CL Dallas: POLK AUDIO MONITOR 12

leroyjr1

THSMITH,

How would you compare the m12's to your 8's?

thsmith

Braddles wrote: »

Well done mate!

I bet getting them off the floor would tighten them up a bit.

I can shoot you the dementions of what's on mine if you like.

Brad

Yes Please ! I definetly want to get them up a couple of inches, If nothing else to get the tweeters at ear level.

Thanks

thsmith

leroyjr1 wrote: »

THSMITH,

How would you compare the m12's to your 8's?

Its a little early yet but there is a difference not not sure how to word it. The highs are much smoother on the 12s and the mid bass and for that matter the lower bass is much tighter.

But the 8s are articulate in the mid-bass. I was suprised how well the week I was waiting for the Ultra.

What surprises me is how much more (10db) I can raise the volume. A friend of mine is at the Cup races this weekend or the 12s would have a 200wpc Kenwood AMP on them now.

thsmith

Ron Temple wrote: »

Congrats...well you weren't kidding. Thought about vintage Polks a couple of days ago and here you are .

Be sure to post over on the Polkie thread @ AVS too.

Those really look pristine. Versus the RTis, I'm assuming these are much more laid back. The detail is there, but a much wider soundstage and different placement in the room. When you put an amp on them, that kick you're hearing will be even better.

I think you'll find that the Ultra is too much for some musical content. It's a great sub, but the big Polks will give you tight and balanced bass for music. Adding the sub makes it tough to tame. For HT let er rip.

Ron, The praise the 12s were getting and for the price I felt they were worth checking out. When I heard and saw them I could not come up with a reason not to buy.

I am not sure what laid back means but there is a big difference. Highs are cleaner and the mid bas and low bass is sweet. They blend with the Ultra like they were made for each other.

I want to do some tweeking, I have not even fired up REW yet, just set them and ran Audessy, I did change XO on AVR to 80 and set the mains to small.

I did this to do a fair comparsion with the 8s.

I was planning to collect a graph with default AUd setting, a graph with the way they are now and set to Large with no sub.

Do appreciate your support and the others here.

Unless there are any objections I will post some graphs with the 12s and the 8s.

thsmith

Braddles wrote: »

Sorry mate just saw you already asked me for the measurements on my thead.

I'll talk in inches for you.

They are 3/4" thick peices of MDF.

1 &1/2" high at the front down to 1" at the back. They run full lenght front to rear of the speaker.
They sit 1" in from each side.
They are just wood screwed in with 2 screws each side.
Mine came with pastic buttons on the bottom to isolate them further. They are pressed in the the countersunk hole for the screw.

Ill take some pics for you if you like?

Excellent Brad, thank you !

Is the stand screwed to the speaker ?

Pics would be great but only if it is not too much trouble.

Braddles

Some pics for ya.

The full lenght shot shows the amount of rear tilt when lined up against the cabinet beside it.

Hope this helps

Cheers

thsmith

Braddles wrote: »

Some pics for ya.

The full lenght shot shows the amount of rear tilt when lined up against the cabinet beside it.

Hope this helps

Cheers

Brad, most excellent, Thank you !

I see that my 12s have small starter holes on the bottom.

I will be making some of those tomorrow.

I like your black 12s, are those series 1s ?

Braddles

No mate series 2. The 12's only came out here in oz when the series 2 monitors were released.

You should take the chance to back to back the speakers with and without the stands.

Let us know what you think.

shadowofnight

You scored bigtime....congrats

thsmith wrote: »

Was able to pick up the M12s today. Don is a great fellow.

12s were in better condition than pics showed. He had them playing when I arrived. Don pointed out the replaced negative post on one speaker.

Pushing the PR makes the 4 six and halves move very well, does not take much.

They have a new home now. As promised here's some pics.

I have listed to then in large and naked with music and was surprised how tight the bass is, I like it. At the moment I am using 2.1 with the Ultra to better compare.

Listened to Hoottie in 5.1, very nice.

Listen to and watched IM and Hulk scenes, very nice. That Ultra is a beast and the M12s blend well with the Ultra and Center.

The one thing I have noticed is what use to sound really good at -10db on the AVR now takes 0. The sound has cleared up and more punch. I could see with the right AMP not needing a sub for music. They kick.

Thanks for the feedback and answers. Back to listening.

thsmith

Thank you ! Going to take some measurements this morning and see how they go.

thsmith

OK, Here is a couple of graphs. First one is comparing apples/apples wrt settings, Audessy ran for each comp, mains set to small and AVR XO set to 80hz. In both cases Ultra was on in same location. M12 is green

Second graph is of the M12s set to large with Aud set to deafault after cal and no sub. They go as low as advertised.

I did raise the M12s a couple of inches up off the floor, graph wise it did increase the lower freqs but have not listened.

