of the speakers' grills being in place... but if you were going to leave the grills off, the feet match those beautiful copper drivers' color quite well.

The problem is that the rear-mounted feet really protrude, and can quickly get in the way... with potentially rather disastrous results. They're also extremely heavy and strong, and very solid, once they’re attached... so if the speakers happen to sit in a spot where there’s any traffic at all, those feet are definitely going to get tripped over.

Not good.

In fact, the first time I ever saw a photo of the various Reference II speakers that have this style of rear feet, that's exactly what came to mind... and I’ve always thought that if I ever owned a pair of them, the first thing I'd do would be to order another pair of front feet for each speaker, as replacements. As it turns out, though -- and as Ref thankfully demonstrated in his post -- that isn't necessary. All that's needed to be done, is to turn the mounting plate over, and reverse its position.

You also need to pick up some 5mm x 40mm machine screws, though (two for each speaker), because the stock 5mm x 30mm ones aren't long enough to use for fastening the foot, in its reversed position. My local hardware store didn't have any Phillips-drive flat-head 5x40s, but the head on the stainless steel Allen-head ones that I got is shallow enough that it sits sufficiently below the contact-surface of the foot's rubber pad, so the screw-head would still never contact a hardwood floor. Thanks to very thickly padded carpeting, this is not an actual concern in my case... though it could be for others.

But... because the central holes in the feet are threaded (in order to accept the spikes that Klipsch supplies), and because those threaded holes are (unfortunately) not exactly the same diameter or threading as the machine-screws used to mount the plate and the foot to the speaker, as they pass through the foot and on into the speaker's mounting hole... the 5mmx40mm screws are not a rock-solid fit -- though it's quite close.

Consequently, the Allen-headed screws don’t *unequivocally* attach the foot to the plate. Micro-nitpicking, perhaps... but true. A flat-headed screw, on the other hand, would automatically center the foot on the plate as it’s tightened, and would thereby hold the foot invariantly in place.

Because of that... I thought that perhaps, in the future, I might want to replace these Allen-headed ones with flat-heads... so I did an online search for some. Turns out that while the stock, 30mm version of these screws is readily available... stainless steel Phillips-drive flat-head M5-40mm machine screws are almost impossible to find. So just for good measure, I ordered eight of them, from here:

http://www.boltdepot.com/Metric_machine_screws_Phillips_flat_head_Stainless_steel_18-8_5mm_x_0.8mm.aspx

Comparison shots of the two:

RF-7 II Rear Foot Reversal -Pic 01 RF-7 II Rear Foot Reversal -Pic 02

Here's the foot assembly, as it comes in the box with the speaker.

RF-7 II Rear Foot Reversal -Pic 03 RF-7 II Rear Foot Reversal -Pic 04

First, remove the foot from the mounting plate. These screws are Torx-head, by the way... not Allen-head.

RF-7 II Rear Foot Reversal -Pic 05 RF-7 II Rear Foot Reversal -Pic 06

Here it is, with its foot removed. You will not be using these Torx screws again... but I'd definitely keep them stored with the speakers' boxes.

RF-7 II Rear Foot Reversal -Pic 07

If, like me, you're doing this to a brand-new speaker, you then need to remove both mounting-plate screws from the bottom of the speaker.

RF-7 II Rear Foot Reversal -Pic 08

You'll use one stock 30mm screw to fasten the plate to the speaker, and a 40mm to attach the foot.... like so:

RF-7 II Rear Foot Reversal -Pic 09

Align the mounting plate like below, and use one of the stock Phillips-head machine screws on the “inside” hole, to attach the plate to the speaker. The plate’s outside hole will be used to attach the foot, via the other plate-mounting hole in the speaker.

RF-7 II Rear Foot Reversal -Pic 10

Pass one of the new 5mm x 40mm screws through the foot's central hole, through the open hole in the mounting plate, and then screw it into the speaker.

RF-7 II Rear Foot Reversal -Pic 11 RF-7 II Rear Foot Reversal -Pic 12

That's it.

