How Un-Polked are you?

VR3

Seas and Scanspeak make drivers for companies all around the world. Wilson Audio and Avalon come to mind.

They are some of the best, and cost what they do for a reason.

heiney9

Vr3MxStyler2k3 wrote: »

Seas and Scanspeak make drivers for companies all around the world. Wilson Audio and Avalon come to mind.

They are some of the best, and cost what they do for a reason.

So Polk shouldn't have spent the millions of dollars at Johns Hopkins university to test and develop their own drivers? They just should have used a mass market driver like Scanspeak or Seas? I see so they wasted their money coming up with the aerated poly prop drivers they spent all that money and time on when they could've just bought stuff "off the shelf".

Might want to let Matt know that for next time. :rolleyes:

My beef here is not with Tylers or any other small boutique brand of speaker. I'm sure they are top notch and many may prefer them over the LSi's. What I take exception to in this thread is the LSi's bascially being reduced to chicken fodder simply because they are percieved as a "mass market" company therefore all of a sudden the LSi's are at the bottom of the pack and use cheap parts, blah, blah, blah. An absolutely a ridiclous assertion.

H9

Demiurge

Things are only worth what people are willing to pay for them.

What makes a $200.00 driver? If it's expensive to purchase it's better?

ohskigod

Vr3MxStyler2k3 wrote: »

I like the LSi line.


What I dont understand is why members of this board can sing so highly of internet direct when it comes to subs. But god forbid the truth be the same for speakers.

QUOTE]


because while I feel the Polk subs are genuinly lacking at there respective pricepoints, the LSi's are not
I just get the impression that people are knocking the LSi's as mass market, where as I look at there build and sound quality and dont get that impression. Its not like the other speakers I've had to compare them to were **** either. I dont think AR9's, Carver Amazings Platinums, Vandersteens, Polk SDA's are slouches in any means. Ths LSi, while not the be all end all, were ot exactly pissed on by other speakers I have owned.


maybe its my preference, because I know I'm one of the few freaks on this board that actualy liked my Lsi's over my SDA's (hence why they were sold, and the LSi's stayed)

Trey, on the topic of perception, I know you loved those 9's at Troy's. Oddly enough, I didnt like the 9 demo, but I know it was because I felt that the living room was too bright for my tastes (actually way too bright, i seem to be sensitive to that stuff). That explains why I got so much seat time with the AR9's in the smaller room (the one's I now subsequently own). funny how things pan out

Early B.

heiney9 wrote: »

So because Polk has the R&D and the money to spend producing amd testing their own drivers they are cheap? If Tyler's sold on the scale that Polks sell I'd bet their drivers and other parts would be less expensive as well. It's called economies of scale. And since when did the cost of something automatically mean it was better. Again I'm not saying that the Tylers or other smaller companies make a bad product, but I don't feel just because the parts have a retail price of $xxxx and they are a small company that they are automatically better.

That is a generalization I'm not willing to make.

H9

It's a question of higher quality. Period.

A car made with higher quality parts is usually a "better" car. A house comprised of higher quality building materials is likely to be a better built house. This simple concept applies to nearly all consumer products, including speakers. Speakers with better parts are likely to sound better than those that aren't. Tyler's drivers cost more because they are better built and sound better than the Lsi's, IMO. This shouldn't be too hard to understand.

Demiurge

Cost doesn't always mirror quality.

Bose?

Yashu

you should know that the closer to full the tranny's are run the better the sound and that's how Class A is designed to run and has nothing to do with shortcomings of the LSi's.

I was not talking about genuine class A. Most amps are not class A. I was talking about your typical SS class B amp. These amps sound better when using less power. When using about a watt or so they can be running in almost class A and sounding very clean, but when using full power they are going to distort a lot more.

Most people that buy LSi are going to probably buy the rest of the gear in the same or similar place. So many LSi owners are going to have, at best, Denon or Onkyo recievers and may not like the sound of their speakers because of this (some people, not all). I didn't say LSi were bad speakers, but I think polk could have worked a little more on their power efficiency, I don't remember much about the vintage polk sound, but when I see quality vintage monitor or SDA I can see that something about the company philosophy became lost.

Your Adcom is a good amp and what I said isn't going to apply to you or I or the 1% of people out there that know what the hell we are doing, but your typical frys or tweeter shopper putting together a HTS.

Maybe it's just my OCD talking though.

heiney9

Early B. wrote: »

It's a question of higher quality. Period.

So you've looked at the LSi x-overs and driver design, analyzed them and determined they are not as good a quality as the Tyler's? OK fair enough................if you in fact have done that or are you just assuming they are cheaper and of lesser quality.............perhaps because they are made by a company who mass produces some of it's products?

Quality is just a subjective a term as anything else in this hobby. Some people accept much lesser quality than others so for you to say it's better quality without defining what constitutes better quality in this regard is really pointless.

