New addition to the family...RT8

RuSsMaN · July 2004

Figured I'd post a pic, this one is from the original RT series (entry level floorstander), not one you see everyday. Picked these up from shepx2 today at his humble abode just east of me.

6 Inch woof, 1 Inch silk dome, power port on the bottom. Nice sounding speakers, for all intents and purposes it's an RT5 in a small tower design.

Going to tweak the crossovers with Audiocap and Mills, and I'm thinking I'll run these on the Golden Tube SEP-1 Line Stage, with a Golden Tube SE-40 Stereo Amp (40w/ch).

Cheers,
Russ

Mike682 · July 2004

Russ,

They look very similiar to my R30's (except for the port)....IMO the R30's are also a good sounding speaker for the price. I paid $99 each last June:D

brettw22 · July 2004

The original RT series kicks **** like NONE of them have since IMO.......enjoy them Russ.....

Loud & Clear · July 2004

Originally posted by brettw22
The original RT series kicks **** like NONE of them have since IMO.......enjoy them Russ.....

~~ brett, do NOT underestimate the **** kicking delivered by the RT55i. Just an fyi.

RuSsMaN · July 2004

Mike, the R series did and do offer a great value, but don't let these looks fool you.

The original RT series is an entirely different animal, and for the better. Critical listening in the near future will help decide if these actually best my original 'Dickeyville' era Monitor 7a's or not.

They are THAT good (on the right gear).

The 55 (i and non-i) are great speakers, and have yet to see a successor worthy of replacing them. Still a slightly different animal, imo. Not knocking it at ALL, they are phenominal - but they still aren't the original RT series, if even by just a slight margin.

You need to hear a pair of RT7's (driven properly), and draw your own conclusions.

Cheers,
Russ

brettw22 · July 2004

Originally posted by Loud & Clear
~~ brett, do NOT underestimate the **** kicking delivered by the RT55i. Just an fyi.

55's can hold their own as an oversized bookshelf, but I don't think that they could beat out the RT16's that I have.....(the 8's oldest sibling)

madmax · July 2004

Is that the same tweeter the LS70's/90's use? Sure looks the same. Do you think the new caps will make much difference? Have you given any thought to the coils or does that not make any sense. I'm thinking about the cap upgrade with the lsi7s. Forget the pc board, they are going to be wired to the drivers.
madmax

organ · July 2004

Conrats! I agree with you guys. The original RT series are really something. How do they compare to the RT5 and 7?

Maurice

brettw22 · July 2004

<burp>

organ · July 2004

How many beers is that for you now, Brett?:D

Maurice

brettw22 · July 2004

I don't drink.......never have.

Could you imagine me with alcohol in me? LOL.....

VR3 · July 2004

The RT5 lays the SMACK DOWN on the RT35i in music...

Would love to hear the RT16 and other speakers from that line up!

Great line indeed...

RuSsMaN · July 2004

Chuck, the LS used the first gen tri-lam. Same tweeter, yes, to a degree - without the 'laminate' 3 metals applied. Aluminum, Magnesium, and Titanium.

This IS the closest you'll get to the original (non lam) Peerless silk dome, ala Monitor 7a / 10a.

Organ, as stated, this speaker is, for all intents and purposes, an RT5 in a tower design. I have the RT7 in the master bedroom (with the tri-lam - 2nd gen).

$275 each on the retail numbers (forerunner to the RT600), 175w continuous power handling, SOLID to 40 Hz. Made for ONE year only, circa 1996. First institution of the power port in a Polk Tower design, and mated with the same midbass and tweet that brought rave reviews to the RT5.

Cheers,
Rooster

organ · July 2004

Oh man, an RT5 that digs lower. That must be sweet. Is it me or does Polk speakers with a single woofer and tweet sound more 'lively' than the double woofs? Some people said that about the LSi7. A few years ago, I set up a pair of 600i for a friend and it sounded more lively than my 800i.

They're going to sound amazing on your tubes. I loved the sound of my RT5 being powered by the Dyna. Which output tube does the GT have?

Maurice

howie777 · July 2004

I personally own the RT10s (step up from RT8s) and yes they are pretty nice speakers. Much better than the circuit city models they made to replace them. Although I can't say about the newer circuit city models. Not to fond of the tweeters though. The RT16s are much better and come with the tri-lam tweets. My college roommate has those. we had my RT10s on rear and his RT16s up front. Not too bad for some college kids!

Good speakers the RT8s, RT10s, RT12s and RT16s

Howie

RuSsMaN · July 2004

Originally posted by organ
Which output tube does the GT have?

Maurice

A Six-pack of 6L6's.

PhantomOG · July 2004

i have never heard any of the older Polk speakers and trust everyone's opinion here on them, but i *really* don't understand why Polk would make each new generation of speakers sound *worse* than the previous.

is it just to save money? make more profit at the expense of how the speakers sound? i assume a reasonable company would try to make each new iteration or generation of their product slightly better if not at least as good as the previous. if not, why bother? if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

hopefully someday i'll be able to listen to Polk's previous lines and grow an appreciation for them, but even if i do, i still won't understand why Polk would make things worse.

phoneisbusy · July 2004

Hey! They look like my RT12's. Less the extra woofer. Would be interested in your opinions after the tweaks if you don't mind Russ.

regards

Dave

RuSsMaN · July 2004

Dave, I'll document it, and take a couple pics. You are correct sir, same speaker, short a driver.

