Polk L200 Speaker Demo Reviews

13468915

Comments

  • erniejade
    erniejade Posts: 6,288
    Great review. Enjoyed reading it.
    Musical Fidelity Tri-Vista 300, Audioquest Thunderbird Zero Speaker Cable, Tyler Highland H2, Audioquest Thunderbird Interconnect, Innuos Zen MK3 W4S recovery, Revolution Audio Labs USB & Ethernet, Border Patrol SE-I, Audioquest Niagara 5000 & Thunder, Cullen Crossover II PC's.
  • vmaxer
    vmaxer Posts: 5,116
    Can’t wait to read your reviews.
    Pio Elete Pro 520
    Panamax 5400-EX
    Sunfire TGP 5
    Micro Seiki DD-40 - Lyra-Dorian and Denon DL-160
    PS Audio GCPH phono pre
    Sunfire CG 200 X 5
    Sunfire CG Sig 405 X 5
    OPPO BDP-83 SE
    SDA SRS 1.2TL Sonicaps and Mills
    Ctr CS1000p
    Sur - FX1000 x 4
    SUB - SVS PB2-Plus

    Workkout room:
    Sony Bravia XBR- 32-Inch 1080p
    Onkyo TX-DS898
    GFA 555
    Yamaha DVD-S1800BL/SACD
    Ft - SDA 1C

    Not being used:
    RTi 38's -4
    RT55i's - 2
    RT25i's -2, using other 2 in shop
    LSI 15's
    CSi40
    PSW 404
  • Geoff4rfc
    Geoff4rfc Posts: 2,116
    I have received the walnut finish L200 review pair.

    r7okm08sbhyf.jpg

    That just looks like a primo PolkAudio advertisement right there......I don't care who you are, that's beautiful!!!

    Source: BRP Panasonic UB9000, CDP Emotiva ERC3 - Display: LG OLED EVO 83 C3 - Pre/Pro: Marantz 8802A - Amplification: Emotiva XPA-DR3, XPA-2 x 2, XPA-6, Speakers, Mains/2ch-Focal Kanta No2's, C-LSiM706, S-702F/X, RS-RTiA9's, WS-RTiA9's, FH-RTiA3's, Subs - Epik Empire x 2

    Cables: AudioQuest McKenzie XLR's/CDP/Amp, Carbon 48/BRP, Forest 48/Display

    EXPERIENCE: next to nothing, but I sure enjoy audio and video MY OPINION OF THIS HOBBY: I may not be a smart man, but I know what quicksand is.
    When I was young, I was Superman but now that old age has gotten the best of me I'm only Batman
  • gmcman
    gmcman Posts: 1,739
    I enjoyed the L200's....will get to a quick review hopefully tomorrow.
  • Ryan, what are the floor standing speakers in your photos? Assuming you like them?
  • ZLTFUL
    ZLTFUL Posts: 5,640
    Donovan84 wrote: »
    Ryan, what are the floor standing speakers in your photos? Assuming you like them?

    Silverline Audio Sonatina MkI
    And I love them.
    But my room is too small for them in all honesty.
    "Some people find it easier to be conceited rather than correct."

    "Unwad those panties and have a good time man. We're all here to help each other, no matter how it might appear." DSkip
  • K_M
    K_M Posts: 1,627
    @Jstas

    "At this point I'm thinking maybe something is wrong with the Nova as several sources showed similar performance. So I swapped the LSiM 703's in and ran through some of the stuff I did before. There was that life to the sound again. So I swapped the Rainmakers in and again, vibrant, lively sound. Put the L200's back on and it was like a wet pillow."


    both those speakers you mention (703's and Rainmakers) have a boosted top end.


  • ZLTFUL
    ZLTFUL Posts: 5,640
    K_M wrote: »
    @Jstas

    "At this point I'm thinking maybe something is wrong with the Nova as several sources showed similar performance. So I swapped the LSiM 703's in and ran through some of the stuff I did before. There was that life to the sound again. So I swapped the Rainmakers in and again, vibrant, lively sound. Put the L200's back on and it was like a wet pillow."


    both those speakers you mention (703's and Rainmakers) have a boosted top end.


    Yet another statement you make that leads me to believe that either your hearing or you mind is faulty...
    "Some people find it easier to be conceited rather than correct."

    "Unwad those panties and have a good time man. We're all here to help each other, no matter how it might appear." DSkip
  • Jstas
    Jstas Posts: 14,707
    K_M wrote: »
    both those speakers you mention (703's and Rainmakers) have a boosted top end.

    What the hell are you talking about?
    Expert Moron Extraordinaire

    You're just jealous 'cause the voices don't talk to you!
  • stangman67
    stangman67 Posts: 2,179
    Can’t talk from a rainmaker perspective but the 703s are pretty lazy up top (not in a bad way). They have a boosted midrange to make up for a lack of organic lower frequency reproduction but certainly not boosted on the top end
    2 Channel in my home attic/bar/man cave

    2 Channel Focal Kanta 3 I Modwright SWL9.0 Anniversary Pre I Modwright PH9.0X I Modwright KWA-150SE I VPI Prime Signature w/ Soundsmith Zephyr MIMC I Lumin U2 Mini I North Star Designs Intenso DAC I Audience OHNO ICs/Audience Furutech FP-S55N and FP-S032N Power Cables/Acoustic Zen Satori I Isotek Sirius

  • erniejade wrote: »
    More to come later on when i have a more time with them but just wanted to say off the bat, impressive sounding so far.

    I echo Erniejade's first impressions.

    hdjh9v7eiu5o.jpgHome theater trials and comparison of the L200 against three other Polk bookshelf speakers (2 channel music only) have been completed.

    vbie8tx42hpc.jpgSetting up the L200 in my 2 channel system. The red light on each speaker is a laser level which assisted with toe in alignment. Feeding the L200s a higher quality signal resulted in much higher quality sound.

    The tonal balance and bass performance are excellent.

    More later.


    Dang! What a tease :# I'm just kidding of course. We're looking forward to your review. ;)
    2ch rig:Speakers: LSi9s with VR3's Fortress modsPreamplifier: Parasound P5Amplifier: Parasound A23CDP: Pioneer DV-563ACables: Wireworld Equinox 7 XLR ICs, Wireworld Ultraviolet 7 USB, AudioQuest Q2s, AudioQuest NRG X(preamp)
  • Jstas
    Jstas Posts: 14,707
    K_M wrote: »

    both those speakers you mention (703's and Rainmakers) have a boosted top end.


    I'd really like it if you could elaborate on this because without some kind of active external signal processing like a gain varistor on the speaker inputs (would have to be powered too) or some kind of complex capacitance circuit, there's no way for a speaker to have a "boosted top end" without some kind of amplification circuit that changes the cutoff frequency to push it past the components +6 dB capabilities.

    Even then, if you did do that, there is a physical limit to the components. You may be able to boost the signal past the +6 dB cutoff but just because you can boost the signal doesn't mean your drivers can actually reproduce it or your ears can actually hear it. A +/- 3 dB cutoff is typically the most boost you can get out of a signal processor before you get signal clipping and a +/- 6 dB cutoff is where the physical limits of the components are reached.

    The only time I have ever been able to push a response curve past a +6 dB limit is with subwoofers in SPL competitions where you are building the enclosure and taking advantage of the enclosure loading caused by the massive amounts of pressurization a sub will provide. Even then, you're barely hitting a +9 dB cutoff and it's not even the driver that's doing it. It's the enclosure resonances and it's hitting it at a very tight frequency stretch, right around driver resonance, that is maybe 10 Hz wide with a super powerful peak right in the center of that range. But even then, you're driving that driver at or just past it's physical distortion point and using the pressure in the sub box to brace the driver against it trying to tear itself apart. Your sub is a one note wonder, though and good for only one thing...competing with the Space Shuttle launches on SPL levels for a "burp" which is, at most, 3 seconds long before you send your amps into thermal failure.

    Speakers are passive devices. They don't boost anything. You can use crossovers to move your -3 dB cutoffs around so that you have a decent amount of driver response curve overlap to make a less than desirable -3 dB cutoff point a non-issue. The thing is, though, without some sort of external amplification either on the actual power end or through some kind of processing on the signal path end (bass button, tone controls, gain knobs, equalizers, etc) you're not going to boost a -3 dB cutoff frequency at all let alone anything above the 0 dB base.

    So, unless you're misusing terminology here to describe something else, you're full of baloney.

    Expert Moron Extraordinaire

    You're just jealous 'cause the voices don't talk to you!
  • stangman67
    stangman67 Posts: 2,179
    edited December 2019
    I imagine we are using boosted as a way to represent more prominent. IE I used it to describe the way a 703 has a bloated/more prominent midrange than a lot of more accurate speakers.
    2 Channel in my home attic/bar/man cave

    2 Channel Focal Kanta 3 I Modwright SWL9.0 Anniversary Pre I Modwright PH9.0X I Modwright KWA-150SE I VPI Prime Signature w/ Soundsmith Zephyr MIMC I Lumin U2 Mini I North Star Designs Intenso DAC I Audience OHNO ICs/Audience Furutech FP-S55N and FP-S032N Power Cables/Acoustic Zen Satori I Isotek Sirius
  • rooftop59
    rooftop59 Posts: 7,952
    edited December 2019
    I don’t think the LSiMs are bright at all; in fact the lower mid-bass bump (reflected in stereophile measurements) makes them a bit warm sounding. However, we all know that Polk does make bright speakers. From John atkinsons measurements of the RTiA1:
    “While the woofer is quite flat within its passband, the tweeter shelves up by 5dB in its top octave.”
    Read more at https://www.stereophile.com/content/polk-rtiii-a1-loudspeaker-measurements#QtxA7cG1hQLGCsZZ.99
    How would you explain that @Jstas?
    Living Room 2.2: Usher BE-718 "tiny dancers"; Dual DIY Dayton audio RSS210HF-4 Subs with Dayton SPA-250 amps; Arcam SA30; Musical Fidelity A308; Sony UBP-x1000es; Squeezebox Touch with Bolder Power Supply
    Game Room 5.1.4:
    Denon AVR-X4200w; Sony UBP-x700; Definitive Technology Power Monitor 900 mains, CLR-3000 center, StudioMonitor 350 surrounds, ProMonitor 800 atmos x4; Sub - Monoprice Monolith 15in THX Ultra

    Bedroom 2.1
    Cambridge Azur 551r; Polk RT25i; ACI Titan Subwoofer
  • Jstas
    Jstas Posts: 14,707
    rooftop59 wrote: »
    I don’t think the LSiMs are bright at all; in fact the lower mid-bass bump (reflected in stereophile measurements) makes them a bit warm sounding. However, we all know that Polk does make bright speakers. From John atkinsons measurements of the RTiA1:
    “While the woofer is quite flat within its passband, the tweeter shelves up by 5dB in its top octave.”
    Read more at https://www.stereophile.com/content/polk-rtiii-a1-loudspeaker-measurements#QtxA7cG1hQLGCsZZ.99
    How would you explain that @Jstas?

    Measuring frequency response is not the same as boosting frequency response in crossover curves.

    https://soundcertified.com/what-does-crossover-do-what-is-crossover-frequency-how-crossovers-work/

    What you see in that Stereophile article you posted is physical measurements with either sensors attached directly to the loudspeaker assembly or response graphs from microphones placed in proximity to the loudspeaker in an anechoic chamber. Any power measurements are not going to be a baseline standard. They are going to be measured at the output level of the amplifier being used. You can monitor that output level with measuring equipment but you are not going to be able to energize the crossover circuit with that amplifier and measure the electronic components at the same time without disassembling the speaker and putting the components on a bench.

    The Stereophile article comes to it's conclusions via measuring it's amplifier output and graphing the SPL produced by the loudspeaker/individual drivers at each measured frequency point and graphing it against the amplifier power level at each point. They can also measure impedance and cabinet flex/resonance with sensors that will show cycles of movement of electricity or physical vibrations which travel in sine waves.

    How would I explain it? You don't understand as much as you think you do. You're trying to goad a gun fight with your pocket knife. That's how I would explain it.
    Expert Moron Extraordinaire

    You're just jealous 'cause the voices don't talk to you!
  • Viking64
    Viking64 Posts: 6,646
    Jstas wrote: »
    How would I explain it? You don't understand as much as you think you do. You're trying to goad a gun fight with your pocket knife. That's how I would explain it.

    y8roedo8qvrs.jpg
  • mhardy6647
    mhardy6647 Posts: 32,926
    edited December 2019
    question re: @DarqueKnight's review above:

    When you say:
    In my two channel system, the L200s produced more weighty and solid images with improved definition and speed.
    What is the comparator? Does this refer to the L200s in the first setup vs. the two-channel setup, or a comparison of the L200s to some other loudspeakers you previously auditioned in the two-channel setup?

    Thanks.

    PS and strictly FWIW:
    The sound stage was still shallow and confined to the area between the speakers.
    I had the same impression.
    mhardy6647 wrote: »
    ... I did note, with some surprise, that the image was ‘small’ – centered between the speakers but not extending beyond them. It was also ‘shallow’; considerably less depth than I am used to from my FrankenAltecs. Both of these observations might stem from the L200s’ placement, so I am loath to fault them too much for this...
    (and not that I'm feeling defensive or anything ;) )

    Perhaps this limited depth/spaciousness arises from the extremely conventional cabinet design?

    Just musing, you know?




  • mhardy6647 wrote: »
    question re: @DarqueKnight's review above:

    When you say:
    In my two channel system, the L200s produced more weighty and solid images with improved definition and speed.
    What is the comparator? Does this refer to the L200s in the first setup vs. the two-channel setup, or a comparison of the L200s to some other loudspeakers you previously auditioned in the two-channel setup?

    Thanks.