H9

Strong Bad

I have Polk all the way around for my HT. RT800i mains, CS400 center and FX500 surrounds. I also have 2 more CS400's in storage for future rear centers. The SVS PC-Ultra rounds out the lowend.

I've never been happier with my HT sound as I am right now!

2 channel I have the SDA-SRS 2.3's. The only thing I plan on changing around here in the future are the electronics and cables.

I also have a set of LSi 7's in storage.

I've always had Polk speakers and love them. Are there as good and better speakers out there....yes, to a degree. How much is enough and to what degree do you finally have to say...I love my setup? I love the Polk brand, trust the Polk brand and will continue to support the Polk brand. They've never let me down!

I have other hobbies and other avenues where my funds go. I'm just not willing to give up everything just to buy and flip around other speakers all the time.

Hey, in the photography world there is this Nikon VS Canon VS all other manufacturers war going on. I love Nikon and it serves my every photography need. With the amount of money I have invested in photography gear, I could easily have some big **** B&W Nautilus's with some outragious electronics. Hmmm, but they won't make me money on the side and get strippers to pose for me!


John

Yashu

big **** B&W Nautilus's

Those sure are ugly speakers. Side story: I went into Home Theater Store the other day to check out the B&W stuff, and they had a set of Nautilus speakers, but the tweeters were all pushed in... hehe... to think someone would do that to 20,000 dollar speakers!

Anyway, like I said, vintage polks sure look nice. Those SDAs of yours are probably f'ing awsome. If there were vintage polks that had magnetic shielding I would be on those **** tomorrow.

skipf

I love my Lsi-9's. Wouldn't swap 'em for anything in their price range, and a lot of speakers well above their range. As has been stated numerous times above, they DEMAND clean power. While rated at 120 watts, mine really didn't begin to shine until I was pushing twice that into them. You can forget getting really good sound out of them with an amp in the "standard" 40-80 watt range. They can't compair to most floorstanding speakers in the bass range, but i would be hard pressed to think of a cleaner mid-high range speaker. They are wonderful for classical music.

madmax

heiney9 wrote: »

So Polk shouldn't have spent the millions of dollars at Johns Hopkins university to test and develop their own drivers? They just should have used a mass market driver like Scanspeak or Seas? I see so they wasted their money coming up with the aerated poly prop drivers they spent all that money and time on when they could've just bought stuff "off the shelf".
H9

They probably could have but I'm sure it was cheaper to pay the one time research fee rather than a per-unit cost.

Which is better? It all depends on how the driver is implemented. You can make low cost drivers in the proper enclosures perform as well as expensive drivers in the appropriate enclosure, you just pay the money up front with engineering cost. Expensive drivers mean nothing more than documentation of their operating parameters. Put them in the wrong enclosure and they will sound like crap.

madmax

dipiazza

One way to raise the perception of quality is to raise the price.

Doesnt mean more expensive is better, doesnt mean that its a ripoff either.

LuSh

It's kinda funny getting involved in this topic now, when 3 years ago I was considered an audio 'snob' when I was playing around with SimAudio, Krell, Meitner and other stuff. I was usually involved in a few cable threads, fast forward 3 years and suddenly I'm the champion of the 'mass market speaker'.

One thing I realized years ago is that audio and video alike are more about perception then actual quality. A good product is usually a good product regardless of where it is distributed or made. While it is true mass-market products are usually conceived and distributed on a feature to price scale, I'm not sure how the LSi fits the bill when the feature list really doesn't add up to a mass market product. In fact on a typical spec sheet...it really doesn't give off any real glaring value. What it does do very well imo is create music.

The Tyler Acoustics aren't in the same price range, so it's a dead issue. The fact that the Polk Audio LSi's can be the cheapest part of any home audio equation is more or an asset then a liability. My point is simple. I have yet to hear a speaker in its price point that beats the LSi9's and 15's. I'm always open to hearing other peoples thoughts and opinions. If the LSi could be distributed through independants they would be the talk of the town, because Polk went mass long ago we all know this won't happen.

To give you an idea of perception and it's impact. Totem Acoustic's was hailed a true high end speaker company for years in Canada, and still is to this day. Except they made the mistake of entering a larger power regional in Alberta called A&B Sound, this all but killed thier perceived vailue in that province. When I even mention Totem to a relative from that province he gives me that 'mass-market' glare. Five years ago he owned a pair of Mani2's and thought the world of them. Now it's considered lower end and Totem has lost their way. It's all about perception....

hearingimpared

LuSh wrote: »

It's all about perception....

This simple statement carries so much weight in this hobby!

VR3

We all need to buy Bose and get it over with.

And not just any Bose. The HIGH END Bose!

heiney9

Vr3MxStyler2k3 wrote: »

We all need to buy Bose and get it over with.

And not just any Bose. The HIGH END Bose!

