Polk monitor 60 or 70...rest of setup inside...help me choose.

slammin86

My current setup is a pair of polk monitor 50's and a cs1 for the front. A pair of monitor 30's for the surrounds, an elemental designs a2-300 subwoofer, and an older onkyo ht-550 receiver. I am selling the monitor 50's, the cs1, and the receiver today.

I am going to buy a polk cs2 center, but do not know if I want to go with the monitor 60's or the 70's. Since I already have a sub I do not know if I need the 2 6.5" subs that are in the 70's tower. I was unable to find out any information on what freq those 2 6.5" subs are actually crossed over at. I plan to crossover the fronts at 80 hz or so.

For the receiver I am going to go with either the onkyo rc270 or the denon 1911. I also plan to use the bi amp capabilities of either receiver since I am using a 5.7 setup instead of a 7.1 setup.

Is it worth the extra 150 to get a pair of the monitor 70's over the 60's? This is used for probably 80% home theater, 15% music, and 5% games.

cnh

WELCOME TO CLUB POLK!!

If home theater is your goal you'd be fine with M60s. The 70s are really better for music. The crossover point is cascaded so that the upper woofers slope off slowly to the same crossover as the lower two which means that they overlap with the tweeter more whereas the lower two drivers transition at the crossover frequency only. That's why you may be confused.

That crossover point is 2.6Khz.

As for an AVR, I'd step up to an AVR that has pre-outs for external amplification. Unfortunately, for Denon, that means the 3311?

You should also look at the Pioneer VSX-1120, or the Onkyo TX-SR708 or 808.

But do listen to all this?

cnh

spock 2054

slammin86 wrote: »

Is it worth the extra 150 to get a pair of the monitor 70's over the 60's? This is used for probably 80% home theater, 15% music, and 5% games.

I think so, but it's up to your ears and budget to decide. If I had the available funds at the time of purchase, I would have picked up the 70's for surrounds instead of the 60's...

slammin86

cnh wrote: »

WELCOME TO CLUB POLK!!

If home theater is your goal you'd be fine with M60s. The 70s are really better for music. The crossover point is cascaded so that the upper woofers slope off slowly to the same crossover as the lower two which means that they overlap with the tweeter more whereas the lower two drivers transition at the crossover frequency only. That's why you may be confused.

That crossover point is 2.6Khz.

As for an AVR, I'd step up to an AVR that has pre-outs for external amplification. Unfortunately, for Denon, that means the 3311?

You should also look at the Pioneer VSX-1120, or the Onkyo TX-SR708 or 808.

But do listen to all this?

cnh

Thanks for the welcome.

Oh, I thought it was something like the lower 2 speakers were crossed over lower, like 160hz or so, so that they acted more like subs.

The onkyo rc270 has pre amp outputs and from what I can tell is very similar to the 708 but for less money.

cnh

Yeah, It looks like the RC270 is very similar..may be missing a feature or two. But it's the same weight and have similar power reserves.

cnh

djperez81

Welcome to CP!!!

I would get the 70's and be happy. I have read here on the forums that it is really not worth to bi amp your speakers. I would highly recommend getting a AVR with preouts or your will be kicking yourself later when you want to add an external amplification. Good luck.

Geoff4rfc

cnh wrote: »

You should also look at the Pioneer VSX-1120, or the Onkyo TX-SR708 or 808.

But do listen to all this?

cnh

slammin86 wrote: »

The onkyo rc270 has pre amp outputs and from what I can tell is very similar to the 708 but for less money.

Yeah, IMO, I'd consider the 708 over the 270 mainly for the extra power, sure it's a little bit more, but you're getting more power and the Sirius radio option. If you're considering a bi-amp solution, you must be thinking of squeezing more power/sound? Get the 708, forget the bi-amping (actually, you should at least try it out so you can see for yourself) and allow yourself the 7.1 option.

djperez81 wrote: »

Welcome to CP!!!

I would get the 70's and be happy. I have read here on the forums that it is really not worth to bi amp your speakers. I would highly recommend getting a AVR with preouts or your will be kicking yourself later when you want to add an external amplification. Good luck.

