I Love SL2000 Tweeters

[candyliquor35m]

I've tried many times to replace them and each time I end up putting them back in.

Without them I lose the magical smooth airyness and pure silk sounds that happen at the top end.

I put a cap on them to tame them down a bit as illustrated in the 2 attachments.

http://www.polkaudio.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=30823

[John in MA]

I ran my RTA-11Ts with the original SL2000s. When I switched to SRS 1.2TLs (SL3000s) the first thing I noticed was the lack of an unpleasant shrill peak in the tweeter response.

Now I feel like getting 194s for the RTAs, probably would enjoy them a lot more.

[nms]

candy you've proved your point many times over.

[avguytx]

Why would a cap be put on them? Doesn't that effectively screw up the crossover to the tweeters? a 2.2uf cap attached to a (roughly) 8-ohm speaker makes it crossover @ 9khz or so. At 6-ohms it's 12kHz! Maybe I just don't understand the philosophy of why a cap would be used instead of a resistor in this scenario. A resistor, of proper value, would attenuate the tweeter if that's what you're going after.

Puzzled to say the least...

[MarcLazarek78]

I think a resistor is correct also. When I went to an audo shop with the same goal on my car audio speakers,it came to be like $2/3 worth of resistors. Might have had a cap on them too,this was 13 years ago. I didn't like em and took em off.

[BaggedLancer]

Why would a cap be put on them? Doesn't that effectively screw up the crossover to the tweeters? a 2.2uf cap attached to a (roughly) 8-ohm speaker makes it crossover @ 9khz or so. At 6-ohms it's 12kHz! Maybe I just don't understand the philosophy of why a cap would be used instead of a resistor in this scenario. A resistor, of proper value, would attenuate the tweeter if that's what you're going after.

Puzzled to say the least...

Certain people are just speical. After so long on the forum I thought you would have known this by now. ;):rolleyes:

[candyliquor35m]

It probably is a resistor but at the electrical parts outlet, they called it a cap. It's labeled 2.2MFD +-10% 250VDC.

[avguytx]

Nope, that's a cap...not a resistor. Anything that has MFD at the end of it is a cap.

[MarcLazarek78]

caps are measured in Farads. MFD sounds like a abbreviation of measurement form.

In Car audio,you would put at least a 1/2 farad Cap (which is the size of a can of shaving cream) you would put the Cap, on the power wire connecting the car battery to the power amplifier. This would store electricity so it takes less time for your amp to reload from the car battery itself. W/O it your headlights could dim when the amp is pulling heavy loads,and your sound will suffer. at least a 1 farad capacitor is recommended tho,which is the size of a really fat can of hairspray.

[avguytx]

A cap is measured in capacitance and MFD (microfarad) is just the smaller version of them. There is also picofarads, too, which are even smaller. We aren't talking about car audio "caps" here.

Oh, and a stiffening cap isn't the be all/end all of fixing a charging system problem. It's only a (poor) bandaid for problems further upstream i.e. alternator, battery, current draw, resistance in poor cables, etc.

[MarcLazarek78]

what would be a good bandaid, a lot of em? Thats the only way I've see it done,but it works.

[candyliquor35m]

Someone else recommended it. I can't find the thread but it sounds great.

[Deadof_knight]

When you put caps in series it halfs them

When you put them in parallel the caps total value are added !

avguytx is correct MFD is Microfarad ! and that picture is a cap!

[dorokusai]

The SL2000 tweeter should be thrown in the trash.

[candyliquor35m]

You'd be throwing away a perfectly good tweeter or maybe you need tubes to make them sound so magical

Golden Tube SE-100 with 10 mullard xf4 el34's
CJ PV10AL with 2 telefunken ecc82's
AH! 4000 with upsampler and 2 telefunken e188cc's
AQ king cobras
solid core 10 awg romex speaker wire
stock sda srs except for the cap on the tweeters
stock sda IC

[MarcLazarek78]

just lower your 5k on your EQ.

[dorokusai]

You'd be throwing away a perfectly good tweeter or maybe you need tubes to make them sound so magical

Golden Tube SE-100 with 10 mullard xf4 el34's
CJ PV10AL with 2 telefunken ecc82's
AH! 4000 with upsampler and 2 telefunken e188cc's
AQ king cobras
solid core 10 awg romex speaker wire
stock sda srs except for the cap on the tweeters
stock sda IC

I'm not a fan of that tweeter but some folks love them. Do you think I need tubes? What do you recommend?

