Oh no!

[polkfan38]

I knew this would happen and I will probably get "I told you so" from some of you. I just spent the last hour playing with my speakers and recievers and came to a bad conclusion. The last set up I did was with a NAD reciever and my Monitor 40s. The Monitor 40s, as good as they are, are not the caliber I am looking for. It had nothing to do with bass extension but the upper mids and highs were just not clear enough for me. This was in a smaller room than I have most of my stuff set up in and is actually well treated sound wise.
At first I was nieve and thought how much better can a much more expensive speaker be? Well, now I am finding out they can. I have listened to $1,000+ speakers in stores before but never on my own equipment.
My daughter is getting the Monitor 40s for here room and I am going to look for something other than the Monitor line for my HT/music room.
Oh well. Live and learn!

[danz1906]

Maybe the LSi line?

[nguyendot]

Maybe some B&W 6xx? lol
or LSi9s..that'd be my pick

[Erik Tracy]

I knew this would happen and I will probably get "I told you so" from some of you. I just spent the last hour playing with my speakers and recievers and came to a bad conclusion. The last set up I did was with a NAD reciever and my Monitor 40s. The Monitor 40s, as good as they are, are not the caliber I am looking for. It had nothing to do with bass extension but the upper mids and highs were just not clear enough for me. This was in a smaller room than I have most of my stuff set up in and is actually well treated sound wise.
At first I was nieve and thought how much better can a much more expensive speaker be? Well, now I am finding out they can. I have listened to $1,000+ speakers in stores before but never on my own equipment.
My daughter is getting the Monitor 40s for here room and I am going to look for something other than the Monitor line for my HT/music room.
Oh well. Live and learn!

What is your budget...we can toss out all sorts of suggestions and none of them may fit what you can afford.

[polkfan38]

My budget is not that big unfortunately. $600 a pair would be a real stretch. More like $400. This can change however. The ones I have really fell in love wit hare the Focal 806vs and the B&W 685s. This is the very top of my limit. I do want to look at some PSBs and some Paraigms however. I still like Polk however and may try some RTis. Unless they are too similar to the Monitor line.
Ug!
I will search the used market as well. Some may laugh but, my favorite speaker in my house right now is a pair of 18 year old Infinity SL20s! Not much LF extension but man! The mids and highs are awesome! 7 of these might keep me happy for awile?

[Erik Tracy]

My budget is not that big unfortunately. $600 a pair would be a real stretch. More like $400. This can change however. The ones I have really fell in love wit hare the Focal 806vs and the B&W 685s. This is the very top of my limit. I do want to look at some PSBs and some Paraigms however. I still like Polk however and may try some RTis. Unless they are too similar to the Monitor line.
Ug!
I will search the used market as well. Some may laugh but, my favorite speaker in my house right now is a pair of 18 year old Infinity SL20s! Not much LF extension but man! The mids and highs are awesome! 7 of these might keep me happy for awile?

If you are set on Polks, then for the sound you seem to be looking for I'd say go with RTis.

The LSis are 'laid back' (would agree - I owned a pair of LSi7s), whereas the RTis have high end 'sparkle' (would agree, still own RTi4s and used to own RTiA3s).

Some say the RTi are 'fatiguing' - I guess it depends on your listening preferences. I thought they sounded quite good

If you are running an AVR, many of the autocalibration features have different profiles you could run to tone down the high end.

If you are not set on Polks - check audiogon.com for some used speaker values.

[polkfan38]

I am going to play around with the Monitors more to see if I can live with them for awile. I am probably being too snobish as well. I have heard really good stuff and want them. Unfortunately, I am not made out of money! I am sure I am not alone here.
The only speakers I have heard that were "fatiguing" were Klipsch. The whole line except those Paladiums or whatever they are called.

[stangjason]

Some say the RTi are 'fatiguing' - I guess it depends on your listening preferences. I thought they sounded quite good

I love mine but I can imagine it might be an issue if someone has a Yamaha AVR that adds to the brightness of the sound or so I read anyways.

[Erik Tracy]

I am going to play around with the Monitors more to see if I can live with them for awile. I am probably being too snobish as well. I have heard really good stuff and want them. Unfortunately, I am not made out of money! I am sure I am not alone here.
The only speakers I have heard that were "fatiguing" were Klipsch. The whole line except those Paladiums or whatever they are called.

Does your current AVR have different autocalibration 'profiles' that you could run?

My AVR has several like "Flat" (to tone down hi freqs), and "Front" (if the fronts speakers are of 'higher quality' than the rest), etc.

"Flat" is the default on my AVR.

I can even turn off the Room EQ profile and the AVR routine will only check for distance, level, and phase. Which means no change to treble settings - you get what you get with source and speakers.

If you think the Monitors sound dull - check what autocalibration profile your AVR is the default. Maybe re-run it with Room EQ turned off?

