Get an exclusive sneak peek into our new project. >>> Click Here
Our native mobile app has a new name: Fora Communities. Learn more.

Klipsch Rf62 Vs BnW speakers

5696 Views 17 Replies 9 Participants Last post by GoND, May 18, 2007

sansreddy

Discussion Starter · May 16, 2007

Hi Guys, thanks in advance for ur replies.

I was about to buy Klipsch Rf-62s HT system, but then I stumbled upon this guy at HT showroom and he told me Klipsch speakers tend to fatigue, when u listen for a longer period(watching a movie). He was telling me, he recomends BnW instead of Klipsch. I have heard Klipsch sound but have not heard BnW. The price for RF 62 for a 7.1 setup is around $3000. Can someone give ur views on this. Wht is the equivalent BnW speakers in the same price range for 7.1 setup. I would like to hear them b4 I make a decision..

thanks again..

sanjay

1 - 18 of 18 Posts

petergaryr

· #2 · May 16, 2007

Well, all I can offer you is that I have Klipsch RF5s as mains in an HT setup and a pair of B&W CM 7s in a stereo only system. If anything, I would say they are more similar than different in sound quality. (this is based only on my experience with those 2 specific models)

Both of these tend to have a pronounced, very detailed high end (to my ears). Others have described the same characteristics as "harsh" or "bright". I can understand their point.

All speakers, no matter what their brand, benefit from effective room treatment. If you took either Klipsch or B&W and placed them in a room with high ceilings, hardwood floors with no rugs, sparse furniture and lots of glass it might be a painful experience.

Put them in a room with wall to wall carpets, drapes, heavy furniture and maybe some sound panels and you will wind up with an extremely detailed, clear, wide and deep soundstage (which you still might not like).

Standard advice: don't buy based on what you hear in a showroom, or even from what you read here. Try to get a pair from a store that allow returns/exchanges. Try them in your home, connected to your own equipment, for at least a week or two. That should allow sufficient time for them to "break in" or for you to just get used to their sound.

See less See more

PULLIAMM

· #3 · May 16, 2007

I used to have Klipsch Reference speakers. Later, I got B&Ws and I will never look back.

sansreddy

Discussion Starter · #4 · May 16, 2007

Peter, thank u for ur input. I completelyu agree with you, about the room accousitcs too. It really makes a lot of difference.

Mr.T, can u tell me was it the music or watching movies made u feel better with B&Ws rather than Klipsch. Wht speakers do u have??

warpdrive

· #5 · May 16, 2007

Quote:
Originally Posted by petergaryr /forum/post/0

Both of these tend to have a pronounced, very detailed high end (to my ears). Others have described the same characteristics as "harsh" or "bright". I can understand their point.

I do not find the B&W CM to be anywhere resembling "pronounced" "bright" etc. In fact, the CM has been notable in the B&W line because their high end is very neutral, not too bright, not too relaxed, but smooth and detailed. Combined with a nice warm mid-bass, it may actually seem a bit laid back especially compared to the other B&W line (e.g. 700 series)

I guess from this one should conclude that it goes to show how differently people hear AND how ones' room could affect the outcome.

psgcdn

· #6 · May 16, 2007

Klipsch makes very dynamic speakers which is a great trait for HT. If you like them, don't let Mr. T scare you away. He doesn't like dynamic range and that could be part of the explanation.

PULLIAMM

· #7 · May 16, 2007

Quote:
Originally Posted by sansreddy /forum/post/0

Mr.T, can u tell me was it the music or watching movies made u feel better with B&Ws rather than Klipsch. Wht speakers do u have??

The Klipsch's I had were RF62s. My first B&Ws were 602S3s, and if I could not have afforded upgrading to the 705s, I would still be very happy with them. All listening was done in the same room, with the same electronics, for 2-channel music only.

My biggest issue with the Klipsch was the one you mentioned, they became fatiguing with extended listening. The B&W 602s are every bit as detailed, but minus the fatigue. The best way I can think to describe the difference is that they are smoother. The B&Ws also image in a way that seems more natural to me. By comparison, the Klipsch imaging seems "closed in", a bit like listening to headphones.

(PS, the idea that I "don't like dynamic range" is utterly ridiculous. I love music with full dynamic range, which the B&Ws do very well. What I don't like is the artificially expanded dynamic range on some modern movie soundtracks.