Cheers,
Russ

TroyD · July 2004

Originally posted by PhantomOG
i have never heard any of the older Polk speakers and trust everyone's opinion here on them, but i *really* don't understand why Polk would make each new generation of speakers sound *worse* than the previous.

is it just to save money? make more profit at the expense of how the speakers sound? i assume a reasonable company would try to make each new iteration or generation of their product slightly better if not at least as good as the previous. if not, why bother? if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

hopefully someday i'll be able to listen to Polk's previous lines and grow an appreciation for them, but even if i do, i still won't understand why Polk would make things worse.

I don't think it's a case of Polk making speakers that sound worse. I think they sound different in some ways. Each generation seems to solve some problems and maybe create new ones.

I also think that we all have our faves and it's tough to get over that mindset.

BDT

organ · July 2004

Wow! Very purdy amp.

Maurice

Loud & Clear · July 2004

Originally posted by PhantomOG
i have never heard any of the older Polk speakers and trust everyone's opinion here on them, but i *really* don't understand why Polk would make each new generation of speakers sound *worse* than the previous.

is it just to save money? make more profit at the expense of how the speakers sound? i assume a reasonable company would try to make each new iteration or generation of their product slightly better if not at least as good as the previous. if not, why bother? if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

hopefully someday i'll be able to listen to Polk's previous lines and grow an appreciation for them, but even if i do, i still won't understand why Polk would make things worse.

~~ There is a difference between knowing the path and walking the path. I can only show you the door, I cannot make you walk through it.

PhantomOG · July 2004

Originally posted by Loud & Clear
~~ There is a difference between knowing the path and walking the path. I can only show you the door, I cannot make you walk through it.

and this means....? i assume you are questioning my belief in everyone's opinion and i'm not sure why. i clearly stated that i implicitly trusted most people's opinion on this forum. i'm relatively new to home audio and trust that those who are more experienced know what they are talking about.

i was hoping someone from Polk might actually chime in. it seemed like a few weeks ago that Polk was taking a more active interest in the forums but i haven't seen much lately.

for as long as i've been a member of this forum, more 'experienced' members have always been waxing lyrical about how much better past generations of Polk speakers are compared to more recent ones. and not *once* have i seen a thread which was answered by someone at Polk defending their new design choices. why is that? is it because there is no defense? that Polk knowingly releases new speakers that don't live up to standards of past Polk speakers? why? just not enough manpower to monitor the forums? fair enough. but now they have said they want to take a more active role here and this is one issue that i personally would like to find an answer to.

RuSsMaN · July 2004

He's making reference to a stupid quote from Dan, and that is ALL. Inside joke if you will, not directed at you.

You are welcome here ANYTIME to hear some classic Polk models for yourself, and draw your own conclusions. I mean that.

Cheers,
Russ

shack · July 2004

for as long as i've been a member of this forum, more 'experienced' members have always been waxing lyrical about how much better past generations of Polk speakers are compared to more recent ones.

This is primarily a SDA phenomenon. However there are always those that prefer a "CLASSIC" to the current product..be it cars, audio equipment, guns, fishing gear, etc...etc...etc... Nothing new or shocking here. You are also making assumptions based on a VERY small (but very loyal and vocal) group of Polk owners ( maybe a 100 ± regulars). Who's to say there are not thousands of owners of the current gear that are extemely satisfied with the new lines.

and not *once* have i seen a thread which was answered by someone at Polk defending their new design choices. why is that? is it because there is no defense?

To defend what? No one is saying that the new speakers are bad. The LSis get huge raves here and the RTi get lots of good reviews and even the lower priced speakers and HTIB get their share of mentions. No defense needed from Polk.

that Polk knowingly releases new speakers that don't live up to standards of past Polk speakers?

It's a conspiracy to force bad speakers on the public. :rolleyes:

this is one issue that i personally would like to find an answer to.

Send them an E-mail (Paul DiComo comes to mind). I bet you get a response.

The bottom line is that the speaker landscape has changed and the "market" for audio is geared for mass market HT. That is where the growth in the industry is. There have been dicussions in these forums as to "Is Stereo dead?", "is a good HT speaker good for music?" and so forth. Many of the classic Polk speakers that get such high praise here were designed with 2 channel music in mind and excell in that area...thus the discussions. Technology has changed, the market has changed, the consumer has changed...Polk knows that and has adapted. Some love the new stuff and some love the old stuff...be it Polk, Klipsch, Ford, Jaguar, Remmington, etc...

Troy's response to your original assumptions summed it up nicely:

I don't think it's a case of Polk making speakers that sound worse. I think they sound different in some ways. Each generation seems to solve some problems and maybe create new ones.

I also think that we all have our faves and it's tough to get over that mindset.

cfrizz · July 2004

So what are the differences between the RT, RTA, RTA'T's, RTA'TL's & RTi series?
Is one really better than the others, or is it simply by degrees and or cosmetic changes?

Is it really fair to compare these to the current lines, or should they just be looked at by themselves.

I've been wanting to know this for the longest time.

Cathy

HBombToo · July 2004

Originally posted by cfrizz
So what are the differences between the RT, RTA, RTA'T's, RTA'TL's & RTi series?

Cathy

To illustrate your question lets use the RTA series. When the signature moves from RTA8T's to RTA8TL there are minor variations in crossover and tweeters. In the case of the 8T's to TL's this was to tame the high end and decrease the low end crossover.

I have upgraded from RT to RTi and heard the difference between the t and TL series and will say that I don't think they are earth shaking changes.

HBomb

New addition to the family...RT8

Comments