Polk Anniversary R200 Speakers

daddywheelz

Any input on these speakers?

chrispyfur

You won't notice any difference in sound between these and the standard R200.

F1nut

daddywheelz wrote: »

Any input on these speakers?

From Polk, "The R200AE 50th Anniversary Edition sounds—and looks—amazing, thanks to enhancements ranging from upgraded crossover components and binding posts to its stunning oiled cherry wood finish."

IME, upgraded crossover components result in a better, more refined sound.

chrispyfur

I have a problem with the R200AE and it's a simple one. Nobody that I'm aware of has done blind A/B testing between it and the regular R200. The closest I'm aware of is Andrew Robinson and in his review he outright claimed they sound "the same".

That's not the problem for me, the problem is that it is $550 more than the standard pair. A 73% markup.

Far be it for me to tell anyone how to spend their money, it's their money. But, were it MY money I'd be a little patient and wait for the next time the R600 goes on sale, as when it does they're often priced under $700 a piece. At that point there will be no debate to be had about whether they sound any different, and it's "the same" price.

All that being said, I am not the market for anniversary edition products, but I know there's a buyer out there for everything.

pitdogg2

@chrispyfur if you have seen the XO between the two you may understand where that money went. It is a far superior compoments than the regular R200 XO.

F1nut

Blind A/B tests are worthless and Robinson is a hack.

chrispyfur

F1nut wrote: »

Blind A/B tests are worthless

I'm sorry to disagree, but in this case of $550 I'd say if speaker A does not sound remarkably better than speaker B then the test is worth $550...

@pitdogg2 I'm not at all implying that polk didn't use better components in the speaker.

I do stand by my statement, nobody I'm aware of who has experience with both speakers says that the anniversary edition actually sounds better. Im happy to be proven wrong.

I'm absolutely NOT saying that either of you guys are wrong, you both have far more experience in the subject than I do and I'm not that foolish. I'm speaking from my own perspective, that the difference in price to me is better spent on the towers.

bcwsrt

https://www.polkaudio.com/en-us/polklore/brand/inside-reserve-r200ae-upgraded-crossover-network.html

I don’t know this Robinson guy, but a lot of people say a lot of things don’t make a difference in this hobby.

@chrispyfur’s post might have been better to start off with “Andrew Robinson said …”

R200 and R600 are apples and oranges.

chrispyfur

I don't care what Andrew Robinson said, I only brought him up because he's the only person I know of who has even mentioned both speakers in the same review.

You're all heavily implying that my opinion is not as valid as yours, yet still nobody has made the claim that the anniversary edition speakers sound $550 better than the standard R200.

As far as apples and oranges comparison, that's exactly the point I'm trying to make! They're not going to sound the same!

Milito

I would have to say that that's based on a person's opinion, it might not sound better to you. However it may to others and be worth it to them.

With upgraded crossovers, to me it would be worth it to try them if I was in the market for R200's. If I didn't like them I would send them back if they didn't seem worth the price increase over the standard R200's.

F1nut

The average result of blind A/B tests are 50/50. Not a ringing endorsement for that test and therefore a worthless one.

The AE version uses more expensive crossover components, binding posts and real wood veneer. That they are only $550.00 more is a bit amazing really.

Pay attention to the room Robinson listens in. Hard surfaces everywhere...not good.

bcwsrt

chrispyfur wrote: »

…

As far as apples and oranges comparison, that's exactly the point I'm trying to make! They're not going to sound the same!

That point is admittedly going waaay over my head, then. If you are looking at bookshelf speakers you probably don’t want towers and vice versa.

F1nut

One thing I disagree with, the Polk info says the AE has an oiled finish. Well, looking at the photos that is a sprayed on satin sheen clear coat finish with a toner added to obtain a very uniform appearance. You can't get that with oil.

chrispyfur

What irks me about this product is that they basically already had a R200 with real veneer and better crossover. It was the L200 and it came out first. (I know you guys already know that).

My suspicion is that in 5 years time the anniversary edition R200 will have almost the same resale as the normal R200.

I'm absolutely sure this speaker sounds great. My R200s sound great, I'm a big fan.

chrispyfur

bcwsrt wrote: »

That point is admittedly going waaay over my head, then. If you are looking at bookshelf speakers you probably don’t want towers and vice versa.

The entirety of my point with that comparison is for the difference in price you get a real difference in sound, not a hypothetical one. Or one that even if real only counts if you listen to the right music on the right gear in the right room, yadda yadda yadda.

F1nut

Not once in the many decades of buying audio gear have I ever bothered to consider what the resale value might be.

msg

@chrispyfur you suck

chrispyfur wrote: »

F1nut wrote: »

Blind A/B tests are worthless

I'm sorry to disagree, but in this case of $550 I'd say if speaker A does not sound remarkably better than speaker B then the test is worth $550...

@pitdogg2 I'm not at all implying that polk didn't use better components in the speaker.

I do stand by my statement, nobody I'm aware of who has experience with both speakers says that the anniversary edition actually sounds better. Im happy to be proven wrong.

I'm absolutely NOT saying that either of you guys are wrong, you both have far more experience in the subject than I do and I'm not that foolish. I'm speaking from my own perspective, that the difference in price to me is better spent on the towers.

