Polk Speakers new vs. old-how do they stack up ?

lakesailor

In spite of being new here I can see that most everyone loves their vintage Polk’s as much as I have loved my 11T’s. As they are getting close to 20 years old I am thinking that an upgrade is soon in order.

One of my concerns is that I have noted many of the new speakers I have thus far listened too don’t seem to hold a candle to the quality of the speakers that were on the market some 15-20 years ago. Yesterday I listened to a pair of floorstanders that list in the $1K range and they were scary bad.

As we don’t have any Polk dealers near where I live I am wondering how the new Polk’s stack up against the older classics? Any opinions on this? and more so new Polk model (s) that you would recommend?

Thx in advance

Face

If you update the crossovers in your currents speakers, you may not look into another set of speakers for another 15 years.

If you can get your ears on them, the LSi's are worth a listen.

treitz3

Newer lineup? LSi's.

zingo

I bump Face's idea. Classic speakers with new electronic components. It's the best of both worlds.

F1nut

Classic speakers with new electronic components. It's the best of both worlds.

Ditto.

Marty913

One of my concerns is that I have noted many of the new speakers I have thus far listened too don’t seem to hold a candle to the quality of the speakers that were on the market some 15-20 years ago. Yesterday I listened to a pair of floorstanders that list in the $1K range and they were scary bad.

An interesting statement and one I would not disagree with. Not wanting to fall into the "good old days" trap of people my age but I have wondered what changed (other than the prices and the quality). The great ones seemed to evolve out of small niche company's that truly seemed to be pursuing the dream of reproducing great music. Most were devotee-founded, privately held and rarely had more than a couple of product lines. Vinyl was king, CD's just taking off, and if you didn't have a audio store in your town you probably hadn't heard of most of the brands. Sitting around with friends and listening to music was an event, not Muzak.

Enter cable television, over-engineering (computers?), home theater, "decor appropriate" design constraints, multiple product lines, new-age materials (plastic), and large box stores. Pair up one or more of the above with a generation of compressed music freaks that grew up on 3" drivers and what have you got?

I vote upgraded electronics in vintage speakers (he said as he climbed off the soap box).

lakesailor

I have a theory on what has changed. The floorstanders I listened to yesterday were basically the exact same dimensions as the 11T’s. They had a slightly different driver configuration with 2 x 8” woofer 1x8” mid bass and a 1” soft dome tweeter; nonetheless they were still a multiple driver speaker much the same as the 11T; in fact is was the overall similarity to the 11T that first drew me to them.

These were from an English speaker company and looked aesthetically very pleasing with beech wood cabinets and contoured black grilles that covered over the array of jet black drivers. They were sexy. Then I listened to them. Yes they could thump, thump, thump like you wouldn’t believe, but it was a very sloppy bass; not tight like the 11t’s. The mid range was overpowered by the two woofers and sounded hollow as a result and the tweeters were completely lost.

On closer inspection the first surprise I came across was weight; these weighed in around 30lbs versus 44 lbs for the 11T’s….14 lbs is a fair bit of weight and given the multiple drivers I would speculate that the bulk of the weight savings is to be found in the cabinets; pretty much the easiest place to cut costs without being obvious to the consumer. Cheap cabinets also explain the sloppy base and I would assume labor savings in construction and obviously less weight makes for cheaper and easier shipping.

The tweeters were also clearly on the cheap side as well, and obviously a bad place to cut costs for all kinds of reasons. I think what it comes down to is that it is far easier to make speakers that look good than actually sound good and in an era with self service big box stores and Internet buy it before you try it websites galore it is likely far easier to sell based on looks alone and that seems to be the problem.

I am glad that people are still thinking highly of new Polk products and I look forward to listening to the suggested Lsi’s…I will be out of town in a month where I can likely find a pair to audition. Thanks to everyone for the idea’s.

P.S. I f I could find a set of speakers that looked as sexy as those Brit’s did, but sounded as good as my 11t’s I would be sold !

cfrizz

Welcome Lakesailor.

