LSiM series speaker reviews

EndersShadow

I thought it would be a good idea to start this thread given the fact a couple of us have had time to listen to them. I am finishing up my review and will be posting part 1 (MidWest LSiM demo) & 2 (Personal demo w/ father and demo with IndyHawg) tonight.

Indyhawg should hopefully hop in and give his thoughts as he was over on Friday night with his Carver tubed cd player and we ran through a bunch of stuff. JimAckley and others (dcmartinpc, anonymouse) will hopefully post their thoughts, and hopefully the bunch from the 707 demo will give their thoughts.

I have the 703's till this weekend and will try to get some more time on them in my other room.

donaldfagen

Thanks, EndersShadow. I've been looking forward to the reviews and comparisons. I'm also hoping a pair of demo 703's makes it out to the NJ/Philly area soon.

Dawgfish

Hello everyone. I just wanted to give a short review of the new LSIM703 Bookshelf speakers. It looks like my speaker karma paid off, as I recieved a package Saturday afternoon! I'm really blown away by this and want to say thanks again. Anyways I came home from fishing and saw a couple of boxes with Polk Audio on them sitting on the front porch. I took the boxes inside and proceeded to unpack them. The first thing I noticed right off the bat was the incredible build quality of these speakers. The ones I have are in the cherry finish and the finish, components, and attention to detail are all first rate and on par with much more expensive speakers.

Before I start with the listening impressions I should state what my system is composed of: KAB modified SL-1200 MK2 turntable with Soundsmith modified Dynavector 20XH cartridge, Jolida JD-9 phono stage with RCA 12AX7 Grey-plate tubes, Opera Audio CD-120 Balanced CDP, Denon DVD-2900 SACD player with Grant Fidelity B-283 tube buffer with Mullard 8100 tubes, Anthem Pre-1L with modified caps (Sonicaps) and Mullard 6922 tubes, Anthem Amp-2 with Mullard 6922 tubes, DCM Timeframe TF-400 speakers with upgraded Peerless midwoofers and woofers, Energy ES-8 sub, Audioquest King Cobra interconnects, JW Cryo Nova speaker cables, Pangea AC-14SE and AC-9 power chords, and a Panamax MS-5100-PM power conditioner. Nothing earth shattering, but I must say this system has great synergy. I am very happy with it's sound.

I have been running the DCM TFs the last several months in place of my much beloved SDA-1Cs due to the fact that I moved and I just don't have the room to set up my SDAs. What I really like about the TFs is they have a lot of the soundstage and imaging properties of the SDAs while taking up a much smaller footprint. No they are not as good as the SDAs especially in the lows, but they do sound somewhat SDA esque. Think of their sound as SDA lite. I really miss my SDAs but the TFs did a respectable job filling in, especially when combined with a sub.

Now for the good part, listening. I hooked up the LSIMs, adjusted their placement, and sat down and started to listen. The first thing that jumped out at me was these have a very pleasant and warm tone, which I was hoping they would have. I have to admit this is probably due to the abundance of tubes in my system. The next thing I noticed was bass was appreciably tighter, more detailed, and had more weight than the TFs, even with the upgraded Peerless woofers on the TFs. The ring tweeter intrigued me and am glad to say it did not let me down. I am a drummer and I like to hear lots of detail and decay with cymbals, especially when listening to jazz. At the same time I like my highs to be smooth and unfatiguing with no added sibulance. Right out of the box, the ring tweeters fit this to a "T". The mids were good, but definitely not as warm, liquid, and soulfull as the mids on the TFs. The soundstage and imaging were also not anywhere as deep and wide, or as precise as the TFs. This was how they sounded right out of the box though and I knew things would only get better with break-in.

I am listening to the LSIMs as I type and they have about 25 hours on them. I knew these would only get better with break-in, but I wasn't expecting them to sound this good with so few hours on them. The highs are more detailed and crisp without a hint of harshness. The lows are getting even tighter and more defined. I am happy to say that the mids are really starting to come alive on these. That liquid, soulfull, sping tingling mid-range that my system had with the TFs is back with these or it's very close at this point anyways. The TFs may still have a slight edge in this department, but the LSIMs keep on getting better with break-in. The soundstage and imaging are getting much better also. Really this and the midrange are the areas where the sound has been improving the most so far. The width of the soundstage has gotten much wider. The imaging is getting much more precise also. You can close your eyes and picture each member of the band, or each part of the orchestra in their respective areas. Center imaging with vocals is much more pronounced now also. The speaker enclosures are starting to disappear and a much more room filling, deep, and wide soundstage is developing. The soundstage is still not as deep as the TFs however, but it's gettin much more expansive as the break-in process goes on. One interesting thing to note was the soundstage with the TFs went several feet beyond the outer edges of the speakers, while so far with the LSIMs, the soundstage goes from the outer edge of the left speaker to the outer edge of the Right speaker and abruptly stops. The imaging is very nice within that stage however. I hope that the soundstge will expand beyond the outer edges of the speakers as the break-in process goes on, but we'll see.