RF-7 II Rear Foot Reversal -Pic 13

As Reference_head pointed out in his original post, the only potential drawback to this setup, is that you will no longer be able to put spikes on the rear feet. Seems like a small price to pay for preventing someone from breaking a toe (or worse)... or knocking over your precious RF-7 II. eek.gif

My thanks and indebtedness to Reference_head for his ingenuity in coming up with this simple procedure in the first place... and (hopefully) for his kind indulgence with my blatant theft of his intellectual property. biggrin.gif
Edited by B 26354 - 9/28/13 at 4:46pm
post #26801 of 35212
the only draw back as I pointed out before is now the speaker is tippy , Klipsch put those feet out like that so to protect themselves from lawsuits from kids getting crushed by the falling speaker ,
Now while this a useful mod ,
IT does come with a Disclaimer for to
eek.gif ::::::::::::::::::::::::::: USE CAUTION ::::::::::::::::::::::::: eek.gif
if you do this mod as you have made the speaker some what unstable from what the MFGer had designed .


NOT saying anyone should Do OR Not do this mod just remember the feet were wide for a reason is all I'm pointing out smile.gif
Just be SAFE wink.gif
post #26802 of 35212
I need help with mounts for RS52ii's and RB61ii's for side surrounds and back surrounds, any links gentleman?
post #26803 of 35212
Quote:
Originally Posted by bad1550 View Post

I'm interested in upgrading from the RF-82 II to the RF-7 II.

My AVR is the Yamaha 3030. Anyone have experience with this combo and will this be ok without an additional amp.?

Thanks

I have an RX-A2010 (140 wpc), and I'm running my new RF-7 IIs along with an RC-3 II center, SF-3 surrounds and an SVS SB12 sub in my 14x19x8 living-room... and the sound is amazing. Crystal clear.

My average volume setting for both 2.1-channel music and 5.1 film is between -18dB and -15dB, though... and VERY rarely -12. So if you like it really L-O-U-D (to me... -12 in my smallish room is really loud)... you might end up considering an amp at some point in the future. In my own space, I don't feel the need for one, at all.

Edit:

Incidentally....

I know you've said that you "have to sell" your RF-82 IIs to get the RF-7 IIs... but without knowing what surrounds you currently have (if any), like some of the others have recommended, I will STRONGLY suggest that you keep the 82s to use as surrounds, if you possibly can.

In my case, the dual-8"-woofered FS-3s that I'm using as surrounds may not be a "recommended" timbre-match with the 7 IIs, but they still sound incredible when I'm listening to well-produced 5.1 sound. Seriously... I have a couple of jazz SACDs that are done in 5.1, and several live jazz (and popular) concert Blu-rays that of course are multi-channel... and my system makes them sound so wonderful, it's enough to make you cry.

In your case, the 82 IIs as surrounds would be superlative, and a perfect match with the 7 IIs, and honestly, if I were you, I'd keep them... and save up until you can buy the 7 IIs later on. You will be extremely happy that you did.
Edited by B 26354 - 9/28/13 at 6:27pm
post #26804 of 35212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fastslappy View Post

the only drawback, as I pointed out before, is now the speaker is tippy. Klipsch put those feet out like that to protect themselves from lawsuits from kids getting crushed by the falling speaker.

Now while this a useful mod, it does come with a Disclaimer for you to

eek.gif ::::::::::::::::::::::::::: USE CAUTION ::::::::::::::::::::::::: eek.gif

if you do this mod, as you have made the speaker somewhat unstable, from what the MFGer had designed.

NOT saying anyone should Do OR Not do this mod. Just remember the feet were wide for a reason, is all I'm pointing out smile.gif

Just be SAFE wink.gif

Thanks Fast! I completely understand what you're saying, and it's an extremely valid point.

But honestly, even on my thick carpeting, I don't find them to be at all unstable.

The area immediately around them is a little bit "close-quartered", though, so I'm still getting used to their size... and I've accidentally bumped into them several times in the past week, when I didn't realize I was standing close to one and turned around too quickly... and they've hardly moved.

And where they're positioned in my room (for the past five years, all of my "fronts" have been in exactly the same two spots)... if I didn't leave those rear feet off, I'd have broken toes -- and a broken neck -- within another week, from tripping over feet that never existed on any of my other Klipsch towers.

Also, there are no young children in my life at all (or raucous, falling-down-drunk adults, either, for that matter), so for me... that's not a concern.