)

See less See more

petergaryr

· #8 · May 16, 2007

Quote:
Originally Posted by warpdrive /forum/post/0

I do not find the B&W CM to be anywhere resembling "pronounced" "bright" etc. In fact, the CM has been notable in the B&W line because their high end is very neutral, not too bright, not too relaxed, but smooth and detailed. Combined with a nice warm mid-bass, it may actually seem a bit laid back especially compared to the other B&W line (e.g. 700 series)

I guess from this one should conclude that it goes to show how differently people hear AND how ones' room could affect the outcome.

Absolutely.

I will add this to the mix. I know there are other threads that get into the "all amps sound alike/no they don't" debate. I can only speak from my own experience and this is what I have observed with the CM 7s.

They have been connected to: a Denon Receiver, a Rotel separates RC1070/RB1070 combo, a Yamaha receiver and finally, the Yamaha used as a pre/pro going into a Crown K1 amp.

The CM7s sounded really good with the Denon. They were even better with the Rotel. They were ok with the Yamaha. They are REALLY good with the Yamaha/Crown combo. I appears that the more clean power that is available to them, the better they do.

See less See more

cschang

· #9 · May 16, 2007

Not for the the CM7, but here are some just published measurements for the CM1:
http://www.soundstagenetwork.com/mea...eakers/bw_cm1/

WolfsBane

· #10 · May 16, 2007

Quote:
Originally Posted by sansreddy /forum/post/0

Hi Guys, thanks in advance for ur replies.

I was about to buy Klipsch Rf-62s HT system, but then I stumbled upon this guy at HT showroom and he told me Klipsch speakers tend to fatigue, when u listen for a longer period(watching a movie). He was telling me, he recomends BnW instead of Klipsch. I have heard Klipsch sound but have not heard BnW. The price for RF 62 for a 7.1 setup is around $3000. Can someone give ur views on this. Wht is the equivalent BnW speakers in the same price range for 7.1 setup. I would like to hear them b4 I make a decision..

thanks again..

sanjay

Can offer an opinion only....

I've heard both, and currently own a modified RF-82 system. My system was bought and calibrated for music first and HT second. I've had teens at home with the system on for music and HT for close to 18 hours a day. Not even a hint of fatigue whatsoever. The new Reference IV systems have redesigned horn systems that makes them much smoother than previous Klipsch speakers. I tend to prefer the Klipsch over B&W, but this is not a knock on the B&W... this is my choice and personal preference. I love the clarity, dynamic range, and sound rendering of the Klipsch. If you get a chance, my advise would be to try to listen to both before making a choice.

Pulliamm...

You must be referring to the famous, (or infamous), MAX Dynamic Range setting on some AVRs. In some ways, I agree... It just doesn't make a whole lot of sense... We diligently calibrate our HT systems on a standard dynamic range setting like we are supposed. And then when we watch a movie, we are going to crank it to MAX and throw the whole speaker calibration off???? And some of these DVDs are already engineered to hot to start with....

See less See more

psgcdn

· #11 · May 16, 2007

Quote:
Originally Posted by WolfsBane /forum/post/0

Pulliamm...

You must be referring to the famous, (or infamous), MAX Dynamic Range setting on some AVRs. In some ways, I agree... It just doesn't make a whole lot of sense... We diligently calibrate our HT systems on a standard dynamic range setting like we are supposed. And then when we watch a movie, we are going to crank it to MAX and throw the whole speaker calibration off???? And some of these DVDs are already engineered to hot to start with....

I'm not sure...

We are talking about DRC (Dynamic Range Compression), sometimes labeled as midnight-mode. Enabling DRC or MM reduces the dynamic range of Doldy Digital movie soundtracks, sometimes by as much as 15 dB, away from normal (and from what you calibrated for). Action movies with DRC engaged are boring, not better. But I suppose if your speakers strain to handle the peaks, you gotta use it!

GoND

· #12 · May 17, 2007

I have the Klipsch RF-83's with corresponding center and surrounds, and one thing that I've been really impressed by is their detail at lower volumes. You don't have to crank them to all hell for them to sound good.

My reasoning for choosing them is that my price range was to buy a 5 speaker system (already had a decent sub) for a carpeted basement and not spend over $2,500, which I came in under by a few hundred bucks due to a great sale here in Indianapolis at Ovation Audio/Video. I preferred the Klipsch speakers over any others in this price range, and I listened to a lot of choices.

Sure, some people find them bright, but for my room and my usage (mostly HT) I really like them.

warpdrive

· #13 · May 17, 2007

Quote:
Originally Posted by WolfsBane /forum/post/0

You must be referring to the famous, (or infamous), MAX Dynamic Range setting on some AVRs. In some ways, I agree... It just doesn't make a whole lot of sense... We diligently calibrate our HT systems on a standard dynamic range setting like we are supposed. And then when we watch a movie, we are going to crank it to MAX and throw the whole speaker calibration off???? And some of these DVDs are already engineered to hot to start with....

