Looking forward to L800 but have concerns, what are your thoughts?

displayname

@mpitogo - I'd love to get your perspective on the review after having lived with them for awhile now.

displayname

nooshinjohn wrote: »

marvda1 wrote: »

i was just about to post this. this review puts them in a new light.
this might explain some of what we heard at the October bash.

Sounds like I was right on with my questioning how they were set up and what gear was involved. Sounds like these are the modern equivalent of the Infinity RS as far as being a difficult load.

Given that the L800s were being fed by a Cambridge Edge A integrated amp, 851n streaming Tidal and connected with appropriate cables throughout, I don’t think the gear was an issue. I never felt power was lacking in that demo. On the contrary, I said the power and fun factor was one of the best traits of the L800s. The room may not have been ideal for the SDAs, but the onsite Polk rep did say they were performing correctly.

The review did highlight some valid elements of the L800:
“One of the more inconsistent loudspeakers I have ever encountered”
“A big hulking speaker that is actually very difficult to live with.”
“You have to kind of tailor your taste to what’s going make them work and perform at their best”
“Here we have the L800 kind of acting like a prima-donna… that requires you on some level to conform to its needs”
“You’ll sit there, and you’ll wonder where all the imaging went… The soundstage will completely collapse, and you’ll just be scratching your head.”
“I don’t know who this loudspeaker is going to appeal to because it is so big, it is so cumbersome, and frankly it is difficult to live with.”

I’m not saying Andrew Robinson is the ultimate authority on audio. But those quotes align with my experience. If get the opportunity to hear the L800s again, I would take it. I’d love to hear the differences in a symmetrical room. They had strong moments and I’d love to hear them at their finest. But based on my experience, I wouldn’t be pulling my wallet out for them and I would be surprised if a different room or different gear swayed me to feel differently.

That’s just my opinion, formed from a somewhat limited exposure to the L800s. But I think this review will resonate with a lot of people who have heard these speakers, and I think it brings up relevant points of consideration.

Emlyn

I'm aware that the vlogger Andrew Robinson had experience with the old Martin Logan CLSIIz speakers which also needed a high current amp to perform best. That high current amp requirement is my main takeaway from his speaking about the L800s. The 4 ohm rating is nominal with dips below. Not as easy to drive as the old SDAs because of the driver selection. Most likely the tweeters, of which there are two in each cabinet, but impossible to tell which frequencies present the toughest loads at this point. I recall on the CLSIIz speakers it was the high frequency range that caused amps to fall short, but if a suitable amp was found they would sing.

I think most of his videos are about lifestyle oriented gear which sells today. He talks a lot, but seems to put a lot of effort into what he does. The L800s are definitely "throw back" speakers in today's market and would miss his target demographic by a fairly wide margin. That's why I like the speakers.

nooshinjohn

displayname wrote: »

nooshinjohn wrote: »

marvda1 wrote: »

i was just about to post this. this review puts them in a new light.
this might explain some of what we heard at the October bash.

Sounds like I was right on with my questioning how they were set up and what gear was involved. Sounds like these are the modern equivalent of the Infinity RS as far as being a difficult load.

Given that the L800s were being fed by a Cambridge Edge A integrated amp, 851n streaming Tidal and connected with appropriate cables throughout, I don’t think the gear was an issue. I never felt power was lacking in that demo. On the contrary, I said the power and fun factor was one of the best traits of the L800s. The room may not have been ideal for the SDAs, but the onsite Polk rep did say they were performing correctly.

The review did highlight some valid elements of the L800:
“One of the more inconsistent loudspeakers I have ever encountered”
“A big hulking speaker that is actually very difficult to live with.”
“You have to kind of tailor your taste to what’s going make them work and perform at their best”
“Here we have the L800 kind of acting like a prima-donna… that requires you on some level to conform to its needs”
“You’ll sit there, and you’ll wonder where all the imaging went… The soundstage will completely collapse, and you’ll just be scratching your head.”
“I don’t know who this loudspeaker is going to appeal to because it is so big, it is so cumbersome, and frankly it is difficult to live with.”

I’m not saying Andrew Robinson is the ultimate authority on audio. But those quotes align with my experience. If get the opportunity to hear the L800s again, I would take it. I’d love to hear the differences in a symmetrical room. They had strong moments and I’d love to hear them at their finest. But based on my experience, I wouldn’t be pulling my wallet out for them and I would be surprised if a different room or different gear swayed me to feel differently.

That’s just my opinion, formed from a somewhat limited exposure to the L800s. But I think this review will resonate with a lot of people who have heard these speakers, and I think it brings up relevant points of consideration.

Looking at the specs for the Cambridge, I have my doubts that it was up to the task. Not saying it is a bad piece of gear, but if the Polks are that demanding, it may simply been a good pairing is all.

mhardy6647

displayname wrote: »

...
“Here we have the L800 kind of acting like a prima-donna… that requires you on some level to conform to its needs”...

I would opine that this is true of many loudspeakers - even truly great ones - past and present. Maybe even more today than ever.