Nonetheless, I concur with you... and I hereby disclaim all responsibility for any accidental repercussions resulting from anyone following any of my suggestions.

wink.gif
Edited by B 26354 - 9/28/13 at 4:35pm
post #26805 of 35212
Quote:
Originally Posted by B 26354 View Post

I have an RX-A2010 (140 wpc), and I'm running my new RF-7 IIs along with an RC-3 II center, SF-3 surrounds and an SVS SB12 sub in my 14x19x8 living-room... and the sound is amazing. Crystal clear.

My average volume setting for both 2.1-channel music and 5.1 film is between -18dB and -15dB, though... and VERY rarely -12. So if you like it really L-O-U-D (to me... -12 in my smallish room is really loud)... you might end up considering an amp at some point in the future. In my own space, I don't feel the need for one, at all.

Edit:

Incidentally....

I know you've said that you "have to sell" your RF-82 IIs to get the RF-7 IIs... but without knowing what surrounds you currently have (if any), like some of the others have recommended, I will STRONGLY suggest that you keep the 82s to use as surrounds, if you possibly can.



In your case, the 82 IIs as surrounds would be superlative, and a perfect match with the 7 IIs, and honestly, if I were you, I'd keep them... and save up until you can buy the 7 IIs later on. You will be extremely happy that you did.

I agree 100% KEEP THEM!
post #26806 of 35212
Quote:
Originally Posted by booga24 View Post

I need help with mounts for RS52ii's and RB61ii's for side surrounds and back surrounds, any links gentleman?

There are some good ideas here look back a few pages & at the photos.
post #26807 of 35212
Im glad my little mod to the feet was able to help someone smile.gif

When i first did the mod it was so i could angle the 7s in more. With the new cabinet everything just barley fit with the subs up front


After that i moved the subs back behind the 7s. And my gf had bought me some cool speaker spikes for a b day present smile.gif



Got them a little big in case at some point i get new speakers and the new ones are wider.
post #26808 of 35212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reference_head View Post

Im glad my little mod to the feet was able to help someone smile.gif

When i first did the mod it was so i could angle the 7s in more. With the new cabinet everything just barley fit with the subs up front


After that i moved the subs back behind the 7s. And my gf had bought me some cool speaker spikes for a b day present smile.gif



Got them a little big in case at some point i get new speakers and the new ones are wider.

Smaller subs would solve your problem with space up front. tongue.gif
post #26809 of 35212
Quote:
Originally Posted by B 26354 View Post

I have an RX-A2010 (140 wpc), and I'm running my new RF-7 IIs along with an RC-3 II center, SF-3 surrounds and an SVS SB12 sub in my 14x19x8 living-room... and the sound is amazing. Crystal clear.

My average volume setting for both 2.1-channel music and 5.1 film is between -18dB and -15dB, though... and VERY rarely -12. So if you like it really L-O-U-D (to me... -12 in my smallish room is really loud)... you might end up considering an amp at some point in the future. In my own space, I don't feel the need for one, at all.

Edit:

Incidentally....

I know you've said that you "have to sell" your RF-82 IIs to get the RF-7 IIs... but without knowing what surrounds you currently have (if any), like some of the others have recommended, I will STRONGLY suggest that you keep the 82s to use as surrounds, if you possibly can.

In my case, the dual-8"-woofered FS-3s that I'm using as surrounds may not be a "recommended" timbre-match with the 7 IIs, but they still sound incredible when I'm listening to well-produced 5.1 sound. Seriously... I have a couple of jazz SACDs that are done in 5.1, and several live jazz (and popular) concert Blu-rays that of course are multi-channel... and my system makes them sound so wonderful, it's enough to make you cry.

In your case, the 82 IIs as surrounds would be superlative, and a perfect match with the 7 IIs, and honestly, if I were you, I'd keep them... and save up until you can buy the 7 IIs later on. You will be extremely happy that you did.

I am selling my RF-82 ii , RS 52 ii and RC 62 today.

I plan to order the RF-7 ii and RC -64 ii Center for now. So, I was considering the RS-62 as surrounds when Im ready in the near future hopefully. I thought they would provide the proper Side surrounds vs the RF-82 ii as surrounds? now I am not too sure?

