Polk Audio vs. Klipsch syndrome.

[Kvn_Walker]

Serious question for anyone out there. Is there a difference (in sound preferably) between a woofer that is specified as a mid/woofer and one that is just listed as a woofer?

It all depends on implementation. Here is a speaker with two identical woofers with different crossover points (2.5 way system)

http://www.hifi-classic.net/review/advent-heritage-9.html

Most of the time though, the midrange is handled by a smaller driver than the main woofers, in 3-way or higher speakers.

Not sure what Polk is peddling these days, but I know Klipsch doesn't make anything with cone midranges. Every driver that's not a primary woofer is horn loaded.

 

[Kvn_Walker]

Sorry, Joe had already beat me to it.

 

[speakerman39]

@LamontSim maybe I missed it, but what is your budget? There are some good suggestions here. But, given it is for music, then I would highly consider these if I were you:

https://www.crutchfield.com/p_336D220BA/Wharfedale-Diamond-220-Blackwood.html

My room was similar in size to the OP's and the 220's offered me plenty of low end extension. They can also be placed close to a wall b/c the ports are down-firing via a plinth. I found the 220's to be very laid-back and a bit warm in the midrange. The top end is buttery smooth w/no listening fatigue whatsoever. Very neutral for the most part, but I often describe them as being on the warmer side of neutral. The 220's handled everything I threw at them. Just very forgiving if you will and quite musical. Could listen to them for hours at a time and never once became fatigued. Highly recommend!


Cheers,

Phil

 

[LamontSim]

Looked at the Wharfedale Dai mk one 225's and I do not understand the grill. Is it one forvvthe tweeter and one for the woofer?

 

[Joe B]

Looked at the Wharfedale Dai mk one 225's and I do not understand the grill. Is it one forvvthe tweeter and one for the woofer?

YES

 

[Ridire Fáin]

To any and all who might know better, I am in the market for a pair of bookshelf speakers to go with my Onkyo TX-8270 2-channel receiver rated at 100 watts per channel. I am interested in the Polk RTI A3 and the Klipsch RP-160M or Klipsch RP-600M. There will not be any home theater use for these, strictly for music listening pleasure in a room approximately 15 x 15. The music that would be played would be R&B, funk, soul, rock, alternative, and alternative rock and some jazz at times. No classical. I understand both are leading brands but can someone out there please help to steer me in the right direction. I've heard both brands and still can't make up my mind. This is why I am asking for the help of other audiophiles out there.

I own Polk RTi A

To any and all who might know better, I am in the market for a pair of bookshelf speakers to go with my Onkyo TX-8270 2-channel receiver rated at 100 watts per channel. I am interested in the Polk RTI A3 and the Klipsch RP-160M or Klipsch RP-600M. There will not be any home theater use for these, strictly for music listening pleasure in a room approximately 15 x 15. The music that would be played would be R&B, funk, soul, rock, alternative, and alternative rock and some jazz at times. No classical. I understand both are leading brands but can someone out there please help to steer me in the right direction. I've heard both brands and still can't make up my mind. This is why I am asking for the help of other audiophiles out there.

I have owned Polk's for 20 years and have the Rti A3 in a 7.2 home theater system and they are used in both movie and causal music listening. I caution against the RtiA3 for music only application if the Onkyo amp is bright or has some hash in it. I always been impressed with Onkyo product but have liked there stuff. I have used the Polk's with Marantz and Anthem receivers with good results. The key to get the best out of these is neutral lack luster amplification that tends not to color the sound .

A few years back when I did get the upgrade bug and before settling on the Rti Aeries A9, Center, A3 surround and height. I did look at Klipsch but they had too much chestiness for my liking so I settled back on the Polk's. That being said, Klisch have a great sound and are more forgiving of an receivers shortcomings. So IMHO the Klipsch may be a better fit.

You may tired of looking but I think there are some other big bang for the buck offerings to compare. Paradigm, and SVS come to mind. I have pair of Paradigm Titians in 2 channel office system and enjoy them. These brands have similarly priced models to the Polk's/Klipsch's that are also over achievers.

Two speaker I recently listened to and enjoyed. The Dali Zensor 1 $349.00 and a big, big, surprise for me, Audioengine HDP6 Passive Bookshelf Speakers $449.00. These did not have the definition and tightness of the DALI but the treble was clean and clear without sibilance that Polk's can get, and the bass was far more extended than the Dali while remaining nearly as tight. In short the Dali has crispest and most detailed sound while Audioengine had the fuller presentation.