[MarcLazarek78]

so is the cap softening up the blow?

[candyliquor35m]

I'm not a fan of that tweeter but some folks love them. Do you think I need tubes? What do you recommend?

You've probably tried them all but you see what my favs are.

[candyliquor35m]

so is the cap softening up the blow?

I thought it was because of the resistors I thought I was adding but maybe it was wishful thinking or the effect of adding more and more tubes into the mix.

I'll try to take the caps out tomorrow on one side and see if I can tell any difference.

[heiney9]

so is the cap softening up the blow?

The problems with the sl2000 can not be easily remedied by a simple cap or resistor. If that were the case Polk would have just redesigned the x-over rather than spending 2 years R&Ding a new tweeter (sl3000 at that time).

It's obvious some people like the sl2000, it stems from (2) reasons 1) they like the forward, somewhat harsh output. It seems to make things sound more detailed. We all have different hearing and some just prefer it, they are in the huge minority.

2) and this is where most who don't have an issue with the sl2000 fit; they have never heard the new silk replacement to hear how much smoother, laid back and detailed it is. It integrates much better and isn't as "shouty". Obviously if you have nothing to compare it to, then one might find the sl2000 to be adequate.

Candy.....is one of the few who feel the sl2000 is fine, again he's in the minority and if he's tried the RD0194-1 and didn't like it, then his opinion is valid.

He is one of the few who after hearing the RD0's went back to the sl2000.

H9

[avguytx]

Maybe his hearing at or around that range is deteriorated. It's a high possibility as mine isn't as good as it used to be and although the SL2000 was bright in that range, it wasn't too terribly bad with the stock crossovers. Now, when the crossovers were redone, it became waaayyyy too much for me. I still prefer the RD0's myself.

[heiney9]

Now, when the crossovers were redone, it became waaayyyy too much for me. I still prefer the RD0's myself.

That's a good point, I found the same thing when I redid the x-overs on my 5B's. The sl2000's became unlistenable. I spent almost 19 years with the sl2000 in my 11T's as I had them since new. I wish I wouldn't have waited so long to get the RD0's, at the time I joined this forum I was huge doubter that a tweeter could make that much of a difference; it can and it does.

sl2000's aren't horrible; it's just for most the RD0's are that much better sounding when compared side by side. As always there are exceptions but very few after hearing the RD0's agree the sl2000's are preferred.

The thing is if one buys the RD0's and don't think they are more pleasing you can get almost all your money back by selling them her on CP if you want to continue to use the sl2000's.

H9

[ShinAce]

Without a full schematic of the crossover, we cannot say what effect the cap is having. We don't even know how or where it is wired in the speaker.

You guys are being rough for absolutely no reason.

Maybe there's a cap and a resistor being used as a Zobel network. Maybe it just so happens to be acting as a notch filter. Maybe the cap is still sitting on someone's desk.

[rskarvan]

You guys who spend the coins to supposedly "upgrade" the crossover kind of scare me. I can understand replacing a broken tweeter. And, I can even understand "upgrading the tweeter" with a Polk-approved replacement.

But, when you decide that you are better equipped to select a source component than Polk Audio engineering, you are a little bit "out there". Sure, there are better components available. But, at the same time, the ones that they selected are "engineered" for the system.

Its no wonder that your tweeter sounds "different" after you've monkey'd with the crossover. And, I have yet to hear one person who has modified a x-over say... "boy, that sucks".

My Monitor 10's sound fabulous with their stock cross-over. Could they sound better... perhaps. But, then they really wouldn't be Polk Audio Monitor 10's would they.

I trust Polk Audio to do things right the first time. The rest of you are just "tweakers".

[dorokusai]

I feel the same way and have -zero interest in modding any Polk speakers again.

[heiney9]

Without a full schematic of the crossover, we cannot say what effect the cap is having. We don't even know how or where it is wired in the speaker.

You guys are being rough for absolutely no reason.

Maybe there's a cap and a resistor being used as a Zobel network. Maybe it just so happens to be acting as a notch filter. Maybe the cap is still sitting on someone's desk.

Don't know what your definition of rough is, but this topic of "fixing" the exaggerated output of the sl2000 has been discussed in the past and there is no "fix". I'm just simply stating my opinion and I've given credit to Candys....opinion as well. It's his opinion and he's certainly entitled to it. So far this has been a very logical and well mannered discussion. Sounds like maybe you have a small chip on your shoulder.

