Monitor 10s

[Mike Kozak]

Ok sorry everybody for not starting a new thread. Anyway the Monitor 10s I have seem to have the Mids wired together. On each speaker, one of the mids is wired to the other mid. I did not expect this. I am calling Polk.

[nikolas812]

I thought you got it figured out.:confused: If not hopefully someone here can get you on track. So you don't have to wait untill tomarrow.

[Ricardo]

Well, I don't think that is an issue...there should be one pair of wires coming from the crossover, going to one driver, and then from that driver to the other.

[heiney9]

Ok sorry everybody for not starting a new thread. Anyway the Monitor 10s I have seem to have the Mids wired together. On each speaker, one of the mids is wired to the other mid. I did not expect this. I am calling Polk.

If you can read a schematic take a looky here and click on M10 original PDF.

http://www.polkaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?t=38755

[ShinAce]

As per the schematic, both midranges are in parallel.

Read Ricardo's post.

[Mike Kozak]

Thanks, I have them hooked up and they do sound good, a good bit different than the model 7Cs, but great imaging all the same. I did not realize how big these are!!! Almost floor speakers.

[nikolas812]

Glad to hear you got them working.

[Mike Kozak]

Thanks Nikolas, man they look like they just came from the factory, very clean, the vinyl is in perfect shape, nice and dark, they look and sound fabulous!!!

[jakelm]

Fill us in on which you find sound better,

[nikolas812]

Good to hear you like them and that there were in the kind of shape that you expected. How about the sound. Which would you prefer? The 7's or 10's? Can you tell a difference between tweeters? How about the bass. Is better or worse? Sorry for all the questions. If you need more time I wold understand. I think there is a pretty big debate among members as which is better and I think a lot of them lean toward the 7's. That is one of the reasons I went with 7's. They seemed to be put above the rest. I am like you though. After hearing how good my 7's sound I immediately started wondering about the tens.

[Mike Kozak]

Well, actually I do think the 7s image a bit better, might just be my imagination. I will have to listen to the 10s more I think.

[Mike Kozak]

Bass is good, tweeters sound the same to me, but maybe I need more listening time

[mhardy6647]

Well, actually I do think the 7s image a bit better, might just be my imagination. I will have to listen to the 10s more I think.
They are expected to, due to phase cancellation of the two horizontally arrayed midwoofers in the 10s.

The "worst" thing about the 10s, though, IMNHSO (and it's not really that "bad", just different) compared to the 7s is a much warmer midbass presentation. For the last decade or so, I've always called the 10s sound "phat". 'course, 25 years ago, I'd have told you that the 7s were "lean".

[Mike Kozak]

Yes, the 10s do have more midbass presence, but I am warming up to them, I think they will be my main speakers for the HT and general music listening.

[Face]

I found the 7's to be a more balanced speaker as others have mentioned.

[Mike Kozak]

[QUOTE=mhardy6647;800595]They are expected to, due to phase cancellation of the two horizontally arrayed midwoofers in the 10s.

Question, why would Polk make a speaker that is supposed to be better, not image as well?

[jakelm]

.

Question, why would Polk make a speaker that is supposed to be better, not image as well?

Polk needed to come out with a speaker that was more "rock". Polk said "lets try something with more bass, for the bassheads out there"

[mhardy6647]

Question, why would Polk make a speaker that is supposed to be better, not image as well?
The 10s were designed a long, long time ago, before "imaging" was an important criterion. The mid-1970s Polks provided the warm, sweet, well-defined "British Monitor" (read: KEF/Rogers/Chartwell/Spendor) sound at a far lower price point.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v223/mhardy6647/whatmore.jpg

[jakelm]

The 10s were designed a long, long time ago, before "imaging" was an important criterion. The mid-1970s Polks provided the warm, sweet, well-defined "British Monitor" (read: KEF/Rogers/Chartwell/Spendor) sound at a far lower price point.

I disagree. Imaging was important in the 70's. I think that decade had the most interest in imaging.

The 10's have great imaging, but when side by side with the 7's, they fall short.

[mhardy6647]

Nope, I don't think so; with two significant exceptions: the Bose 901 and the DCM timewindows. (actually, I'll add the Shahinian Obelisks, which, BTW, are still in production).

Now... time alignment was big in the 1970s (think, e.g., KEF 105, or, for that matter, the original Polkstand, not to mention the Polk 12 family with the stepped-back tweeter), but imaging in this pinpoint/laser, 'soundstage' idiom that's been big for the past decade or so was pretty much unheard of in the 70s.

[Mike Kozak]

My 10s sound great! money well spent. plus they really rock!!

[mhardy6647]

Polk's mantra ca. 1977 was "the high definition loudspeaker". Excellent transient response was the popular spin in those days (e.g., harman/kardon "ultrawideband" electronics).

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v223/mhardy6647/GMmusicPolk10primosystem.jpg

[Ricardo]

Are those offers still available? I want one of each ;)

[vintageaudio]

Mr. Hardy, with all due respect I must disagree with this statement "but imaging in this pinpoint/laser, 'soundstage' idiom that's been big for the past decade or so was pretty much unheard of in the 70s."
As an audio fan and someone in the biz in the mid to late '70's, we were certainly very aware of imaging back then. Myself and all my audio friends were certainly aware of imaging. We learned that with good separates and speakers like Advents, Dahlquists, Infinitys, Tannoys, Fried, Polk and Maggies, etc. pinpoint imaging and also depth of soundstage were achievable and enjoyable. Among audiophiles of the day....imaging was expected in any higher end system....even way back then.

[Mike Kozak]

Dumb question, but is it a no no to put the Monitors on the floor? The only stands I have are 15" in height and they seem too tall for these big ole speakers? Thanks

[jakelm]

Dumb question, but is it a no no to put the Monitors on the floor? The only stands I have are 15" in height and they seem too tall for these big ole speakers? Thanks


The closer to the floor and back wall, the more bass the 10's will put out. Idealy, you want them about 8"-12" off the floor with a slight tilt up to the listener.

[Mike Kozak]

Thanks, I will find something to put them on

[jakelm]

How well are you at wook working?

[jakelm]

http://www.polkaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=245015

[mhardy6647]

I don't find the balance of the 7s or the 10s to be very pleasant when they're smack dab on the floor. YMMV.

[Mike Kozak]

thanks for the link

[Mike Kozak]

I think the best thing for me to do is cut down the stands I have. chop them in half should do it, they are actually 16" high

[jakelm]

Click the link i gave you. That should give you a good idea of how high to go.

[Mike Kozak]

Yes I did, 8" looks about right, thanks

[Mike Kozak]

Look, very shiny, glad I have mine already......http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=110224267922&indexURL=7&photoDisplayType=2#ebayphotohosting