Just do some research here on the forum about the LSI's, they are great speakers but cost alot of money to get them setup properly with the right amount of power to operate to their full potential.

obieone

I'm researching 'old speakers' at the local flea market. Saw some Panasonic? 3-ways with 17" WOOFERS! The guy didn't have them lit off, but I'd love to hear what those sound like.

geoff727

I was considering a pair of newer Polks, possibly LSi's. Then I auditioned some at the only place I could find here in the Seattle area that carried them. The LSi15's were very poorly set up in this electronics warehouse store, with 500 other noise sources around (car stereos, boom boxes, computers, big TV's). So a good audition was simply impossible. Then I looked at the LSi25's in their theater room. This was better, but I still get the feeling that a lot of these set-ups are contrived with maximum "boom factor" in mind, not maximum fidelity.
I hate those kinds of "auditions", and I can never see myself buying anything under those conditions.
On the other hand, I love my refurb'ed -1C's. Granted, though, it's difficult to say "I'd put 'em up against the LSi's anytime", because I really couldn't tell what I was hearing with the LSi's under those annoying conditions. But a few hundred dollars of components have brought the -1C's to a whole new level, just like they have for so many others with many different brands, including a lot of good folks here.

geoff727

Marty913 wrote: »

The great ones seemed to evolve out of small niche company's that truly seemed to be pursuing the dream of reproducing great music. Most were devotee-founded, privately held and rarely had more than a couple of product lines.

That's one reason I also love my Nudell/Christie era (pre-Harman takeover)Infinity's. They're just good speakers, no two ways about it.

djf

F1nut wrote: »

Ditto.

Still chewin them up there, hey Nut?

I agree. Newer electronics and materials would benefit... but let's face it, the days of having speakers in your house that are the size of a drive in movie screen are gone. I saw an ad for a pair of Klipsch's for like 650 bux, I got the space but not the watts...


Currently: Easy Money, King Crimson, Live at Asbury

Marty913

geoff727 wrote: »

That's one reason I also love my Nudell/Christie era (pre-Harman takeover)Infinity's. They're just good speakers, no two ways about it.

I know, it's hard to find quality bookshelf speakers like these anymore. Wish I'd never let them go.

geoff727

Yep, QLS1's.....with different midranges on the top two?

Likesailor, I think I'd hang on to those 11T's. I agree with the other guys, some crossover updating, maybe some brand new veneer if you're a woodworker, and that would be a sweet speaker indeed.

Marty913

geoff727 wrote: »

Yep, QLS1's.....with different midranges on the top two?

Likesailor, I think I'd hang on to those 11T's. I agree with the other guys, some crossover updating, maybe some brand new veneer if you're a woodworker, and that would be a sweet speaker indeed.

Yep, it was back in the mid/late 80's & I bought them from a guy who did trade shows at Municipal Auditorium in Kansas City. It took me over a year to track down the correct mids (no Internet back then). Finally got them fixed, sold them, and bought a pair of 2.3TL's.

geoff727

How'd the 2.3tl's stack up against the QLS1's? I recently listened to a pair of Infinity RS4.5's Very nice detail in the mids & highs. My stock 2.3tl's didn't have near the detail, but I felt they were more fulfilling in the mid-bass region.

Marty913

geoff727 wrote: »

How'd the 2.3tl's stack up against the QLS1's? I recently listened to a pair of Infinity RS4.5's Very nice detail in the mids & highs. My stock 2.3tl's didn't have near the detail, but I felt they were more fulfilling in the mid-bass region.