So far I hear a wider sound stage and the highs are not as harsh/sharp as the RT8s. The highs are cleaner with the M12s.

All and all I am very pleased. now to make some a permanent stands.

Ron Temple

Wow, it kind of drops like a ported sub below tuning. The PRs in the SDA line have a 12db slope like a sealed sub...must be the crossover. That's not a criticism just an observation.

thsmith

Ron Temple wrote: »

Wow, it kind of drops like a ported sub below tuning. The PRs in the SDA line have a 12db slope like a sealed sub...must be the crossover. That's not a criticism just an observation.

Yep, Aud could be influencing this too. As you have seen I have some nulls in LP.

thsmith

Ron Temple wrote: »

I think you'll find that the Ultra is too much for some musical content. It's a great sub, but the big Polks will give you tight and balanced bass for music. Adding the sub makes it tough to tame. For HT let er rip.

While listening to Allman Brothers Eat a Peach I had to turn the sub off and set the M12s to large. WOW:D

This is the first one I found that made the Ultra and M12s not play well.
Absolutely stunning sound. They dig deep enough for me to double check the Ultra wasn't on.

I need power, more power;)

leroyjr1

What do I need to get a eq graph for my system?

thsmith

leroyjr1 wrote: »

What do I need to get a eq graph for my system?

RS SPL meter, a PC sound card that does analog in and out (not mic), cables and Room EQ Wizard (REW).

STart here http://www.hometheatershack.com/forums/rew-forum/11707-room-eq-wizard-rew-information-index-links-guides-articles-stickies-please-read.html#post103867

thsmith

thsmith wrote: »

Yep, Aud could be influencing this too. As you have seen I have some nulls in LP.

Might be placement or just the way M12s roll off. Not sure but the SDA PR looks like a different style than the M12s. From what I can tell the SDAs do not use a basket PR like the M12s.

I cranked up some Van Morrison and those PRs really move quit a bit.:D

Ron Temple

Be careful with the dancing drivers...I get mine moving ~ 105dbs @ 3M. According to my VU meters, the peaks are hitting 120-150w. You don't want to clip the Denon.

Another CD that will surprise you with bass...fun with the sub, but too much...Sarah McLachlan, Solace. Not exactly rock n roll, but there are some very deep and hot bass tracks.

thsmith

Ron Temple wrote: »

Be careful with the dancing drivers...I get mine moving ~ 105dbs @ 3M. According to my VU meters, the peaks are hitting 120-150w. You don't want to clip the Denon.
QUOTE]

Agree.

I know the Adcom's are popular amps but what about the YAMAHA MX-600U , it to is rated at 200wpc at 8ohms. I think they can be had for about half the price of the Adcom GFA-555s ?

Ron Temple

Googled it, didn't see any pans, but not much info period. Didn't look too hard. Adcom's are a known commodity and the 555s can be had in the $300 range if you're patient. I prefer Carver to Adcom, but I like laid back. TFM24, 25, 35(x)s go in the same range ($250-400), all north of 200w @ 8ohms.

There are several Polkies in the DFW area, maybe someone will step up and give you an audition .

Braddles

Dont assume the more wpc will sound better. I just finished a 3 day & nite test with 3 amps and found the the one with the least wpc sounded best. Tested 200 wpc Rotel, 150 wpc bel canto but the 140 wpc Quad the best to me. The 12's are rated at 91db so you can achieve very loud sound quite easy. I read a good quote about wpc once.
" If it doesn't produce the first watt properly, whats the point of 199 more of them"Try and get a listen before parting with your hard earned.

bluecomet

I bought the other set of Monitors the seller had for sale. They are Monitor 10A's. These speakers are awesome. Your monitor 12's must be something else. I hame RT800i's and the Monitor 10A I feel is superior. I thought my set of Monitor 7's were great, especially when using a sub, with the 10's I don't think I am going to need it unless I am lessoning to HT for effects. Great speaker line, it is hard to believe these speakers are 30 years old.

Conradicles

bluecomet, I feel the same way that you do. I too have the same Model 10A that you have. I saw those on e-bay and knew somebody was going to be happy. Mine are in near perfect condition with the Peerless tweeters. I use them in my Home theater with no subwoofer. After adjusting the room EQ of my Pioneer Receiver and turned up the bass at 40 HZ and a little at 125 HZ...there is no need for a sub anymore in my opinion. The Monitor 10A are great speakers!

shaneybob

Congrats on the 12's, thsmith!! I've always wanted a set of them after having the 5B's since '84. I knew I should have made the trip form Amarillo!!!!

I'm with Mr. Temple and prefer Carver with my monitors, although my old amp finally started giving me fits quite a few years ago and was retired and replaced with a NAD.