Polk Reserve R200: Spinorama and measurements (a really nice surprise!)

[Transmaniacon]

What a shame though they used that ring radiator tweeter which beams too much in the upper octave.

Only when you’re like 30 degrees off center. I don’t think that’s a realistic listening position.

 

[thewas]

Only when you’re like 30 degrees off center. I don’t think that’s a realistic listening position.

My experience with such tweeters is that the reduced sound power in the upper octave is also audible on-axis, same like with full range drivers.

 

[Transmaniacon]

My experience with such tweeters is that the reduced sound power in the upper octave is also audible on-axis, same like with full range drivers.

As an owner of the R200, I can tell you this speaker is not short on treble detail or output. It maintains excellent composure at higher volumes, isn’t fatiguing, and offers exceptional clarity. I really don’t think it’s much of an issue at all.

 

[thewas]

As an owner of the R200, I can tell you this speaker is not short on treble detail or output. It maintains excellent composure at higher volumes, isn’t fatiguing, and offers exceptional clarity. I really don’t think it’s much of an issue at all.

At the R200 (possibly also on the R700 but its harder to see in the small plots) they have partially compensated that high beaming by bumping it up on-axis, so like you say it shouldn't be too audible:

Don't get me wrong, this is just nitpicking at a very high level because the rest measures so nicely, on other poorer measuring loudspeakers I wouldn't even have commented about such a detail.

 

[MarkWinston]

Now the Metas dont really make much sense at 1500 bucks, which I was planning to get. Even if I had a small 3 meter by 3 meter room, I would shove the R700 in instead of a smaller speaker. After the Audioholic review, its safe to say that the R700 is THE best pair of speakers under 2 grand. Change my mind.

 

[Transmaniacon]

At the R200 (possibly also on the R700 but its harder to see in the small plots) they have partially compensated that high beaming by bumping it up on-axis, so like you say it shouldn't be too audible:

Don't get me wrong, this is just nitpicking at a very high level because the rest measures so nicely, on other poorer measuring loudspeakers I wouldn't even have commented about such a detail.

Fair enough!

 

[Transmaniacon]

Now the Metas dont really make much sense at 1500 bucks, which I was planning to get. Even if I had a small 3 meter by 3 meter room, I would shove the R700 in instead of a smaller speaker. After the Audioholic review, its safe to say that the R700 is THE best pair of speakers under 2 grand. Change my mind.

Yeah it certainly is hard to beat!

 

[mhardy6647]

If anyone happens to do a head to head comparison the R200 with the LS50 "Meta"... umm... let me know. 'K?

 

[Transmaniacon]

If anyone happens to do a head to head comparison the R200 with the LS50 "Meta"... umm... let me know. 'K?

Tharbarmar on YouTube prefers the R200 to the Meta, and says it’s the best bookshelf you can get under $1500 in his opinion. It’s just his opinion but he has heard a lot of speakers and has started measuring his in-room response in his reviews.

 

[Urvile]

I've got the L400/R700 combo, with a sub, and I like it quite a bit. It's nice to see some objective validation.

 

[napilopez]

If anyone happens to do a head to head comparison the R200 with the LS50 "Meta"... umm... let me know. 'K?

Tharbarmar on YouTube prefers the R200 to the Meta, and says it’s the best bookshelf you can get under $1500 in his opinion. It’s just his opinion but he has heard a lot of speakers and has started measuring his in-room response in his reviews.

I think I'm in the same group. I didnt compare the R200 directly to the meta but from what I recall R200 was sonically more to my tastes, plus it just has more bass. I would also call it the best passive speaker I've heard under $1500. The Focals Choras which have been my reference forever and had wider soundstage but the R200 was more neutral to my ear. I remember tonality being remarkably similar to the Genelec 8341B I had around the same time.

 

[MarkWinston]

If anyone happens to do a head to head comparison the R200 with the LS50 "Meta"... umm... let me know. 'K?

I own the R200 and Im looking forward to buy a Meta. I love how the Metas project mids yet staying really neutral. I own the OG LS50s and I like the R200 more. After owning the R200 for a months nows, the only thing I dont like is how lean and shouty they can sound at higher volumes, and these little buggers can take A LOT of power for their size so I tend to push it. The only speaker I like more than the R200 is the Diamond 12.2. And my future Metas. Or just get the R700 and be done with. Could very well be end game for me under my conditions.

