Trilams in the RTi150s???

[AsSiMiLaTeD]

Two questions:

Would it be possible and relatively easy to put a pair of trilaminate tweeters in my RTi150s?

Is that a good idea, or would differences in design, crossover, etc make this a bad idea?

I really like the sound of the trilams a little better than the Silk/Polymers I have now, but am not willing to get rid of the 150s becuase the like the mids and bass...just thinking out loud...

[F1nut]

Originally posted by Polkmaniac
would differences in design, crossover, etc make this a bad idea?



Ed Zachary!

[AsSiMiLaTeD]

Originally posted by F1nut
Ed Zachary!
How'd I know that was going to be the case...

Oh well, worth asking anyway...

I love the 150s, just thought if I could get the trilams in there I'd have my ultimate speaker...at least in my price range...

[dorokusai]

It is certainly a workable idea, but it is not a drop in replacement.

[AsSiMiLaTeD]

Originally posted by dorokusai
It is certainly a workable idea, but it is not a drop in replacement.
I think this will be a good project for me one of these days...

I've noticed that several people around here are into 'customizing' things a bit, think I'm gonna venture into that a bit as well...

As I'm in Texas, I usually go into hibernation in the summer becuase of the heat...should give me some good projects to work on...

[gmorris]

Why would you want to put the Fraternity from Revenge of the Nerds into your speakers?

(Trilams, get it, ha ha ha)

[disneyjoe7]

Can you explain, different case ? Crossover needs to be reworked :eek:



Originally posted by dorokusai
It is certainly a workable idea, but it is not a drop in replacement.

[AsSiMiLaTeD]

Originally posted by disneyjoe7
Can you explain, different case ? Crossover needs to be reworked :eek:
I would think that the crossovers in the speakers are built to work best with the tweeters and driver...therefore changing either may not work too well with the crossover...

[Loud & Clear]

Sounds like he might need to be as smart as one of the tri-lams to get that mod done right. Sadly I can't be of any help, as I haven't anything in common with the tri-lams, save for Poindexter's premature disorder.

[VR3]

The Tri Lam (IE The RT35i with a baffle)

and the RTi150 Silk (Baffle).....


IT IS A DROP IN REPLACEMENT.

It fits in nicely, I have tried it :D

Ken sent me a silk replacement for my tri lam in the rt35i, it fitted in perfectly. But I didnt need it as I discovered it was a crossover problem.

Try it out.

The baffle's are the same between series -- they snap in, snap out.

To my knowledge the original rt series that used the baffle, the non I, (RT25, rt35, rt55) -- used a smaller baffle.

[AsSiMiLaTeD]

Originally posted by Vr3MxStyler2k3
The Tri Lam (IE The RT35i with a baffle)

and the RTi150 Silk (Baffle).....


IT IS A DROP IN REPLACEMENT.

It fits in nicely, I have tried it :D

Ken sent me a silk replacement for my tri lam in the rt35i, it fitted in perfectly. But I didnt need it as I discovered it was a crossover problem.

Try it out.

The baffle's are the same between series -- they snap in, snap out.

To my knowledge the original rt series that used the baffle, the non I, (RT25, rt35, rt55) -- used a smaller baffle.
You don't think I'll have issues with the different crossovers?

[faster100]

I don't believe any one has actually tried it, and I know Ken will send the parts to test it out.. I would think the specs of each tweeter are very close and could be tested safely to see what the results were... after all, they changed the material the tweeter was made of only for the most part? NO?

[VR3]

The Silk and the Tri Lam are pretty much the same.......

BUT.......

The Sonic differences are huge, the Silk (to Me) is not near as good as the Tri Lam or other past Polk tweeters.

The crossover issue, NAH.....

Try it out

[AsSiMiLaTeD]

Originally posted by Vr3MxStyler2k3
The Silk and the Tri Lam are pretty much the same.......

BUT.......

The Sonic differences are huge, the Silk (to Me) is not near as good as the Tri Lam or other past Polk tweeters.

The crossover issue, NAH.....

Try it out
Yeah, I've always loved the tri-lam sound...the Silkds aren't bad, just not as good to me either...

[dorokusai]

I meant drop in Trey, as in no changes internally, not just fit and finish :rolleyes: I would check with Ken before I would move forward simply on a "Nah" comment.

kswauger@polkaudio.com

[AsSiMiLaTeD]

Originally posted by dorokusai
I meant drop in Trey, as in no changes internally, not just fit and finish :rolleyes: I would check with Ken before I would move forward simply on a "Nah" comment.

kswauger@polkaudio.com
I sent him a PM...maybe should use email instead?

[dorokusai]

Yes.

[disneyjoe7]

Was this reference for me?

If so here's something I've been working on. Getting ready for market, just needed to "find" the cash first. ;)

http://bellsouthpwp.net/g/o/goofy8/



Originally posted by Loud & Clear
Sounds like he might need to be as smart as one of the tri-lams to get that mod done right. Sadly I can't be of any help, as I haven't anything in common with the tri-lams, save for Poindexter's premature disorder.

[disneyjoe7]

Originally posted by Polkmaniac
Two questions:

Would it be possible and relatively easy to put a pair of trilaminate tweeters in my RTi150s?


NO

Is that a good idea, or would differences in design, crossover, etc make this a bad idea?


NO, Little metal, Nothing IHMO, YES.



I really like the sound of the trilams a little better than the Silk/Polymers I have now, but am not willing to get rid of the 150s becuase the like the mids and bass...just thinking out loud...


Keep them just like they are, and stop dreaming of the Tri-Lam's.




Posing the New Polk Audio, RT150i

[disneyjoe7]

Poor fit due to bigger magnet on tweeter of the Tri-Lam.

