ABathingApe
500+ Head-Fier
Does anyone have any experience with these? I'm considering a pair of RX8's over some B&W 600 series.
Monitor Audio RX Series
- Thread starter ABathingApe
- Start date
endless402
500+ Head-Fier
rx8 wont time as well as rx6 if it's anything like the rs8 vs rs6
too new to tell. the local store in vancouver just got their RX.
build quality wise, RX is much better than 600 series.
what hifi has done a few RX reviews
too new to tell. the local store in vancouver just got their RX.
build quality wise, RX is much better than 600 series.
what hifi has done a few RX reviews
ABathingApe
500+ Head-Fier
Quote:
I always have to take what hifi reviews with a grain of salt. They are just too short. I actually had the chance to demo RX8's and 684s today. The RX8s, though detailed, made the music sound lifeless and unexciting. They were not dynamic nor did the setup I heard have any drive, punch, or authority in the lower registers. The 684's on the other hand really engaged me. Yes on certain tracks they didn't sound as nice, but boy did they move air. They had great imaging and detail retrieval even at lower listening volumes. And the ones I'm interested in, the 683's, are supposed to have that much MORE umph to them. I can see what what-hifi gave the 684's 5 stars. They really are a very neutral yet engaging speaker, especially at their price point. It was like sennheiser vs grado, except this time grado actually had R&D behind them and a fairly flat frequency response...
| Originally Posted by endless402 /img/forum/go_quote.gif rx8 wont time as well as rx6 if it's anything like the rs8 vs rs6 too new to tell. the local store in vancouver just got their RX. build quality wise, RX is much better than 600 series. what hifi has done a few RX reviews |
I always have to take what hifi reviews with a grain of salt. They are just too short. I actually had the chance to demo RX8's and 684s today. The RX8s, though detailed, made the music sound lifeless and unexciting. They were not dynamic nor did the setup I heard have any drive, punch, or authority in the lower registers. The 684's on the other hand really engaged me. Yes on certain tracks they didn't sound as nice, but boy did they move air. They had great imaging and detail retrieval even at lower listening volumes. And the ones I'm interested in, the 683's, are supposed to have that much MORE umph to them. I can see what what-hifi gave the 684's 5 stars. They really are a very neutral yet engaging speaker, especially at their price point. It was like sennheiser vs grado, except this time grado actually had R&D behind them and a fairly flat frequency response...
Bones13
Headphoneus Supremus
Have not heard the newer stuff from Monitor Audio. Sad to hear that you were underwhelmed by them. I loved my RS6 set up for several years before upgrading. Really great speakers for 1K. But then again, the review I read on the RS 6 mentioned that the main positive aspect is that the speaker did nothing wrong, while not really doing anything "special". I guess that is a lofty goal for a speaker set in that price range. I really enjoyed mine.
endless402
500+ Head-Fier
Quote:
shoudlnt compare rx8 to 684. compare the rx6 against them. you need a lot of power and current for rx8.
i hope the amp that was used could put out at least 150w. current is key for these big speakers. same with 683's.
my local dealer doesnt have rx8, only rx6
sounds like it was way underpowered if it doesnt have drive / punch / authority
| Originally Posted by ABathingApe /img/forum/go_quote.gif I always have to take what hifi reviews with a grain of salt. They are just too short. I actually had the chance to demo RX8's and 684s today. The RX8s, though detailed, made the music sound lifeless and unexciting. They were not dynamic nor did the setup I heard have any drive, punch, or authority in the lower registers. The 684's on the other hand really engaged me. Yes on certain tracks they didn't sound as nice, but boy did they move air. They had great imaging and detail retrieval even at lower listening volumes. And the ones I'm interested in, the 683's, are supposed to have that much MORE umph to them. I can see what what-hifi gave the 684's 5 stars. They really are a very neutral yet engaging speaker, especially at their price point. It was like sennheiser vs grado, except this time grado actually had R&D behind them and a fairly flat frequency response... |
shoudlnt compare rx8 to 684. compare the rx6 against them. you need a lot of power and current for rx8.
i hope the amp that was used could put out at least 150w. current is key for these big speakers. same with 683's.
my local dealer doesnt have rx8, only rx6
sounds like it was way underpowered if it doesnt have drive / punch / authority
endless402
500+ Head-Fier
endless402
500+ Head-Fier
just realized rx8 is a 4ohm load in the specs. hard load to drive if it's true. will have to see detailed graph to see true ohm across the spectrum.