Thx

Bob
post #26810 of 35212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fastslappy View Post

the only draw back as I pointed out before is now the speaker is tippy , Klipsch put those feet out like that so to protect themselves from lawsuits from kids getting crushed by the falling speaker ,
Now while this a useful mod ,
IT does come with a Disclaimer for to
eek.gif ::::::::::::::::::::::::::: USE CAUTION ::::::::::::::::::::::::: eek.gif
if you do this mod as you have made the speaker some what unstable from what the MFGer had designed .


NOT saying anyone should Do OR Not do this mod just remember the feet were wide for a reason is all I'm pointing out smile.gif
Just be SAFE wink.gif

I agree with your caution on this. I don't have the 7's, but I have the somewhat similar sized RF-83's. I installed the feet in the 'normal' configuration specifically because the speakers are definitely unstable when placed on a carpet. This is especially true when the carpet and carpet pad are reasonably thick. without the spiked feet in place, I was easily able to rock the speakers fairly easily and it would be relatively easy to tip them over. At 100 pounds and just over 4' tall, this is not a good thing. Throw in some small grand-kids and it's a recipe for disaster. This is not just being overly concerned on my part. I actually had to prevent a tip-over during a grandson's visit before I added the feet. A truly scary moment.

Anyway, YMMV, but be aware that depending on your personal environment and circumstances, mounting the feet in anything but the preferred manner, may be extremely dangerous.
post #26811 of 35212
For the feet, I simply switched them to be parallel with the side of the speaker and used the included screw to mount them. I could only use one screw instead of two this way, but its very tight and doesn't wiggle. The benefit is I was able to use the carpet spike.

Much easier than getting another screw and it worked perfectly.
post #26812 of 35212
Quote:
Originally Posted by baloo_btru View Post

For the feet, I simply switched them to be parallel with the side of the speaker and used the included screw to mount them. I could only use one screw instead of two this way, but its very tight and doesn't wiggle. The benefit is I was able to use the carpet spike.

Much easier than getting another screw and it worked perfectly.

Understood. But in my case, I walk beside and behind them many times each day, so having the feet stick out behind the speakers would be just as dangerous for me as having them sticking out from the sides. Ultimately, of course, it comes down to whatever works best in one's specific situation.


Quote:
Originally Posted by lflorack View Post

I agree with your caution on this. I don't have the 7's, but I have the somewhat similar sized RF-83's. I installed the feet in the 'normal' configuration specifically because the speakers are definitely unstable when placed on a carpet. This is especially true when the carpet and carpet pad are reasonably thick. without the spiked feet in place, I was easily able to rock the speakers fairly easily and it would be relatively easy to tip them over. At 100 pounds and just over 4' tall, this is not a good thing. Throw in some small grand-kids and it's a recipe for disaster. This is not just being overly concerned on my part. I actually had to prevent a tip-over during a grandson's visit before I added the feet. A truly scary moment.

Anyway, YMMV, but be aware that depending on your personal environment and circumstances, mounting the feet in anything but the preferred manner, may be extremely dangerous.

Also understood. But regarding how unstable your 83s are... the 7 IIs are 1" shorter than the 83s, and 2.25" wider, and they weigh 15 lbs less... which is probably why I don't find them to be unstable at all. As you say, everyone's Mileage May Vary. In my situation, it's the protruding feet that are the very real danger. wink.gif
post #26813 of 35212
Quote:
Originally Posted by bad1550 View Post

I am selling my RF-82 ii , RS 52 ii and RC 62 today.

I plan to order the RF-7 ii and RC -64 ii Center for now. So, I was considering the RS-62 as surrounds when Im ready in the near future hopefully. I thought they would provide the proper Side surrounds vs the RF-82 ii as surrounds? now I am not too sure?

Thx

Bob

Like every other point of discussion in this thread, the topic of surround-speaker type and positioning has hundreds of posts... and, similarly, one's conclusions will depend to a great extent on individual room and setup conditions... not to mention listening tastes.

Earlier this year, I went from SF-2 fronts (dual 6.5" woofers) and SS-1 surrounds (dual 5" horns and a 5.25" woofer) to SF-3 fronts (dual 8" woofers), and using the SF-2 towers as surrounds, pointed directly at my Main Listening Position. The difference was quite literally stupefying. I suddenly realized that there was infinitely more content going on in the surround channels than I had ever imagined.

