difference between klipsch rf-3II and rf-35 (1 Viewer)

[BradleyS.]

I Know the rf-35 series took the place of the rf-3II series, but is there actually any difference in them? I dont know if they are voice matched, but im assuming they are. Would it be bad to run two different series together in the same system? I was thinking about using a rc-7 center channel with the rest of the rf-3II line since the center is really the "main" speaker used for voice dialoque.

 

[Rick-S]

From what a salesman told me, the new drivers are slightly better. In addition, the driver in the RF-35 is front mounted as opposed to rear mounted in the RF-3II. According to him, this will produce better sound. I listened to both and to me they sound similar.
I am using the RB-75's which have the same horn as the RF-7's and my center speaker is the RC-3II. I emailed Klipsch about the mis-match and they said that it would be fine and cause no problems as far as timber matching was concerned.

I eventually would like to get the RC-7 just because it is superior to what I am using.

 

[ChrisLazarko]

They are similiar from what I have heard too. I haven't heard the RF3's but I have heard the RF-35 and they were very nice.

 

[James W. Johnson]

There is very little difference in sound between the RF-35 and older RF-3IIs.
I purchased an RC-35 center to use as a center with my RF-3IIs ..mixing and matching the old series with the new is just fine because they are a very close match.

On the other hand the RB-75, RF-5 , RF-7 and RC-7 dont really match the above speakers because they use a larger and much different compression driver.

I would not use an RC-7 with the RF-3IIs.

 

[Rick-S]

Why don't you email tech support at Klipsch (see www.klipsch.com) and ask this question.
That would be straight from the horse's mouth!!
They will answer you within 2-3 days.

 

[James W. Johnson]

The RF-35 and RF-3IIs are vitually identical in every regard except the RF-3IIs compression driver is crossed abit lower and it uses slightly different drivers.
The driver orientation is the same on both speakers and both are rear ported.
The RF-3II have a slightly higher power handling rating, have a slightly bigger cabinet and are a few pounds heavier.

I have heard them both and they sound identical to my ears, if anything the RF-3IIs are slightly better because
of the larger cabinet, lower crossover point and higher power handling.
Klipsch decided to raise the price to $1000 on the RF-35 while the RF-3IIs were only $850 msrp , they were forced to do this because the Synergy line at BB is taking on the old Reference pricing as the new SF-3s are $850 a pair.

 

[James W. Johnson]

Better yet, give them a call. They will tell you that they are very closely matched.



Now as I stated the RF-35s and older RF-3IIs are very similar the older RC-3II and new RC-35 are quite different, the newer center is better IMO because its
ported and has a tapered xover instead of a basic 2 way like the old RC-3II had.


The newer bookshelf are also improved , especially the RB-25 compared to the older RB-3. The latter was never really suitable for surround duty as a wall mount because it was rear ported , the RB-25 are front ported and have the wall mount hardware built onto the cabinet...these are excellent surrounds for someone who prefers a direct radiator and is tight on space.

 

[Rick-S]

Better yet, give them a call. They will tell you that they are very closely matched

LOL, well...is it a match or not??

Hopefully Klipsch will know the answer which ever method he uses to contact them.

 

[James W. Johnson]

I was reffering to the match between the older RF-3IIs and newer RF-35s and the rest of the mid line.

The upper end line does not match with the mid series line.

 

[James W. Johnson]

Oh and I dont know what number you are using but I get thru every time with no problems, they are very CS oriented in my experience.
The number is..
1-800-KLIPSCH (1-800-554-7724)

 

[Frank Carter]

I've never had a problem getting through to Klipsch as well either. One time I did leave a message and I received a call about 15 min later. I think their customer service is excellent.

 

[BradleyS.]

well I think i'm just going to go with the rf-3II because there slightly cheaper than the rf-35's and theres basically no sound difference. I'll use the extra money to put towards a svs pb2-isd.

 

[Rick-S]

Wise decision!!

A SVS is on my wish list too.....hopefully very soon. You will enjoy your RF-3II's.

 

[James W. Johnson]

Ditto. I did the same thing.

I have RF-3IIs on the mains, RB-25 surrounds and an RC-35 center and I love them.

 

[Rick-S]

I have RF-3IIs on the mains, RB-25 surrounds

James, I envy that you have the floor/wall space to use bookshelves as surrounds!
I have lattice work on one wall so I have to go with something that mounts from the crown molding.
What do you think about the RS-35's as L/R surrounds? My only hesitation is that I want localization and not wide dispersion. I am sure you are aware that the tweeters are mounted at 180 deg angles with the woofer in the middle at 90 deg.
Do you think I would still hear the L & R speakers rather than a dispersed sound?

 

[James W. Johnson]

Rick, I went with the RB-25s because they extend lower and work better for surrounds in my situation and I do prefer direct radiators.

They are not all that big and IMO the perfect surround. They extend down to 49Hz vs 81Hz on the RS-35s, furthermore they installed so easy, a single screw and hang em....thats it.

http://mywebpages.comcast.net/bentvalve/new4.jpg

http://mywebpages.comcast.net/bentvalve/new2.jpg