Do you mean the really expensive BOSE?

VR3

YES!

The ones that are under 4" tall - that makes them better!

dale 442

In Canada, the LSi line is not mass marketed at all. I have still yet to audition them. Can you already tell I'm not a online shopper?
The best local store, for me, won't touch Polk NOW with a bloody ten foot pole. This is the store I bought my 2b's from and were a huge Polk dealer at one time.
What happened?
Cause the big box stores now have the Rti's and the R's and advertise the hell out of them regularly in the local papers and with flyers.
The amount of money spent means crap to me.

The only thing that matters is how it fits your own ear, and we all know how different our own hearing is perceived.
Really a dumb argument going on here. "I think this" "You think that".
Matt Polk did his work. The people now there know what they want. If you don't like them, clean the "Taters" out of your ears!!

These are not "Big box only speakers"

dale 442

I do agree with the fact that some of the people buying Polk's at the outlets end up with a piece of crap AV receiver. That's all they want and need. More show for their neighbors than anything else.

For some, more into audio as a hobby, we know that it takes time and some thought and time (Again) to put something together that sounds complete.

I am the type of guy who is proud to not OVERSPEND (Can you say Bose) on any brand of product because it is the "One to have".

Again, amount spent means nothing. The less spent the better, or have I been missing something all these years??
Whether it be a mass market brand or a niche market one, same crap.

begbie

AndyGwis wrote: »

...There's so much out there that it would be silly to stick with just one brand....

Agreed.

dale 442

Do you have one doctor? Do you have one dentist?

One being the apt word here. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it"

IF, you are happy with the product...

cfrizz

Bravo Dale!

ND13

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Strong Bad

With regard to HT (and not 2 channel), keys to getting the "perfect sound" come from buying matching speakers all the way around, proper setup of all speakers and proper setup of the speakers within the receiver itself.

After you've exhausted all of these areas should you write off a particular brand and model line of speakers. For instance, to say the new Polk line of mains suck when you have, say, a JBL center and B&W surrounds going into a cheap **** Sony receiver is unfair to Polk. "Hey, my setup is so unbalanced and sounds like crap. I'm dumping the Polks cause they are mass marketed pieces of crap!" How fair would that be? Buy all one brand and model line so all drivers match in all channels.

My setup consists of the RT800 mains, CS400 and FX500 surrounds going into the Yamaha RXV795 with the PC-Ultra bringing up the lowend. Yesterday I emailed back and forth with Ed (Dr Spec) at SVS about setup. I went home, tweaked things and gave it a test run with War of the Worlds. The sub needs more tweaking and testing, but what I heard was nothing short of brilliant! Balance, clarity and crystal clear sound from top to bottom, all the way around!

John

ohskigod

the RT line, particularly the ones you have, were damn good for home theater. I rolled with RT55's as mains for quite some time with no issues.

no surprises here you diggin what your running. system looks nice and balanced, and an SVS bringing up the bottom always makes the other speakers job that much easier.

Strong Bad

ohskigod wrote: »

the RT line, particularly the ones you have, were damn good for home theater. I rolled with RT55's as mains for quite some time with no issues.

no surprises here you diggin what your running. system looks nice and balanced, and an SVS bringing up the bottom always makes the other speakers job that much easier.

Oh hell yeah, that line was very impressive! Ain't no way I'll get rid of them. Thats why years ago I decided to score a couple more CS400's for eventual use as rear centers. They're packed up and in storage.

I had the RT55's as mains before the RT800's became available local at a bargain basement price. I decided to change to them instead of spending the $$ for a nice pair of stands for the RT55's. I sold the 55's shortly after.

Alot of setup has to happen in the receiver itself to bring your system to life. When I got the SVS, that opened up the possibility to get it perfect in the receiver (all speakers set to SMALL so the SVS handles EVERYTHING below 80hz). Other minor tweaks happened also.

Polk ROCKS!

John

MillerLiteScott

John, it looks like we have the same receiver. Have you found any tips for your set up?

steveinaz

As always, this topic also falls into the point of diminishing returns. Usually, you get what you pay for; but there's a point where performance differences quickly begin to dwindle--although price continues to rise. Does that mean expensive speakers are a rip-off? No. You're paying for more attention to minor detail, better construction, finer wood, custom built drivers/crossovers, and to an extent---the prestige of a particular brand label. You have to measure the value of these things for yourself--if that exotic wood wrapped around your speakers is worth the extra 5 grand---than it's worth it, to you. Does it make the speaker better? Not necessarily.

Like all things in life, it's all relative. If you love the sound of your $399 Epos bookshelf, than you have no need for a $8000 floorstander--right? The problem is, people get caught up in the prestige thing...you know, if it's sold at CC or BB it can't be good--that's rediculous. Since when does a distributor determine the quality of a product?

Strong Bad

Steve, right on!

Scott, I'll PM.


John