At this time in the break-in process to say that I am impressed with these speakers would be an understatement. I have listened to everything from classical, blues, jazz, country, bluegrass, rock, and hard rock with these with equally good results. Since I am still relatively early in the break-in process I have only just now started to listen to these at moderately loud volume levels. This is another area where the LSIMs so far have been much better then the TFs. The TFs would start to lose their compusure and get some distortion at moderately loud to loud volume levels. The LSIMs at the same volume levels sound much more composed and do not have the slightest hint of distorting. I am really looking forward to spending a lot of time listening to these speakers. I will update this post from time to time as the break-in process carries out and let you know how they sound over time. All indications so far say that Polk really has a winner on their hands with these speakers. If you have been considering trying a pair of these all I can say wholeheartedly is what are you waiting for? Go out and try these out. If your results are like mine you will not be disppointed!

RuSsMaN

This is all well and good fellas, but first and foremost please make sure you submit these on the product pages themselves.

EndersShadow

My thoughts from the Midwest Demo are below:

LSiM 703 Impressions (Midwest Demo).pdf

Dawgfish

EndersShadow wrote: »

My thoughts from the Midwest Demo are below:

LSiM 703 Impressions (Midwest Demo).pdf

Nice review. Your impressions seem to be similiar to mine early on in the break-in process. My LSIM703s definitely did not have the life-like prescence and soundstage my Timeframes had until they got about 22-25 hours on them. I now have about 32 hours on them and the soundstage keeps getting more expansive and deeper to the point now where they are getting close to the soundstage on the TFs. The speaker boxes are starting to "disappear" and the life-like sound is really starting to come through. I can't comment on how they compare to the modidfied LSI-9s as I have never heard them. They are comparing very favorably to the TFs though which are known to have very good soundstage and imaging properties. I can't wait to hear how these continue to evolve over the break-in process.

nooshinjohn

What a beautiful speaker from the aesthetic perspective. They are well engineered, beautifully constructed, and a worthy heir to the flagship status enjoyed by the SDA-SRS 1.2TL. The look is impressive without being imposing or objectionable. Not quite sculpture, but still adds elegance to the decor of a room. Very well done!

But this is where the fun begins. Let me explain...

The speakers were set up in a large room, with high vauled ceilings aproximately 12 feet apart on the long wall of the room, powered by Parasound stereo amps in a bridged mono set-up. Two tube pre-amps, an Anthem and Sunfire Classic were used. More for fun than anything else, a twenty year old Yamaha RX-v2090was also used.

The group's initial impressions were decidedly negative about the sound. The soundstage was flat and recessed, bass boomy and loose, and the mids were very directional. The highs were quiet sharp and comparable to the old SL2k's of SDA days. In short, they just did not sound good at all. We played with placement, swapping gear, and several other things. Believe it or not, the Yammi reciever seemed to be the best fit for them, but even then, they just never seemed to come to life.

We discussed our impressions after comparing them to some modded SDA-1c's and we were all in agreement that the SDA's sounded far better in all catagories than the 707's did. We were all shocked amd more than a bit dissapointed to say the least.

After luinch, we decided that we should hear then in comparisson to the SRT setup in the other room. The were again powered by the same Parasound amps, but used a Pioneer Elite as the processor. The room was about the same size as the previous setup, but here they were placed on the short wall, 18" from the wall, at 10 feet apart. There was no vaulted ceiling here as well.

In this room we all heard once again the very same things, but this time it was a very different speaker to say the least. The soundstage was vastly improved, imaging, bass, mids, highs.. everything was there as it should be. Once again we were stunned by the difference. These were the speakers I was hoping to hear after driving three hours to get there. We compared them to the SRT's next and the findings were mixed. WE appreciated the finess and detail the 707's are capable of, but the shear power and brute force of the SRT's was more in line with the needs of HT than music.

As a last test, just for fun, we used the 707 as a center and let the SRT's do what the do best while listening to David Gilmore on bluray. This combination was simply mesmerizing. the thunderous rock'concert experience was breathtaking, with the punch in the gut bass and crystal clear tight focus of the LSIm delivering vocals as you would expect them to sound at a live event.

Final Impressions...

As stated previously, the design, attention to detail and engineering are simply world class. The sound they are capable of is also very, very good, but at this time I feel there is a bit more work needing to be done.