[disneyjoe7]

Fit & Finish 2

[disneyjoe7]

The smaller magnet size on the RTi150 tweeter. The Tri-Lam tweeter works ok, I don't hear any problem with crossover point or anything like that. I just wouldn't keep this like this. I don't care for the Tri-Lam sound IHMO.

If you do go for it, but you will have to make to back hole for tweeter a 3/16" deeper or so.

[VR3]

Hmmm.....

I guess the hole in the RTixxx line is different than the RTxxxi line. I never switched out the RTi70, but the baffle should be the same.


I have my silks unplugged, and they arnt coming back.

But I know why you dont like it, I stacked my RT35i on top of the tweeterless RTi70 today and immediately put them back on surround duty.

Very bright, very disturbing, I did not like it at all.

The RT5 by far is my FAVORITE speaker of the 3 pairs I own by Polk. They have AMAZING highs, KILLER mids and decent bass. The highs excell above and beyond the Silk and the Tri Lam (to Me). That is why I am stacking them and have the silk unplugged.

Sorry to hear it didnt work out, and surprised the magnet on the tri lam is bigger than the silk??

Also if you open up the Silk and the tri lam, there is more damping material inside the tri lam than the silk??

Either way, if I had to choose my favorite of the three...

1) Polymer
2) Tri Lam
3) Silk

The Silk to me is overly bright, harsh and annoying - alone or in the stacked configuration. It just dosnt sound good to me, which alas is why I have it unplugged. But the Polymer in the RT5 is all around smooth and seamless with the driver setup. I really enjoy it.

All my opinion though.

[disneyjoe7]

Sid,

1st what do you call the RTi150 tweeter?

1) Polymer
2) Tri Lam
3) Silk


2nd the RTi150 tweeter back magnet is not as deep. I will post picture of the Tri-Lam tomorrow so all can see the difference.

[VR3]

the RTi150 is a Silk/Polymer Dome -- but to me it is plainly a silk, and lacks the detail of both the Polymer and the Tri Lam. Take a Tri Lam speaker full, then a silk/polymer (RTixxx line), play the same song. There are several things missing (atleast to me) in that same song. Particularly in the cymbal, snare, and acoustic guitar area.

The Polymer in the RT5 even shows this more (to Me).

The RT5 is a Polymer Dome

The RTxxxi line is a Tri-Lam Dome

The Silk is a nice tweeter, but its just not my cup of tea.

[AsSiMiLaTeD]

cool, thanks for the demo...

[dorokusai]

Excellent work DJ, thank you for taking the time to do all that, and take pictures! ....any questions Trey? :)

The crossover point, and whole crossover issue is going to be dependent on more than an ear. It may very well be small or it could be large on the gun, that would be a more labor intensive swap.

Sidenote: If I never hear another SL2000 in my life, I will die happy.

[VR3]

No questions here.

lol, sorry about before. I thought you meant external changes. I had no idea the enclosure hole for the tweeter would not be deep enough. Surprised there.

The SL ---- TL replacements are STELLAR man.

BIG IMPROVEMENTS, IMO.

[weavercr]

I dont know the impedance of the speakers? or the other thiele small parameters.

Polks speakers that are using the trilam as crossovered ar 2.0 k on the RT1 35, 55 and 800. while the silks on the rti 38 are 2.4k, rti70 2.1k and RTi 150 are 2.4 k.

The cutover frequency will not cause a problem, but what are the spl of both tweeters, this will change the entire balance of the speaker if they do not match. Crossovers may have a built in -db attenuation to balance out different spl ratings.


So without knowing all of the thiele small parameters of both speakers, your shooting in the dark.

[disneyjoe7]

Thanks for the info. I was rethinking that there's something different with the crossover, due to the fact that "Sid the Kid" says that silk is louder. I find the silk not as loud and the Tri-Lam louder. The Silk tweeter smoother then the Tri-Lam tweeter.

So with this info find that if tweeters are swapped troubles can be found. I would think that crossovers may level out sound for the given design of speaker. So in turn there's a balanced speaker sound. :cool:

I will be changing the tweeter back. I will then post pictures of both tweeters and the back area of speaker that was not deep enough.





Originally posted by weavercr
I dont know the impedance of the speakers? or the other thiele small parameters.

Polks speakers that are using the trilam as crossovered ar 2.0 k on the RT1 35, 55 and 800. while the silks on the rti 38 are 2.4k, rti70 2.1k and RTi 150 are 2.4 k.

The cutover frequency will not cause a problem, but what are the spl of both tweeters, this will change the entire balance of the speaker if they do not match. Crossovers may have a built in -db attenuation to balance out different spl ratings.


So without knowing all of the thiele small parameters of both speakers, your shooting in the dark.

[dorokusai]

Silk is King.

[disneyjoe7]

Thanks,

If RTi150 tweeter is silk then I too love Silk. Silk is King.

My new RT150i is queen. Going back to Silk tonight.






Originally posted by dorokusai
Silk is King.

[disneyjoe7]

Ok, my RTi150's are back to Silk. Tri-lam is out. I don't think it was a bad change not as easy as I would have expected but, again smooth.

If you like the Tri-Lam tweeter then I would say try it out. It's ok IMHO.

Here are some new pictures I promised.

This one is showing the height difference of both tweeters. This reduced height is caused by the magnet change. (I think is a shielding magnet, I believe)

[disneyjoe7]

Again the tweeters next to each other.

[disneyjoe7]

The smaller back opening on the RTi150 causing fit & finish problem.

[VR3]

I hear ya man.

I had the RT35i playing with the RTi70 woofers for like...10 seconds, and then I unplugged it and switched them back with the RT5.

Very shrill, didnt mate well with the RTixxx woofers one bit.

Thanks for doing the test. Very cool.