ABathingApe
500+ Head-Fier
Quote:
Just couldn't bring myself to demo the RX8's again. Even though my cambridge could do 200wpc into those things I have just always like that B&W sound. Upped my budget and bought some CM9's without demoing! Let's just hope these pan out. I liked the CM1's and CM5's, so I expect much of the same from the 9's. Except more because of that FST midrange.
Oh yea, and I had to compare the RX8's with the 684's because the 683's were not in stock at the dealer. Even still, the 683's are a big step up from the 684.
| Originally Posted by endless402 /img/forum/go_quote.gif just realized rx8 is a 4ohm load in the specs. hard load to drive if it's true. will have to see detailed graph to see true ohm across the spectrum. |
Just couldn't bring myself to demo the RX8's again. Even though my cambridge could do 200wpc into those things I have just always like that B&W sound. Upped my budget and bought some CM9's without demoing! Let's just hope these pan out. I liked the CM1's and CM5's, so I expect much of the same from the 9's. Except more because of that FST midrange.
Oh yea, and I had to compare the RX8's with the 684's because the 683's were not in stock at the dealer. Even still, the 683's are a big step up from the 684.
Uri Cohen
Formerly known as HyperDuel
A little off topic I just got the BR2 from the Bronze series and for the price they are amazing. I can't even think about how good the higher end models will be.
Marcus_C
1000+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2010
- Posts
- 1,057
- Likes
- 32
The CM9 is a brilliant speaker, you should be happy with them, and they look so good!!
ABathingApe
500+ Head-Fier
Quote:
The RX8's I tried were very refined. Somewhat of a laid back sound, not quite as engaging as I like it. Mind you that was through a Marantz MM8003 which really isn't a proper stereo amp.
Quote:
I know, at the end of the day I hated the finishing on the 683's regardless of sound. I figured if I was going to spend that much on a speaker they better look darn nice
. CM9's are like eye candy and have the sound signature to back it up.
| Originally Posted by HyperDuel /img/forum/go_quote.gif A little off topic I just got the BR2 from the Bronze series and for the price they are amazing. I can't even think about how good the higher end models will be. |
The RX8's I tried were very refined. Somewhat of a laid back sound, not quite as engaging as I like it. Mind you that was through a Marantz MM8003 which really isn't a proper stereo amp.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by Marcus_C /img/forum/go_quote.gif The CM9 is a brilliant speaker, you should be happy with them, and they look so good!! |
I know, at the end of the day I hated the finishing on the 683's regardless of sound. I figured if I was going to spend that much on a speaker they better look darn nice
endless402
500+ Head-Fier
yup CM's are great to look at
though i prefer the ugly looks of a proac
though i prefer the ugly looks of a proac
Uri Cohen
Formerly known as HyperDuel
Quote:
I have my speakers going thru a Marantz 2226 from the 70s. To my ears the sound is very engaging with the TT or DAC.
| Originally Posted by ABathingApe /img/forum/go_quote.gif The RX8's I tried were very refined. Somewhat of a laid back sound, not quite as engaging as I like it. Mind you that was through a Marantz MM8003 which really isn't a proper stereo amp. |
I have my speakers going thru a Marantz 2226 from the 70s. To my ears the sound is very engaging with the TT or DAC.
ABathingApe
500+ Head-Fier
Quote:
Very nice, I have a 2238B from the same era. Unfortunately it needs a little TLC. The power section seems to be fine, but the pre seems to be kind of damaged. I may need to replace the caps as well. Did you have to do any maintenance on yours?
| Originally Posted by HyperDuel /img/forum/go_quote.gif I have my speakers going thru a Marantz 2226 from the 70s. To my ears the sound is very engaging with the TT or DAC. |
Very nice, I have a 2238B from the same era. Unfortunately it needs a little TLC. The power section seems to be fine, but the pre seems to be kind of damaged. I may need to replace the caps as well. Did you have to do any maintenance on yours?
Users who are viewing this thread
