Speaker Asylum

General speaker questions for audio and home theater.

Return to Speaker Asylum

Is old Polk better than newer Polk? (Monitor 10 era)

76.189.19.19
Posted on November 5, 2009 at 10:27:53
6 Meters DX
 Is it true that Polk Audio was a true high end speaker company back in the 70's and 80's, before they went 'mass consumer'? Someone told me this recently.

I had an old pair of Polk Audio studio 'Monitor 10B' speakers (in mint condition) stored in a temp controlled enviornment (wrapped in foam in my furnished basement) for over 10 years. I just fired them up this morning, and OH MY GOD do they sound great! I had put them in storage when I got Magnepans, but listening to them today, I am in a state of audio shock at how great they sound! Maybe a tad bright (which I like), but very revealing and well balanced and non-fatiguing overall. I am leaving them out to savor (switch back and forth from MG12's to Monitor 10's from time to time) from here on in. I can't believe that the Monitor 10 is a 'dated' design, given it's premium sound capabilities.

Anyone else own these?

RE: Is old Polk better than newer Polk? (Monitor 10 era), posted on November 9, 2009 at 00:49:12
LongPlay
Audiophile

Posts: 1778
Location: BoSox and Pats Country
Joined: February 15, 2005
 Back in the late 70's I was saving for the Monitor 10s but by the time I got up the money Polk Audio had just introduced the RTA 12 speaker as top of their line. I bought them and am still happily listening to them in my office system. They have an open baffle tweeter and they deliver spacious sweet sound that I listen to all day long. The Monitor 10s are a fine sounding speaker as well. Today the Pold LSI line sounds very very good for their cost. As a Polk owner, however, be prepared to be continually dissed by the golden eared big wallet crowd, but just sit back and enjoy the music with a smile on your face.

Yes, posted on November 5, 2009 at 20:45:01
badman
Reviewer

Posts: 2479
Location: Tustin, CA (Orange County)
Joined: March 10, 2001
 I'm picking up a pair of what I think are Monitor 7s soon, and have Monitor 5jrs I gave the old man. Spectacularly well-balanced simple speakers.



Bass is supposed to sound big. 6.5" is not a woofer size.


RE: Is old Polk better than newer Polk? (Monitor 10 era), posted on November 5, 2009 at 16:45:02
KT88
Dealer

Posts: 4830
Location: Roanoke VA
Joined: October 5, 2001
 I think they stacked-up better against the competition back then. They never were tops but were very respectable designs at reasonable prices for the performance afforded. I have owned the Monitor 7, Monitor 10, Monitor 10B, Monitor 11 (pretty rare I suppose) and have taken some of these in on trade as well. I have repaired some large SDA 1B units. I had to study the crossovers in order to make-up a custom interconnecting cable to replace the original which was lost. The quality of the newer units doesn't compare despite some small technical innovations. Most improvements since those earlier years have been to improve manufacturing efficiency, reduce materials, and otherwise lower their costs. Still, they offer today better performance and value than many other similarly priced or cheaper systems. Their popularity over the last decade has inflated their price beyond their value, that however is not unique in mass market electronics.
-Bill

Polk Was Never High End, posted on November 5, 2009 at 13:06:33
Audiophile10000
 In this, or any other eras. Those who seem to think so either've never heard a true high end speaker, or they have low auditory standards.

What Polk, and others like it represented was the top end of mid-fi. But, mid-fi they were, and are more so now.

RE: Polk Was Never High End- do you know of and/or have you heard these two?, posted on November 6, 2009 at 09:03:27
Awe-d-o-file
Manufacturer

Posts: 6093
Location: 2 hr. west of DC
Joined: January 10, 2004
 The SDA-SRS 1.2TL that retailed for $3495.00 in the mid 80's was very good and audiophile quality. The rare RTA-12 from the late 70's was very good too. Both from when they were made in Baltimore.

I have the 1.2TL's and they out-imaged my Quad 988 ESL's (now sold) by a A LOT! Overall they are more fun to listen to than the Quads, hence the Quads got sold. We all know how good the Quads are AND their limitations. (I was a dealer)

Polk had several speakers with good crossovers and crossover parts. Early models used the Peerless soft dome and their 6" butyl coated cone with rubber surround and some had passive radiators. I don't care for anything they've done the last 20 years.





ET




Question "Authority", the mainstream media sucks - Go Independent and hold BOTH parties accountable instead of just the other guys!

I need music to help forget the reality of today
RE: Polk Was Never High End, posted on November 5, 2009 at 13:48:52
Chef Henry
Audiophile

Posts: 166
Joined: July 27, 2001
 Thank you, Audiophile 10000, for setting 6 Meters DX straight about the inferiority of his speakers. Without True High End Audiophiles like yourself to guide us, we bottom feeders would be cast adrift, with nothing to base our judgements on but our pathetically inadequate auditory standards.

