musichal
poet emeritus
Yes, as reported above in the Kick-Off post, which may be too long for many readers.
Budget Bookshelf Battle Coming Eventually To A Thread Near You
- Thread starter musichal
- Start date
Yes, as reported above in the Kick-Off post, which may be too long for many readers.
tom67
Well-Known Member
You have a huge following....if the loser offers to buy you off, what will you ask for?Yes, as reported above in the Kick-Off post, which may be too long for many readers.
musichal
poet emeritus
World peace.
I have tried and tried to tell people how nice the Polks were but all I heard was Elac Elac Elac.... As you have seen they sound just as good if not better AND they dont look like they came out of Fred Sanfords junkyard. If the Elacs at least had a decent vinyl case I would respect them a lot more. Vinyl does not have to look or be cheap at all.....again, look at Polk's vinyl covered units like the TSX 110Bs that I own......you have to get up close and touch them to tell they are not veneer.
musichal
poet emeritus
The more I listen to them, the more I like them. Initially, I thought the tweeter sibilant, but no, it was the recording. Now that the woofers have loosened up some, bass has improved - and it wasn't bad right out of the box. Midrange resolution is good, too. Not quite as good as my Silver 6, but not that far off, either.
Of course, if one prefers a very warm speaker with the top rolled off, then the RTi-A3 would not be his choice. That is not a snide slur against anyone's preferences - we like what we like. This speaker fits my preference for a highly detailed presentation with a bass alignment that doesn't overreach woofer size, thus allowing a better midrange presentation. It sounds more like my MA S6 than different.
As most realize, a detailed top end can, and will, reveal the shortcomings of some recordings. So your preference for a speaker may depend on which is more forgiving, your speaker or your ear. The last thing many of us want is a speaker that allows us to really enjoy only the best recordings. I guess, if this is true (and if I'm not totally full of crap) then I have a forgiving ear. Full of it, or not, I don't feel deprived when listening.
Weaknesses? Doesn't have quite the dynamic impact to which I've grown accustomed, but don't suck in this regard, either. There isn't much I find to criticize about its presentation, and when I consider size and price, well, that's saying something.
Christine, who is a decidedly non-audio-enthusiast music lover wonders why we need larger, more expensive speakers when this is available so affordably, "Sounds just like the big ones to me."
Last edited:
They are very detailed indeed. When I am done with my adventure with vintage speakers I may roll around to some more Polks. And they are indeed beautiful as well. I know it is sly to put so much emphasis on looks but it is all a part of my enjoyment of a system.
flyz51
dipolar since 1990
I always enjoy your comments/threads, and this is no exception. I won't bother with the popcorn emoticon, but am looking for the popcorn and air popper as soon as I'm done here (well maybe). Your last sentence helps remind me why I've loved my wife of almost 45 years unconditionally. She's put up with Magneplanars in the living room with no complaint for nearly 30 years, even allowing me to buy the replacements I chose after tearing a hole in one of the panels of the SMG-a's that I had used for almost 20 years.
Erik Tracy
Everyone's happy when the wizard walks by
That jibes with my experience as a former RTiA3 owner.
Strengths: Easy to drive, works really well at low to mid volumes with good microdynamics and detail. Good source recordings can give some big grinning enjoyment.
Weaknesses: can be strident at louder volumes with bad source material, can sound congested and the soundstage collapses when driven too hard (as in scare the neighbors loud; and I was using a clean recapped Carver m1.0-t with ample power).
After watching this thread my interest in my cheapie Polk TSx110s was piqued again. I dug them out and hooked them up to my Fisher CA 800 (100 wpc) which had Marantz Imperial 5s on it. This system is in our bedroom which is about 20 feet long and the Polks are in the corners. Since I was re arranging the systems anyway I hooked them up to my Sony STR 5800 and they sounded just as nice.
The first thing that I found interesting was that the Imperial 6s they are sitting on sound just as good in the high end (they are recapped). The second thing is the amount of bass is really impressive for a 5 in woofer especially since they are in the corners of the room. With a soft room and them being in the corners I had to boost the 4k a bit.
Even these cheapie HT Polks really sound pretty damned good. And another thing that stands out is how nice the vinyl wrap is on them. One has to get fairly close to be sure it is not veneer.
The first thing that I found interesting was that the Imperial 6s they are sitting on sound just as good in the high end (they are recapped). The second thing is the amount of bass is really impressive for a 5 in woofer especially since they are in the corners of the room. With a soft room and them being in the corners I had to boost the 4k a bit.
Even these cheapie HT Polks really sound pretty damned good. And another thing that stands out is how nice the vinyl wrap is on them. One has to get fairly close to be sure it is not veneer.
musichal
poet emeritus
I'm a slow reviewer. The new Polks needed breaking in, anyway. But I'm slow at everything, like a Dodge Dart with a slant-6 engine stuck permanently in first gear, the motor working hard at 15mph and the tank is mighty low. I found the speaker a great value for a good speaker with great aesthetic value. So let's score them somewhat arbitrarily, as a reference for the models to come.
We'll stick with the old five-star system, in tenths.
Polk RTiA3 (cherry) gets all five stars for value from a fit-and-finish aspect. Great, though magnetic grilles (rather than pegged) would have been a nice touch. Couple that with good sound and for the current sale price of $239/pr it has to score: 5.00.
Sound. I'm impressed with the performance of these speakers. Decent output down near 50hz at fairly high levels. A smooth frequency response. Will play within their limits as loudly as most people would want to listen. So what's to fault?
Like many relatively small modern speakers (and some good old recapped small vintage models, too) they can be very revealing of a weak source, whether ii is the recording or gear at fault, but we know this, and have come to expect it with detailed sound. Despite the detail, there seems to be a lack of resolution in the upper mids, and a hint of fuzziness near the crossover notch. I thought perhaps the latter due to a cabinet resonance, but was unable to detect it using slow frequency sweeps, so perhaps it is a driver dynamic, or a combo of both. The former, the lack of resolution, was not an egregious error, either. Melody Gardot was not as present as usual compared with my modest reference Silver 6, though.
That's not bad, but the news could also be better in terms of imaging. Like many small-baffle speakers they cast a good image, but I've heard many models do it a little better (and a few a lot). The soundstage is fairly wide, but with little depth.
Still, despite the criticism, I really enjoyed my listening time with the A3; they are a fun listen. They remain unruffled at fairly high volumes. Could you live with them long-term? Well, you could do worse. Could I? I might, in a secondary system. No, I mean I really might. I may be selling my Klipsch Forte. Today. If so, I'll start with the Polks in there atop dual subs. The eventual winner of this shoot-out gets the spot, if the Klipsch go bye-bye.
Anyway, I decided upon a solid 3.8 stars for sound quality for the A3.
We'll see how the Elac B6 fares next. I have to listen awhile to speakers, so expect this thread to resume in a day or three, or so. I'm a slow reviewer.
We'll stick with the old five-star system, in tenths.
Polk RTiA3 (cherry) gets all five stars for value from a fit-and-finish aspect. Great, though magnetic grilles (rather than pegged) would have been a nice touch. Couple that with good sound and for the current sale price of $239/pr it has to score: 5.00.
Sound. I'm impressed with the performance of these speakers. Decent output down near 50hz at fairly high levels. A smooth frequency response. Will play within their limits as loudly as most people would want to listen. So what's to fault?
Like many relatively small modern speakers (and some good old recapped small vintage models, too) they can be very revealing of a weak source, whether ii is the recording or gear at fault, but we know this, and have come to expect it with detailed sound. Despite the detail, there seems to be a lack of resolution in the upper mids, and a hint of fuzziness near the crossover notch. I thought perhaps the latter due to a cabinet resonance, but was unable to detect it using slow frequency sweeps, so perhaps it is a driver dynamic, or a combo of both. The former, the lack of resolution, was not an egregious error, either. Melody Gardot was not as present as usual compared with my modest reference Silver 6, though.
That's not bad, but the news could also be better in terms of imaging. Like many small-baffle speakers they cast a good image, but I've heard many models do it a little better (and a few a lot). The soundstage is fairly wide, but with little depth.
Still, despite the criticism, I really enjoyed my listening time with the A3; they are a fun listen. They remain unruffled at fairly high volumes. Could you live with them long-term? Well, you could do worse. Could I? I might, in a secondary system. No, I mean I really might. I may be selling my Klipsch Forte. Today. If so, I'll start with the Polks in there atop dual subs. The eventual winner of this shoot-out gets the spot, if the Klipsch go bye-bye.
Anyway, I decided upon a solid 3.8 stars for sound quality for the A3.
Polk RTiA3 bookshelf speaker pair:
SQ 3.80
Value 5.00
Overall 4.00
SQ 3.80
Value 5.00
Overall 4.00
We'll see how the Elac B6 fares next. I have to listen awhile to speakers, so expect this thread to resume in a day or three, or so. I'm a slow reviewer.