I don't think you have the right understanding of dynamic range. You WANT the Max Dynamic Range setting for most AVR's because that setting is essentially Dynamic Range COMPRESSION == OFF, which is going to give you the same dynamic range as what's on the disk. On my Yamaha, setting it to Max gives you the most unaltered sound.

There are no AVR's that I'm aware of that expand dynamic range artificially when set to Max because that would just suppress low level information and make it even harder to hear details. Do you know of any that do that?

Soundood

· #14 · May 17, 2007

There is a fundamental misunderstanding that most people have of horn speakers like Klipsch. First off, the nature of a horn speaker is not that it is "bright", but the horn driver itself is highly efficient. This is because, unlike a regular speaker design, the horn directs more energy in a very defined area. This has a TON of advantages, particularly in commercial cinema systems which are absolutely dominated by horn designs (and, by the way, now dominated by Klipsch). It has huge advantages in dynamics and impact since less energy is wasted going to areas of the room where you don't want it. The DISadvantage to this in a home environment is that the horn design tends to put more energy into the seating area and then into the back of the room where it is typically reflected back, causing a lot of excessive energy. In addition, in a long narrow space, the first reflective points on the Klipsch are going to be much stronger and side wall acoustics are not only a good idea, but they will need to be a different design than a typical "spray it everywhere" conventional driver.

By the nature of their design, the Klipsch compression driver and horn is NOT bright or fatiguing or harsh. The titanium compression driver used in their top end products (The larger Ref Series V models, THX Ultra 2 and the current Heritage Series) is actually extremely smooth, highly refined, extended, and very low distortion. With the higher efficiency, the Klipsch will remain in the lower distortion ranges at higher levels in a large or heavily damped space vs. a traditional driver design that is often operating at the top end of it's design envelope and has a high level of rising distortion, particularly when combined with the underpowered amps found in 95% of most home theaters.

What IS an issue is that many people have smaller non-acoustically treated bright rooms where a horn design will reflect more top end energy tilting the tonal balance upwards. This is NOT a defect in the speaker but a reflection (

) of the room acoustics. Ideally, your theater room SHOULD be acoustically treated (if you don't, you are missing out on the single greatest improvement you can possibly make to your system). In a room that IS treated and well damped, a speaker like the B&W can sound dull, and compressed, where the Klipsch will sound balanced clear and will still have tremendous dynamic impact. I tried both when we were evaluating a new speaker line and in my treated demo demo space, the Klipsch simply walked all over the B&W's (the bigger Nautilus series) which I simply could not get to sound good no matter how much horsepower we threw at them. In smaller or narrow reflective spaces, the Klipsch may be bright due to the acoustics. This does NOT mean there is anything wrong with the Klipsch design...only that there are acoustic issues that preclude that design from working successfully in that particular space, just as the B&W's are the wrong choice for a larger highly damped theater.

Point is, the people who make a blanket statement that Klipsch is "bright" are totally misrepresenting the nature of the product and do not understand the advantages and limitations of the design. I find that half the time, they have rooms that are acoustic nightmares and that they are underpowering the systems or have mixed the speakers with electronics that emphasize the top end (done to balance the many "dull" speakers out there. Done properly with the right mix of electronics, a good install and decent room acoustics, there are few systems out there, short of high end commercial cinema products, that will compete with the bigger Klipsch Reference series or THX Ultra 2 systems in my experience.

See less See more

Reactions: 1

PULLIAMM

· #15 · May 17, 2007

Quote:
Originally Posted by psgcdn /forum/post/0

I'm not sure...

We are talking about DRC (Dynamic Range Compression), sometimes labeled as midnight-mode. Enabling DRC or MM reduces the dynamic range of Doldy Digital movie soundtracks, sometimes by as much as 15 dB, away from normal (and from what you calibrated for). Action movies with DRC engaged are boring, not better. But I suppose if your speakers strain to handle the peaks, you gotta use it!

My comment about modern movie soundtracks referred to the soundtracks themselves, not to AVR settings. Many of them have very excessive (and very far from "realistic") dynamic range. I can hardly stand to watch movies like that (eg WOTW) in a commercial theater, but using DRC at home compensates for it. My HT speakers very definitely do not strain to handle the peaks, but that is irrelevant to the current discussion since I only mentioned my stereo speakers.

WolfsBane

· #16 · May 17, 2007

Quote:
Originally Posted by psgcdn /forum/post/0

I'm not sure...