F1nut

“I don’t know who this loudspeaker is going to appeal to because it is so big, it is so cumbersome, and frankly it is difficult to live with.”

I cherry picked his one comment as I believe it reveals what the review guy is all about....life style consumer grade products.

Clipdat

nooshinjohn wrote: »

Looking at the specs for the Cambridge, I have my doubts that it was up to the task. Not saying it is a bad piece of gear, but if the Polks are that demanding, it may simply [have not] been a good pairing is all.

So a connecting a $6k pair of speakers to a 54lb $6k integrated that does 100wpc into 8ohm and 200wpc into 4ohm isn't "a good pairing"?

At RMAF, Polk had them connected to a Marantz HT processor and a MM7055 multichannel HT amplifier. (https://www.audioadvice.com/marantz-mm7055-5-channel-power-amplifier.html) - They could've used anything and they used this pedestrian amp.

You seem to be hung up on the equipment or setup at Skip's Polkfest event being a culprit for what people heard and ignoring the fact that keeps getting mentioned about how the Polk representative was present and confirmed several times that the L800s were performing as intended.

Please try to accept and respect what people heard at the event and their opinions on the sound, instead of looking for any excuse as to why something wasn't "right" with the setup.

dromunds

So much negativity. I don't follow some of you guys. First, somebody implies the L800's won't perform unless you spend lots of $$$. But how much was the Marantz MM7055? Isn't it around $2,000? (the Cambridge Edge A is $6,000 retail, is that a lot? But as mentioned its only 100 watts into 8 ohms and apparenty not compatible with 2 ohm) And I thought the L800's got rave reviews at RMAF, didn't they? I can't remember, but maybe award winners? In any event, another review I read had the L800's hooked to Hegel H390, which is 250 watts into 8 ohms and 2 ohm stable. Similarly priced as the Cambridge Edge A IIRC. Reviewer had very good things to say about the L800's. Unless I'm mistaken, the Hegel is near the same price as the Cambridge but has some real juice. In any event, I would think the people who are buying the L800's would have real good quality power - but if they performed admirably at RMAF with the Marantz, then I'm just not following some of the logic here - maybe I'm all wet, but what I'm noticing is a lot of negativity by some toward the Legend series.

dromunds

Excuse me, the Marantz MM7055 is apparently $1,199. Yet, unless I'm remembering it wrong the L800's received glowing reviews at RMAF hooked up to it.

nooshinjohn

Clipdat wrote: »

nooshinjohn wrote: »

Looking at the specs for the Cambridge, I have my doubts that it was up to the task. Not saying it is a bad piece of gear, but if the Polks are that demanding, it may simply [have not] been a good pairing is all.

So a connecting a $6k pair of speakers to a 54lb $6k integrated that does 100wpc into 8ohm and 200wpc into 4ohm isn't "a good pairing"?

At RMAF, Polk had them connected to a Marantz HT processor and a MM7055 multichannel HT amplifier. (https://www.audioadvice.com/marantz-mm7055-5-channel-power-amplifier.html) - They could've used anything and they used this pedestrian amp.

You seem to be hung up on the equipment or setup at Skip's Polkfest event being a culprit for what people heard and ignoring the fact that keeps getting mentioned about how the Polk representative was present and confirmed several times that the L800s were performing as intended.

Please try to accept and respect what people heard at the event and their opinions on the sound, instead of looking for any excuse as to why something wasn't "right" with the setup.

Too much to pick apart here, but that is not my intention. All I said was there may... MAY have been some sort of synergy issue with that setup. The review also pointed out issues with the room... the exact issue that was at Skip’s house. All I am saying is a professional reviewer caught the same stuff you guys reported, then set about citing the SAME concerns I had and cited Polk’s own manual for these speakers to show the requirements for the speakers were not met in his listening space. He also said he went through hell looking for synergy before he found it.

The Polk rep was out of his mind if he said they were set up properly when the manual itself says they were not.

I am going to state here that I fully accept what was heard at Skip’s as fact, and the review in the video confirms all that you guys said. I see that, but you should also see what I was saying as well.

displayname

I did say if I ever had the opportunity to hear them in an ideal environment I would gladly do so. But I've only seen the L800 at two places (only listened at one), and neither had symmetry. Like so many things in audio they are hard to come across in person.
When it comes down to ownership, it's still not something I'd consider. In their price range there are other speakers that I like the sound of that are far less particular than the L800. I do think they would be hard to live with for most people.

nooshinjohn

nooshinjohn wrote: »

Looking at the specs for the Cambridge, I have my doubts that it was up to the task. Not saying it is a bad piece of gear, but if the Polks are that demanding, it may simply [have not] been a good pairing is all.

Clipdat wrote: »

So a connecting a $6k pair of speakers to a 54lb $6k integrated that does 100wpc into 8ohm and 200wpc into 4ohm isn't "a good pairing"?

In this case, apparently not. Synergy is a biotch.

Clipdat wrote: »

At RMAF, Polk had them connected to a Marantz HT processor and a MM7055 multichannel HT amplifier. (https://www.audioadvice.com/marantz-mm7055-5-channel-power-amplifier.html) - They could've used anything and they used this pedestrian amp.