I feel it's a bit funny that Candy.... doesn't even know what part it is, why it was chosen to be used or what exact effect it has. Pretty difficult to discuss the merits of a tweak if you really have no idea about what it is or what effect it has.

H9

[heiney9]

You guys who spend the coins to supposedly "upgrade" the crossover kind of scare me. I can understand replacing a broken tweeter. And, I can even understand "upgrading the tweeter" with a Polk-approved replacement.

But, when you decide that you are better equipped to select a source component than Polk Audio engineering, you are a little bit "out there". Sure, there are better components available. But, at the same time, the ones that they selected are "engineered" for the system.

Its no wonder that your tweeter sounds "different" after you've monkey'd with the crossover. And, I have yet to hear one person who has modified a x-over say... "boy, that sucks".

My Monitor 10's sound fabulous with their stock cross-over. Could they sound better... perhaps. But, then they really wouldn't be Polk Audio Monitor 10's would they.

I trust Polk Audio to do things right the first time. The rest of you are just "tweakers".

Once again you just don't get it. It's not about "knowing what's better than Polk". Parts are better today as well as being more cost effective. Polk hit a price point with it's different lines. The LSi's use much better parts in their x-overs than the RT or Monitor line. With your thinking all the speakers should have the same level of parts. It doesn't work that way and if you have ever even followed this upgrade discussion you'd know DarqueKnight talked extensively with Ken and Polk engineers and they made recommendations on where to improve. Right from the horses mouth. Pay attention and get your facts straight.

Also parts wear out over time, they have a useful life cycle and they need to be replaced in order to get the maximum sound. When tires wear out on your 20 year old car do you want to get the latest and best technology or rather spend your money on 20 year old technology.

It's not and never been about "we know what's better than Polk". It's a 20 year old product that can benefit from improvements in parts as well as the parts being at the end of their product lifecycle. Tweaker, yes we are but for a different reason than you say.

H9

[rskarvan]

H9,

I've had crossovers in speakers that are over 20 years old and they still sound fabulous. So, I am skeptical about capacitors wearing out in a cross-over. Perhaps their value will change a little... but, the system has probably been designed to be reasonably insensitive to that.

When the components for the speaker system were selected, they were probably all engineered with a certain "target accuracy" in mind. There is no sense to putting gold-rated capacitors on a bronze-rated driver. So, upgrade if you must.... but, there is probably little benefit unless that particular $0.50 component is the weak design link in the chain.

Lastly, have you guys ever heard of "the law of diminishing returns"? It is a real phenomina that exists and must be considered in every design decision. Sure, I can make a part more accurately... but, at what benefit?

I purchase speakers based upon the fact that "I enjoy their sound". It would be silly (and incredibly egotistical) to purchase speakers thinking... "Not bad... but, if you swap out the tweeters, re-wire it with silver-wire, change the binding posts to vampires, and replace every capacitor with Sonicaps, re-stuff it with cotton-balls instead of poly-fill, and change the grill fabric... then, it will make an incredible difference and be a "giant killer".

Tweakers. Gotta love em.

[dorokusai]

Why is it about "getting it" exactly?

I recall a conversation with a Polk engineer about tweaking the LSi and guess what the first comment was? Add some dampening to the port tube. Second? Upgrade the woofer. Third? Upgrade the crossover....if you want to. Are my facts straight?

Just because it's old doesn't automatically mean it needs repair. I have a 25+ year old pair of DQ10's that still sound great and I didn't notice the crossovers on my to-do list.

Enjoy yourself, upgrade what you want, that's why the hobby is fun but don't get mad at those who don't care. I like to tweak electronics, loudspeakers? No.

[heiney9]

Ron,

Based on your argument you've obviously never tried the things you are doubting. Talk with Nelson Pass sometime he makes recommended improvements all the time for older Threshold amps he designed. In fact he encourages the updating and improvements.

If you don't have any desire to try tweaking, that's your prerogative, but it's hard for you to argue against it with any sort of credibility if you've never tried it.

H9

[heiney9]

Why is it about "getting it" exactly?

I recall a conversation with a Polk engineer about tweaking the LSi and guess what the first comment was? Add some dampening to the port tube. Second? Upgrade the woofer. Third? Upgrade the crossover....if you want to.