I've had experience with both. Kinda. Unfortunately, all I'm able to report is that the R200AE sounded better out of the box than the R200 standard did out of the box, which in my experience, was friggin' horrendous in my not so humble opinion.

I didn't get a chance to let the AEs fully burn-in/break-in, and ended up returning them, because they were, at that point, only $549 better than the R200 standard, not $550 better, so it was pretty much a rip-off.

Kidding - I returned them mostly because I'd just ordered two other pair of bookshelf speakers just prior to the AEs which I wound up thoroughly falling in love with, just had no more room, and couldn't justify the cost for just having them sitting around.

The AEs out of the box sounded at least as good as a burned in pair of R200 standards on the same gear in the same space. (This configuration reversed my initial opinion of the R200 standards.)

To me, this says a lot, because, in my experience, new speakers have improved significantly with 200hrs minimum burn-in/break-in on them, and in most cases, proceeded to improve further with more time thereafter. I thought this was in my head at first, but I have experienced this consistently with every new pair of speakers. I do agree that this is all still plenty subjective, incomplete, and doesn't prove a thing, but it was a significantly good start. Who knows, maybe the AEs would have sucked after burn-in, or maybe they wouldn't have been significantly better.

I think the AEs would have been better, though. How much better, I can't say, though I suspect the audio improvements would have been in nuanced stereo performance at the very least, if not transformative due to the crossover upgrades. Personally, I found the R200s' bass performance to be a bit ridiculous if not given tons of room, and at first, I found them cold and edgy.

The AEs sure were pretty, though!


As for people who've heard/reviewed both, @Braddles from downunda found a bunch of pre-market review stuff on the AEs from over in the Asian market and posted to a thread here somewhere. I don't know where those posts are here, but this one particular reviewer made specific comparisons between the AEs and standard R200s, and the AEs were specfically better. That thread is around here somewhere if you wanted to search for it. Coulda been new-speaker-hype-bias, though, who knows.

ps.
@chrispyfur you feisty today dude! lol
eet mor fyebur!

chrispyfur

@msg I love you too buddy!

Maybe I need a Snickers... or a nap.

I hope none of you guys feel like I'm trashing these speakers or getting really aggressive about it, that's not the case at all. I'm just offering a different opinion.

Also, I think we (I) may have scared away another potential new member.

bcwsrt

Then he didn’t belong here anyway. 😂

chrispyfur

msg

chrispyfur wrote: »

@msg I love you too buddy!

chrispyfur wrote: »

Maybe I need a Snickers... or a nap.

I hope none of you guys feel like I'm trashing these speakers or getting really aggressive about it, that's not the case at all. I'm just offering a different opinion.

Also, I think we (I) may have scared away another potential new member.

lol

I was pretty sure other-chris hacked your account.

chrispyfur

Speaking of which, anyone hear from him lately? Lol

msg

No. And kinda eerie. I was just out mowing earlier and had the same realization...
I thought maybe family summer vacation?

bcwsrt wrote: »

audioluvr

I can tell you from experience (Shut up Scott!), anyone who's rolled capacitors will tell you there can be huge gains in sound quality with higher end crossover components. In this hobby $550 is cheap IMHO for all the upgrades that were done to the AE's.

Clipdat

chrispyfur wrote: »

You won't notice any difference in sound between these and the standard R200.

wat

bcwsrt

Yep, way to go, @chrispyfur.

chrispyfur

Not the worst thing I've ever done!

Polk says in the article above that these speakers have less distortion at higher volume, and they have better imaging. I believe both of those statements.

I do not believe that I personally would prefer the benefits of these speakers enough more than the regular R200 for me personally to justify the spend of money. The R200 is already a great speaker, this is not going to be the same difference as upgrading crossovers in a 30 year old pair of speakers. You're paying for a tremendous level of diminishing returns, again in MY opinion.

Not to mention, in order to realize the gains in imaging you'll need optimal placement for that, including stands, at which point there is no benefit to bookshelf speakers vs towers in my opinion.

I would rather spend the same money and have tower speakers that are voiced the same and will have more presence. You'll notice the additional presence from the towers 100% of the time, not just when you're actively listening for it.

If they had come out with an anniversary edition R700 with true 3 way crossover design I would have nothing bad to say about that product.

F1nut

Oy vey

treitz3

chrispyfur wrote: »

I do not believe that I personally would prefer the benefits of these speakers enough more than the regular R200 for me personally to justify the spend of money.

Justifying things to yourself does not make it true or any less valid.

Tom

chrispyfur

Friends,

I am not going to continue to defend my posts on this thread.

I didn't set out to stir up a hornets nest.

All I meant to do was offer a different opinion, and I meant to present it as opinion. If it seemed like I was trying to defend opinion as though it was fact then I apologize and it wasn't my intent.

If it seemed like I was saying that this product was, in any way, a bad product then I apologize and it was not my intent.

If it seemed like I was saying that the experience of other members was less valid than my opinions then I apologize and it most definitely was not my intent. In fact, I'm counting on it regarding crossover upgrades for my own vintage speakers.

chrispyfur