Big +1, the 70's over the 60's, more power, larger drivers, more drivers, more sound. I had the same dilemma, "hmmmm, 70's or save a bit of money and get the 60's????". I got the 70's and haven't looked back, VERY happy with these bad boys. I was afraid of getting the 60's and then always wondering what if?

over50

I agree to go with M70.

cnh

OK, for full disclosure, it seems like most of us are running M-70s? I have them as my fronts as well. But I also have a 51lb Onkyo powering them. And have even had a 200 x 2 watt power amp in the mix in the past? M-70s like some extra power but can sound fine with 'less'?

cnh

Geoff4rfc

cnh wrote: »

OK, for full disclosure, it seems like most of us are running M-70s? I have them as my fronts as well. But I also have a 51lb Onkyo powering them. And have even had a 200 x 2 watt power amp in the mix in the past? M-70s like some extra power but can sound fine with 'less'?

cnh

Right!! Let me ask this question then to all the 70 owners, now that you've tasted ownership of the 70's, would any of you trade down to own the 60's instead and comfortably say good by to your 70's?

spock 2054

Geoff4rfc wrote: »

Right!! Let me ask this question then to all the 70 owners, now that you've tasted ownership of the 70's, would any of you trade down to own the 60's instead and comfortably say good by to your 70's?

No way. I paid 149.99 per speaker for the 70's - probably the lowest price I'd seen for the cherry finish back in June of 2010 from newegg. They look and sound more expensive than they are. At the time of purchase, the 60's were 10 dollars less than the 70 series...

Geoff4rfc

spock 2054 wrote: »

No way. I paid 149.99 per speaker for the 70's - probably the lowest price I'd seen for the cherry finish back in June of 2010 from newegg. They look and sound more expensive than they are. At the time of purchase, the 60's were 10 dollars less than the 70 series...

There's one, I'm also one that would not downgrade although I've never heard the 60's, but Spock owns both the 70's and 60's and wishes he had 70's as his surrounds instead of the 60's.

Anyone else want to testify?

Lietuvis91

For mostly HT and no external amplification, I would say go with m70s. They have a bigger sound stage than m60s.

However, don't expect anything too amazing for loud music playback, as they do need a little more power than most avrs can provide to really sound their best at high volumes, especially in all channel playback. A quality avr will help with this too...

Geoff4rfc

Lietuvis91 wrote: »

For mostly HT and no external amplification, I would say go with m70s. They have a bigger sound stage than m60s.

However, don't expect anything too amazing for loud music playback, as they do need a little more power than most avrs can provide to really sound their best at high volumes, especially in all channel playback. A quality avr will help with this too...

Are you sure you want to go with that one? Your statement is the opposite of your equipment list.

spock 2054

Geoff4rfc wrote: »

There's one, I'm also one that would not downgrade although I've never heard the 60's, but Spock owns both the 70's and 60's and wishes he had 70's as his surrounds instead of the 60's.

Anyone else want to testify?

Just to clarify, if I had the funds, I would have preferred to have the 70's as surrounds. They are just too massive to fit in the back of my living room. The 60's fit perfectly.

Geoff4rfc

spock 2054 wrote: »

Just to clarify, if I had the funds, I would have preferred to have the 70's as surrounds. They are just too massive to fit in the back of my living room. The 60's fit perfectly.

I can dig it, can you imagine using 70's all around in a 7.2 set up

Lietuvis91

Geoff4rfc wrote: »

Are you sure you want to go with that one? Your statement is the opposite of your equipment list.

yes.

This is why, for music purposes, i run the m70s amplified in a 2 ch rig.

I use my 2 ch daily, and my HT maybe once a week... Thus the priority for me is my 2ch rig, and thats where I use the better speakers (m70s).

I bought the m60s before the m70s, so once I compared, I made that decision.

slammin86

Lietuvis91 wrote: »

yes.

This is why, for music purposes, i run the m70s amplified in a 2 ch rig.

I use my 2 ch daily, and my HT maybe once a week... Thus the priority for me is my 2ch rig, and thats where I use the better speakers (m70s).

I bought the m60s before the m70s, so once I compared, I made that decision.

So in your opinion, driven bi amped off my receiver, which will get louder and sound cleaner for music the 60's of the 70's? Keep in mind I will have them crossed over at 70 or 80 and my sub will take over from there.

cnh

In general bi-amping off the same AVR does next to nothing to the sound. YMMV.

