Polk L200 Speaker Demo Reviews

rooftop59

Dynaudio Contour 1.3 mkii vs Polk L200

Intro: The packaging is difficult to evaluate since @f1nut reinforced and double boxed them, but I do feel confident in saying that if these are shipped as is without a double box, there will be lots of damaged speakers. The aesthetics are, of course, a matter of personal taste. While I like the walnut veneer better than the cherry on the LSiMs, I think that overall the LSiM703s were better looking speakers. The L200 drivers—while provocative—are a bit to modern and esoteric for my liking. But again, that is a matter of personal taste.

Use: For this review, I put them in my main system in place of my Dynaudio Contour 1.3 Mk.II and ran them exclusively for almost 2 weeks, including casual TV viewing, lots of Netflix streaming (Outlander sounded good!) and lots of background music. I am comparing them to the Dyns, because, well, that’s what I have, and I don’t have as much experience with high end speakers as lots of folks here. Keep in mind that the Dyns were $2400 in 2000, which would put them around $3600 today, about twice as much as the L200s.

System: Bryston BDP-1 (AES-BUS)  Cambridge 851c (as DAC via balanced cables)  Cambridge 851a integrated  L200s (via cheap in-wall cables…ugh). My room is HUGE and lively, feeding directly into a couple other rooms. The house is 4300 sq ft, and when playing music on this rig you can easily hear it upstairs. All hardwood and vinyl plank, lots of almost floor to ceiling windows.
I turned the sub off, sat down and compared the following tracks:

• Chris Stapleton – “Millionaire” (Qobuz 96/24): The initial pluck of acoustic has more body or meat on it with the 1.3 Mk.IIs, while it has slightly more shimmer with the L200s. Chris’s voice is slightly more recessed with the 1.3 Mk.IIs, but the nasally quality of his voice is really emphasized by the L200s. Both do a very good job with layering and separation of instruments, and both lay a solid bass/kick drum foundation.
• Corinne Bailey Rae – “Girl put your records on” (cd flap rip): The bass on both is very strong, I really feel no need for a subwoofer. On the L200s the bass sounds ever so slightly synthesized—like the rough edges when the bass player slides from one note to another over the fretboard which should have some grit—gets smooth over just a tad. The 1.3 Mk.IIs have that grit. Similar with her nasally alto—which is fairly thin and the break between chest to head voice is easily discernable on both—but every once in a while there is some gravel in her voice, and this is smoothed over by L200s and more easily heard on the 1.3 Mk.IIs. But overall, very close…
• Shelby Lynne – “Just a little lovin’” (Qobuz 192/24): sparse, well recorded song. Drenched in reverb, giving the instruments a great sense of space. On the 1.3 Mk.IIs the bass sounds nice and fat like it should, extends really (a low A flat on a five string),and the bass does not drop off at all in volume. Shelby’s voice floats out in front like it should, the high hat and rid symbols have nice shimmer and decay without drawing undue attention to themselves. On this track I actually like the L200s a bit better. The bass isn’t as fat which brings more attention to the grittiness of the fret slides. The reverb is also slightly more accentuated which gives the song a slightly bigger feel, like you’re in a slightly bigger hall. But the symbols don’t sound unnatural, just ever slightly more prominent.
• John Mayer – “Wait till tomorrow” (flac cd rip): Pretty bad recording, incredible musicianship. Pino Palladino’s bass is slightly fatter on the L200s and the drums (which tbh sound like a toy kit) are pushed slightly into the background on the L200s. The drums are a little more forward and prominent with the 1.3 Mk.IIs, and the insanely fast bass on the solo breakdown is easier to follow on the 1.3 Mk.IIs. They seem a bit better with pacing and speed, which is part of the Dynaudio house sound and something their speakers tend to excel at…
• Herbie Hancock (w/ Norah Jones) – “Court and speak” (Qobuz 96/24): excellent recording, piano sounds very natural on both. The reverberation inside the piano at opening is very clear in the right speaker on both. Two things stand out: soundstage is a bit bigger on the 1.3 Mk.IIs, about two feet beyond the speakers. The L200s don’t have the same effect. Also, high hat and symbols are more prominent on L200s, as are the highest notes on the tenor sax solo.
• R+R=Now – Collagically Speaking tracks 2 and 3 (Qobuz 96/24): Robert grasper, Derrick hodge, and a bunch of other young jazz studs who combine amazing jazz musicianship with r&b. Well recorded album, much harder to discern much difference. I wanted to listen to this album because 5 string bass goes very deep, and on track 3 “by design” the soundstage is HUGE. Doorbells and chimes, radio talk samples, ocean sounds, etc., are coming from all over place. The L200s showed they could extend beyond speakers several feet, and there was a bit of height as well. Satisfying overall, but then there come the 1.3 Mk.IIs. Several sounds appear to come from up above and the the side of my right ear, the ocean sounds are well above speakers, and chimes are coming from all over, just a massive presentation, not something I get with most rock, country, or jazz combos.