These speakers have given me the impression that they are very particular about their placement, their environment, room treatments, and the gear that is used to bring them to life, they are not the kind of speaker that the vast majority of owners will take home, plug in and hit the play button. In my opinion, they need to be offered with some kind of an active crossover, or other means to enable the owner to craft the sound of his speakers to their environment, and to his/her liking.

Packaging was spot on and very well done, but I do hope that the actual shipping containers will be of a more durable cardboard, as the ones at the gathering will only last for a couple more trips.

I hope that my impressions will help make them better and that they were helpful. I love my Polks, and want to see the LSiM line become the standard by which all other speakers are judged.

moosepapi

I can't find any lsi m 703's to listen to yet. Want to compare them to the B&W cm5's. Anyone have any thoughts on comparisons?

xsmi

nooshinjohn wrote: »

More for fun than anything else, a twenty year old Yamaha RX-v2090was also used.

I have this receiver powering my SRS 2's. I'm curious, how did it sound powering the 707's?

donaldfagen

moosepapi wrote: »

I can't find any lsi m 703's to listen to yet. Want to compare them to the B&W cm5's.

EXACTLY what I wanted to compare them with!

newsman

Thanks for another addition to the 707 reviews on this forum.
However, the results does not bode well for 707, to say the least. I consistently hear positive praise for 703, mixed emotion on 707. I've listened to 707 at Lone Star Fest, and the "boominess" off bass was blamed on a small room. When I heard them later at home of a fellow Polkie in a much bigger room, I couldn't really form a solid opinion because of unfamiliar setup.

In your case you actually had problems with them in a big room. Such a big speaker should love a big room, and honestly a good speaker should perform good in any room size, even if not delivering to its full potential. Hmmm...

robert0507

So given this and many other "reviews" of the 707. How would the 707 compare to the Rti a9. I am considering buying the Lsim 707 but with all the not so great reviews I am a little concerned about getting them and selling my A9's. I listen to mostly music in two channels with some movie watching.
Thanks

xsmi

Nevermind. I re-read the review and it sorta answered my question.

Dawgfish

Having never heard the B&W cm5s it's hard for me to say how the LSIM703s compare. All of the B&W speakers I've heard in the past have been a little on the bright side for my tastes. I don't know if the cm5s are that way however. My guess is the 703s will hold their own against a lot of speakers, especially in their $1500 price range. I've heard some Tyler Audio, Totem, and Usher bookshelfs before and based what I've heard so far with the 703s, they compare very well with them.

EndersShadow

anonymouse wrote: »

Perhaps on lesser equipment, the 9s would have fared less well, and the 703's would be comparable because at 8 ohms they are theoretically at least easier to drive. The 703s did seem to have more bass than the 9s, but the 9s bass (at least on my modded ones) was more defined and tighter.

We were careful to maintain an apples to apples comparison with the cables and such - and I believe the A-B comparison was fair. So I'm wondering what went wrong here. I do not think Polk wants to take a step back. It would be good to get someone else to do the same shootout.

I am doing the same with my LSi 15's and the 703's off a HK 3490 and the sound isnt too much different. I have used FLAC and CD's and I did have a couple moments at the end of my last session where the 703's woke up and beat the hell out of my LSi 15's. It was on a Carver SD/A 390t CD player (which has tubes in it) connected via analog w/ Audioquest GSnake cables and Monoprice speaker wire.

I am going to attempt to re-create this in the next couple days to see if it was the tubes finally warming up (since it happened literally on the last CD we used) or something else.

I have another write up with my long term impressions coming with some pics as well.

Dawgfish

EndersShadow wrote: »

I am doing the same with my LSi 15's and the 703's off a HK 3490 and the sound isnt too much different. I have used FLAC and CD's and I did have a couple moments at the end of my last session where the 703's woke up and beat the hell out of my LSi 15's. It was on a Carver SD/A 390t CD player (which has tubes in it) connected via analog w/ Audioquest GSnake cables and Monoprice speaker wire.

I am going to attempt to re-create this in the next couple days to see if it was the tubes finally warming up (since it happened literally on the last CD we used) or something else.

I have another write up with my long term impressions coming with some pics as well.

Could it be that the 703 really likes tubes? Tube equipment in general tends to have a bigger soundstage IMHO. I'm trying to remember all the gear that y'all used during the demo. My rig has tubes in every step (source, pre, amp). The soundstage I'm getting now with about 40-45 hours on them is comparable to that of the TFs. These things just keep getting better.

nooshinjohn

The 707's seemed to respond better to having tubes in the mix as well. It seems that other's findings with the new series bear out the fact that the LSiM's respond best to having high quality gear elsewhere in the foodchain. Are you 703 guys seeing that result as well? How picky are they to placement concerns?

EndersShadow

Dawgfish wrote: »

Could it be that the 703 really likes tubes? Tube equipment in general tends to have a bigger soundstage IMHO. I'm trying to remember all the gear that y'all used during the demo. My rig has tubes in every step (source, pre, amp). The soundstage I'm getting now with about 40-45 hours on them is comparable to that of the TFs. These things just keep getting better.

nooshinjohn wrote: »

The 707's seemed to respond better to having tubes in the mix as well. It seems that other's findings with the new series bear out the fact that the LSiM's respond best to having high quality gear elsewhere in the foodchain. Are you 703 guys seeing that result as well? How picky are they to placement concerns?

I havent really messed much with placement, but I do think tubes in the mix may indeed be the difference, hence me borrowing the Carver from Indyhawg. I want to get the cd player up and running for a bit, and then do A/B testing between my laptop hooked up playing FLAC, and the same song via CD player to see if the soundstage gets better.

I have them on the outside of my LSi's so there is about 9 ft between the two of them, with both of them just about 9 feet from my listening position. They are about 1 ft from the back wall.

nooshinjohn

I would suggest bringing them out into the room another foot as well....

Dawgfish

I set up my 703s exactly in the same positions as I had my TFs with the same toe-in. I had my TFs elevated on stands and I have the 703s on the same stands. The stands are about 30 inches high and are placed about 1 foot from the wall. Unfortunately due to space constraints, I can't pull them out any further. I adjusted the toe-in a couple of times real early in the break-in process (1-2 hours) and never adjusted them since. It sounds so good now, I don't plan on adjusting anymore :-).

Face

Placement will make or break any speaker. Depending on the speaker, few degrees of toe or few inches can make a night and day difference.

leroyjr1

Has anyone tried any HT listening with these speakers?

EndersShadow

nooshinjohn wrote: »

I would suggest bringing them out into the room another foot as well....

Face wrote: »

Placement will make or break any speaker. Depending on the speaker, few degrees of toe or few inches can make a night and day difference.

I will give it a try with them out another foot later this week and see what that does. Any suggestions as to distances? Should both the speakers and myself be equally as far from each other?

falconcry72

EndersShadow wrote: »

I am doing the same with my LSi 15's and the 703's off a HK 3490 and the sound isnt too much different.

Please excuse my bluntness:

There is either a problem with your gear or a problem with your ears.

ranger

Interesting thread. Has anyone listened to the 705s ?

Face

EndersShadow wrote: »

I will give it a try with them out another foot later this week and see what that does. Any suggestions as to distances? Should both the speakers and myself be equally as far from each other?

Read metaphacts' posts, he sets up rigs for a living. http://www.audioaficionado.org/general-audio-discussion/8486-speaker-placement-ultimate-tweak.html

dorokusai

I've owned many speakers that didn't sound great when setup in my room under my generic setup method. When tweaked, they came alive and there's simply no easy translation between them. I've read all kinds of garbage about the Golden Triangle and other ideas as far as placement goes. In the end, none of it matters. In the end, your room and your actual listening position determine the best sound from anything from a dog barking, wife yelling or loudspeaker singing. Don't listen to BS theory and BS adjectives from someone else, move them around, move your self around and find what works best for you. You'd be amazed, adj or adverb?, at what you can do with simple placement. Good luck.

Good post Face.

Mark

nooshinjohn

dorokusai wrote: »

I've owned many speakers that didn't sound great when setup in my room under my generic setup. When tweaked, they came alive and there's simply no easy translation between them. I've read all kinds of garbage about the Golden Triangle and other ideas as far as placement goes. In the end, none of it matters. In the end, your room and your actual listening position determine the best sound from anything from a dog barking, wife yelling or loudspeaker singing. Don't listen to BS theory and BS adjectives from someone else, move them around, move your self around and find what works best for you. You'd be amazed, adj or adverb?, at what you can do with simple placement. Good luck.

Good post Face.

Mark

Agreed Doro.

EndersShadow

falconcry72 wrote: »

Please excuse my bluntness:

There is either a problem with your gear or a problem with your ears.

I was referring to the fact the differences that existed between the 703's and the LSi 9's at Dons also exist between the 703's and the LSi 15's in my setup even on my HK 3490.

I wasnt saying the two series sounded the same.

falconcry72

EndersShadow wrote: »

I was referring to the fact the differences that existed between the 703's and the LSi 9's at Dons also exist between the 703's and the LSi 15's in my setup even on my HK 3490.

I wasnt saying the two series sounded the same.

Ah. Gothca. Cary on.

moosepapi

So really, how good are the lsi 9's compared to the 703's? I can't get a hold of the 703's to listen too. Is there a significant improvement with the 703's? In otherwords, is it worth an additional $500?