Audiophile 10000 (did I get the right number of zeros in there?), you are truly the living embodiment of High End.

That Wasn't My Intention, posted on November 5, 2009 at 14:10:11
Audiophile10000
 I just find that today, pretty much anything that produces a sound is considered high end, especially by the magazines; especially Stereophile.

Every review reads the same way. Every speaker finds the reviewer enumerating the recordings he listened to, and how they sent him into paroxysms of ecstasy. For some dudled reviewers, the worse the speaker is, the better they like it [because bad speakers have 'humanith'].

But, tin isn't gold. Gold is gold. I've heard lots of Polks. They're not Proacs, Quads, Avalons, or even Vandersteens [which. properly set up are incredibly good and really are high end, IMO]. And, I just wanted to point that out.

RE: That Wasn't My Intention, posted on November 6, 2009 at 07:19:15
geo770
Audiophile

Posts: 215
Joined: January 9, 2004
 There were definitely higher price speakers around than the Polk Monitor 10's. The idea behind the early Polk Audio speakers was to provide the next generation of overachieving speakers - high quality at reasonable cost. Unlike the high end in which cost was no object.

So what? Why be in such a rush to inform us of this incredibly important fact?

Back in the day there was either hi fi or not. High fidelity was a spectrum from comparitively low to high cost. None of this "mid fi" crap. I will add, though, that Polks were sold by the audio salons, who had an interest in differentiating the high volume, discounted brands from the low volume gear not sold by the discounters. What I strongly suspect is that the discounted brands evolved into "mid fi" and the salon brands became "hi fi"

RE: That Wasn't My Intention, posted on November 5, 2009 at 14:30:13
Donald North
Manufacturer

Posts: 910
Joined: February 8, 2001
 I'd rather listen to Polk Monitor 10s over Vandersteen model 1,2, or 3s any day.

Donald North

I always liked the SDA 2 and SDA CRS models as well as the monitor 5 and monitor 7, posted on November 5, 2009 at 12:50:55
Victorymoto
Audiophile

Posts: 549
Location: Southeast
Joined: September 11, 2004
 these were, for the money, really really good speakers.

this isn't to say the current Polks are bad nt, posted on November 5, 2009 at 12:51:47
Victorymoto
Audiophile

Posts: 549
Location: Southeast
Joined: September 11, 2004
 .

RE: Is old Polk better than newer Polk? (Monitor 10 era), posted on November 5, 2009 at 12:48:48
mbnx01
Audiophile

Posts: 1547
Location: Phoenix
Joined: October 22, 2004
 Monitor 10's. DQ-10's. Cizek. ADS. All great speaker from 30 years ago that I wish you could buy today.

RE: Is old Polk better than newer Polk? (Monitor 10 era), posted on November 5, 2009 at 19:28:34
Bill the K
Audiophile

Posts: 2301
Joined: June 3, 2006
 Ah,those were great speakers.Even the lowest priced ADS which had a special quality.And those big ones!Most under rated non publicised speakers I think.

RE: Is old Polk better than newer Polk? (Monitor 10 era), posted on November 10, 2009 at 15:56:55
mauimusicman
 I agree. Even the little ones, what were they, the L-400's?
I used to play them all day at the hi-fi shop I worked at just to see the expressions on peoples faces when they were told they were listening to the smallest speaker in the store. I never liked Polk speakers much. The 5's were ok. The 10's sold pretty well, but I sure replaced a LOT of those old black tweeters. The 12's were not bad. The SDA's were interesting, image wise. The A/D/S line was much better in my opinion.

RE: Is old Polk better than newer Polk? (Monitor 10 era), posted on November 6, 2009 at 09:14:01
mbnx01
Audiophile

Posts: 1547
Location: Phoenix
Joined: October 22, 2004
 Where is Godehard Gunther these days? I'd like to kick him in the ass for running that company into the ground.

They were good, posted on November 5, 2009 at 11:04:14
Donald North
Manufacturer

Posts: 910
Joined: February 8, 2001
 The Monitor 10 is one of the best valued-engineered speakers I've ever heard. Polk hit the nail on the head with that design. I wish they would re-release them.

Donald North

I'll second that..., posted on November 6, 2009 at 02:38:28
mpathus
Audiophile

Posts: 2009
Location: Eastern USA
Joined: June 19, 2004
 ...I first heard the Polk 10's a college buddy of mine had in 1981.

I couldn't afford the 10's, but worked all summer for a pair of Polk 7b's.

The Polk 10's had something special, a lot of music for the money in a reasonably sized speaker package = my fave Polk.

Page processed in 0.071 seconds.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2009, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ] [ Go Green ] [ Take5 ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]