Why Polk Audio wasn't Included?

stealth

I am quite curious why only Polk Audio wasn't included in the What Hi-Fi (UK)mag overall reviews of mosts audio products?

Meaning to say, I bought one of their issues of 2005 and mosts audio products there including loud speakers category have been given part of their reviews, from brands like Monitor Audio, B&W, Tannoy, Sonus Faber, Wilson Audio, Bose, Denon, Mission, Castle, ProAc, Ruark, Energy, PSB, Paradigm, Wharfedale, JMLab, Phase Tech., Dynaudio, Celestion, Acoustic Energy, Spendor, Usher, Triangle, Canton, RHB, Linn Speakers..etc.(including the not-so-good Jamo brand were given a review there).

Why only Polk speakers?

Just asking...?


Thanks,

speakergeek

Ignorance, obviously!

LuSh

Because Polk Audio is considered Mid-fi in the press.

disneyjoe7

And Bose isn't that BS.

pjdami

Britain's Hi-Fi choice kind of dissed the LSi 15's here in a recent review:

http://www.hifichoice.co.uk/review_print.asp?ID=2650

I still have my LSi 15s and run them in the theater and Hi Def TV application. Some two channel too. Could have gotten rid of them a long time ago but for some reason I like them too much and they do the job perfectly for their application in my system.

Joey_V

HIFI Choice is a moronic magazine if they chose to include Bose and not Polk's LSi.

Apparently, they are biased against the Polk image.

Oh well, their loss.

nebborjk

Maybe Polk doesn't spend enough advertising dollars in that magazine.

*Seby*-Polk-

nebborjk wrote:

Maybe Polk doesn't spend enough advertising dollars in that magazine.

Agreed. Polk don't interest participate in that magazine OR prefer spend dollars in other markets, like Japan for example. Who knows.

Ferres

Their not fond of 'warm' sounding speakers over there. They consider that as 'coloration'.

reeltrouble1

LSI7 & RTi4=Stereophile recommended, enough said. I dont really need mags to tell me what is good or not, I use my ears.

RT1

LuSh

Quite honestly Polk has done nothing but help people consider their speakers mid fi via distribution, whens the last time you saw Polk in a high end dealer? Exactly. It has a ripple effect.

reeltrouble1

Well, they are more or less mid-fi are they not? I could give a rats **** what boutique or not you find them in, they sound great to me. I suppose if where you buy them is important to a person. Just not my bag.

I would like to see Matt Polk come out with a real statement speaker, but does not seem to be something he wants to do, I dont know, he hasn't asked me.

RT1

dorokusai

Mid-Fi is where the money is and advertising dollars don't always add to the bottom line. Use Definitive Technology as an example....alot of ads, great HT, nothing worthwhile in the critical listening area....a truly forgetable speaker.

At least Polk offers a high quality 2CH speaker, namely the LSi. It may not be a "I just gotta tell everyone what I bought..." speaker, but it's pretty damn decent.

If Polk wanted to make a High-End speaker, AGAIN, they could, but they probably won't...so stop crying about it. If you want to complain, EMAIL them, as posting here does nothing.

If they listened to this place, they would have went out of business a long time ago...leave business to the business.

You can reap the benefits or go the F home. If you are that knowledgeable, start your own business.

I'm making general comments. This disclaimer is for the stupid.

VR3

Is it a fact that Def Tech is not a critical listening speaker or is that just your opinion?

Yeah, thats what I thought. But thanks for your insight.

I think we'd all like to see Polk make one pair of balls to the wall speakers - but its unlikely. The SRT was it, but it was ugly and marketed as the ultimate HT speaker...

dorokusai

Well, beings I posted it jackass, what do you think? I wasn't aware that some members might use ghost-posters on the internet.

SKsolutions

I don't think that review was overly critical. I think that it had some valid points especially when you consider the crossover point for the unpowered LF driver. Polk just doen't do the very low end well. I prefer the 9's with a powered sub crossed low. I think the Defenitive Technology Supercube is a great match.

heiney9

SKsolutions wrote:

I don't think that review was overly critical. I think that it had some valid points especially when you consider the crossover point for the unpowered LF driver. Polk just doen't do the very low end well. I prefer the 9's with a powered sub crossed low. I think the Defenitive Technology Supercube is a great match.

