Who has RT55's?

SuperchargedLT1

Just wondering who else is using a pair of RT55's. At the time I purchased them, they were the best bookshelf speaker Polk had. I knew I was going to use them with a sub, so a small speaker was OK with me. For the price, they're not bad.

ohskigod

I've still got a pair. were my 2 channel main speakers. they are now surrounds in my home theater. I love em, and wont get rid of them anytime soon. They have a pretty loyal following amongst many members here.

I see you use an electronic crossover, thats to combine the subwoofer to the highs and midbass seperatly?

Ferres

Same here. I use them as surrounds as well, but from time to time I give them a listen and they still make me a smile.

beardog03

I like the 55i`s that I have, but would like to find a pair of mint(ish) 55`s (no i ) to go with my older rt speaks...

keep at it supercharged...they are out there, you just have to keep looking and be ready to move when you find them..

organ

I remember seeing them for the first time. They were the Godzillas of bookshelf speakers.

Maurice

SuperchargedLT1

beardog03 wrote:

I like the 55i`s that I have, but would like to find a pair of mint(ish) 55`s (no i ) to go with my older rt speaks...

keep at it supercharged...they are out there, you just have to keep looking and be ready to move when you find them..

Oh, I didn't know you could get RT55's, without the "i". I beleive mine are RT55i's. Whats the difference? Thanks.

ohskigod

supercharged, what are you powering the actual rt55's with, i see you have a reciever powering the sub, what whgat about the 55's themselves?

SuperchargedLT1

ohskigod wrote:

I see you use an electronic crossover, thats to combine the subwoofer to the highs and midbass seperatly?

I use a 3 way electronic crossover for all of the speakers. Tweets, mids, and the sub. I'm not a big fan of passive crossovers, allthough I know properly designed passives can have great sound quality. I just don't like the power loss through them, and the lack of "easy" adjustability of the crossover frequency.

HBombToo

the 55i's have different tweeters and crossover's. I originally bought 55's as surrounds with my 800i's and did the upgrade. To be honest I really could not hear much difference between the 2... some may but I could not.

either or the 55 bookshelf is a great speaker.

HBomb

SuperchargedLT1

ohskigod wrote:

supercharged, what are you powering the actual rt55's with, i see you have a reciever powering the sub, what whgat about the 55's themselves?

I'm using a cheap Sony 5 channel receiver in DVD mode. I use the rear channels to power the tweets and the front channels to power the mids. The center channel isn't powering anything.

SuperchargedLT1

Anyone know why my signature isn't showing up in my posts?

Ricardo

Your signature will show only once in each thread...it's in your first post

shack

SuperchargedLT1 wrote:

Anyone know why my signature isn't showing up in my posts?

A person's signature only shows up in the first post of any thread. It was done because the very long sigs are a PIA when trying to read through a long thread.

Skynut

I am using my 55's on top of my RT3000's instead of the speakers that came with them.
I use the RT3000 tops as center speakers on the left and right of my telly.
I like the way the 55's sound for 2 channel better.

ohskigod

might want to try some better amplification with them down the road. their sound will surprise you. ran mine on Rotel seperates and they sounded great. consider upgrading amplification before upgrading the speaker itself.

Dennis Gardner

Come on guys, he's a car audio convert that is using what he has to make the most of what he has learned from the CA side. Active crossovers are the bomb in the world of CA, but only find there way into the most esoteric of systems for 2 channel setups.

You got to give him props, for it but I think that when the drivers, boxes and crossovers are all designed to work together, most find it a trade off in synergy when swapping out complete integral designs.

Before you take my post as negative, I will give it to you that most box speakers are a combination of compromises but simply making a passive part active may not be an improvement. All electronics add some type of signature to the sound that passive parts can't. BTW, I use active crossovers in my CA too and run a dual EBS Adire sub in my HT.

ohskigod

if you get better amplifications down the road, a better reciever or seperates, experiment with rehooking up the passive and listening to them, then going back to the electronic. I wonder what the differences would be.

SuperchargedLT1

Dennis Gardner wrote:

Come on guys, he's a car audio convert that is using what he has to make the most of what he has learned from the CA side.

Because I own a JL audio sub, and like active crossovers, I'm a car audio guy? I'm actually a recording/professional audio kinda' guy. I've been a musician the majority of my life. I think it's fair to say that I'm a pretty good judge of what "real" music is supposed to sound like.

Active crossovers are the bomb in the world of CA, but only find there way into the most esoteric of systems for 2 channel setups.

Designers and manufacturers of recording studio monitors seem to like them.

You got to give him props, for it but I think that when the drivers, boxes and crossovers are all designed to work together, most find it a trade off in synergy when swapping out complete integral designs.

This might hold true to "audiophile" grade speakers like B&W's, but were talking about some RT55's. Decent, but deffinately not high end. How much design do you really think went into these? The accountants had more to do with the design then the engineers did.

Before you take my post as negative, I will give it to you that most box speakers are a combination of compromises but simply making a passive part active may not be an improvement.

Forgive me. In my case it was an improvement. Removing the passive crossovers, rewiring everything, making a bunch of cables to adapt RCA's to 1/4", and seting up an active crossover wasn't for fun. It would have been much easier to leave the RT55's as they were, but I just wasn't impressed with the sound.

BTW, I use active crossovers in my CA too and run a dual EBS Adire sub in my HT.

I drive a '68 Camaro. Saying my car is loud is an understatement. 650 HP from a supercharged small block is pretty noisy. Obviously, I don't have a car stereo.

Dennis Gardner

Knowin' where someone comes from helps us to understand............cool on ya for undertaking the crossover project. A number of us have upgraded the original crossovers with higher grade components, but few have used active units. I agree that the 55s are one of the better bookshelves out there and a great value to boot.

Welcome to CP and stay around awhile to share your knowledge. We have a great time passin around the BS.

AsSiMiLaTeD

I use the rear channels to power the tweets and the front channels to power the mids. The center channel isn't powering anything.

Did I read that correctly? Must not have, since I don't see anyone else commenting on it.

Ron-P

I run a pair of RT55's (no i) as mains in my theater. Each is bi-amped with an Adcom GFA-535. I doubt I'll ever replace them.

audiobliss

SuperchargedLT1 - Please tell me more 'bout your Camaro! You could start a thread on it in the clubhouse. What have you done to it? What'll it do the 1/4 mile in? Do I assume from your CP (club polk) user name that you've done a transplant and plopped an LT1 in it? Pics, please!

amulford

I have a pair. Bookshelves my A$$...

Dennis Gardner

I've got BIG books...................

ohskigod

SuperchargedLT1 wrote:

This might hold true to "audiophile" grade speakers like B&W's, but were talking about some RT55's. Decent, but deffinately not high end. How much design do you really think went into these? The accountants had more to do with the design then the engineers did.

gotta disagree with you here. I've owned B&K bookshelves (still own a pair) and I like the RT55 better. Of course I'm allways hard on anything with a metal tweet. to shrill for me.

I have to speak honestly here. you have to drive those RT55's with something better than a cheap reciever before you can accuratly comment on their design qualities. There actually built quite well. Why design a poorly built speaker that weighs close to 50 lbs? if your gonna build cheap, wouldnt you make it a little lighter with cheaper materials?

granted, I wouldnt hold up the RT55 to say a Sonus Faber, but calling it cheap and poorly built is just not accurate, just my .02