One final recommendation on the budget side. Would be the SVS prime bookshelf. $249.00 much of the same musicality as the Audio Engine but can be had for $200.00 less. Really enjoyed the time I spent listening to them.

To answer your question directly. Even though I own Polk's given the sunniness of Onkyo receivers amplification, I would recommend the Klipsch. I fear the treble from the Polk's would be too biting when mated with it. Wish you the best and have fun.

 

[LamontSim]

I own Polk RTi A


I have owned Polk's for 20 years and have the Rti A3 in a 7.2 home theater system and they are used in both movie and causal music listening. I caution against the RtiA3 for music only application if the Onkyo amp is bright or has some hash in it. I always been impressed with Onkyo product but have liked there stuff. I have used the Polk's with Marantz and Anthem receivers with good results. The key to get the best out of these is neutral lack luster amplification that tends not to color the sound .

A few years back when I did get the upgrade bug and before settling on the Rti Aeries A9, Center, A3 surround and height. I did look at Klipsch but they had too much chestiness for my liking so I settled back on the Polk's. That being said, Klisch have a great sound and are more forgiving of an receivers shortcomings. So IMHO the Klipsch may be a better fit.

You may tired of looking but I think there are some other big bang for the buck offerings to compare. Paradigm, and SVS come to mind. I have pair of Paradigm Titians in 2 channel office system and enjoy them. These brands have similarly priced models to the Polk's/Klipsch's that are also over achievers.

Two speaker I recently listened to and enjoyed. The Dali Zensor 1 $349.00 and a big, big, surprise for me, Audioengine HDP6 Passive Bookshelf Speakers $449.00. These did not have the definition and tightness of the DALI but the treble was clean and clear without sibilance that Polk's can get, and the bass was far more extended than the Dali while remaining nearly as tight. In short the Dali has crispest and most detailed sound while Audioengine had the fuller presentation.

One final recommendation on the budget side. Would be the SVS prime bookshelf. $249.00 much of the same musicality as the Audio Engine but can be had for $200.00 less. Really enjoyed the time I spent listening to them.

To answer your question directly. Even though I own Polk's given the sunniness of Onkyo receivers amplification, I would recommend the Klipsch. I fear the treble from the Polk's would be too biting when mated with it. Wish you the best and have fun.

Thank you for the wonderful feedback. This makes me want to ask you a few things. First, how would I tell about my receiver being bright or I think you meant, harsh?
Secondly, when you bought your Polk A3's, did you know if they were more of a home theater type speaker or for music as well?

 

[everettT]

Thank you for the wonderful feedback. This makes me want to ask you a few things. First, how would I tell about my receiver being bright or I think you meant, harsh?
Secondly, when you bought your Polk A3's, did you know if they were more of a home theater type speaker or for music as well?

Bright would be from 2khz and up being fatiguing or a a slightly rising response from their upwards.

 

[LamontSim]

Bright would be from 2khz and up being fatiguing or a a slightly rising response from their upwards.

And what about the speakers, did you know if they were geared more for home theater?

 

[LamontSim]

Sorry, wrong reply.

And what about the speakers, did you know if they were geared more for home theater?

 

[Stuiemac]

Not sure if you already committed but I do have a few opinions. First let me put it out there I have LSIi Polk inwalls (family room tv), Klipsch R7iis towers (critical listening in the master bedroom), JBL 590s (incredible budget towers!) The klispch icon X entire 7.2 which were for the theater room but I'm switching the JBls in there because the jbls are more capable in the larger room and also when we move I don't mind leaving those. There are other companies throughout the house jamo, svs, elac, htd, monoprice, sonance, etc.

Ok now to the opinions I love the lsi Polk's for tv listening. They do well with voices and were one incredible deal. But I detest the tweeter,I personally love horns and compression drivers with metallic composition. The Polk's use a ring radiator and personally it lacks the crisp clarity that makes glass sound like glass breaking. Just a tad more muddy than I desire. I wish I just spent the extra and went with the klipsch pro inwalls.

Now towers and bookshelf speakers have a slightly different characteristic than inwalls but they are a timber matched series so I can say I'd love them regardless.

The jamo bookshelves 803s are great for music. And affordable. Hit the highs and lows without fatigue but they image less than horns and technically are a Klipsch sister company.

