Short answer: the Klipsch RP-600M II. It ranks #74 of 130 bookshelf speakers by sound quality at $449.99; the Zu Audio Method ranks #128 and costs $700, which makes this an easy call rather than a real tradeoff.
What the Klipsch RP-600M II offers: Redesigned waveguide extends flush to the baffle edge, reducing diffraction compared to the original RP-600M. Roughly 10-20° wider horizontal radiation than the original, giving more soundstage envelopment while retaining precise imaging. A major step up in overall tonal neutrality compared to the original RP-600M, largely eliminating that model’s midrange resonance issues. Unusually, sounds better with the grille on - the grille smooths out the elevated treble rather than degrading the sound, a rare trait among speakers the reviewer has tested. More refined back-panel hardware, including anodized binding posts and jumper cables for optional bi-amping. Responds well to EQ correction (verified using measurement software and a miniDSP), letting the on-axis response be made genuinely linear. Watch for: On-axis, the treble runs notably hot - even hotter than the original RP-600M in some respects - and needs about 20° of toe-out or the grille installed to sound balanced. Horizontal dispersion is very slightly less linear across angles than the original RP-600M, a minor trade-off for the wider overall radiation pattern. Klipsch’s marketed sensitivity (about 94.5dB) is, like the original, a half-space rating roughly 9dB above the anechoic reality (closer to 85-86dB). In-room bass rolls off around 60Hz in practice, and a 120Hz boost paired with a midrange scoop gives kick drums their “tambour” without real low-end weight - a subwoofer is still recommended. Vertical listening tolerance is limited to about ±10° from the tweeter axis. Toeing the speaker out for better on-axis tonality (rather than using the grille) introduces slightly more diffuse imaging from added sidewall reflections.
What the Zu Audio Method offers: High-sensitivity design (measured about 90-90.7dB average through the 300Hz-3kHz vocal range), making it easy to drive to loud levels with modest amplifier power. Not a difficult electrical load - minimum impedance around 5.8 ohms, compatible with most 8-ohm-rated amplifiers, though Class A/AB amps should have good ventilation given a 3-ohm minimum EPDR. Verified not to be a defective unit: both speakers in the pair measured consistently with each other, and an independent reviewer’s own measurements of the same model matched the findings here. Watch for: A severe suckout in the 1.5-3kHz range (down as much as 19dB below the mean at its worst) removes attack and clarity from brass, woodwinds, and snares, and gives an overall laid-back, unengaging character. Erratic, inconsistent high-frequency response - alternating between accentuated and subdued at different frequencies - makes cymbals, hi-hats, and sibilant vocal sounds behave unpredictably from track to track. Directivity is poor and inconsistent with frequency, meaning off-axis (sidewall-reflected) energy is actually louder than the direct sound in several bands - a problem that fundamentally cannot be corrected with EQ, since boosting the direct sound would boost the already-too-loud reflections even more. High sensitivity comes at the direct cost of bass extension: F3 of 92Hz and F10 of 56Hz mean essentially no meaningful bass. Despite the high sensitivity, dynamic headroom is poor rather than better as often assumed - distortion in the higher frequencies creates what the reviewer calls an “electronic glare.” Third-order harmonic distortion peaks sharply around 6-7kHz, contributing to an edgy, metallic quality on cymbals and hi-hats, and multitone distortion crosses the reviewer’s 3% threshold. Instantaneous compression testing shows serious dynamic-range issues specifically in the treble (a dip around 2kHz, a peak around 4kHz, and a large dip across 5-7kHz). Vertical radiation has an unusually narrow sweet spot, since the midrange driver beams while the tweeter stays wide, creating a mismatch. Switching to a high-output-impedance amplifier shifts the response by roughly 1-1.5dB in places but doesn’t come close to correcting the fundamental frequency-response problems. Toeing the speakers out reduces some of the on-axis dip’s severity but doesn’t restore a properly immersive soundstage, since off-axis and on-axis response remain too different from each other.
Buy the Klipsch RP-600M II. It ranks higher for sound quality than the Zu Audio Method and costs less, so the other one has nothing left to offer.
If sound quality matters at all to you, skip the Zu Audio Method. It ranks near the bottom of the 130 bookshelf speakers, so look higher up the list instead.
Want more options? Browse the full Passive Home rankings.