We are talking about DRC (Dynamic Range Compression), sometimes labeled as midnight-mode. Enabling DRC or MM reduces the dynamic range of Doldy Digital movie soundtracks, sometimes by as much as 15 dB, away from normal (and from what you calibrated for). Action movies with DRC engaged are boring, not better. But I suppose if your speakers strain to handle the peaks, you gotta use it!

Nope

Definitely not what I was eluding to. My understanding was that midnight mode, or night mode as it is also called is supposed to be only intended for listening to movies in the evening when you want to quiet down sound effects and not wake up someone that may be sleeping. It is not supposed to be a permanent setting for continuos listening.

WolfsBane

· #17 · May 17, 2007

Quote:
Originally Posted by warpdrive /forum/post/0

I don't think you have the right understanding of dynamic range. You WANT the Max Dynamic Range setting for most AVR's because that setting is essentially Dynamic Range COMPRESSION == OFF, which is going to give you the same dynamic range as what's on the disk. On my Yamaha, setting it to Max gives you the most unaltered sound.

There are no AVR's that I'm aware of that expand dynamic range artificially when set to Max because that would just suppress low level information and make it even harder to hear details. Do you know of any that do that?

No... not really. Most issues with dynamic range that I've experience can be tracked down to the source, (the way the DVD was engineered). There are some well engineered DVDs out there. But there are some down right ugly DVDs out there as well. They jack up the dynamic range on the source to bolster sound effects and LFE at the expense of everything else.

GoND

· #18 · May 18, 2007

Quote:
Originally Posted by Soundood /forum/post/0

There is a fundamental misunderstanding that most people have of horn speakers like Klipsch. First off, the nature of a horn speaker is not that it is "bright", but the horn driver itself is highly efficient. This is because, unlike a regular speaker design, the horn directs more energy in a very defined area. This has a TON of advantages, particularly in commercial cinema systems which are absolutely dominated by horn designs (and, by the way, now dominated by Klipsch). It has huge advantages in dynamics and impact since less energy is wasted going to areas of the room where you don't want it. The DISadvantage to this in a home environment is that the horn design tends to put more energy into the seating area and then into the back of the room where it is typically reflected back, causing a lot of excessive energy. In addition, in a long narrow space, the first reflective points on the Klipsch are going to be much stronger and side wall acoustics are not only a good idea, but they will need to be a different design than a typical "spray it everywhere" conventional driver.

By the nature of their design, the Klipsch compression driver and horn is NOT bright or fatiguing or harsh. The titanium compression driver used in their top end products (The larger Ref Series V models, THX Ultra 2 and the current Heritage Series) is actually extremely smooth, highly refined, extended, and very low distortion. With the higher efficiency, the Klipsch will remain in the lower distortion ranges at higher levels in a large or heavily damped space vs. a traditional driver design that is often operating at the top end of it's design envelope and has a high level of rising distortion, particularly when combined with the underpowered amps found in 95% of most home theaters.

What IS an issue is that many people have smaller non-acoustically treated bright rooms where a horn design will reflect more top end energy tilting the tonal balance upwards. This is NOT a defect in the speaker but a reflection (

) of the room acoustics. Ideally, your theater room SHOULD be acoustically treated (if you don't, you are missing out on the single greatest improvement you can possibly make to your system). In a room that IS treated and well damped, a speaker like the B&W can sound dull, and compressed, where the Klipsch will sound balanced clear and will still have tremendous dynamic impact. I tried both when we were evaluating a new speaker line and in my treated demo demo space, the Klipsch simply walked all over the B&W's (the bigger Nautilus series) which I simply could not get to sound good no matter how much horsepower we threw at them. In smaller or narrow reflective spaces, the Klipsch may be bright due to the acoustics. This does NOT mean there is anything wrong with the Klipsch design...only that there are acoustic issues that preclude that design from working successfully in that particular space, just as the B&W's are the wrong choice for a larger highly damped theater.

Point is, the people who make a blanket statement that Klipsch is "bright" are totally misrepresenting the nature of the product and do not understand the advantages and limitations of the design. I find that half the time, they have rooms that are acoustic nightmares and that they are underpowering the systems or have mixed the speakers with electronics that emphasize the top end (done to balance the many "dull" speakers out there. Done properly with the right mix of electronics, a good install and decent room acoustics, there are few systems out there, short of high end commercial cinema products, that will compete with the bigger Klipsch Reference series or THX Ultra 2 systems in my experience.

Thanks for taking the time to provide that info. What room treatments have you found the most beneficial? Mine are in a finished basement with carpet and 9 foot ceilings, and I could easily incorporate some sound treatments once I knew what people were using that works best.

1 - 18 of 18 Posts

This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.