or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › Energy Take Classic 5.1 vs Polk TL 1600
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Energy Take Classic 5.1 vs Polk TL 1600 - Page 2

post #31 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gmash View Post

Buy five of these for $300 and save up for a sub.

http://www.nhthifi.com/Bookshelf-speaker-SuperZero-2-0
These are in a different class than anything else mentioned here imo. They would be worth every extra penny.
post #32 of 115
keep the energy if you like then more ,every speaker have their own signature sound and the energy got more your attention.
post #33 of 115
If you really want to improve things you need to go bigger ,otherwise you will have a tiny sound with a localized sub ,with satellite speakers you will have to setup everything from 120hz and up.
post #34 of 115
Accept that the Energies are better and let me win the recommendation battle!!!tongue.gif
post #35 of 115
Valtyr I didn't know that we were in a battle.rolleyes.gif
Edited by losservatore - 8/21/13 at 7:19pm
post #36 of 115
Woah losservatore, we're not in a fight that you don't know about! (Sorry for making it seem that way) I was telling the OP to keep the Energy speakers since he enjoyed them the most but was really trying to enjoy the MLT's more because of the cost. My favorite thing to see on these types of threads is when someone picks a speaker that I recommend that is how I win at playing recommendations. Again, apologies if you thought I was internet fighting!
post #37 of 115
If the OP order 2 and he was going to order a 3 speaker system, I think he can do better and buy bookshelf speakers.



The THX standard for movies is 80hz this micro speakers cant even reach that. You will be force to increase the crossover settings and get a localized sub.

If you don't mind about that then choose the one that you like.
post #38 of 115
Those Super Zero are 4.5" rather than the 3" of the Takes. Not only will they go lower but they sound a lot better, have a larger soundstage and are better quality. The difference would be night and day.
post #39 of 115
I was under the impression both systems were purchased to test and send the worst back. My encouragement was just to keep the best one.
post #40 of 115
Im not going to keep feeding you ,is simple to just said that he likes the energy more and not necessary to said he will return the worst. That really sound sarcastic to me.

Anyways if he want something better the super zeros are a better option.
Edited by losservatore - 8/21/13 at 10:36pm
post #41 of 115
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bond 007 View Post

Those Super Zero are 4.5" rather than the 3" of the Takes. Not only will they go lower but they sound a lot better, have a larger soundstage and are better quality. The difference would be night and day.

The drivers are bigger on the MLT-2s, but they just don't sound as good to me. Not nearly as full....
post #42 of 115
Speakers this small will leave you wanting something better with a fuller sound.
post #43 of 115
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by losservatore View Post

Speakers this small will leave you wanting something better with a fuller sound.
Losser, why do you think the MLT-2s don't sound as full?
post #44 of 115
I don't understand the meaning of full sound on speakers of this size.
post #45 of 115
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by losservatore View Post

I don't understand the meaning of full sound on speakers of this size.

I guess my question is why do the smaller speakers sound more detailed in this circumstance?
Edited by faksnima - 8/21/13 at 10:33pm
post #46 of 115
Perhaps you're hearing a better component that is more catered to your listening needs? My understanding is that small speakers cannot physically reproduce the same depth of sound as something even reasonably larger.

To give you an example, the first time I heard silk dome tweeters they blew my mind and I preferred two tiny bookshelf speakers over an entire 5.1 setup because of those. Although the output was no where near the same as the 5.1 system hearing the details of a better speaker made me yearn and appreciate qualities that my previous setup did not have. I have now come to appreciate better quality metal tweeters again but going from one to another with no experience in between made me feel the quieter more detailed speakers were more "full".
post #47 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by faksnima View Post

The drivers are bigger on the MLT-2s, but they just don't sound as good to me. Not nearly as full....
Because theyre poor quality speakers. The Super Zero are not.
post #48 of 115
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bond 007 View Post

Because theyre poor quality speakers. The Super Zero are not.

The NHTs are within my budget (the 5-set). Is there any decent sub out there at a value?
post #49 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by faksnima View Post

The NHTs are within my budget (the 5-set). Is there any decent sub out there at a value?
Whats your budget?
post #50 of 115
Thread Starter 
300 was my limit....If the NHTs are that much superior to the MLT-2/ETCs....I wouldn't mind spending another $100 or so. I'm not sure $100 is enough for a decent sub.
post #51 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by faksnima View Post

300 was my limit....If the NHTs are that much superior to the MLT-2/ETCs....I wouldn't mind spending another $100 or so. I'm not sure $100 is enough for a decent sub.
Its not. Unless you get something used. The Bic F12 would probably be the best sub for under $200.
post #52 of 115
post #53 of 115
You can always get the better speakers now and save up for the subwoofer.

If I had my choice to buy the F12 (again) or wait to get something like the NXG Subwoofer I would wait, save, and purchase something that isn't terrible.
post #54 of 115
The F12 isnt terrible by any means. Other than that I completely agree. Save about $300 and get a better sub.
post #55 of 115
All this satellite speaker have the same quality parts but every crossover is implemented differently.


Imo the super zeros are a better speaker than the MLT-2,energy take classic and Polk. But like I said nothing like bookshelf.



The super zeros looks more like a mini bookshelf rather than satellites.
Edited by losservatore - 8/22/13 at 11:20am
post #56 of 115
Thread Starter 
Are solid bookshelf speakers on par with the size of the budget pioneers?
post #57 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by faksnima View Post

Are solid bookshelf speakers on par with the size of the budget pioneers?
I dont understand the question.
post #58 of 115
Pioneer speakers are considered the best budget bookshelf speakers that you can get, I haven't found anything that sound as good at that price.
post #59 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by losservatore View Post

Pioneer speakers are considered the best budget bookshelf speakers that you can get, I haven't found anything that sound as good at that price.

I agree, one simply cannot buy better speakers than the Pioneers.

The next level (to me) is Cambridge Audio S30, between the two you've got the best two speakers under ~$500 in my humble opinion.
post #60 of 115
I was going to mention the Cambridge s30 biggrin.gif . Talking about bookshelf speakers make me feel better about recommendations, but the super zeros are a better option vs the satellites if you need all the speakers to be mounted on the walls.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Speakers
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › Energy Take Classic 5.1 vs Polk TL 1600