Just because it's old doesn't automatically mean it needs repair. I have a 25+ year old pair of DQ10's that still sound great and I didn't notice the crossovers on my to-do list.

Enjoy yourself, upgrade what you want, that's why the hobby is fun but don't get mad at those who don't care.

First off Mark I'm not talking about the Lsi's we can cover that in 20 years. They are new, the paerts are new and they use higher quality parts than the Monitor or old RTi line. Could the x-over be improved, sure but probably not very noticeable.

2nd of all I have a friend who just rebuilt perfectly good DQ-10's and mirror imaged them, used premium x-over components and the the difference was night and day so there is some merit for people to consider these types of things.

Tweaking is not necessary to enjoy the products as they are but good things can come out of it if the person is so inclined to take an interest.

As far as the "not getting it" part, I don't tweak because I think I can do it better than the manufacturer as Ron implied in his post.

[rskarvan]

H9,

You are completely right. I have never tried "tweaking" a perfectly good speaker. I also keep my cars "factory original" also.

I've done lots of tweaking on the job as an engineer. I've run dozen of studies to optimize the selection of material properties for a particular application. Subtle shifts in metallurgy can have huge effects on a particular design. I truly understand the importance of tweaking things for optimization purposes.

But, my tweaking is done scientifically. I form a hypothesis. I design a test. I measure the test variables. I evaluate any gage error. I take into account all known sources of other variations that may have contributed to the test results. I modify my math model of the system to match the newly acquired data. I run a simulation on the new math model. Finally, I confirm the model with a 2nd set of test test data and study the variation that occurs.

I just don't have the resources in my home to make proper design improvements in a methodical manner. That is why the good people at Polk Audio make the big bucks!

Finally, if it can't be measured, it is not real. Everything can be measured. If you feel its "subjective"... I will argue that you are just too lazy to have established a proper measurement system.

[dorokusai]

H9 - I agree and I'm not arguing the fact that it has it's advantages. I have issues with the fact that its implied that it HAS to be done. You'll find an "upgrade the crossover" comment within 10 posts of anyone asking about their vintage Polk. It's ridiculous.

If I'm here in 5 years I'd be suprised, let alone 20.

What happened to listening to a speaker based on its merits?

I've heard complete overhauls of DQ10's, some good, bad and terrible. In the DQ10 world, your "friend" would be the rskarvan of that forum....for perspective of course. You can ruin the sound of a loudspeaker as easily as you can tweak it.

[rskarvan]

Upgrading cross-overs is a perfect example of the Polk Audio forum "sheep mentality". Congratulations Doro for separating yourself from the herd. Beware though, the emperor now has no clothes.

[NJPOLKER]

The definition of merit is, worth, value, excellence, something deserving praise, taken right out of the dictionary. My feeling is I have more "merit" after tweeking my Polks to bringing out the best possible sound. After listening to my upgraded/updated Polks I feel an awful lot of pride I was able to increase the performance noticeably. That being said I feel "everyone" should do the similar things to increase the performance of there Polks. I might be wrong but I doubt it. My feelings are that most of the members here like the upgrading/updating ideas.
So it can't be ridiculas, can it?
I sure do not need to be a chemist or engineer I just need my fellow Club Polk members to assist in my upgrades/updates. You guys are the best!
Drew

[rskarvan]

Birds of a feather....

[NJPOLKER]

rskarvan,
What do you think some of the members here work for Solen and or Sonic Craft?
Baahhaa
Drew
BTW, I think I have too much time on my hands these days.

[rskarvan]

I just think that the x-over tweakers are hopeless audiophiles that make design decisions without the benefit of facts or data. This isn't science. This is just a grape kool-aide phenomina.

[Face]

This is turning into a cable type debate. You don't know until you try it for yourself.

DK and others have reported that cap values can drift over time. I updated 2 pairs of 20+ year old speakers so fa,r and saw a significant difference both times. I wouldn't hesitate to do it again with a vintage speaker.

[rskarvan]

I've got a 20 year old amp... should I open it up and upgrade all the caps in that too? How about the preamp... are the capacitors in that also in need of upgrade too?

My goodness... I think the time to upgrade a component is when it is BROKEN. Signs of a broken component are usually pretty obvious. It crackles a lot. It's burnt. Its leaking goo all over the place, etc.