Klipsch has a line for everyone. But they focus on clairty and see people feel this realism to be fatiguing. It's generally due to a lack of room treatments. A properly treated room and calibration will tame the highs and take it from over whelming to just stellar. But yes if you plan to listen to poor source material they will make you cringe (even streaming services can bring out a highly compressed shrill or feel lacking in mid and bass) but I love all my Klipsch. I've tamed the horns and have the space, time and equipment available to make them sound excellent all day long. The soundstage is very large and precise.

The JBL towers bang for the buck are near untouchable. (They go on sale for 500ish each on a monthly basis.) The big long horn is very forgiving and the drivers dig deep. Very nuetral overall with great clairity and very unforgiving with placement. But their size is not a laughing matter. Nor the overwhelming size of their soundstage. Massive!

There are thousands of speaker companies at all different budgets and unfortunately once you get started you will never be 100% satisfied. Proper calibration will always make or break everything you listen to and you will always be curious about the grass being greener. But even the cheapest of set ups can impress and bring smiles and the most expensive be overbearing and fatiging. Too much or too little bass, treble, mid, volume, power, etc. Can't please them all. My other half loves the Polk's but if she goes into another room she will come back and complain they sound horrible. But once her ears forget and adjust back she is all smiles all day.

Whatever you choose I am sure you will be happy we all hear a little differently and have our own experiences and opinions. Personally I'd go with the Klipsch but I love revealing speakers and horns are the only efficient way to get that level of refinement. I've installed kef muons and still chase after some Martin Logan electrostats. I lean heavily towards a nuertal to revealing speaker and care less for forgiving speakers. You just need to find your preference. Big box stores will let you return whichever you don't like so try both side by side. Have fun!

P.S.
bright = revealing muddy = forgiving we just all bitch ours is better by using negative words. Lol Polk and Klipsch are generally considered more neutral to more revealing. Just depends on what you listen to and what you enjoy.

 

[LamontSim]

Not sure if you already committed but I do have a few opinions. First let me put it out there I have LSIi Polk inwalls (family room tv), Klipsch R7iis towers (critical listening in the master bedroom), JBL 590s (incredible budget towers!) The klispch icon X entire 7.2 which were for the theater room but I'm switching the JBls in there because the jbls are more capable in the larger room and also when we move I don't mind leaving those. There are other companies throughout the house jamo, svs, elac, htd, monoprice, sonance, etc.

Ok now to the opinions I love the lsi Polk's for tv listening. They do well with voices and were one incredible deal. But I detest the tweeter,I personally love horns and compression drivers with metallic composition. The Polk's use a ring radiator and personally it lacks the crisp clarity that makes glass sound like glass breaking. Just a tad more muddy than I desire. I wish I just spent the extra and went with the klipsch pro inwalls.

Now towers and bookshelf speakers have a slightly different characteristic than inwalls but they are a timber matched series so I can say I'd love them regardless.

The jamo bookshelves 803s are great for music. And affordable. Hit the highs and lows without fatigue but they image less than horns and technically are a Klipsch sister company.

Klipsch has a line for everyone. But they focus on clairty and see people feel this realism to be fatiguing. It's generally due to a lack of room treatments. A properly treated room and calibration will tame the highs and take it from over whelming to just stellar. But yes if you plan to listen to poor source material they will make you cringe (even streaming services can bring out a highly compressed shrill or feel lacking in mid and bass) but I love all my Klipsch. I've tamed the horns and have the space, time and equipment available to make them sound excellent all day long. The soundstage is very large and precise.

The JBL towers bang for the buck are near untouchable. (They go on sale for 500ish each on a monthly basis.) The big long horn is very forgiving and the drivers dig deep. Very nuetral overall with great clairity and very unforgiving with placement. But their size is not a laughing matter. Nor the overwhelming size of their soundstage. Massive!

There are thousands of speaker companies at all different budgets and unfortunately once you get started you will never be 100% satisfied. Proper calibration will always make or break everything you listen to and you will always be curious about the grass being greener. But even the cheapest of set ups can impress and bring smiles and the most expensive be overbearing and fatiging. Too much or too little bass, treble, mid, volume, power, etc. Can't please them all. My other half loves the Polk's but if she goes into another room she will come back and complain they sound horrible. But once her ears forget and adjust back she is all smiles all day.

Whatever you choose I am sure you will be happy we all hear a little differently and have our own experiences and opinions. Personally I'd go with the Klipsch but I love revealing speakers and horns are the only efficient way to get that level of refinement. I've installed kef muons and still chase after some Martin Logan electrostats. I lean heavily towards a nuertal to revealing speaker and care less for forgiving speakers. You just need to find your preference. Big box stores will let you return whichever you don't like so try both side by side. Have fun!

P.S.
bright = revealing muddy = forgiving we just all bitch ours is better by using negative words. Lol Polk and Klipsch are generally considered more neutral to more revealing. Just depends on what you listen to and what you enjoy.

Thanks. That helps a great deal.

 

[Ridire Fáin]

Thank you for the wonderful feedback. This makes me want to ask you a few things. First, how would I tell about my receiver being bright or I think you meant, harsh?
Secondly, when you bought your Polk A3's, did you know if they were more of a home theater type speaker or for music as well?

This is far from scientific, and completely subjective. First off, since I am not listening to your Onkyo on a daily basis, it is not fair for me to assess its sonics. However, there are things I personally listen for when determining components character.

Assessing Brightness: Is determined two ways. One, is not only do I listen to music, but bring something that has some spoken word. What I looking for is overly pronounced S and T sounds. (AKA spitiness) Telarc Symphonic Star Trek is an example. Then ask, does Leonard Nimoy's voice sound clear and natural?
The second, is I also bring something "close miked" like Allison Krauss's Forget About It and listen for the same thing. Does this piece of gear make it sound as if she singing into my ear or is her voice seem like it's hissing?

( Be advised, this coloration can show up in recordings, music sources, amplification, and speakers. So it might take switching out of components before isolating which piece of gear has it.)

In regards to Hash: How it manifests itself for me, is when a instrument that is not electrified takes on an electric, amplified, guitar sounding character. This usually shows up at higher volumes on music that has loud peeks. I like using something that features a piano being performed solo, or in a duet. George Winston or Robert Silverman (Stereophile's Poem) type stuff. When listening on a loud passages, where the performers are hitting those ivories with a lots of energy, does the piano still sound natural, or has the sonics taken on a sort of crackling, an egg is frying character? There is not really an audible pop (Clipping ) or horrible notes (Distortion) emanating from it, but the instrument is no longer sounding 100% realistic and organic either. In short, is a $50.000 plus Steinway, now sounding like a slightly broken $500.00 electric KORG?

If an component has either of these sonic characteristics, Polk speakers bring that out in spades.

I knew that Polk primarily produces home theatre speakers now days. That used not be the case 20 years ago. That being said, I had enough positive experience with them to know they can be very musical when matched with the right gear. They are well acclaimed for good reason and have not abandoned their 2 channel music heritage. After all, if a speakers does well with music it will also do well with movies. Klipsch still makes what I consider "High End" speakers specific for 2 channel music. Sadly those are expensive, starting at $2K and up. Nonetheless, that technology trickles down to the model you are considering, which is another reason why I think they would be a better fit than the Polk Audios.

 

[JerryLove]

I cannot offer anything to your original question. I don't have the exposure to those two make/models to be useful.

In regards to your choice to go bookshelf-sans-sub... I don't think you will find the results pleasing. Not in a 15x15 room at any rate. The ability of most bookshelves to generate SPL at lower frequencies is inherently limited. It's going to sound "hollow" or, worse, you'll end up with breakup. Consider, at minimum, some small used sub. I've picked up old B&W and Energy subs <$100. They aren't great units (though they aren't terrible either); but will be a huge step up from no sub at all.

First, how would I tell about my receiver being bright or I think you meant, harsh?

It's not. Some exotics excepted; receivers (amps) that are not being over-driven are flat. The quality of EQ on receivers varies, of course; but I've yet to run into a mainstream amp/receiver that was incapable of putting out an accurate signal.

a home theater type speaker or for music as well?

What do you believe the difference between those two purposes is?

 

[LamontSim]

I own Polk RTi A


I have owned Polk's for 20 years and have the Rti A3 in a 7.2 home theater system and they are used in both movie and causal music listening. I caution against the RtiA3 for music only application if the Onkyo amp is bright or has some hash in it. I always been impressed with Onkyo product but have liked there stuff. I have used the Polk's with Marantz and Anthem receivers with good results. The key to get the best out of these is neutral lack luster amplification that tends not to color the sound .