Because the synergy was right, perhaps?

Clipdat wrote: »

You seem to be hung up on the equipment or setup at Skip's Polkfest event being a culprit for what people heard and ignoring the fact that keeps getting mentioned about how the Polk representative was present and confirmed several times that the L800s were performing as intended.

I could care less about the gear, as it sounds like synergy was not achieved, and therefore any listening was a challenge to start with. Did he also say they sounded as intended? Seems to me you guys said some sort of partition was half-hazardly cobbled together to try and create a reflection point.

Clipdat wrote: »

Please try to accept and respect what people heard at the event and their opinions on the sound, instead of looking for any excuse as to why something wasn't "right" with the setup.

Based upon the review video, it seems to me that the creator of said review encountered many of the same issues you guys did and said the same things I did with regards to set up.

Not disputing at all what you heard, but I accept the reviewer's position that these are one of the most demanding loudspeakers to set up correctly and pair with the proper gear, and they are the most difficult loads for an amplifier to control that Polk has ever created.

I do not understand why Polk chose to create such a demanding speaker. To me, all this does is add value to the original SDA-SRS line.

erniejade

He also said on the same album even after his matching, some sounds sounded great and some did not. We experienced that as well.

nooshinjohn

erniejade wrote: »

He also said on the same album even after his matching, some sounds sounded great and some did not. We experienced that as well.

Understood, and I accept all of that. IMHO, no speaker should be that particular. Synergy is a biotch, but it would appear that these may be on an entirely different level of difficulty. Another possibility is that they are the same demo pair and they have a problem.

mpitogo

Wow harsh. I agree with amp being picky. My LSiM 707 works great with balanced differential amplifiers MC452/PM-10. But with L800 not so, SDA was weak. As far as recordings, I agree poor recordings just don’t do well. Not sure about his room setup and treatment but I have mine in a decent sized 16dx25w and love them.

Everything else is just hurtful. Wow and that was a paid Polk review.

nooshinjohn

I have yet to hear a poor recording sound good on anything... SDA or not.

displayname

mpitogo wrote: »

Wow and that was a paid Polk review.

Not paid, but certainly not what Polk was hoping for I'm sure.

mpitogo

Ok will edit. Misread that disclaimer.

dromunds

I’m still at a loss to understand how this guy can think the L800 is the most difficult load to control that Polk has ever created yet they sounded great with an $1,199 Marantz MM7055 multichannel HT amp? Too many statements floating around that lack foundation.

Viking64

mpitogo wrote: »

Ok will edit. Misread that disclaimer.

You better hurry up. You're almost out of time.

erniejade

dromunds wrote: »

I’m still at a loss to understand how this guy can think the L800 is the most difficult load to control that Polk has ever created yet they sounded great with an $1,199 Marantz MM7055 multichannel HT amp? Too many statements floating around that lack foundation.

And he said a pro-ject intigrated was his choice for synergy. That kind of suprised me.

tonyb

C'mon gents, like you guys never came across a speaker before that was power hungry and picky about placement. This is by far not unique to the l800's. Like Doc said, many highly regarded speakers suffered the same criticism.

tonyb

dromunds wrote: »

I’m still at a loss to understand how this guy can think the L800 is the most difficult load to control that Polk has ever created yet they sounded great with an $1,199 Marantz MM7055 multichannel HT amp? Too many statements floating around that lack foundation.

This is why reviews should be taken with a grain of salt. Some may deserve a bit more weight than others, depending, but the only opinion that matters is going to be yours. On your gear, in your room, with your ears.

F1nut

erniejade wrote: »

dromunds wrote: »

I’m still at a loss to understand how this guy can think the L800 is the most difficult load to control that Polk has ever created yet they sounded great with an $1,199 Marantz MM7055 multichannel HT amp? Too many statements floating around that lack foundation.

And he said a pro-ject intigrated was his choice for synergy. That kind of suprised me.

It's hard to believe something like the MaiA S2 at 38wpc @ 4 ohms had the best synergy. In fact, it puts into question his entire review.

tonyb

Bingo Jess

marvda1

he did say it's not about the number of watts but current.

nooshinjohn

That is why I want to get my amps on a pair. High watts and high current should be a match made in heaven, and may just be what solves some of these other issues. I will be happy to travel within 150 miles and bring the amps with me just to hear how that sounds.

Tony M

….

halen

High watts and high current does not equal synergy. I think it best that you not comment further until you have actually experienced it. Everything you have said so far is baseless assumptions. So stop offending everyone that did experience it.

You know? I have never relied on some magazine or some online review.

Buy a pair man.

nooshinjohn

Never said high watts and high current would equal synergy either, but it does sound like a good place to start... As far as commenting goes, I will say what I like. I don’t agree with every review or magazine I read either, nor do I trust anybody else’s ears but my own.

I especially don’t trust ears that heard a pair of speakers not set up properly, according to the suggestions and guidelines of the manufacturer and have at best, a couple hours (and less time in the sweet spot) of experience with them in an unfamiliar space.