The only thing that is suspect about that review is that it seems to be out of the norm from what a lot of other reviewers have stated about the speaker. Some of the less flattering points made by the HiFi Choice article are the same areas other reviews rave about for the LSI-15. It seems to be the "odd" review out. I've never heard anyone state "because the mid drivers and bass driver are so far apart in the cabinet, they don't seem to be well integrated" (or something to that effect). To me this makes no sense and I think they are just trying to find a reason for what they think they perceive. Remember it's a British mag and the British sound is a bit different. Keep that bias in mind.

They certainly have every right to say what they said, but this is why one review should never persuade/dissuade anybody's choice. FWIW, the same magazine gave my AMC DAC8 (digital to analog converter) a pretty glowing review and I don't think it quite lives up to the review. But perhaps my expectations were too high for a $300 Dac used in a 2nd system.

SKSolutions-Polk does the low end just fine, many times it's a matter of a great source and some good ole fashioned high current. I've never been a fan of using a sub for the bottom end. Certainly a sub can help for bookshelfs, but I'd rather get the floorstander rather than the bookies and sub. To each their own. I've never had a problem with Polks and bass...always very clean, deep, articulate, natural, well integrated and extended. Frankly, a lot of source material is just bass shy, nothing you can do about that, except put on another song. Anyways this is IMHO.

H9

Drumingman

Interesting comments on Polks speakers. I have read reviews on Polks more expensive speakers and the ones I've read have compared them to more esoteric brands. They have excellent things to say about Polk speakers.
It seems that a lot of Polk owners here don't think Polks are as good as they could be.

SKsolutions

heiney9 wrote:

I've never heard anyone state "because the mid drivers and bass driver are so far apart in the cabinet, they don't seem to be well integrated" (or something to that effect). To me this makes no sense and I think they are just trying to find a reason for what they think they perceive. Remember it's a British mag and the British sound is a bit different. Keep that bias in mind.

SKSolutions-Polk does the low end just fine, many times it's a matter of a great source and some good ole fashioned high current. I've never been a fan of using a sub for the bottom end. Certainly a sub can help for bookshelfs, but I'd rather get the floorstander rather than the bookies and sub. To each their own. I've never had a problem with Polks and bass...always very clean, deep, articulate, natural, well integrated and extended. Frankly, a lot of source material is just bass shy, nothing you can do about that, except put on another song. Anyways this is IMHO.

H9

Heiny9 I don't think the writer knew himself. My complaint in my audition and looking at the papers of the LSi15 was that it had a fairly high crossover point for an unpowered side firing sub. I think the author spewed some vagaries about cohesion, but when you have potentially directional freq's propagating off the baffle, you can have a speaker that sounds confused at times. Whether this was actually the case, or I imagined it, there it is. I'd rather place the(1) sub and keep my radiation patterns simple. I opted for the 9's, happy without a matching sub at the moment. Very dynamic and musical.

Although I don't understand British comedy, I do understand their penchant for the brighter side of audio. When younger, I went from the bright, then leaned to the "Dark" side. Now I prefer warm and clean. This may change again, but I doubt it.

My comment about Polk and the low end. OK. Here it is. Polk subs. . . . . blow. I don't like them. They engineer some great sounding smaller driver speakers, and I DO love their sound across all product lines. Execept their subs. I won't say never, but . . never.

I have read posts by you, Heiny9, and you appear to be well educated especially where the innards are involved, and I've applauded some of your posts. I am not being sarcastic or spiteful here. I just wanted to explain my opinion further and let others know that polk subs stink, british people are wonky, and warm and clean will always be "cool".

Thanks
Sean

heiney9

Hey Sean, no problemo. Polk subs do leave a lot to be desired for 2-ch music play back. I recommended a PSW-650 to a friend for his HT set-up and he loves it. Me, I don't like it at all but I knew what his tastes were and how he wanted it to sound. The Polk subs can sound decent if just in a lower dollar HT set-up. Personally, I've never liked the sub/bookshelf thing; just my preference. The thing with getting him into the Polk sub now he may abandon his Cerwin Vega's for some new Polk mains.....so the idea was to plant the seed for him. He and I have completely different philosophy on what sounds good. Also my comment about Polk doing bass well DID NOT include their subs.

H9

speakergeek

SKsolutions wrote:

I just wanted to explain my opinion further and let others know that polk subs stink, british people are wonky, and warm and clean will always be "cool".

Thanks
Sean

Looks like straight-forward, un-biased opinion to me.