Polk S8

skrol

I had picked up a pair of S8's a while back that had been waiting for a new tweeter. The previous owner said that something fell off the back of one of the speakers and he taped it back on . It turned out to be the tweeter. If it had been the mid-woofer, I was going to part them out. I decided to fix them up instead.

The cabinets cleaned up very nicely and I just picked up a set of new tweeters. I have to say that these are probably some of Polk's most under-rated speakers. They sound better than their cabinetry would suggest. While they don't wow in any particular way, they have a very pleasant character. They image fairly well but not as well as my modded RTA-11TL's. The bass fairly deep and solid. The highs are smooth and have just a hint of an edginess. I expect this will smooth out as new tweeters break in.

I'll probably leave these in my system for a little while just because I have them. However, I don't have a need for them and will eventually be selling them. I wonder how they compare to the Monitor 5A's that I also have collecting dust?
Stan

intangible

Pretty much mirrors my impressions of my S10s. I would not expect the tweeter to get any less harsh; this pair is way past where they would have broken in and are still fatiguing to listen to for extended periods.

skrol

Really? I wouldn't call my S8's fatiguing even with the new tweeters. They were actually quite pleasing, though not as open as higher end speakers. However, these were entry level Polks. I am not a fan of the plastic flange of the tweeter (which is why I had to replace one) and the XO's use budget oriented components. A little upgrade of capacitors may really improve the sound. I may try it once the tweeters are broken-in. I just don't want to sink much money into them if I am going to sell.

I noticed that there was a S10 SE that uses the SL-6000 Tri-laminate tweeter vs the SL-5000. Which do you have?
Stan

intangible

These are the originals with the SL5000 tweeters. I've put them back on Craigslist and moved them to the kitchen since acquiring better speakers, so I'm not too concerned with modifying them.

Tweeter issue aside, these are surprisingly decent speakers. They feel like toys compared to the Monitor series, but compare favorably sound wise to the 7s. I imagine your S8s compare similarly to the 5s.

jameselmer66

Ressurect an old thread. But I was wondering; best sound quality, S8 or Monitor 5's?

Mystery

jameselmer66 wrote: »

Ressurect an old thread. But I was wondering; best sound quality, S8 or Monitor 5's?

I have both.
S8's go lower than 5's. I can hear bass throw from far away on S8 but 5's bass are punchier without much throw.
I prefer 5's for stereo as they are better in imaging. Still need to more side by side comparison though.

skrol

I think it depends on which 5's. Comparing my 5A's w/Peerless to the 5B's w/ SL2000, the 5A's have it on the upper end with nice balance and smoothness. However, the 5B's have better low end.

I have not done a shoot-out between the 5A, 5B and S8 yet. But I will say that the S8 surprised me with its very easy to listen to character. The bass is clean and digs pretty deep, maybe more so than the 5B. The upper end is very smooth. ZSP did a great job voicing these speakers. The one thing I find a little disappointing in the S8 is the use of plastic on the tweeter and the fascia. The 5A and 5B have very solid build quality.

With proper XO mods and swap the tweeters for RDO194, the 5B would probably trump the S8. I hope to try that too some day.

Mystery

The ones I have are just 5's, no A or B.
Monitor5:

S8's sound better than Monitor 4.6; 5's sound better than both 4.6 and S8 but S8 has better/long throw bass than 5's.
Agree on easy to listen to S8's. If I turn volume high, 5's are brighter than S8's.
S8:

Joe08867

I wouldn't call the bass from the S8 long throw. More like boomy in comparison to monitor 5's.

Tony M

S8's win here also.

Mystery

intangible wrote: »

These are the originals with the SL5000 tweeters. I've put them back on Craigslist and moved them to the kitchen since acquiring better speakers, so I'm not too concerned with modifying them.

Tweeter issue aside, these are surprisingly decent speakers. They feel like toys compared to the Monitor series, but compare favorably sound wise to the 7s. I imagine your S8s compare similarly to the 5s.

Me also looking for better ones. Any recommendation?

Tony M wrote: »

S8's win here also.

:question:

halo71

Joe08867 wrote: »

I wouldn't call the bass from the S8 long throw. More like boomy in comparison to monitor 5's.

You should hear the S10's! :eek:

Joe08867

halo71 wrote: »

You should hear the S10's! :eek:

I Have!!! :eek:

Tony M

Mystery wrote: »

Me also looking for better ones. Any recommendation?


:question:

I was answering which ones sound better to me. I believe that was the question asked in this thread from the OP.

Not to answer your question that was above my answer, but to the OP.

skrol

Mystery
The ones you have pictured are the Monitor 5B with the SL-2000. I find the bass very nice with these speakers but the high a little harsh. I bet they would really sound nice with the RDO-194 tweeters and XO upgrade.

I really do not find the S8 bass boomy. It may be a placement issue. I have heard that the S10 is boomy. The design engineer said that the S10's were made for people who "like mucho bass" and that the S6 and S8 were better balanced.
Stan

Mystery

skrol wrote: »

Mystery
The ones you have pictured are the Monitor 5B with the SL-2000. I find the bass very nice with these speakers but the high a little harsh. I bet they would really sound nice with the RDO-194 tweeters and XO upgrade.

Yes they are brighter but I like them as it is for now.
As for the Monitors, they are just 5's, not 5B.
See attached picture.

skrol

You can't always believe the tag on the back 100%.

mhardy6647

My understanding is that the ones with the SL2000 tweeter and tags that say "Monitor 5" are, in fact, Monitor 5, Series II.
The original, unsuffixed Monitor 5 would have the Peerless silk dome tweeter.

FWIW, I have a pair of the "Monitor 5, Series II" myself. The tweeter is notoriously harsh - but I can live with it. Far prefer the Peerless, though.

