Polk as good as Revel, KEF, Paradigm, PSB, Focal, Thiel, & better than B&W

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I just got the latest Home Theater Magazine yesterday. They reviewed some high-end systems from Parasound Halo, McIntosh, and, hmmm..........well, Polk.

At first glance, the ($4K/pr MSRP) Polk LSIM707's drivers reminded me of the DefTech Mythos, but the cabinet reminded me of my Salon2.

The size of the Polk: 9.5" x 50.9" x 18.4"/ 99lbs.

This I gotta see.

So I went straight to the FR measurements, thinking I would get a good laugh. I thought I would see something like +/- 4dB or 5dB.

But, no. I was shocked.

Here is the 5-point average FR of the LSIM707: +1.05/-1.73 dB from 40Hz - 20kHz! The F3 = 34Hz.

As comparison, here are some much more expensive towers from 200Hz-10kHz (+/- dB/ F3):

Focal 1028Be: 1.75/1.84/48Hz
Salon2: 0.99/2.25/25Hz
Paradigm S8: 0.97/1.90/51Hz
PSB Synchrony 1: 1.18/2.24/56Hz
Thiel CS3.7: 0.98/1.24/37Hz
Polk: 1.05/1.73/34Hz

The Polk measures just as well or even better than some.

[jcl]

Haven't heard the new line but I always thought the old Lsi line sounded a lot better than their other offerings.

[3db]

All well and good but how do they sound?

[j_garcia]

Haven't heard the new line but I always thought the old Lsi line sounded a lot better than their other offerings.

And that isn't saying much. I previously owned some LSis and they are pretty good speakers; they just aren't great speakers.

[jcl]

And that isn't saying much. I previously owned some LSis and they are pretty good speakers; they just aren't great speakers.

Touche. Agreed, while I liked them the several times I heard them I never ended up getting them. I always found something else that I liked for the money. They are more appealing at almost half off from their Ebay store.

[Irvrobinson]

The Polk measures just as well or even better than some.

Perhaps, but there's more to how speakers sound than these measurements. The old Dunlavys (SC-IV-VI) measured better than any of these, and yet I can assure you that you wouldn't trade their high frequency performance for that of the Revels.

[DS-21]

These?



They look interesting. The small mid + close-by tweeter is a reasonable and proven way to get good power response with wide directivity (see, e.g. NHT Classic Three/Four). They'd probably sound good in a fairly absorptive room.

Though I don't generally like those ring radiator tweets. They always seem to sound a little boxed in to me.

Not a big fan of Polk's slot-loaded port, either. Simply because it's so hard to get to and plug!

Also, while HTMag's sound power measurement is generally pretty useful, it doesn't capture everything. For instance, of the speakers you've listed, the Thiel CS3.7's numbers are misleading. Sure, their response fits into a tight window. But they're just not good-sounding speakers. They're just very fatiguing to listen to. I wanted to like them, given Peter Azcel's breathless praise for an older design called the Win SM10 that used a similar coaxial + coplanar mid-tweet.

(I've not heard the Focals you list, though given my experience with the JM Labs Mezzo Utopia I assume I'd hate them.)

Perhaps, but there's more to how speakers sound than these measurements. The old Dunlavys (SC-IV-VI) measured better than any of these, and yet I can assure you that you wouldn't trade their high frequency performance for that of the Revels.

The old Dunlavies were damn headphones, due to the crossover design. Simply no room to move one's head. That was their biggest problem. Power compression from the poor little Vifa tweeter on a 1st order crossover was a distant #2.

[j_garcia]

The ring radiator tweeter was actually my favorite part of the LSis. It was the midrange I found disappointing. Good bass, but not enough clarity in the critical (vocal) range.