The M-70s are more 'musical', better with music than 60s IMO. But they also like more power. I remember running mine when I first bought them with an Onkyo 605 and that was OK in two channel. But I later ran them through a Denon with an Adcom GFA-555 (2 channel power amp) and they were like a NEW speaker for music--they opened up, imaged better, had cleaner highs, weightier bass, etc.

I should add that this was 2 channel operation only. I turned the sub off!

cnh

Lietuvis91

Geoff4rfc wrote: »

I can dig it, can you imagine using 70's all around in a 7.2 set up

Ideas like this, is actually the exact reason for my post.

I first bought the m60s, then m70s went on sale and I bought those. I had a 7.1 system running off of my onkyo sr608, and it sounded ok for HT, but when I tried all ch, high volume, music playback, this setup sounded anemic and dull... as if I had small bookshelves all round... :frown: so then I pulled off 2 speakers and went back down to a 5.1 setup. This made the remaining speakers sound much better, as they now each got more power.

Point is, if you want loud all channel music out of 4 or 6 m70s for some crazy party, like i did, you better feed them enough power, which means an amp or at a minimum a very solid avr.

The OPs intent seems to be mostly HT, in which case m70s in the front should do ok off of most avrs out there... more power will improve the sound however.

Lietuvis91

cnh wrote: »

In general bi-amping off the same AVR does next to nothing to the sound. YMMV.

The M-70s are more 'musical', better with music than 60s IMO. But they also like more power. I remember running mine when I first bought them with an Onkyo 605 and that was OK in two channel. But I later ran them through a Denon with an Adcom GFA-555 (2 channel power amp) and they were like a NEW speaker for music--they opened up, imaged better, had cleaner highs, weightier bass, etc.

cnh

ditto!

http://www.polkaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?t=109593&highlight=parasound

Geoff4rfc

Lietuvis91 wrote: »

Ideas like this, is actually the exact reason for my post.

If you've got the power to drive all big speakers, what's wrong with this idea?

Lietuvis91

Geoff4rfc wrote: »

If you've got the power to drive all big speakers, what's wrong with this idea?

lol! Nothing wrong with it... I just wanted to make sure that people realized that big speakers need big power to sound... well... BIG!

When I was a newb, I didn't realize this until I bought the darn sr608 and all those big speakers and then wondered why this setup didn't sound BIG, like it should... :rolleyes:

over50

I also went from M60 to M70. I`m happy with the M70 and would not trade for M60. After saying this it is a difference and i like the M70 better,quailty and looks better. But the m60 are good speakers and its not like going from M60 to Rt series would be..As soon as my wife signs off i will upgrade to the RT's.
Enjoy.

slammin86

I went ahead and bought the m70's and cs2 last night. I didn't want to wonder "what if" so I figured I better just go with the bigger ones.

Now I just have to pick out a receiver.

MCCLIPSE

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Here's mine set up in my family room, we just moved in last month and I got these 2 weeks ago and love the sound and the look. (sorry for the crappy pic by the way)

ROHfan

MCCLIPSE wrote: »

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Here's mine set up in my family room, we just moved in last month and I got these 2 weeks ago and love the sound and the look. (sorry for the crappy pic by the way)

Wow, pretty sweet! Congrats, and good luck.

MCCLIPSE

thanks

slammin86

I wonder if I need to start looking into an amp? I have seen the onkyo m-282 go for a pretty cheap price new ($170ish). It is rated at 100x2.

Geoff4rfc

slammin86 wrote: »

I wonder if I need to start looking into an amp? I have seen the onkyo m-282 go for a pretty cheap price new ($170ish). It is rated at 100x2.

Have you picked out your receiver yet? You won't need an amp if you get the right power. I have an 807 and PLENTY of power to spare driving the same speakers you have.

slammin86

Geoff4rfc wrote: »

Have you picked out your receiver yet? You won't need an amp if you get the right power. I have an 807 and PLENTY of power to spare driving the same speakers you have.

I bought a rc270.

I was actually looking at one of the bigger heavier receivers, like the 807, but I do not have the room for it. The max I can go on height is 7"



Even with the 270 I am going to have to move the receiver to the bottom shelf because the middle shelf is only 6" tall.