If we are going to start upgrading electronic components just because its getting old.... then that is just silly.

[NJPOLKER]

Grape kool-aide phenomina? Last time I had Cool-Aide was in Jonestown Guyana. Maybe thats why I am this way or that I live in NJ.
I love the SL-2000 in a way its just that the RDO is far superior and try to share that with fellow members.
Drew

[F1nut]

ronnie's rolling, zero credibility, but he's rolling.

[rskarvan]

I agree entirely that the RDO tweeters are worthy upgrades!!!

[NJPOLKER]

I understand that if is ain't broke don't fix it. However, status quo is not a good thing especially in this hobby, kinda boring too. I'd hate to listen to the same song over and over again.
Damn, I have too much time on my hands. Thank goodness the golf course opens March 1st.
Drew

[ben62670]

I have owned about 8 SL2000's, and 2 of them sounded great! I replaced them with the RDO's, and I liked the two SL2000's more than the RDO194's. The nasty peak is at 12k. Please feel free to play that with a signal generator. It is very faint, and any music that reaches into 12k is so brief you would hardly notice it. No voices extend into that range. Very few guitar notes will touch that range, and it won't be the main part of the note, just the harmonics. Basically what he did when adding a 2.2mfd cap in series it became a 6db bass blocker at around 10-12k depending on speaker impedance. Seeing that Polk has not released this info we shall (I will) never know!

Here is a chart on what is really going on with music. I am not saying that harmonics don't occur, but 95% of music is below 3.5k
http://www.psbspeakers.com/Images/Audiotopics/fChart.gif

Edit another good one
http://www.studystack.com/studytable-27242

[rskarvan]

Ben, thank you for your nice factual post. It is refreshing!

[candyliquor35m]

Donald Fagen - Nightfly
Carver m1.0t amp
AI M3A pre with telefunkens
Ah! 99 cd with telefunken e188cc's
stock sda 2b's

Ok I just pulled the cap off my right 2b and it was definitely brighter but also had more detail. The left 2b sounded a little dull but was a pretty good compromise to eliminate any harshness. It's something I can live with.

For kicks I put in a rd0194 in the right 2b and it sounded twangy with no depth, soundstage or resonance.

For kicks I added the cap to the 194 and it opened up quite nicely and had more depth, soundstage and resonance and it's something I could live with if I had to but I still prefer the sl2000.

With the sl2000 on the left with the cap, it loses some of the brightness and harshness but retains that little edge that you get from tubes. The guitar has that magical warmth and fullness. Fagen's voice sounds full and masculine.

I hate to say it but the 194 makes Fagen sound a little like he was castrated as a teenager.

I have nothing against the 194 and I'm not bashing it and I'm glad so many of you like it but I prefer the sl2000 hands down.

The 194 makes my 2b's almost sound like any old generic speaker you can buy these days with nothing special about it.

[ben62670]

Ben, thank you for your nice factual post. It is refreshing!

If I wanted to hear something from an A-hole I would have farted:D
You suck Ron.

Edit
BTW I still use my ears for final judgement.

[strider]

If I wanted to hear something from an A-hole I would have farted:D
You suck Ron.

Edit
BTW I still use my ears for final judgement.

Game, set, and match.

[heiney9]

I've got a 20 year old amp... should I open it up and upgrade all the caps in that too? How about the preamp... are the capacitors in that also in need of upgrade too?

My goodness... I think the time to upgrade a component is when it is BROKEN. Signs of a broken component are usually pretty obvious. It crackles a lot. It's burnt. Its leaking goo all over the place, etc.

If we are going to start upgrading electronic components just because its getting old.... then that is just silly.

Performance diminishes over time and rarely do you realize it until you get something new. By the time it crackles, pops, burns or leaks goo.....it's way too late and it usually does other damage as a result. And yes, you could go into your 20 year old amp and replace caps, etc. Those parts that have a finite life span.

Too each their own the whole sheep and grape koolaid comment is way over the top. Personally I have never stated that upgrades are mandatory, just a suggestion, and I personally relay the results I have experienced.

To think that an electronic component you buy, at the consumer level no less, will last indefinitely is ridiculous; and you call yourself an engineer. Ask any amp designer worth anything and they'll tell you capacitors have a useful life of around 10-12 years for high quality components and less for crap components. As always some will last longer and some will not. It's not so much of it completely failing as it will dramatically change it operating parameters over time.

Mark, you and I agree more than we disagree. Just because you upgrade components, etc. doesn't always mean an improvement. Having done it a couple times now, I'm a firm believer the cost and effort is worthwhile.

H9

Anyways, my head is bloody from banging it against the wall. I need to clean up and move on.

[heiney9]

Donald Fagen - Nightfly
Carver m1.0t amp
AI M3A pre with telefunkens
Ah! 99 cd with telefunken e188cc's
stock sda 2b's

Ok I just pulled the cap off my right 2b and it was definitely brighter but also had more detail. The left 2b sounded a little dull but was a pretty good compromise to eliminate any harshness. It's something I can live with.

For kicks I put in a rd0194 in the right 2b and it sounded twangy with no depth, soundstage or resonance.

For kicks I added the cap to the 194 and it opened up quite nicely and had more depth, soundstage and resonance and it's something I could live with if I had to but I still prefer the sl2000.

With the sl2000 on the left with the cap, it loses some of the brightness and harshness but retains that little edge that you get from tubes. The guitar has that magical warmth and fullness. Fagen's voice sounds full and masculine.

I hate to say it but the 194 makes Fagen sound a little like he was castrated as a teenager.

I have nothing against the 194 and I'm not bashing it and I'm glad so many of you like it but I prefer the sl2000 hands down.

The 194 makes my 2b's almost sound like any old generic speaker you can buy these days with nothing special about it.

Please let Matt and the gang know about your scientific findings. They need to issue a service bulletin to all SDA and Monitor owners with the sl2000. :rolleyes:

[NJPOLKER]

The difference between the SL-2000 and the RDO maybe a matter of preference.The RDO's sound better to me in my SRSII, SDA2a's and Monitor 10's. However no one can say that the properly upgraded/updated crossovers don't make a huge difference over the originals.
So I'll say this again, if you have original crossovers in your Polks upgrade/update them ASAP. Not my opinion, FACT.
Drew

[heiney9]

I just don't have the resources in my home to make proper design improvements in a methodical manner. That is why the good people at Polk Audio make the big bucks!

Ronnie, we are not reinventing the wheel here. We are replacing worn parts with the same value parts established by Polk. In many instances the new same value parts perform better than the old parts because of improved technology. We aren't redesigning anything, you really need to pay attention.

Finally, if it can't be measured, it is not real. Everything can be measured. If you feel its "subjective"... I will argue that you are just too lazy to have established a proper measurement system.

Read my sig...................you'll see we are on opposite side of the scale here.

H9

[rskarvan]

Nelson Pass is wrong. Everything can be measured and absolutely nothing is subjective about accurately reproducing an audio signal.

[ben62670]

If you removed the crap from a certain members head, and the small amount left was petrified it would sound like a pea rolling through the grand canyon:D

[heiney9]

You stick to absolute measurements and what's printed in black and white and I'll stick to enjoying the music I hear on a subjective level and they way I hear it and it makes me feel. Talk about a sheep mentality...........everything has to be black and white in your world. Baaaaa.......Baaaaa......Baaaaa.

There's room for both types in the audio world.

[Boywonder]

Not that I want to jump into the fire, but.....I consider myself an audio skeptic, especially with things like cables, etc. but I do notice (much to my astonishment) an improvement in my monitor 10's with Solen Caps over the stock mylar/electrolytic 20 year old ones.

When folks speak of "upgrading" the crossover they are really meaning "refreshing" or "renewing" without changing the values of anything. It is well understood in speaker design that film caps will outperform electrolytics in most applications; electrolytics are used for cost considerations easpecially in larger values.

I have a pr of completely stock 10B's and a pr with new Solen caps that i have been doing a direct comparison between. Both are fed the exact same signal with one stock 10B and one modified 10B connected such that I can switch between the two speakers quickly.

My two observations (after about 2 hrs of listening) are: The "refreshed" crossover seems to have more dynamic range than stock, and the SL-2000 sounds a little more annoying in the "refreshed" speaker. To me, dynamic range goes a long way toward an engaging system. The "refreshed" speaker also seems to have a crisper "attack" on drums, cymbals, etc.

I am also aware that "you cannot polish a turd" so if your source is a compressed lo res MP3 file, or your source components are not very dynamic or resolving all the speaker technology in the world won't matter much.