 

[Transmaniacon]

I own the R200 and Im looking forward to buy a Meta. I love how the Metas project mids yet staying really neutral. I own the OG LS50s and I like the R200 more. After owning the R200 for a months nows, the only thing I dont like is how lean and shouty they can sound at higher volumes, and these little buggers can take A LOT of power for their size so I tend to push it. The only speaker I like more than the R200 is the Diamond 12.2. And my future Metas. Or just get the R700 and be done with. Could very well be end game for me under my conditions.

Yeah I would love to get some R700s if I had a room that could take advantage of them. I currently just have this setup in my home office, and the R200 are well sized for this room.

 

[mhardy6647]

After owning the R200 for a months nows, the only thing I dont like is how lean and shouty they can sound at higher volumes, and these little buggers can take A LOT of power for their size so I tend to push it.

Thanks. Interesting observation ... and I must disclose that all of my listening to date has been at low to moderate volume. I'm not much of a rafter-shaker any more.

Out of curiosity, what are you using for amplification with your R200s?

 

[Transmaniacon]

Thanks. Interesting observation ... and I must disclose that all of my listening to date has been at low to moderate volume. I'm not much of a rafter-shaker any more.

Out of curiosity, what are you using for amplification with your R200s?

I'd be curious to know as well, I have pushed mine on occasion but don't get any shouty-ness. For reference I am using a Parasound HCA-1500a.

 

[MarkWinston]

I am using the SMSL DA-9, Rotel RC-1572 MKII pre and RB1552 MKII power and the Topping PA5 with SMSL SU9, SU9N and Sanskrit 10th MKII. Whichever combo I use, it gets shouty and bright when I push the volume. Erin who recently reviewed the R100 confirmed what I was saying all along, it is detailed but it can get lean at high volumes. Its no wonder because from graphs, we can see it indeed has a rising top end. Great at low and normal volumes, not so at really high volumes. Still one of the best sounding speakers Ive owned so far, with the 12.2 taking the top place.

 

[Transmaniacon]

I am using the SMSL DA-9, Rotel RC-1572 MKII pre and RB1552 MKII power and the Topping PA5 with SMSL SU9, SU9N and Sanskrit 10th MKII. Whichever combo I use, it gets shouty and bright when I push the volume. Erin who recently reviewed the R100 confirmed what I was saying all along, it is detailed but it can get lean at high volumes. Its no wonder because from graphs, we can see it indeed has a rising top end. Great at low and normal volumes, not so at really high volumes. Still one of the best sounding speakers Ive owned so far, with the 12.2 taking the top place.

I wonder if you are pushing your amp a little too hard. 130 watts of honest power is solid, but I could see you running in to clipping issues if you are really cranking it.

 

[MarkWinston]

I wonder if you are pushing your amp a little too hard. 130 watts of honest power is solid, but I could see you running in to clipping issues if you are really cranking it.

It gets bright to my ears way before clipping levels, the r200 is fairly easy to drive. Maybe Im used to really flat on axis speakers...

 

[beagleman]

Nice surprise, don't understand though why so many use ring tweeters with their excessive beaming on the upper octave.

I think many find that to be of benefit honestly. I know the forum, mindset, is that wide dispersion is very important, but I have owned a few ring radiators and love how they have a very defined, focused image.

I find it a benefit, and like that precise sound. Sitting precisely in the "Sweet spot" it creates an image that is, instead of wide and diffuse,is very focused and works fantastic on female voices. They float in the air, and when toed in a bit, the center image is very strong and has a sense of immediacy.

Not saying it is perfect, but as with anything, there are tradeoffs and advantages.

 

[beagleman]

A couple of reviewers weren's sure either so they contacted Polk. The designer confirmed that they are 2.5 way.
That beeing said. I can't find the crossover information either. Maybe worth investigating further.

The reason being, most 2.5 way speakers do not list a "Crossover" frequency for the one woofers earlier rolloff. It is not technically crossing over to anything, but it is a simple shelf filter or low pass filter implemented on the mid to higher region of one woofer.

So its response may start rolling "off", (not crossing) at around 400hz.
Technically that is not a crossover "point", but simply tailors the woofers output over a certain range.

That other woofer has a normal crossover to the tweeter.