RT12 vs. RT800
Aaron
Posts: 1,853
RT12 setup
refer to "RT12 testing" thread
RT800 setup
I found that they actually sounded great in the exact same place as the RT12's. I even thought the same amount of toe-in sounded the best, too. Once I was happy with the placement I removed the rubber feet and spiked the speaker. Boy did that tighten up the bass! Geez. I need to get some spikes for the RT12's.
RT800 vs. RT12
I thought it was pretty much a no contest: the RT800 is a better speaker.
Bass:
The biggest difference between the speakers is their bass. The RT800's put out significantly less bass, but it is a much more natural amount. It's not over-emphasized like with the RT12's. The RT800's bass is much tighter, too, but still not as tight as it should be. There is also much more detail present. The RT12's tend to muddle through bass passages and blend the notes together while the RT800's didn't do this. They're certainly not perfect, but significantly better than the RT12's.
Midrange:
There wasn't too many differences here. I found the RT800's to be a little lighter on the vocals, particularly female. They made the RT12's sound a little chesty. I feel that the RT800 representation is the more accurate one.
Tweeter:
This was another area of significant difference thanks to the soft dome (RT12) vs. the tri-lam (RT800). Surprisingly I didn't find the tri-lam to be that harsh at all. What I did find was significantly more detail and frequency extension. The high frequency roll-off that I was experiencing with the RT12's was gone. The overall difference in sound that this made was pretty signifcant. It seemed like lost musical information (detail) was added to every instrument.
Imaging/Soundstage:
As I suspected, the RT800's couldn't quite equal the large soundstage of the RT12's. I think the RT800's imaged at least as well, if not a little more precisely, but their soundstage was just a little smaller than the RT12's.
Conclusion:
I found the RT800 to be a more accurate, detailed, and quicker speaker. It didn't seem quite as lush or smooth as the RT12, but I think that's because it was more detailed, accurate, and uncolored. While I didn't find the tri-lam to be harsh, I did sense that there was more listening fatigue. I think much of this blame rests on the Yamaha receiver, though. In the end, my vote definitely falls on the RT800.
Aaron
refer to "RT12 testing" thread
RT800 setup
I found that they actually sounded great in the exact same place as the RT12's. I even thought the same amount of toe-in sounded the best, too. Once I was happy with the placement I removed the rubber feet and spiked the speaker. Boy did that tighten up the bass! Geez. I need to get some spikes for the RT12's.
RT800 vs. RT12
I thought it was pretty much a no contest: the RT800 is a better speaker.
Bass:
The biggest difference between the speakers is their bass. The RT800's put out significantly less bass, but it is a much more natural amount. It's not over-emphasized like with the RT12's. The RT800's bass is much tighter, too, but still not as tight as it should be. There is also much more detail present. The RT12's tend to muddle through bass passages and blend the notes together while the RT800's didn't do this. They're certainly not perfect, but significantly better than the RT12's.
Midrange:
There wasn't too many differences here. I found the RT800's to be a little lighter on the vocals, particularly female. They made the RT12's sound a little chesty. I feel that the RT800 representation is the more accurate one.
Tweeter:
This was another area of significant difference thanks to the soft dome (RT12) vs. the tri-lam (RT800). Surprisingly I didn't find the tri-lam to be that harsh at all. What I did find was significantly more detail and frequency extension. The high frequency roll-off that I was experiencing with the RT12's was gone. The overall difference in sound that this made was pretty signifcant. It seemed like lost musical information (detail) was added to every instrument.
Imaging/Soundstage:
As I suspected, the RT800's couldn't quite equal the large soundstage of the RT12's. I think the RT800's imaged at least as well, if not a little more precisely, but their soundstage was just a little smaller than the RT12's.
Conclusion:
I found the RT800 to be a more accurate, detailed, and quicker speaker. It didn't seem quite as lush or smooth as the RT12, but I think that's because it was more detailed, accurate, and uncolored. While I didn't find the tri-lam to be harsh, I did sense that there was more listening fatigue. I think much of this blame rests on the Yamaha receiver, though. In the end, my vote definitely falls on the RT800.
Aaron
Post edited by Aaron on
Comments
-
Well, I'm glad you found what you found, and it is a good read right up until the end (the one part of this review that bugs me).
'I think much of this blame rests on the Yamaha receiver, though.'
Why in the hell did you do all this with a RECEIVER? You have amps, do you not? This much time, this much effort, the cable switching, all this with a friggin receiver?
Cheers,
RussCheck your lips at the door woman. Shake your hips like battleships. Yeah, all the white girls trip when I sing at Sunday service. -
Two reasons: 1) I don't like the sound of my Yamaha amp and 2) my Yamaha amp doesn't accept banana plugs so I couldn't test the Monster vs. MIT. Also, the Yamaha receiver is a $1500 piece. It's not bad at all. Granted, it's still no seperates system.Why in the hell did you do all this with a RECEIVER? You have amps, do you not? This much time, this much effort, the cable switching, all this with a friggin receiver?
Aaron -
OH, well, if it cost that much THAN it must sound good.
BDTI plan for the future. - F1Nut -
That's what the salesman told me anyway..... :rolleyes:OH, well, if it cost that much THAN it must sound good.
Aaron -
I've been thinking about this today as I've been demoing the RT800's and RT55's. It's not that the tweeter is terribly harsh or overly bright, I just find it fatiguing. It's certainly not as smooth as the LSi ring radiator. It would be interesting to demo the newer "i" series or the brand new RTi's. I'd be curious to see how they've improved this. I still suspect the Yamaha is partly to blame for this.I think much of this blame rests on the Yamaha receiver, though.
Aaron