Now, as I've noted, the 7 IIs are my fronts, and the SF-3s have replaced the SF-2s, in their same positions and orientations. And again, the fullness of the sound-spectrum that comes from the dual-8"-woofered tower surrounds (much like your 82 IIs), just brings a "whole new world" of dimensionality and realism to the surround fields... which I don't honestly feel could be accomplished by a traditionally-configured surround speaker. Even the 62 IIs.

Not all that long ago, it was true that the surround speakers in one's system were more-or-less of "secondary" importance, and didn't need to be as large or broad-spectrumed as the front speakers.

That notion is dead. Modern film sound-engineering makes hugely prominent use of the surround channels, providing us with an amazingly "immersive" listening experience.

Many on this thread insist that the best possible front-stage combination is three identical speakers. From a practical, physical-layout standpoint, that's not often possible... which is why combinations like your RF-7 II / RC-64 II exist. Having a full-spectrum center channel is now critically important.

But the same notion now holds true for the surround speakers. So, as many contend, the "ultimate" 5.1 (or 5.2...) setup would now consist of five identical towers... or at least, it would employ the largest feasible surround-towers possible.

Again... some of us have discovered that we prefer tower surrounds pointing directly at us at ear-level. Others find the more indirect sound-dispersion pattern that comes from a traditionally-arrayed surround speaker like the 62 IIs to be more to their liking. It all comes down to what sounds best to you, in your own space.

I simply think that since you will now be the ecstatic owner of an INCREDIBLE front-stage... you owe it to yourself to try getting 82 IIs as surrounds -- or at least, strongly consider it. For me, it would be a complete "no-brainer", because the RS-62 IIs and the RF-82 IIs are exactly the same price.

Obviously, it's up to you, but if you do end up with the 82 IIs... as many of us are attempting to tell you, you are going to be VERY happy that you did. biggrin.gif
post #26814 of 35212
Quote:
Originally Posted by B 26354 View Post

Like every other point of discussion in this thread, the topic of surround-speaker type and positioning has hundreds of posts... and, similarly, one's conclusions will depend to a great extent on individual room and setup conditions... not to mention listening tastes.

Earlier this year, I went from SF-2 fronts (dual 6.5" woofers) and SS-1 surrounds (dual 5" horns and a 5.25" woofer) to SF-3 fronts (dual 8" woofers), and using the SF-2 towers as surrounds, pointed directly at my Main Listening Position. The difference was quite literally stupefying. I suddenly realized that there was infinitely more content going on in the surround channels than I had ever imagined.

Now, as I've noted, the 7 IIs are my fronts, and the SF-3s have replaced the SF-2s, in their same positions and orientations. And again, the fullness of the sound-spectrum that comes from the dual-8"-woofered tower surrounds (much like your 82 IIs), just brings a "whole new world" of dimensionality and realism to the surround fields... which I don't honestly feel could be accomplished by a traditionally-configured surround speaker. Even the 62 IIs.

Not all that long ago, it was true that the surround speakers in one's system were more-or-less of "secondary" importance, and didn't need to be as large or broad-spectrumed as the front speakers.

That notion is dead. Modern film sound-engineering makes hugely prominent use of the surround channels, providing us with an amazingly "immersive" listening experience.

Many on this thread insist that the best possible front-stage combination is three identical speakers. From a practical, physical-layout standpoint, that's not often possible... which is why combinations like your RF-7 II / RC-64 II exist. Having a full-spectrum center channel is now critically important.

But the same notion now holds true for the surround speakers. So, as many contend, the "ultimate" 5.1 (or 5.2...) setup would now consist of five identical towers... or at least, it would employ the largest feasible surround-towers possible.

Again... some of us have discovered that we prefer tower surrounds pointing directly at us at ear-level. Others find the more indirect sound-dispersion pattern that comes from a traditionally-arrayed surround speaker like the 62 IIs to be more to their liking. It all comes down to what sounds best to you, in your own space.

