Rti6 vs Energy RC10

[droid56]

I have 2 RTi6's, along with 3 other mismatched Polk speakers, that do the home theater thing in my living room, and they do it well, in my opinion. I'm very happy with the sound that the RTi6's produce when it comes to movies and high-def tv, and I almost always like how they sound playing rock music.

On this board I have read the opinion that the RTi series do home theater well, but that they are a little bit bright for music, particularly non-rock music. I play a lot of music, so I'm interested in having speakers that do a variety of music well.

So I bought 2 energy RC10 speakers, and I am breaking them in for about 100 hours, which is the manufacturer's suggestion.

In a day or two, I will compare the 2 speakers using a wide variety of music, and if the energy speakers don't do a wide variety of music better than the RTi6's, then they'll be returned.

I will let you know what my non-audiophile ears hear.

[Ern Dog]

Sounds good. Be sure to indicate the other gear you are using as well.

[fireshoes]

The RC10's are nice speakers. Good detail but you can still listen to them for a long time. Nice construction.

[droid56]

I think I will attempt an A-B comparison of the Polk RTi6 and the Energy RC10 tomorrow, and then sometime this coming weekend, I'll type out my opinion on this site.

I have 2 worries. I'm worried that they'll sound exactly the same. I'm also worried that my non-blind comparison might not be accurate. But I will be honest to best of my non-audiophile ability.

I have a very modest audio system. My speakers are plugged into a Denon 1507 receiver, that features only 75 watts per channel (I know it's actually less). I'm only comparing the 2 speakers' music performance so the other Polk speakers that form my 5.1 home theater system will not play any role in my evaluation. I'm keeping the Polk Rti6's for home theater even if the Energy speakers sound better for music to me.

Both speakers are very well constructed. Both feature attractive wood veneer. The Energy speakers look better than the Polks with the screen removed. The Energies have non-plastic speaker terminals, while the Polks do not. The Polks are a lot heavier and bigger than the Energies.

More to come in 2 or 3 days. Remember, I'm an audio neophyte.

[fireshoes]

I'm worried that they'll sound exactly the same.

No need to worry about that.:)

[droid56]

I just spent the last 3 hours comparing the RTi6 sound to the Energy RC10's, by listening to music that ranged form Diana Krall to the White Stripes. Apparently I don't have ears that can hear the subtle differences that others can hear.

I know I am capable of hearing "big" differences in sound quality because I immediately noticed a huge improvement when I upgraded from crummy Sony speakers to the Polks a few years ago. I also noticed a clear cut improvement when I replaced a very cheap JVC receiver with a Denon 1507.

To my middle-aged, non-audiophile ears, the RTi6's and the RC10's sound slightly different, but I really can't say the more expensive Energy speakers are clearly better than the Polk speakers. The Polks sound a hair brighter than the RC10's, but that tiny bit of extra brightness doesn't "fatigue" my ears, even over time. Both seem to produce the same level of detail.

If money wasn't an issue, I just might pick the Energy speakers for music, but only by the narrowest of margins. Since the Polks are paid for, and they are at least as good as the Energy speakers for home theater, I think I'm returning the RC10's. The fact that they look so good with their screens removed is the only reason I'm currently not 100% sure they're going back.

[stryker]

This is now 2 years later so I'm drumming up an old post. Any other feedback regarding these 2 speakers? I have the option to buy either one on the used market but the Energys are about $100 more.

[ctrulock]

troll? I had the rti6. Bought better amp and got lsi9. Best ever.