M70 vs. RTi A3

I recently upgraded from Monitors to the RTi A line, I am also would go with the bookshelf speakers.

xcapri79 wrote: »

With a good amp, I would take the Monitor 70's for music. The choice is based on personal preference. The room and its treatment are also a factor.

yes monitor 70's do sound a lot different with an amp, and do create more sound than an RTi A3.

thesurfer wrote: »

Of course,, more drivers,,, but the rti,s use better tweeters, and midbass,

yep, also true, plus they look awesome

For HT?

I would have to go with the larger speakers. HT is not exactly rocket science.

Personally, I think you can put together a pretty respectable HT system with smaller fronts as long as you have a good sub. I've watched movies on a system that's A3's on stands for fronts and rears and a Velodyne sub, and I like that a little better honestly than my system which is Monitor 70 fronts and OWM 3 rears mounted at the ceiling. I went with the M70 fronts because of the price performance and because I knew I'd be listening to a fair amount of 2-channel on them so wanted something more full range.

cnh makes a very good point, and I'm really happy overall with the sound of my M70 based HT. I would say one thing about the RTi vs. Monitor debate for home theater and that is if you're into voice matching your center I do feel like the CSi A6 center (which matches RTi) really blows away the CS2 center (Monitor). Again, the CS2 in my system is good, but since the highs are clearer in the RTi's I think it makes a significant difference in simple things like just how clearly dialogue is articulated when there's a substantial amount of other audio.

In my case, I had to create separate audio profiles on my receiver to emphasize the center on TV (movies seem to be mixed better). My buddy's RTi system just sounds clear as a bell all the time. To be fair, this could also be due to the fact that his big-**** center is competing with bookshelves and mine is up against M70's, which definitely are the bomb.

ShadowTowel wrote: »

Okay... Well I'm a home theater guy who loves his blu ray movies... Are you all saying that the monitor 70s and the matching center would be better for me than my rti a3's with a csi a4? I am like 95% movies and 5% music.

In other words, if I was able to sell my front 3 and get the monitor 70s and a cs1/2 without losing any money, it would be a great improvement/deal?

I think you're much too suggestable. Keep what you have and start saving for a nice sub. You're an HT/gamer, the sub will make the largest difference in your rig and you'll appreciate the better resolution. I wouldn't take a step backwards to get a bigger sound. I'd make the sound bigger.

If you're really looking for an upgrade, hold out and save for some Rti A7's at a minimum...

I still think the Monitor 70's are an upgrade from the A3's, but the A7's are a nice speaker for the money.

ShadowTowel wrote: »

Well I have a sub that I consider good, but I realize there is room for improvement. I don't think my sub is a slouch though. It certainly helps out the bookshelves on the low end a lot!

You have a BIC PL-200, right? There is no reason at all why you can't get amazing HT performance with the RTiA3/CSiA4 setup. It may take some fiddling with the various settings (crossover, speaker size, speaker levels, etc...), but once you get it set just right, you should be enjoying some very nice results. Of course, upgrades are always possible. Only you can decide when to stop. If I were building my HT again, I'd seriously consider bookshelves over towers.

Sit back and soak in what you've got, before making any decisions to change it.

dnoyeB wrote: »

Why do you prefer M70s + sub over A3's + sub? It would seem that part of the money spent on the M70 is wasted due to the duplication of the work the sub is already doing!?

I think it depends on what your listening preferences are (2-channel vs 5.1). At NewEgg sale prices a pair of M70's costs about the same as a pair of A3's. And for 2-channel music listening many prefer a full-range speaker to bookshelves and only one sub. Unless the bookshelves can reach low enough, the sub has to extend up into the bass frequencies that are "directional" by which I mean it becomes fairly easy to tell that the bass is coming from a different location from the higher frequencies and it throws off the stereo imaging a bit (IMO). In fact, if you tell your AVR your fronts are large, it's default settings most likely will not send a signal to the sub when processing 2-channel sources so there won't be overlap in that case.

But in this case, if they're going to be used 95% for HT/5.1 and only 5% for 2-channel/music I think you're right that you don't need the full range floorstanders as fronts. It really comes down to a matter of preference.

@ShadowTowel, I wouldn't worry at all about the smaller center... maybe if you had it with A7/9's you'd have a good case for needing the bigger one, but you should definitely be able to get your HT sounding sweet with the gear you've got. Unfortunately, as long as there are things like multipurpose living areas used as media rooms and budgets and wives, every HT becomes an exercise in doing the best you can with the constraints you've got.

Upstatemax wrote: »

The Monitor 70's have great midrange and an expansive soundfield. Thanks to the Cascade crossovers in them, they are a very smooth and as CNH mentioned, put out a WALL OF SOUND.

I also don't like to have a sub handle all of my lower frq... I prefer to have a sub handle mostly LFE and let the mains handle everything north of 60hz (I now have my RTi A7's set to 40hz). I find they do it tighter and quicker than most subs and it makes it more difficult to locate the sub in the room.

I have found that when the A3's start to go below 100hz they get muddy and sloppy. The Monitor 70's can go down to 40hz but I found them to be better crossed over at 60. The A3's, I would not dare to drop below 100hz.

IMO, the less you have to RELY on a sub, the better.

Crossover is subjective, and while I generally agree with you about reliance on a sub, an 80Hz crossover seems reasonable for these speakers. Even bumping up slightly to 90 or 100, it should still sound great. I have some smaller Def Tech satellites in my living room, that are not quite as capable as the RTiA3s on the low end, and after much experimenting, I have them crossed over at 80Hz. Sounds great. Different speakers, I know, but the concept is the same - let your ears be the judge. I also crossed my RTi10s over at 60Hz for a while and went back to 80... to each their own, I guess!