Mystery

skrol wrote: »

You can't always believe the tag on the back 100%.

I see... that's even more confusing. So are these 5's or 5B's?
Does anyone have 5B's tag?

mhardy6647 wrote: »

My understanding is that the ones with the SL2000 tweeter and tags that say "Monitor 5" are, in fact, Monitor 5, Series II.
The original, unsuffixed Monitor 5 would have the Peerless silk dome tweeter.

FWIW, I have a pair of the "Monitor 5, Series II" myself. The tweeter is notoriously harsh - but I can live with it. Far prefer the Peerless, though.

To add to confusion, from what I read here in the forum, Monitor 5 series II have SL2500 tweeter, not SL2000.

heiney9

skrol wrote: »

Mystery
The ones you have pictured are the Monitor 5B with the SL-2000. I find the bass very nice with these speakers but the high a little harsh. I bet they would really sound nice with the RDO-194 tweeters and XO upgrade.

Stan

Yes, they do. I have 5B's with Larry's rings, brgmans gaskets, Clarity cap/Solen caps, Mills and they are a marvelous speaker to listen to. Very well balanced and image like crazy, great midrange and solid bass.

H9

mhardy6647

.

Mystery wrote: »

I see... that's even more confusing. So are these 5's or 5B's?
Does anyone have 5B's tag?


To add to confusion, from what I read here in the forum, Monitor 5 series II have SL2500 tweeter, not SL2000.

.. and that's why the product brochures always contain boilerplate along the lines of "the manufacturer reserves the right to make improvements to the product at any time without advance notice" or "specifications subject to change" or words to that effect.

:-)

heiney9

mhardy6647 wrote: »

My understanding is that the ones with the SL2000 tweeter and tags that say "Monitor 5" are, in fact, Monitor 5, Series II.
The original, unsuffixed Monitor 5 would have the Peerless silk dome tweeter.

FWIW, I have a pair of the "Monitor 5, Series II" myself. The tweeter is notoriously harsh - but I can live with it. Far prefer the Peerless, though.

No, the Monitor 5 Series II have the SL2500 tweeter which is the same design as the SL3000. They shouldn't be that harsh.

The picture shows a Monitor 5B and since it black ash with an SL2000 tweeter, a little rare, as all the black ash 5B's I've come across are Series II with the SL2500. Which the above is not.

The SL2000 is a lot harsher than the SL2500, but the Peerless and RD0 are better.

H9

mhardy6647

... I don't doubt any of that; anything past about 1983 in Polk Audio lore is too recent for me; I got a little distracted by family and career for a coupla decades.

I guess based on earlier posts to this thread, it is no surprise that the s/n sticker on these just says "Monitor 5"?

EDIT: Oh, this is my reference point - looking at it now, I may have mis-interpreted H9's comments http://www.polkaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?125631-5-Jr-vs-5a

Mystery

heiney9 wrote: »

No, the Monitor 5 Series II have the SL2500 tweeter which is the same design as the SL3000. They shouldn't be that harsh.

The picture shows a Monitor 5B and since it black ash with an SL2000 tweeter, a little rare, as all the black ash 5B's I've come across are Series II with the SL2500. Which the above is not.

The SL2000 is a lot harsher than the SL2500, but the Peerless and RD0 are better.
H9

Okay, so I can safely assume what I have is 5B even though the tag says 5.:idea:
I've included 2 more larger/better pictures if that helps in confirming these as 5B's instead of 5's.
Thanks

heiney9

For the third time YES, you have 5B's :cheesygrin:

No assumptions, they ARE 5B's

They all say 5 except the Series II, they say Monitor 5 Series II. We can all tell by the cabinet, inclusion or lack of fuses, drivers, grill, type of tweeter and color of the Polk logo. That's how you date most Polk speakers from that era like Original Monitors and SDA's.

H9

Mystery

heiney9 wrote: »

For the third time YES, you have 5B's :cheesygrin:

No assumptions, they ARE 5B's

They all say 5 except the Series II, they say Monitor 5 Series II. We can all tell by the cabinet, inclusion or lack of fuses, drivers, grill, type of tweeter and color of the Polk logo. That's how you date most Polk speakers from that era like Original Monitors and SDA's.

H9

Thanks for confirmation... I have 5B's then .
Is 5B preferred over 5 or vice versa?

heiney9

Mystery wrote: »

Thanks for confirmation... I have 5B's then .
Is 5B preferred over 5 or vice versa?

Depends..........

The main difference's are the tweeters used, although there are some minor x-over difference's as well as MW differences. But the tweeter has the most impact.

The 5's and some 5A's came with the Peerless tweeters, as far a bone stock M5, those are preferred compared to models with the SL1000 or SL2000 tweeters. The SL2500 was not too bad and then of course the RD0 replacement tweeters are excellent.

H9

Barcus1963

Thought these were 5B's:question:
These are with the overlapped mid-woffer to the PR
Or were there different suffexes to the 5B?
Newbie here
Im all confused now:sad:

AlexBushOF

Hello. And Bye.
buy cheap laptop computers apple

skrol

Barcus1963 wrote: »

Thought these were 5B's:question:
These are with the overlapped mid-woffer to the PR
Or were there different suffexes to the 5B?
Newbie here
Im all confused now:sad:

The Monitor 5A had the overlap of the MW and PR. The 5B has more space between. That looks like a 5A with SL-1000.

skrol

mhardy6647 wrote: »

.
.. and that's why the product brochures always contain boilerplate along the lines of "the manufacturer reserves the right to make improvements to the product at any time without advance notice" or "specifications subject to change" or words to that effect.

:-)

And Polk took full advantage of the disclaimer.:cheesygrin: