[Amel]

is it ok if I use 4 Klipsch RF-52 as my home theater setup, two fronts, two surrounds? will I miss a lot by not getting the RS'

 

[Zen Traveler]

There's nothing wrong running an additional set of RF-52s as surrounds and depending on the room and material may work better than the RS-52. Multi-channel music sounds great using Towers as SS.

 

[Amel]



Quote:
Originally Posted by Zen Traveler /forum/post/14231497


There's nothing wrong running an additional set of RF-52s as surrounds and depending on the room and material may work better than the RS-52. Multi-channel music sounds great using Towers as SS.

I don't listen to music a lot, but I ilke to watch blurays and hd channels


my living room is 20x12, I am about 7-8 feet away from the tv

 

[Zen Traveler]



Quote:
Originally Posted by Amel /forum/post/14232067


I don't listen to music a lot, but I ilke to watch blurays and hd channels


my living room is 20x12, I am about 7-8 feet away from the tv

It could still be a good investment, but given that every room has different acoustics and seating, you really need to try them out to see which would sound better.


Imo, If you have a small targeted listening position and are able to put the SS slightly behind you and angled to your seat I feel the RF-52 could be the better option.


If you have several LPs that aren't in line with the main seat (or are walking around the room while enjoying stuff) the RS-42s may work better. Try one out and understand the return policy in case it doesn't work out. Good Luck.

 

[craig john]

The RS's are wide diffusion bipoles. They'll add more ambiance than the monopole RF's. However, because they're bipoles, they'll be almost as "directional" as the RF's when the program material calls for directionality. I think Klipsch's WDST surround speakers are some of the best designed surround speakers on the market. They provide both ambiance and directionality.


I also think one of the biggest benefits of the RS's over the floorstanders is that they can be mounted above the listening position. Many movies are mixed with the assumption that the surrounds are above ear level. Airplane flyovers and other "overhead" surround effects will only sound like they are overhead if they originate above the LP. With floorstanders mounted at ear level, you'll lose any "overhead" surround effects.


However, I do agree with Zen that for multi-channel music, the floorstanders will be the better choice. There is virtually no MC music with overhead sound effects. Everything is mixed assuming speakers at ear level. If you listen to much MC music, (which you said you didn't), then the floorstanders will serve you better. Otherwise, I think the RS's mounted above ear level would be the better choice.


Just my $0.02.


Craig

 

[Zen Traveler]



Quote:
Originally Posted by craig john /forum/post/14232242


...I also think one of the biggest benefits of the RS's over the floorstanders is that they can be mounted above the listening position. Many movies are mixed with the assumption that the surrounds are above ear level. Airplane flyovers and other "overhead" surround effects will only sound like they are overhead if they originate above the LP. With floorstanders mounted at ear level, you'll lose any "overhead" surround effects.

Fwiw, my RF-3 side surrounds tweeters are raised slightly above ear level (as well as my rear RB-75s) and I don't lose that "overhead" effect. Helicopters sound so real that it sounds like they are flying over my house.

;-)


I also agree that the WDST works well in alot of situations. We use RS-3s in the Bedroom and even with multi-channel music I like them better in there because of their less than ideal positioning--For movies they work great for the reasons mentioned.

 

[ldgibson76]



Quote:
Originally Posted by craig john /forum/post/14232242


The RS's are wide diffusion bipoles. They'll add more ambiance than the monopole RF's. However, because they're bipoles, they'll be almost as "directional" as the RF's when the program material calls for directionality. I think Klipsch's WDST surround speakers are some of the best designed surround speakers on the market. They provide both ambiance and directionality.


I also think one of the biggest benefits of the RS's over the floorstanders is that they can be mounted above the listening position. Many movies are mixed with the assumption that the surrounds are above ear level. Airplane flyovers and other "overhead" surround effects will only sound like they are overhead if they originate above the LP. With floorstanders mounted at ear level, you'll lose any "overhead" surround effects.


However, I do agree with Zen that for multi-channel music, the floorstanders will be the better choice. There is virtually no MC music with overhead sound effects. Everything is mixed assuming speakers at ear level. If you listen to much MC music, (which you said you didn't), then the floorstanders will serve you better. Otherwise, I think the RS's mounted above ear level would be the better choice.


Just my $0.02.


Craig

+1. Well put!

 

[Amel]

thanks for the great replies guys


I will check them both out


Amel