    Compared to the way they sounded in the previous home theater setup.
    mhardy6647 wrote: »

    Perhaps this limited depth/spaciousness arises from the extremely conventional cabinet design?

    Just musing, you know?

    I had thoughts along the same lines. I wondered if the small sound stage size was a result of the speakers being built more for sonic accuracy rather than imaging.

    Proud and loyal citizen of the Digital Domain and Solid State Country!
  • displayname
    displayname Posts: 1,126
    tonyb wrote: »
    Dang, I feel sorry for the dude that has to follow one of Ray's reviews. :)
    They are coming to me next. I don't have nearly the same volume of things to experiment with in my home, but hopefully with some help from a few friends I can provide enough detail to add value for others here. :)
    Analog: MoFi MasterTracker > MoFi UltraDeck > Sutherland 20/20
    Digital: Cambridge CXC / Streaming > Cambridge CXN v2
    MastersounD Dueventi > Rosso Fiorentino Certaldo or Arcam rHead > Hifiman HE4XX
    Discogs
  • mhardy6647
    mhardy6647 Posts: 32,926
    tonyb wrote: »
    Dang, I feel sorry for the dude that has to follow one of Ray's reviews. :)
    They are coming to me next. I don't have nearly the same volume of things to experiment with in my home, but hopefully with some help from a few friends I can provide enough detail to add value for others here. :)

    I think A/B comparisons with other, familiar loudspeakers (ideally of similar configuration) are invaluable (not that you were looking for any advice :p ).

  • mpitogo
    mpitogo Posts: 475
    What are any of your thoughts on the new style binding posts? $3 parts? I’m not a fan, I thought the previous gen LSiM has better binding posts.

    Has anyone opened up the box to look inside at the crossover? Prolly a cheap $3 parts?

    How about the driver basket? Are they stamped steel? The LSiM where cast aluminum but prone to damage from the heavy motor structure.

    Not to be negative here as I own Legend speakers but built to a price point is starting to nag at me for premium speakers built overseas.
    • Living Room Music-2.0 Polk Legend L800 | McIntosh C70 | McIntosh MA5200 (Treble) | McIntosh MC452 (Bass) | Sublimeacoustic K231 Active xover | Denon DP-2500A | Denafrips Ares II | Belkin Soundform Connect | iPad Air USB to DAC
    • Media Room Ht-7.2.6/13.1 (Atmos/Auro-3D) Polk LSiM707, LSiM706c, LSiM702 F/X [x4], height LSiM703 [x6], HSU VTF-15H MK2 Dual | Marantz AV8805A | Rotel RB-1590 (L/R) | Appollon NC500 11ch | Sony UBP-X800 | AppleTV 4K | JVC RS2100
    • Game Room-5.1 Polk LSi25, LSiC, LSiF/X | Marantz SR7009 | AppleTV 4K | Xbox One S | Sony PS2, PS3 | Nintendo Wii | Gaming PC | Sony 75" LCD
    • Master Bedroom Music-2.0 Totem Hawk | Marantz PM-10 | Marantz SA-10 | SONY PS-HX500
    • Office-2.0 Ascend Acoustics Sierra LX, DSW microPRO3000 | Rotel RA-1570 | Marantz HD-CD1
    • Daughter's Bedroom 1-2.0 TBD Martin Logan Forte
    • Guest Room 2-2.0 Klipsch RP-600M | Martin Logan Forte
    • Guest Room 3-3.0 Martin Logan Motion 40, 50XT | Onkyo TX-SR705 | Apple TV | Samsung 55" TV
    • Guest Room 4-2.0 QAcoustics 3030i | Sansui AU-6900 | Topping DX7s | Sansui FR-1080 | TV
    • Maintenance: Pro-Ject VC-S Record Cleaning Machine
  • nooshinjohn
    nooshinjohn Posts: 25,034
    Buyers remorse setting in?
    The Gear... Carver "Statement" Mono-blocks, Mcintosh C2300 Arcam AVR20, Oppo UDP-203 4K Blu-ray player, Sony XBR70x850B 4k, Polk Audio Legend L800 with height modules, L400 Center Channel Polk audio AB800 "in-wall" surrounds. Marantz MM7025 stereo amp. Simaudio Moon 680d DSD

    “When once a Republic is corrupted, there is no possibility of remedying any of the growing evils but by removing the corruption and restoring its lost principles; every other correction is either useless or a new evil.”— Thomas Jefferson
  • dromunds
    dromunds Posts: 9,969
    I thought the binding posts were quality metal binding posts. That's also mentioned in non-forum reviews out there. I had no problems with the binding posts on the LSiM's but I thought the binding posts on the L200's were superior. For what its worth.