Specifications Side By Side
| Klipsch RP-600M II | Zu Audio Method | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $449.99 per pair | $700 per pair |
| Ranked | #74 of 130 in Large Size Bookshelf Speakers | #128 of 130 in Large Size Bookshelf Speakers |
| Bass Extension (-10dB) | 41Hz (measured, Erin's Audio Corner) | 56Hz (measured, Erin's Audio Corner) |
| Bass Extension (-3dB) | 70Hz (measured, Erin's Audio Corner) | 92Hz (measured, Erin's Audio Corner) |
| Dimensions | 15.7"H x 8"W x 12.5"D (398.8 x 203.2 x 317.5 mm) | 15"H x 8.7"W x 11"D (381.0 x 222.0 x 280.0 mm) |
| Impedance | 8 ohms nominal (3.5 ohms minimum above 80Hz, measured by Erin's Audio Corner) | 8 ohms |
| Sensitivity | 86dB (measured, Erin's Audio Corner) | 91dB |
| Drivers | 6.5" Cerametallic cone woofer, 1" titanium LTS vented tweeter with Tractrix horn | 8" coax HE (Eminence/Zu) woofer, Eminence ASD-1001 tweeter |
| Weight | 13 lbs (5.9 kg) each | 12.1 lbs (5.5 kg) |
| Woofer Cabinet | ported | ported, front |
| Spinorama Preference Score | 4.75 | -0.39 |
| Spinorama Preference Score with Perfect Sub | 6.88 | 2.40 |
Related Speaker Comparisons
How Klipsch RP-600M II compares with other leading options:
- Klipsch RP-600M II vs KEF Reference 1 Meta
- Klipsch RP-600M II vs GR-Research NX-Studio
- Klipsch RP-600M II vs March Audio Sointuva AWG
- Klipsch RP-600M II vs AsciLab C6B
- Klipsch RP-600M II vs Audio First Cadentia 3
Prices on this page were last checked September 14, 2026 at 1:47 AM UTC. Product prices and availability are accurate as of that date/time and are subject to change; the price and availability shown on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply to the purchase of this product.
As an eBay Partner, we may be compensated if you make a purchase.
The Two Speakers In Full
Klipsch RP-600M II: $449.99 per pair Amazon eBay
Pros: Redesigned waveguide extends flush to the baffle edge, reducing diffraction compared to the original RP-600M. Roughly 10-20° wider horizontal radiation than the original, giving more soundstage envelopment while retaining precise imaging. A major step up in overall tonal neutrality compared to the original RP-600M, largely eliminating that model’s midrange resonance issues. Unusually, sounds better with the grille on - the grille smooths out the elevated treble rather than degrading the sound, a rare trait among speakers the reviewer has tested. More refined back-panel hardware, including anodized binding posts and jumper cables for optional bi-amping. Responds well to EQ correction (verified using measurement software and a miniDSP), letting the on-axis response be made genuinely linear. Measured bass extension of 70Hz (-3dB), with a measured sensitivity of 86dB.
Cons: On-axis, the treble runs notably hot - even hotter than the original RP-600M in some respects - and needs about 20° of toe-out or the grille installed to sound balanced. Horizontal dispersion is very slightly less linear across angles than the original RP-600M, a minor trade-off for the wider overall radiation pattern. Klipsch’s marketed sensitivity (about 94.5dB) is, like the original, a half-space rating roughly 9dB above the anechoic reality (closer to 85-86dB). In-room bass rolls off around 60Hz in practice, and a 120Hz boost paired with a midrange scoop gives kick drums their “tambour” without real low-end weight - a subwoofer is still recommended. Vertical listening tolerance is limited to about ±10° from the tweeter axis. Toeing the speaker out for better on-axis tonality (rather than using the grille) introduces slightly more diffuse imaging from added sidewall reflections.