I simply think that since you will now be the ecstatic owner of an INCREDIBLE front-stage... you owe it to yourself to try getting 82 IIs as surrounds -- or at least, strongly consider it. For me, it would be a complete "no-brainer", because the RS-62 IIs and the RF-82 IIs are exactly the same price.

Obviously, it's up to you, but if you do end up with the 82 IIs... as many of us are attempting to tell you, you are going to be VERY happy that you did. biggrin.gif
5 CornScala here center , mains l/r , surrounds l/r , hearing is believing, those that pooh pooh the surrounds as " Not As Important " have never heard a fully balanced system rolleyes.gif
Breaking Bad has some awesome 5 channel sound stage effects , That I Fully Intend to Experience Tonight ! biggrin.gif
post #26815 of 35212
Slappy can we see some pics please biggrin.gif (you know the saying pics or it didn't happen wink.gif )
post #26816 of 35212
Quote:
Originally Posted by B 26354 View Post

Earlier this year, I went from SF-2 fronts (dual 6.5" woofers) and SS-1 surrounds (dual 5" horns and a 5.25" woofer) to SF-3 fronts (dual 8" woofers), and using the SF-2 towers as surrounds, pointed directly at my Main Listening Position. The difference was quite literally stupefying. I suddenly realized that there was infinitely more content going on in the surround channels than I had ever imagined.

I've just recently purchased the RF-7ii 5.1 HT system as well. I currently have a 9 year old RF-15 7.1 system and yesterday I was entertaining the idea of using those RF-15s somewhere as surrounds or rear surrounds to make the RF-7ii system 7.1. It probably wouldn't sound good, right? Anyway, I suppose I could just have a nice sounding bedroom HT system as well.
post #26817 of 35212
Quote:
Originally Posted by cyclones22 View Post

I've just recently purchased the RF-7ii 5.1 HT system as well. I currently have a 9 year old RF-15 7.1 system and yesterday I was entertaining the idea of using those RF-15s somewhere as surrounds or rear surrounds to make the RF-7ii system 7.1. It probably wouldn't sound good, right? Anyway, I suppose I could just have a nice sounding bedroom HT system as well.
No,
go ahead and try them & see how it comes together ,
yes 4 matching towers sound great , BUT those RF-15's will do fine for now as backs . then add some newer as/when cash is there . & yes a RF-15 system would be a Killer bedroom set-up
BUT really if you have 4 RF7II's as mains & surrounds & have no backs then all that back signal goes to the surrounds, so in "some" cases having a non-matching under preforming backs might be not be a good idea .
post #26818 of 35212
Quote:
Originally Posted by cyclones22 View Post

I've just recently purchased the RF-7ii 5.1 HT system as well. I currently have a 9 year old RF-15 7.1 system and yesterday I was entertaining the idea of using those RF-15s somewhere as surrounds or rear surrounds to make the RF-7ii system 7.1. It probably wouldn't sound good, right? Anyway, I suppose I could just have a nice sounding bedroom HT system as well.

Wow... I'd never seen the RF-15s before, so I just now looked them up on the Klipsch site. They're really nice looking.

And frankly, I bet they'd sound great as rear surrounds with your new setup.

Of course, I suppose it depends on how much space you have... but if you're even considering using them like that, I'm guessing that's not an issue. And while the components in the 15s aren't a "perfect" match with those in the newer Reference Series speakers (I'm assuming that your new surrounds are the RS-62 IIs), they'd certainly be a much closer matchup than my SF-3s are with my RF-7 IIs... and as I've said, I love how my system sounds.

Personally, I haven't the space -- nor, actually, the desire -- to go beyond 5.1... but I'm assuming, here, that rear surrounds don't really need to be "huge" (i.e., the same size or output as the fronts or the main surrounds), so if I were you, I'd definitely give the 15s a shot as rears.

Can't hurt to try... right? biggrin.gif
Edited by B 26354 - 9/29/13 at 5:34pm
post #26819 of 35212
A while back i read someone getting great results facing his subs at each other. I would think that you might have cancelation issues with them firing at each other. But other people responded that they also have tried this with great results. So i flipped my front subs around so they face each other and wow to my surprise they have even better response facing each other. Do any of you know why the output would increase so much?
post #26820 of 35212
They are now both in opposite corners?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Speakers
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › Klipsch owner thread