Keeping in mind the QLS1's were "crippled" for most of the time I had them, I would have to say the 2.3TL's had a much tighter bass and were considerably "faster" (if that term makes sense). My listening room was smallish, probably 14 X 16) and the Polk's were a better fit. Then again, it was in reality the SDA effect that sold me. Although I started serious audio in the late 60's I had never heard a soundstage like that before. If there was one thing about the Q's I really liked it was probably the highs and in general the "wall of sound" they could throw at you. The three tonal control knobs were kind of unique and helped a lot to tailor the overall sound but the Q's just could create the overall experience that the Polk's could.

ryboltroad

Diitto DItto Face's comment. I spent all last night rebuilding a set of Monitor 10. New crossover components and one w driver in each speaker. I have spent all day just dazed and confused trying to figure out which Cd to put in next and which amp is better.
Right now Dire Straights and Love Over Gold with the Denon 2200 is slightly edging out the Carver 55 and Meatloaf but just barely......

ben62670

Back to the original question.
Polk Speakers new vs. old-how do they stack up ?
Vertically. I have my Old Polk's (RTA15rdo's)stacked one on top of the other with a T-shirt between them next to my new Polk's made out of old parts. This is my office rig so it isn't set up properly:o

Refefer

Your speakers still scare me ben.

Joe08867

Ben those speakers are just F-ing awesome.

ben62670

I just bought some more amps too:D They will be run by 2 GFA-565's, a GFA-585, and a GFA-5800, or GFA-545. I want something a little more special for the tweets. I just hope the finished basement has 7'6" ceilings, or I won't be able to stand them up:D I might go redneck on it, and take out a couple ceiling tiles:D:D

nms

I still can't get over how BIG those things are. How do they sound a background listening levels?

heiney9

Marty913 wrote: »

One of my concerns is that I have noted many of the new speakers I have thus far listened too don’t seem to hold a candle to the quality of the speakers that were on the market some 15-20 years ago. Yesterday I listened to a pair of floorstanders that list in the $1K range and they were scary bad.

An interesting statement and one I would not disagree with. Not wanting to fall into the "good old days" trap of people my age but I have wondered what changed (other than the prices and the quality). The great ones seemed to evolve out of small niche company's that truly seemed to be pursuing the dream of reproducing great music. Most were devotee-founded, privately held and rarely had more than a couple of product lines. Vinyl was king, CD's just taking off, and if you didn't have a audio store in your town you probably hadn't heard of most of the brands. Sitting around with friends and listening to music was an event, not Muzak.

Enter cable television, over-engineering (computers?), home theater, "decor appropriate" design constraints, multiple product lines, new-age materials (plastic), and large box stores. Pair up one or more of the above with a generation of compressed music freaks that grew up on 3" drivers and what have you got?

I vote upgraded electronics in vintage speakers (he said as he climbed off the soap box).

Matthew Polk remarked in an online interview in 1990:

"One thing people don't realize is that designing loudspeakers is sometimes a little like being in the fashion business. One year people want big speakers, a couple years later they want small speakers. Sometimes the change in the way people live their lives drives the technology of our products instead of the other way around. And then sometimes we we just build and design whatever we want." From compendium 2nd edition.

I'd vote vintage with new components in the x-over and the newer tweeters. However the LSi's seem to fit into the "fashionable and great sounding" category. I had a pair of LSi's and yes, they can be more expensive but they are worth it.

H9

markmarc

From best down, here are my top 4 Polk series choices:
Lsi,
SDA
Monitors (original version)
RTi

Mike Kozak

Now this really pisses me off!!
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&Item=300196672346&Category=14993&_trksid=p3907.m29

MarcLazarek78

What pisses you off about it?

I made a post here on them yesterday. And they were only at $50 at the time

NJPOLKER

Better to be pissed off than on.
Give us an update on your 10's and forget about what you paid. Well I guess you won't beable to forget with us reminding you.
Drew

Face

I sold a pair in similar condition to someone on the board here for $50. There are bargains out there once in a while.

ben62670

nms wrote: »

I still can't get over how BIG those things are. How do they sound a background listening levels?

They sound fine at lower levels. There is an open chamber all the way to the bottom for the passives. I used batting material, and adheared it to the walls to allow a nice straigh path to the PR's. When low the cones are barely moving, but you can still feel the bass. Cranked it just punches you.

markmarc wrote: »

From best down, here are my top 4 Polk series choices:
Lsi,
SDA
Monitors (original version)
RTi

RTA is in the middle there, and I think closer to the top;)
LSI? I would love a set of nines with a sealed sub.

Face

I wouldn't mind owning a pair of LSi9's either, they really impressed me.