A few years back when I did get the upgrade bug and before settling on the Rti Aeries A9, Center, A3 surround and height. I did look at Klipsch but they had too much chestiness for my liking so I settled back on the Polk's. That being said, Klisch have a great sound and are more forgiving of an receivers shortcomings. So IMHO the Klipsch may be a better fit.

You may tired of looking but I think there are some other big bang for the buck offerings to compare. Paradigm, and SVS come to mind. I have pair of Paradigm Titians in 2 channel office system and enjoy them. These brands have similarly priced models to the Polk's/Klipsch's that are also over achievers.

Two speaker I recently listened to and enjoyed. The Dali Zensor 1 $349.00 and a big, big, surprise for me, Audioengine HDP6 Passive Bookshelf Speakers $449.00. These did not have the definition and tightness of the DALI but the treble was clean and clear without sibilance that Polk's can get, and the bass was far more extended than the Dali while remaining nearly as tight. In short the Dali has crispest and most detailed sound while Audioengine had the fuller presentation.

One final recommendation on the budget side. Would be the SVS prime bookshelf. $249.00 much of the same musicality as the Audio Engine but can be had for $200.00 less. Really enjoyed the time I spent listening to them.

To answer your question directly. Even though I own Polk's given the sunniness of Onkyo receivers amplification, I would recommend the Klipsch. I fear the treble from the Polk's would be too biting when mated with it. Wish you the best and have fun.

The Onkyo receiver I have is as I mentioned, the TX-8270 at 100 watts per channel. A 2 channel unit and I really have no intent for a home theater use for it. Have a decent sound bar for that.

 

[LamontSim]

This is far from scientific, and completely subjective. First off, since I am not listening to your Onkyo on a daily basis, it is not fair for me to assess its sonics. However, there are things I personally listen for when determining components character.

Assessing Brightness: Is determined two ways. One, is not only do I listen to music, but bring something that has some spoken word. What I looking for is overly pronounced S and T sounds. (AKA spitiness) Telarc Symphonic Star Trek is an example. Then ask, does Leonard Nimoy's voice sound clear and natural?
The second, is I also bring something "close miked" like Allison Krauss's Forget About It and listen for the same thing. Does this piece of gear make it sound as if she singing into my ear or is her voice seem like it's hissing?

( Be advised, this coloration can show up in recordings, music sources, amplification, and speakers. So it might take switching out of components before isolating which piece of gear has it.)

In regards to Hash: How it manifests itself for me, is when a instrument that is not electrified takes on an electric, amplified, guitar sounding character. This usually shows up at higher volumes on music that has loud peeks. I like using something that features a piano being performed solo, or in a duet. George Winston or Robert Silverman (Stereophile's Poem) type stuff. When listening on a loud passages, where the performers are hitting those ivories with a lots of energy, does the piano still sound natural, or has the sonics taken on a sort of crackling, an egg is frying character? There is not really an audible pop (Clipping ) or horrible notes (Distortion) emanating from it, but the instrument is no longer sounding 100% realistic and organic either. In short, is a $50.000 plus Steinway, now sounding like a slightly broken $500.00 electric KORG?

If an component has either of these sonic characteristics, Polk speakers bring that out in spades.

I knew that Polk primarily produces home theatre speakers now days. That used not be the case 20 years ago. That being said, I had enough positive experience with them to know they can be very musical when matched with the right gear. They are well acclaimed for good reason and have not abandoned their 2 channel music heritage. After all, if a speakers does well with music it will also do well with movies. Klipsch still makes what I consider "High End" speakers specific for 2 channel music. Sadly those are expensive, starting at $2K and up. Nonetheless, that technology trickles down to the model you are considering, which is another reason why I think they would be a better fit than the Polk Audios.

How can you tell if a bookshelf speaker is geared more towards HT than music?

 

[Kvn_Walker]

You shouldn't be hearing any high frequency harshness or coloration out of that amp unless it's at clipping level or somehow defective.

 

[LamontSim]

How can you tell if a bookshelf speaker is geared more towards HT than music?

The Klipsch really have a heavy bass response on some tracks even though on others they sound rich and full.

 

[everettT]

How can you tell if a bookshelf speaker is geared more towards HT than music?

A good speaker is a good speaker.

 

[LamontSim]

You shouldn't be hearing any high frequency harshness or coloration out of that amp unless it's at clipping level or somehow defective.

I don't. It's clear and smooth.