Overall, while I will be keeping my 1.3 Mk.IIs, I really enjoyed my time with the Polk L200s. There really was not a massive drop off in overall sound quality. While I ran my sub crossed over at 50 HZ (speakers running full range) during casual listening, I turned it off for the comparison, and both speakers sounded very good with tight, full bass on their own. While I wouldn’t want to trade my Dyns for the Polks, if I walked into a Hi-Fi store and compared these directly, it would be very hard to choose given the price difference. One could buy a really nice sealed sub with the savings, and that would be very tempting to me…

nooshinjohn

The L200's have landed at my home as of 5:15pm. They arrived in good shape and are hooked up and playing now. They are being fed by my Carver Statement Monoblocks, Pass Labs X0.2, Krell Evolution 505 SACD player. Cables are Audioquest Meteor 12ft Double BiWire, Audiquest WEL RCA from amps to preamp and Audioquest MacKenzie from the Krell to the preamp.

Initial impressions are that they image quite well, and present a tightly focused center image. They seem to disappear with a pretty deep and holographic soundstage... They also seem to LOVE some power being fed their way.

More to come over the next few days...

audioluvr

So they sound fantastic on insanely good equipment... You suck.

Edit: That's just what I was thinking out loud John. Looking forward to your review...

nooshinjohn

audioluvr wrote: »

So they sound fantastic on insanely good equipment... You suck.

Edit: That's just what I was thinking out loud John. Looking forward to your review...

Not so fast my young Padawan. This gear is also good at exposing serious flaws. The first of which is these Polk logos on the face of the grills are hideous to look at on a speaker of this caliber. They should have used the signature of Matt Polk from the old SRS badges IMHO...

nooshinjohn

First night is in the bag. I will be doing some tweaking of placement tomorrow, but so far they are sounding ok.

halo

rooftop59 wrote: »

Dynaudio Contour 1.3 mkii vs Polk L200

Great review & thank you for listing some tracks I can listen to on my speakers (as well as what you were looking for specifically with each track!).

erniejade

@rooftop59 Solid review thank you!

Mike Reeter

I would like to start this with a Big Thank You to Jesse and the Polk Audio Reps that made this Demo of the L200's possible!

I also want to thank Forum Member "halo" for letting me intrude into his life and home to retrieve the L200's for my turn in the Demo lineup. I don't think he really knows just how much I enjoyed my time there. It was a pleasure for sure. Hopefully one day I can return the hospitality.

And, I also want to say that, I'm not as gifted with "Pen to Paper" as most of the Members that have submitted their reviews previous to this one!

I haven't had much experience with various brands and types of speakers over the years, I've been quite happy with the SDA's for quite some time now. I've tried other "Conventional" style speakers, but have always came back to the SDA Sound. I do have a pair of Modified CRS+ with the 4.1TL Upgrade that I would compare to the L200's.

Like others before me, I was impressed with the build quality and the Esthetics of the 200's. I had my time with the Black Oak models, and I didn't really object to the Gloss Black Baffles. Nice Grills, and I could live the Polk emblems. Overall, a nice looking Speaker.

A little run down on the Gear:

ModWright LS-100 Preamplifier
ModWright PH-9.0 Phono Preamplifier
Lampizator Amber 3 DAC
VAS Audio Citation II Mono Blocks (EL-34 Based)
Analog Source: VPI Classic 3 SE/SoundSmith Zephyr
Digital Source: Audiolab 6000 CDT/Streaming Flac Files and Qobuz.
Held together by MIT Shotgun S1 Speaker Wires and S1 I/C's, Audio Sensibility Digital Cables and PS Audio Power Cables.
Pair of Rhythmik F8 Subwoofers.

Room size is approx. 16' W x17' D x 9' H with two large openings into a much larger space. It's pretty much impossible to pressurize the room, but I have made some treatments and feel like it sounds pretty good.






I set the 200's up on the only pair of Stands that I have available, which were a little tall for them, it put the Tweeters at 42' above the floor. After some fine tuning, I ended up with the Speakers at 36" from the back wall to the front Baffle, 47" from each side wall, 7' apart c-c and 9.5' from my listening position, with a slight toe-in.

Victor had mentioned when I picked the 200's, that they excelled with Women's Vocals. So I dug out some samples to start off with.

Without getting into a long winded description of each cut I listened to, I'll just list the selections.

First up was "Angel" by Sarah McLachlan from the Surfacing CD.

Second was "Hello" from the Adele 25 CD

On to Qobuz for a 24/48 sample of Lady GaGa (don't judge ) a tune from the Sound Track of, A Star is Born "Remember us this way"

A 24/192 sample of Norah Jones, "Come away with me"

And a duet from Mark Knopfler's Tracker LP with Ruth Moody "Wherever I Go"

I feel these Tracks literally put the Artist in the room. I was taken aback by the Clarity and Detail retrieval from the new Tweeters. A 'Detailed, yet smooth' presentation is the sound I've been chasing for several years. It can be a Tough Nut to crack, I felt the 200's delivered this aspect in spades. NO glare or fatigue what so ever. Although, I did find the Vocals a little recessed, but not to point of a distraction by any means.

So far too good, I selected a couple of Male Vocal examples that I consider to be very good also.

First up: Chris Jones, Title Track "Roadhouses and Automobiles"

Next, From the Chris Stapleton "Traveler" CD, "Tennessee Whiskey"

About all of the "Clapton Unplugged" CD

A MoFi LP of Willie Nelsons "Stardust"

Mark Knopfler cover of "Some Day" from "The Breeze" a Tribute LP by Clapton/Friends to JJ Cale.

And the title track of Merle Haggards "Kern River" LP.

The same Clear, Accurate Treble Presentation was exemplary. But, the 200's lack a little bit in the Lower end, as would be expected, in the size of my room.

So, I tuned in the Rythmiks to accompany the 200's and pulled out one my favorite LPs for Dynamics and Sonic perfection:

Steely Dans "Gaucho" and cued up "Babylon Sisters".

Next up: Dire Straits "Communique" LP, another Sonic Bliss gem.

I just kinda got lost and played several LP's, and the 200's were delivering all that good Analog Tone, Exceptionally Well.

The L200's took on another dimension in sound with the Subs doing the Heavy Lifting, MUCH FULLER Presentation! With what sounds like a "Seamless" transition between the Tweeter and the Mid Driver, the addition of the Subs (crossed over @ 50 hz) was just what they needed to be a very good, Full Range Speaker.

After a few days of listening to the L200's, I set up the CRS+'s for a quick comparison. A little to my dismay, the L200 Tweeters were Clearer and Cleaner that the RDO-198's. Of course the Stage Width was no contest, and the CRS's have a much Fuller Sound without the aid of the Subs, but the L200's were not embarrassed, at all.

I could "feel" the Emotion and see into the Music with these little Jewels.

If I could just find a pair of SDA's sporting that Ring Tweeter, I'd be a Happy Man. Wait a minute...I think Polk Audio just released something along those lines

I will wrap this up by saying that, in a few short years my wife and I will both be Fully Retired. We will be moving closer to Family and Friends, and will be "Downsizing" our home considerably.

I'm sure that I won't be afforded the Space that I enjoy now for a Music Room, and will more than likely be making the best of a smaller space. I can see myself having a Tubed Integrated and a nice pair of Bookshelf Style Speakers.

The L200's will most definitely be on my "List". I was impressed with the L200's and I think Polk did a great job on the Legend Series.

There is a Polk "Legend" Dealer hosting a Demo of the L800's next month, I'm almost afraid to attend

treitz3

Mike Reeter wrote: »

I just kinda got lost and played several LP's, and the 200's were delivering all that good Analog Tone, Exceptionally Well.

Don't ya' just love it when that happens?

BTW, nice write up for not being a pen to paper kinda guy.

Tom

Mike Reeter

treitz3 wrote: »

Mike Reeter wrote: »

I just kinda got lost and played several LP's, and the 200's were delivering all that good Analog Tone, Exceptionally Well.

Don't ya' just love it when that happens?

BTW, nice write up for not being a pen to paper kinda guy.

Tom

I do, and Thank You

dromunds

Excellent review. You made me realize I should have played some Knopfler with Ruth Moody when I had them. They sure look good in your set-up too!

tonyb

Nice review...you seemed to really enjoy your time with them. Btw....super nice system you have there. Congrats man.

Mike Reeter

tonyb wrote: »

Nice review...you seemed to really enjoy your time with them. Btw....super nice system you have there. Congrats man.

Thanks Tony! Like I said, I haven't had a lot of experience with other brands and types of speakers. I did try a pair of Dynaudio Contour S3.4LE's a couple of years ago. They had a wonderful Tone to them, but nothing outside of the Speakers. I like W-I-D-E Stereo and the Concert Hall presentation that SDA's provide. The Upgraded SDA's are still revealing any changes I've made in the Upstream Gear.

The L200's were a "Fresh Breath of Air" in my system, and I really enjoyed my time with them. But they are no replacement for their Older Brothers.

JayCee

Thanks, Mike, nice review. I'll echo the sentiment above. You're too modest...you provided a thoughtful and informative presentation of your experience.

Your music choices and gear are similar to some of mine. I have 3.1tl's, 4.1tl's and MIT S1's so will be a like comparison. My PSA stack, IMHO, is pretty good and I've found the SDA's to scale very well as my gear's improved. I have similar hopes for the 200's.

Your observations on the 198 vs new tweeter are intriguing. I'm also very interested in evaluating the mids. Like you, I've found conventional speakers leave me underwhelmed when compared to SDA soundstage. I've gone on record saying the only way I'd get rid of the 1.2tl's in my primary system is if Polk created a better SDA, but, unfortunately, I have no dealers close to me so it'll be a challenge to hear the 800's anytime soon. At the very least, my time with the 200's will give me a taste of what the 800's might offer.

Based on your experience I'm looking forward to my turn with them. Thanks again for the review.

John

Mike Reeter

JayCee wrote: »

Thanks, Mike, nice review. I'll echo the sentiment above. You're too modest...you provided a thoughtful and informative presentation of your experience.

Your music choices and gear are similar to some of mine. I have 3.1tl's, 4.1tl's and MIT S1's so will be a like comparison. My PSA stack, IMHO, is pretty good and I've found the SDA's to scale very well as my gear's improved. I have similar hopes for the 200's.

Your observations on the 198 vs new tweeter are intriguing. I'm also very interested in evaluating the mids. Like you, I've found conventional speakers leave me underwhelmed when compared to SDA soundstage. I've gone on record saying the only way I'd get rid of the 1.2tl's in my primary system is if Polk created a better SDA, but, unfortunately, I have no dealers close to me so it'll be a challenge to hear the 800's anytime soon. At the very least, my time with the 200's will give me a taste of what the 800's might offer.

Based on your experience I'm looking forward to my turn with them. Thanks again for the review.

John

Thank you John, I think you will enjoy the L200's. Their scale is no where near the SDA's, but still an enjoyable experience.

The one thing that stood out most to me was how "Intimate" the 200's were. I felt they did a good job at conveying the Artist emotions.

halo

Excellent write-up Mike! I really appreciate you listing the specific tracks you listened to while evaluating the speakers.