I cannot comment on "air", "airyness", "chestiness", blah, blah, blah because I am an audio skeptic.

Ron: I also have a couple of unmolested preamps and power amps from the late 70's and early 80's that sound rather flat (compressed). They used to be very entertaining to me so one of two things have occured: The caps need refreshing or I have moved up the food chain and these components sound the same as the day I bought them. I think that the caps need refreshing.

I am also an engineer (ME) involved in product development of electro-mechanical devices on a daily basis so I completely agree with you on the merits of rigorous testing of new designs. Not too many folks here are second guessing Polk's design intent when they speak of "crossover upgrades".

I would suggest "refreshing" a crossover, leave the other speaker stock, conduct your own listening test, and draw your own conclusions.

[NJPOLKER]

I just got done listening to my SRSII's over the past few hours and they sound wonderful and thats really my major concern. The RDO's with the Mills resistors and Sonic Caps WOW. Soon comes Dynamat and binding posts!
There is not a graph of any description that can change what I actual hear.

Ben, my head is almost as big as the Grand Canyon but big head big brain!

[ben62670]

Nelson Pass is wrong. Everything can be measured and absolutely nothing is subjective about accurately reproducing an audio signal.

Ron super simple. Take two different amps with the same specs, and they both will not sound the same. Take two CD players with the same specs, and they will not sound the same. Measuring something is not going to tell you what is better. Audio, food, clothes, nearly anything on this planet(or yours). Keep up the good work. I appreciate a good laugh.

BTW
I am not that impressed with the components in the LSI series speakers. I would definitely mod the caps.

[NJPOLKER]

I don't want to be the one to "polish the turd" but it will look alittle more appealing all cleaned up and shinny than old and moldy ready to blow away in the wind like old caps and resistors.

[candyliquor35m]

Not to leave the sl3000 out, I put one in the right 2b with the cap attached and I couldn't tell any difference between it and the 194 w/cap.

[rskarvan]

They used to be very entertaining to me so one of two things have occured: The caps need refreshing or I have moved up the food chain and these components sound the same as the day I bought them. I think that the caps need refreshing.

I agree with your analysis (above). What I have learned is that my "sonic memory" is very poor. It is very easy to "move up the food chain" and forget that the old ones sound exactly the same. That is why I am no fan at all of subjective listening to evaluate a change. If it isn't measurable, it isn't real.

[rskarvan]

Ron super simple. Take two different amps with the same specs, and they both will not sound the same. Take two CD players with the same specs, and they will not sound the same. Measuring something is not going to tell you what is better. Audio, food, clothes, nearly anything on this planet(or yours). Keep up the good work. I appreciate a good laugh.

BTW
I am not that impressed with the components in the LSI series speakers. I would definitely mod the caps.

What you are describing is normal production variation. No two models of anything are completely identical. There is always variation.

I've never owned or listened to an LSi speaker. I did see one once in a show-room, and I wasn't particularly impressed with its construction. I had already set my sights on Thiels when the LSi was introduced. Never even gave it a shot.

I would HATE to have to upgrade a Thiel crossover. There are 155 components on each cross-over board (very complicated x-over design). I doubt that Jim Thiel would have selected a 155 element cross-over if all the caps needed upgrading every decade.

[heiney9]

I would HATE to have to upgrade a Thiel crossover. There are 155 components on each cross-over board (very complicated x-over design). I doubt that Jim Thiel would have selected a 155 element cross-over if all the caps needed upgrading every decade.

I bet if you bought your Thiel's 20 or more years ago Jim would be more than happy to make some recommendations to "refresh" the x-over and I bet it would sound even better.

H9

[rskarvan]

It hardly seems possible that they could sound better.

[NJPOLKER]

Ron,
Your a bright guy and I bet you could do the upgrade to the Thiel's and if you can't just give them to me for awhile and I will do it. I may even return them after the break-in period in this case may take a couple of years. 155 element x-over would be fun maybe I should go buy a pair.
On a serious side, I bet if you upgraded the crossovers on the Thiels they would sound better than they currently do. Thats why they call it a upgrade. I had an upgraded room in Atlantic City last week and that was real nice, upgrades are great.

[NJPOLKER]

It hardly seems possible that they could sound better.

Yes they can. There is always a way to have better sound. I have learned that over the past year I have been a member of Club Polk
drew

[F1nut]

What you are describing is normal production variation. No two models of anything are completely identical. There is always variation.