[jayman_1975]

If i were you i would look at snagging a pair of Monitor Audio RS6. If you keep you eye out you could find a pair in your price range. You would have a hard time beating them for without spending more than $1000

[danz1906]

Here's a nice pair of paradigm speakers for a great price-no affiliation:

http://www.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls....-reduce---SF-B

[polkfan38]

After some more playing around, I got the 40s to behave. I have a NAD, a Pioneer and a Denon reciever. The Denon did the best job. The Pioneer was second and the NAD third. What is interesting is that a lot of people say there is no sound difference between recievers. Well, I will take this a little further. That NAD reciever hooked up to some older ADS speakers is pure magic! I am becoming more aware of component matching. It really becomes a trial and error issue.
I have posted this before but, those Monitors do not like being near a boundry. Back or side. The best sound I got was with them 3 feet from a side wall and 18 inches out from the back wall. This was in two different rooms.

[F1nut]

You will never hear what any speaker is capable of power them with a receiver. You can take that to the bank.

[TroyD]

I just hocked a loogey to emphasize the point.

BDT

[F1nut]

Hehe.....

[polkfan38]

True that! I have been pondering some Emotiva equipment but am hesitant due to some possible quality issues.

[cnh]

F1nut, is of course correct. But you can hear differences between speakers even on the same AVR. Rti-As bookshelves will, for exampe, give you cleaner mids and more detailed highs than M40s and tighter, faster Bass. I prefer my Rti-A3s for music on any of my AVRs (Pio, Onkyo, Denon). Do they sound better on separates. I don't know because I run my LSIs and SDAs on the separates. Because, Rti-A bookshelves are efficient enough for other sources of power.

Focal and B&W 600 series. No comparison in my book. B&Ws make my ears bleed!

cnh

[treitz3]

I just hocked a loogey to emphasize the point.

That there's funny.

Why don't you look for a pair of used Focal 807v's? They can be had for right at or slightly below the top end of your budget. I have had them before and they are a very nice speaker. Below, you will find a thread with my review on that very speaker.

http://www.polkaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?t=63683

[treitz3]

Oh, and you don't want to know my review on B&W. It won't be good.

[polkfan38]

I loooooove Focal. But, I didn't think B&W were that harsh. I have listened to all of there stuff except the 800 series. Hmmmmm. Although the highs on the CM5 were a little too articulate if not a little piercing.

[jbooker82]

Just a heads up,
New Egg has RTI A7's on sale for 349 each if you looking to try some.

[xcapri79]

After some more playing around, I got the 40s to behave. I have a NAD, a Pioneer and a Denon reciever. The Denon did the best job. The Pioneer was second and the NAD third. What is interesting is that a lot of people say there is no sound difference between recievers. Well, I will take this a little further. That NAD reciever hooked up to some older ADS speakers is pure magic! I am becoming more aware of component matching. It really becomes a trial and error issue.
I have posted this before but, those Monitors do not like being near a boundry. Back or side. The best sound I got was with them 3 feet from a side wall and 18 inches out from the back wall. This was in two different rooms.

There are differences between receivers. My Monitor 40's are relatively close to a wall being set on a dresser. They are powered by a Harman Kardon 3490 and they sound very good to me. The Polk Monitor 40's are one of the best bargains in a bookshelf speaker. Nice performance for little cost.

So what speakers will you be giving to your daughter?

[Klegg]

In addition to the Polks mentioned, Consider the Kevlar coned energy RC 50s or 70s. Discontinued in favor of a cheaper model, but still available at a nice discount.

I just picked up a pair of RC 70s. They are increasingly rare now, but still crop up and at stunning discounts.

Almost forgot...I am in the same boat. Purchased Monitor 40's. great for the money, but I am looking for more. I also noticed a lack of crispness. Which surprised me. I expected them to be bright. Now I have a CS2 that certainly does sound bright.

[polkfan38]

My Pioneer and NAD recievers had the least amount of "crispness" The Denon brought more "crispyness" to them but not TOO much. Just right. The Pioneer actually added more to the bass which I thought was odd but, it is what it is.
I have never been able to listen to the Energy RCs. Just the CBs and CFs. Did NOT like them. I feel my Monitors perform WAY better.

[Klegg]

My Pioneer and NAD recievers had the least amount of "crispness" The Denon brought more "crispyness" to them but not TOO much. Just right. The Pioneer actually added more to the bass which I thought was odd but, it is what it is.
I have never been able to listen to the Energy RCs. Just the CBs and CFs. Did NOT like them. I feel my Monitors perform WAY better.

I agree about the CFs (which is why I did not recommend them!) The RCs were several levels above the Cf and the CB. Different cones, different cabinets everything is different.

[polkfan38]

I see Energy has a new line coming out. (With a old name I believe) I wonder if it will be anything like the RC line? As far as performance.

[polkfan38]

On other thing. The knuckle test. I have several older Infinities and wrapping my knuckle on them is like doing so on cinder blocks. Doing so on the Polks however, it is like doing so on a hallow door. I don't have any test equipment but, this can't be good for dynamics or some kind of colorations.

[tonyb]

Did you really think you would get real wood cabinets at the price point of the M40's ?

[polkfan38]

No. I am fully aware of the differences in price points and what they bring to the table. I will say one thing though. The fit and finish on the Polks are very good.

[polkfan38]

To add to this, I took my Monitor 40s to a Paradigm dealer to do some comparing. To make a possibly long story short. M40s destroyed the Atoms. Were about equal to the SE1s. The Signature line was in another league however. The only thing the Atoms had on the M40s was a very slighty better detail in the very high freq. range.
These were all powered by a Cambridge Audio integrated amp and CD player. And in a treated room btw. You don't see this very often.