You are most welcome and I would be more than happy to have you over again any time. I enjoyed it as well!

You are correct in that the first thing that stood out to me (and the Mrs) was the forward vocal presentation of the L200's. That was a treat.

If I didn't say it in my review, I know I said it in a PM to Jesse - thank you, good sir, for putting this demo together!

dromunds

Here’s hoping for a Legend SDA-CRS!

Mike Reeter

dromunds wrote: »

Excellent review. You made me realize I should have played some Knopfler with Ruth Moody when I had them. They sure look good in your set-up too!

With Nigel Hitchcocks work on the Sax, Mark's usual Guitar excellence and Ruth at the mike, it's one of my favorites from that LP.

dromunds wrote: »

Here’s hoping for a Legend SDA-CRS!

Wouldn't that be something, one can only hope!

Milito

Great review Mike!

nooshinjohn

One thing not discussed a bunch in the reviews so far is the redesigned Power Port on the back of the speaker. This is showing itself to perhaps be the most significant element of the new speaker, at least in my listening. It allows that speaker to perform as a modified dipole.... more to come.

F1nut

What redesigned power port???

Clipdat

"Enhanced Power Port Design: Extending the low-end, the upgraded Power Port technology produces less port noise and more bass than traditionally ported loudspeakers. Polk Audio improved the traditional Power Port design by smoothing out the port flare, which offers a smoother transition into the listening area and adds multiple dBs of bass response."

F1nut

Yeah ok, whatever. Looks like the same old power port to me.

nooshinjohn

F1nut wrote: »

Yeah ok, whatever. Looks like the same old power port to me.

It’s not... today I thought my surround was on, so I walked up to my center channel to check. Nothing, but I did hear sound from behind the speaker. It was nearly full range sound, and at about twenty percent of the volume of what was coming from the front side. I have only heard dipoles do that little trick.

They have been placed about three feet from my back wall, and the center point of the sound field comes from about two feet behind the front plane of the speakers and extends forward 4 feet into the room, The rear power port does more than it is given credit for.

Mike Reeter

nooshinjohn wrote: »

F1nut wrote: »

Yeah ok, whatever. Looks like the same old power port to me.

It’s not... today I thought my surround was on, so I walked up to my center channel to check. Nothing, but I did hear sound from behind the speaker. It was nearly full range sound, and at about twenty percent of the volume of what was coming from the front side. I have only heard dipoles do that little trick.

They have been placed about three feet from my back wall, and the center point of the sound field comes from about two feet behind the front plane of the speakers and extends forward 4 feet into the room, The rear power port does more than it is given credit for.

I had the L200's set up this same distance from the back wall as well.

I felt like the Vocals were a little recessed (around 2ft. behind the front baffles) but it makes sense that it was the port putting sound that far behind the speakers.

I thought the sound extended into the room 3-4 ft. because of the new style mid-driver. Regardless of what makes it happen, I enjoyed their Presentation.

F1nut

nooshinjohn wrote: »

F1nut wrote: »

Yeah ok, whatever. Looks like the same old power port to me.

It’s not... today I thought my surround was on, so I walked up to my center channel to check. Nothing, but I did hear sound from behind the speaker. It was nearly full range sound, and at about twenty percent of the volume of what was coming from the front side. I have only heard dipoles do that little trick.

They have been placed about three feet from my back wall, and the center point of the sound field comes from about two feet behind the front plane of the speakers and extends forward 4 feet into the room, The rear power port does more than it is given credit for.

I heard nothing like that at Polk or here at my house.

nooshinjohn

I didn't believe it either, until I put my ear a couple feet away from the port. I am listening to them now, and the center image appears two feet behind the speakers and about a foot above them. The sound extends a couple feet outside the outer edges of the speakers as well. The soundstage is really quite good.

F1nut

It's your room.

nooshinjohn

It must be. the performance I am getting from them is very much like what I remember the CRS being like.

indyhawg

Great review, Mike. Another review that keeps the bar set high for future reviewers. Also very nice room.