Rt16

ratster

The local craigslist has a pair of RT16's for $250.00.

Would these be a upgrade to my Monitor 60's?

What would my gains/losses be?

They would be powered by a HK3490

Thanks,
Rhett

dane_peterson

I would personally pass on them for $250. I'm sure there are several members here who like that speaker, but I don't know that I'd throw that much coin at them.

If you work him down to $150 or so, pick 'em up and do a side-by-side. Your receiver's remote has an A/B switch button, so it would be easy to do so.

ratster

dane_peterson wrote: »

I would personally pass on them for $250. I'm sure there are several members here who like that speaker, but I don't know that I'd throw that much coin at them.

If you work him down to $150 or so, pick 'em up and do a side-by-side. Your receiver's remote has an A/B switch button, so it would be easy to do so.

Ok.Thanks

mantis

The rt16's are excellent speakers and one of my all time favorite polk speakers. For 250.0 if they are in good shape , I'd say pick them up and A-B them as said above. I'm gonna assume they will out perform your monitors.

If for nothing else you can resell them for what you pair or so and not really lose anything. Really the experience is worth it.

falconcry72

I have a pair of RT16's, and I like them a lot. I think a paid about 200 bucks for'em about a year ago. I haven't heard the Monitors, so I can't help there.

I like the tweeters on the RT16's better than the tweeters in the old SDA's, including the upgraded RD0's, but overall I like my SDA's better for music because, well, they're SDA's...

The RT16's have nice deep bass, and they are HEAVY!

They do well with music, but I like them better for home theatre, that said, if my SDA's blew up and I had to use the RT's for music I wouldn't kill myself or anything, in fact I'd enjoy using them.

Just get'em and try'em, as mantis suggested, if you don't like'em you can sell'em.

Hey mantis or anyone else: were the RT16's Polk's top of the line speaker in their day?

Ron Temple

falconcry72 wrote: »

Hey mantis or anyone else: were the RT16's Polk's top of the line speaker in their day?

I'm thinking the line was S, RT and LS at that time.

ratster

Thanks for the replies. I'm satisfied with my Monitors but not overjoyed.Just kinda shopping for something with a lil more bass to them so I don't have to fool with a sub.
Thanks again guys!

falconcry72

ratster wrote: »

Thanks for the replies. I'm satisfied with my Monitors but not overjoyed.Just kinda shopping for something with a lil more bass to them so I don't have to fool with a sub.
Thanks again guys!

Overall the RT16's actually have more bass than my SDA 2B's, but it's not as natural sounding, that's one reason I like the SDA's better for music and the RT16's for movies.

The RT16's will deffinetly have more bass than your Monitor 60's. The RT16's drop to 25hz with a -3db limit at 37hz whereas the Monitor 60's only drop to 38hz with a -3db limit at 48hz. That's a significant difference. The RT's use 7.5" drivers whereas the Monitors use 5.25" drivers.

ratster

I'm still learning so I'm not very hip on the HZ and db thing.Would the "new" Monitor 70's get me what I'm lookin for?The way Newegg is havin sales I could easily wait on a new set of them.

falconcry72

ratster wrote: »

I'm still learning so I'm not very hip on the HZ and db thing.Would the "new" Monitor 70's get me what I'm lookin for?The way Newegg is havin sales I could easily wait on a new set of them.

Hz (hertz) are used to measure frequency. High number = high pitch (cymbals etc), low number = low pitch (bass).

Humans hear roughly from 20hz to 20,000hz, so it's good to have gear that can reproduce sound throughout that whole spectrum. Most common "full range" speakers don't actually get down to 20Hz. The point is that the RT16's can play lower notes than the Monitor 60's can.

DB (decibels) are used to measure volume. Higher number = louder.


The Monitor 70's drop to 30Hz with a -3db limit at 40hz, so they'd likely have more bass than the 60's but less than the 16's. I haven't heard the 70's so I can't compare them to the 16's, but that used pair of rt16's costs half as much as a new pair of 70's, and I really doubt that they'd only sound half as good. I would guess that they'd sound as good if not better than the 70's; plus the 16's won't depreciate anytime soon unless you f'em up, whereas the 70's will lose a good percentage of value as soon as you open their boxes.

cheif pontiac

Sorry to be slow on the draw, I am new and just found this. As a 15 year owner of RT16's I thought I would chime in. I absolutely love mine. They are great for home theater if you want something to go low enough to not need a sub, you would have to buy RTi a9's or a7's to beat a pair of RT16's. After enjoying mine for all these years. I finally bought a home big enough where I could expand my audio equipment. I followed through by buying RT7's. My home theater room is deep and I have a lot of area behind my seating position. I ended up replacing my RT/FX's with the 7's. I then bought a second pair for presence speakers. They share the same tweeter and driver as RT16's. They sound awesome on there own too.

I love my RT16's for music as well. They go very deep and have lots of bass with good mid range, the Trilaminate tweeters can have bright highs depending on the Amp. A friend gave me some RT1000p's with the powered drivers. There is more or louder bass (more noise, 16's are tighter) I think the 1000's suffer in the midrange. I use them as rears now.


Out of curiosity and also the room for a second setup I bought some RT12's. The are great too but everything about them is like having 85-90% of the RT16's.

I haven't heard Monitors and I am sure they share a lot of the same sound qualities. As I found a difference between the RT16 and Rt12 I am sure you would see that difference between the Monitors and RT's.

If they are still listed E-mail the seller and ask what their bottom line is. I wish I could find some local. I think something under $25o is fair if they are not beat up and function. I have heard that RT16's the second year 1996 had a run of defective drivers.

falconcry72 wrote: »

Hey mantis or anyone else: were the RT16's Polk's top of the line speaker in their day?

The RT's came in as the LS were being phased out I am sure a lot of stores had both at the same time. My local dealer did not by 95. There was a RT20 with the powered drivers that was a predecessor to the RT2000. I believe these RT's were also the last built in the U.S. as they were out before Polk went mass market.

falconcry72

Ok so everything I said about the rt16's was based on my last experience with them about 6 months ago. At the time I was running them off a Denon 3805 AVR with 120 stated watts per channel. Since then I have put together my first decent two-channel system which consists of a Denon 3910 SACD/Redbook player, a Parasound pl/d 2000 preamp, and a Parasound HCA2200-II poweramp (250 real watts per channel at 8ohms).

I have been running my Polk SDA 2B's on this system, and occasionally a pair of Swans Diva 2.1 bookshelves.

This thread made me dig up my RT16's to try'em out with the better amplification. It was AWESOME!!!:D The mids and highs are much more detailed and clear than the SDA's. The bass is very strong- they don't drop as low as the SDA's, but overall the bass/midbass is louder; however the SDA's bass sounds more natural, so they win on that side of things. The RT's won't replace the SDA's in my system because I enjoy the enveloping nature of the SDA effect more than the impoved clarity of the 16's, but I'm going to keep them in the room to switch back and forth. Great loudspeaker!:)

cheif pontiac

Cool Falcon, I have been wanting to get a Parasound for my RT16's.