Full Klipsch RP-600M II review and specifications →
| Bass Extension (-10dB) | 41Hz (measured, Erin's Audio Corner) |
|---|---|
| Bass Extension (-3dB) | 70Hz (measured, Erin's Audio Corner) |
| Dimensions | 15.7"H x 8"W x 12.5"D (398.8 x 203.2 x 317.5 mm) |
| Drivers | 6.5" Cerametallic cone woofer, 1" titanium LTS vented tweeter with Tractrix horn |
| Impedance | 8 ohms nominal (3.5 ohms minimum above 80Hz, measured by Erin's Audio Corner) |
| Sensitivity | 86dB (measured, Erin's Audio Corner) |
| Spinorama Preference Score | 4.75 |
| Spinorama Preference Score with Perfect Sub | 6.88 |
| Weight | 13 lbs (5.9 kg) each |
| Woofer Cabinet | ported |
- Links
- Reviews, Comparisons and Sound Samples
- Erin’s Audio Corner: The Truth about Klipsch’s “NEW” Sound. RP-600M Update. More from Erin’s Audio Corner →
- Erin’s Audio Corner Website Klipsch RP-600M II
- GR-Research: We Bought The "NEW" RP-600M II Is KLIPSCH Listening?! More from GR-Research →
- Erin’s Audio Corner: 5 AWESOME SPEAKERS Under $1000 You Won’t Regret
- Erin’s Audio Corner Measurements (spinorama.org)
- Head-to-Head Comparisons
- Klipsch RP-600M II vs Dynaudio Emit 20
- Klipsch RP-600M II vs Philharmonic BMR Monitor
- Klipsch RP-600M II vs JBL Studio 630
- Klipsch RP-600M II vs Behringer B2030P
- Klipsch RP-600M II vs Ascend CBM-170 SE2
- Klipsch RP-600M II vs Infinity Reference R162
- Klipsch RP-600M II vs GR-Research X-LS Encore
- Klipsch RP-600M II vs Infinity IL10
- See all 72 comparisons
Zu Audio Method: $700 per pair Zuaudio eBay
Pros: High-sensitivity design (measured about 90-90.7dB average through the 300Hz-3kHz vocal range), making it easy to drive to loud levels with modest amplifier power. Not a difficult electrical load - minimum impedance around 5.8 ohms, compatible with most 8-ohm-rated amplifiers, though Class A/AB amps should have good ventilation given a 3-ohm minimum EPDR. Verified not to be a defective unit: both speakers in the pair measured consistently with each other, and an independent reviewer’s own measurements of the same model matched the findings here. Measured bass extension of 92Hz (-3dB).
Cons: A severe suckout in the 1.5-3kHz range (down as much as 19dB below the mean at its worst) removes attack and clarity from brass, woodwinds, and snares, and gives an overall laid-back, unengaging character. Erratic, inconsistent high-frequency response - alternating between accentuated and subdued at different frequencies - makes cymbals, hi-hats, and sibilant vocal sounds behave unpredictably from track to track. Directivity is poor and inconsistent with frequency, meaning off-axis (sidewall-reflected) energy is actually louder than the direct sound in several bands - a problem that fundamentally cannot be corrected with EQ, since boosting the direct sound would boost the already-too-loud reflections even more. High sensitivity comes at the direct cost of bass extension: F3 of 92Hz and F10 of 56Hz mean essentially no meaningful bass. Despite the high sensitivity, dynamic headroom is poor rather than better as often assumed - distortion in the higher frequencies creates what the reviewer calls an “electronic glare.” Third-order harmonic distortion peaks sharply around 6-7kHz, contributing to an edgy, metallic quality on cymbals and hi-hats, and multitone distortion crosses the reviewer’s 3% threshold. Instantaneous compression testing shows serious dynamic-range issues specifically in the treble (a dip around 2kHz, a peak around 4kHz, and a large dip across 5-7kHz). Vertical radiation has an unusually narrow sweet spot, since the midrange driver beams while the tweeter stays wide, creating a mismatch. Switching to a high-output-impedance amplifier shifts the response by roughly 1-1.5dB in places but doesn’t come close to correcting the fundamental frequency-response problems. Toeing the speakers out reduces some of the on-axis dip’s severity but doesn’t restore a properly immersive soundstage, since off-axis and on-axis response remain too different from each other.
Full Zu Audio Method review and specifications →
| Bass Extension (-10dB) | 56Hz (measured, Erin's Audio Corner) |
|---|---|
| Bass Extension (-3dB) | 92Hz (measured, Erin's Audio Corner) |
| Dimensions | 15"H x 8.7"W x 11"D (381.0 x 222.0 x 280.0 mm) |
| Drivers | 8" coax HE (Eminence/Zu) woofer, Eminence ASD-1001 tweeter |
| Impedance | 8 ohms |
| Sensitivity | 91dB |
| Spinorama Preference Score | -0.39 |
| Spinorama Preference Score with Perfect Sub | 2.40 |
| Weight | 12.1 lbs (5.5 kg) |
| Woofer Cabinet | ported, front |
- Links
- Reviews, Comparisons and Sound Samples
- Head-to-Head Comparisons
- Zu Audio Method vs Polk Monitor XT20
- Zu Audio Method vs ELAC Debut 2.0 B6.2
- Zu Audio Method vs GR-Research X-LS Encore
- Zu Audio Method vs HiVi Swans 3.1A Sehlin Sound Solutions mod
- Zu Audio Method vs ELAC Debut 3.0 DB63
- Zu Audio Method vs MoFi SourcePoint 10
- Zu Audio Method vs AsciLab C6B
- Zu Audio Method vs GR-Research NX-Studio