Last edited:
Final_Baton
Well-Known Member
Interesting thread and reviews. I really should have gotten a good sub when I had the Mission 751's(first gen). Bet it would have complimented them well. I think I'll get a SVS sub soon. Maybe a SB-10, since I have a small room. I see great review all around for this brand
Dr_Wu
Member
This summer, I did a side-by-side comparison of Monitor Audio Bronze 2, MartinLogan Motion 16LX and Elac UniFi UB5. I was looking for a big improvement over Polk SDA-CRS, before re-capping and upgrading them. All were given recommended break-in play.
Monitor Bronze 2: I found the treble to be very bright. When I first hooked them up, I had no center stage. Everything was coming from outside the speakers. Bi-wiring cleared this up, and the soundstage became very nice and expansive. The treble level was still annoying, however, and the Monitors were the first to be eliminated.
I found the Elacs to be more up front, with a less expansive sound stage. The sound was very nice, but lacked "sparkle". Not bad; but not great.
The MartinLogans lasted the longest, and were nearly keepers. Great looks didn't hurt. The ribbon tweeter was very sweet-sounding. But, again, the breadth and depth of stage did not compare with the old SDAs.
In the end, I eschewed the new speakers and spent that money on new tweeters and upgrading the cabinets on the SDAs. I'm very content with the results and would not re-visit these speakers. I wish I had had access to Dali Spektor 2s for this trial.
Monitor Bronze 2: I found the treble to be very bright. When I first hooked them up, I had no center stage. Everything was coming from outside the speakers. Bi-wiring cleared this up, and the soundstage became very nice and expansive. The treble level was still annoying, however, and the Monitors were the first to be eliminated.
I found the Elacs to be more up front, with a less expansive sound stage. The sound was very nice, but lacked "sparkle". Not bad; but not great.
The MartinLogans lasted the longest, and were nearly keepers. Great looks didn't hurt. The ribbon tweeter was very sweet-sounding. But, again, the breadth and depth of stage did not compare with the old SDAs.
In the end, I eschewed the new speakers and spent that money on new tweeters and upgrading the cabinets on the SDAs. I'm very content with the results and would not re-visit these speakers. I wish I had had access to Dali Spektor 2s for this trial.
As I am a known enthusiast of the NHT Super Zero, I'm anxious to see what ol' Musichal has to say about those little babies.
Great report. Looking forward to part 2!
Nixxuz
Super Member
Wish I had known. I've been himming and hawing for about 3 years over spending the MIGHTY sum of $120 to hear the BIC DV62SI's. But I quickly outgrew them for most of my systems. I am still constantly amazed at how well the DV32B's do when paired with a budget RTR EV1200 12" subwoofer. So I kind of have to assume BIC still has the magic when it comes to bookshelves. I hear nothing but good about the DV64/84's for their price point. And it seems a lot of people have the RTR EV15's as a guilty pleasure in the "Cerwin Vega" style.
So what I'm saying is I should have ordered a pair sent to you and then had you send them along after reviewing them. Or the Fluance SX6's which I did have and liked for a time.
Oh well.
So what I'm saying is I should have ordered a pair sent to you and then had you send them along after reviewing them. Or the Fluance SX6's which I did have and liked for a time.
Oh well.
I've been enjoying Musichals reviews, as his other threads. He has posted before that he listens to/enjoys a variety of music. And notes music played. I think that is a variable often assumed by reviewers, and often left out of reviews or just a casual referance to. I for one, think it is one, if not most important things about a speaker is how it plays a genre of music. Maybe they don't want to put thier own tastes out there for variety of reasons. I try to respect everyones elses tastes. I love of music is what we have in common. What are you useing to evaluate the speaker, is what I want to know.
Last edited:
KentTeffeteller
Gimpus Stereophilus!
Of these offerings, ADS for me is the one I could live with. It has the best midrange and treble, and reasonably decent low end. It's the closest tonally to my Dynaco A 25 speakers, which do nothing wrong.
Final_Baton
Well-Known Member
I'm really looking forward to his ADS take. I'm looking at aa pair of ADS L620 here, another 2 Way speaker, and am wondering if their mid range will be satisfying. I am listening mostly to rock and metal
Last edited:
I only have heard ADS of these brands. But Not this model. Easy too live with at least for jazz vocals, jazz, blues.
Last edited: