XR27+XLS112 Vs. Klipsch RF-7II's - Need help

[JWJW]

I currently have a pair of Klipsch RF-7II floor stander’s that I have been running with my all Mc, MA7000 system. I’ve been semi-happy with their performance….but….The way my home/listening space is laid out, the RF's are a HUGE eye-sore. WAF is zero – and I agree with her. As a solution, I could go with some onwall’s (or inwalls) plus a sub and replace the behemoth RF’s. In fact, by doing this, the speakers would be located in a better listening position/location in our home.
When I think of “onwall or inwall,” I immediately associate these with home theater – not critical music listening. Am I wrong for thinking this way?
A few questions….

• Does anyone on the forum use XR27’s + sub as their main listening speakers for music only (not in an HT configuration)?
• Would this onwall configuration be a viable option to replace my RF’s?
• Or, would I be better off installing WS350’s plus a sub?

Your input please :scratch2:

 

[MX117.MC7150]

Can you post a pic of your listening space as seen from the listening position? There may be other solutions that you are not 'seeing'.

 

[c_dk]

More systems would sound better with properly placed smaller speakers integrated with the room.

 

[GOTSVT?]

I have RF7's and love them!

 

[woodlander]

I can't help but point out that the XR-27s are intended to be center channel speakers. The XLS340s are designed to be used as either in wall or on wall speakers. A pair of those, plus a good sub should sound fine.

I have used Klipsch RF-83s in the past. WAF aside, I find they are too bright for my tastes. I think you will like the change.

 

[c_dk]

I tried for years after Rogers hands were tied to get my sales guys to support McIntosh speakers in the smaller sizes. I failed, they would not buy into them. It seemed to me that McIntosh has continued to abandon speakers that are designed for correct room interaction , they seem now even more so to be designed to fullfill egos

 

[MX117.MC7150]

The XLS340s are designed to be used as either in wall or on wall speakers. A pair of those, plus a good sub should sound fine.

Believe you meant the XLS320s rather than the full-size, floor-standing XLS340s, which are about the same size as the OPs current Klipsch speakers..

Of all the "vintage" McIntosh speakers, the XRT18s might work the best with their smaller mid/bass module and tweeter array that is designed to be hung on the wall. But, c_dk's statement about egos would seem to fit those who worry about "who's is the biggest".

 

[whoaru99]

When I think of “onwall or inwall,” I immediately associate these with home theater – not critical music listening. Am I wrong for thinking this way?

Yes....but moreso from a philosophical standpoint because in my opinion good home theater is harder to do than good 2-ch playback for a number of reasons including more gear to get right and source material that is, IMO, more demanding of the gear.

Aside from that, personally, I've never heard a "good" inwall or wall-hanging speaker to comment on the pure performance aspect. To me, my "judge a book by the cover" impression is that they'd be a compromise of performance for asthetics.

 

[c_dk]

Dedicated woofer systems (biamping) radically changed pro audio for the better. Twenty years later, kicking and screaming, it will drag amateur home audio into better sound also.

I see many posted pictures of speakers towering over rooms and I shake my head because with a look like that it will continue to KILL audio like tail fins and chrome died on cars.

There was a continuity that Mac had that made sense to customers:
ML10,1,2,4
XR3,5,6,7
XL10,XR14,16,18,19,20 the oddball 1051

Is there that family continuity now with multiple choices in woofer systems and satellites for todays growth market?

 

[woodlander]

Believe you meant the XLS320s rather than the full-size, floor-standing XLS340s, which are about the same size as the OPs current Klipsch speakers..

Of all the "vintage" McIntosh speakers, the XRT18s might work the best with their smaller mid/bass module and tweeter array that is designed to be hung on the wall. But, c_dk's statement about egos would seem to fit those who worry about "who's is the biggest".

No, actually, I mean XLS340s. McIntosh says they are intended for in wall, or on wall installation. Check it yourself.

http://www.mcintoshlabs.com/products/mcintosh-xls340-3-way-loudspeaker.asp

The XLS320s would be another option, of course.

 

[c_dk]

The Academy series was quite new when I last worked for a McIntosh dealer and the completion from M&K was tough before they hired a marketing specialist to broaden their appeal and imploded.

I think a 320 triplet with a fast woofer system would be an interesting multi channel music system.

The 340 as listed are available as on walls but WAF could be tough at 46 inches tall.

Isn't a typical big thin screen about 35-38 inches tall?

 

[whoaru99]

Dedicated woofer systems (biamping) radically changed pro audio for the better. Twenty years later, kicking and screaming, it will drag amateur home audio into better sound also.

I see many posted pictures of speakers towering over rooms and I shake my head because with a look like that it will continue to KILL audio like tail fins and chrome died on cars.

There was a continuity that Mac had that made sense to customers:
ML10,1,2,4
XR3,5,6,7
XL10,XR14,16,18,19,20 the oddball 1051

Is there that family continuity now with multiple choices in woofer systems and satellites for todays growth market?

I'm not quite sure I follow...everyone that I know that has a "good" HT system uses subwoofers, often multiple. Small satellite speakers are a bit of a controversy because a nice sub certainly handles the lows with aplomb but I've found that the mid-bass "punch" can be somewhat lacking with satellite speakers, bookshelf-type, and smaller monitor-type speakers.

 

[c_dk]

I guess you have already proved my point... under what circumstance/design criteria could a smaller speaker provide correct bass and not overwhelm the room with it's size. That would allow the sub to be what it is supposed to be .... an effect channel.

 

[whoaru99]

I guess you have already proved my point... under what circumstance/design criteria could a smaller speaker provide correct bass and not overwhelm the room with it's size. That would allow the sub to be what it is supposed to be .... an effect channel.

I'm not clear on what you're saying here.

I often see people saying smaller speakers are easier to place but I don't necessarily agree. Unless you have the small speakers in-wall or ceiling mounted (which usually compromises the positioning as much or more, IMO) a small speaker on a stand takes about the same footprint as a larger floorstander.