You seem to have an on going problem with reading comprehension.

Ben didn't say compare the same model amps from the same company, he said compare two different amps with the same specs. Now, if said company is producing a line of gear and two of the exact same model sound different from each other, they have a serious quality control problem.

[heiney9]

It hardly seems possible that they could sound better.

You have 20 year old Thiel's?? I thought you said your's were newer. Plus, I'm sure you've compared said 20 year old Thiel's with the old caps vs. the same 20 year old Thiel's with new caps to to base your opinion.

[heiney9]

Ron I'm sure your local college offers reading comprehension classes, you seriously should enroll. You read things into peoples posts that just aren't there and no amount of logical deduction can possibly make the leaps you do in your responses.

H9

P.s. I'm being stone cold serious here, no pot shot's at all. Dead serious!

[Boywonder]

Ron: I don't need much sonic memory. I can hook up the old pre or power amp right next to my new stuff today, and do a quick comparison. If it sounded better than my newer stuff, I would not hesitate to use it.

[MillerLiteScott]

I sold all my SL 2000's and I am about to sell some more. No going back for me.

[F1nut]

You read things into peoples posts that just aren't there and no amount of logical deduction can possibly make the leaps you do in your responses.



You mean like the time he thought he read into Sona's posts that she wanted a knight in shining armor to rescue her from the TBT only to end up with a slap in the face. Like that?

[rskarvan]

You have 20 year old Thiel's?? I thought you said your's were newer. Plus, I'm sure you've compared said 20 year old Thiel's with the old caps vs. the same 20 year old Thiel's with new caps to to base your opinion.

Nope... my Thiels are new to me. All the drivers in them have been replaced by Thiel just a few months before I got them (with receipts). But, I'm still working with that old worn-out, 20 year old cross-over that sounds absolutely perfect. Also, they have been refinished so they look new too.

Wouldn't think of changing out components in the cross-over. It takes the cross-over a full decade to "break-in". Otherwise, when coupled with Krell, they'll make your ears bleed. Like a fine wine, I will listen to no Thiel speaker before its time.

Seriously, all my electronics are 20 years old. I need that much "wait time" until I can afford them on the used market. The caps in them sound just fine (and, I would venture to say, much better than most peoples new stuff).

[rskarvan]

You mean like the time he thought he read into Sona's posts that she wanted a knight in shining armor to rescue her from the TBT only to end up with a slap in the face. Like that?

Yep... just like that. Never underestimate a lunatic.

[rskarvan]

Ron I'm sure your local college offers reading comprehension classes, you seriously should enroll. You read things into peoples posts that just aren't there and no amount of logical deduction can possibly make the leaps you do in your responses.

H9

P.s. I'm being stone cold serious here, no pot shot's at all. Dead serious!

I'll be sure to sign up for "reading comprehension" right after I finish that course in sheep herding. Those silly sheep will walk right off a cliff into the abyss left unattended.

[rskarvan]

On a serious side, I bet if you upgraded the crossovers on the Thiels they would sound better than they currently do. Thats why they call it a upgrade.

If I could upgrade a Thiel, I'd be a very talented guy.

[BottomFeeder]

Where's the guy who pops up at just the right time & says,

"I like pie!"

We need him right now!

[Face]

This works too:
Studies also show that those that don't know, don't know.

BDT

[Face]

You mean like the time he thought he read into Sona's posts that she wanted a knight in shining armor to rescue her from the TBT only to end up with a slap in the face. Like that?
There actually is a name for that, it's called "White Knight Syndrome".

[DarqueKnight]

I can understand replacing a broken tweeter. And, I can even understand "upgrading the tweeter" with a Polk-approved replacement.

But, when you decide that you are better equipped to select a source component than Polk Audio engineering, you are a little bit "out there". Sure, there are better components available. But, at the same time, the ones that they selected are "engineered" for the system.

Awwww man...are we back to this again? We went over all this with K-Spec a few months ago.

Ron, as a mechanical engineer, you should know that any commercially offered engineering design has tradeoffs between cost and performance. Sometimes an optimum part is not selected due to cost or supply issues. It is the same principle as building a house from a set of blueprints. If a house is framed in steal beams rather than lumber, and uses cinder block exterior walls rather than lapboard, which implementation will be more impervious to hurricane and termite damage, although functionally and aesthetically, they appear identical?

I did my first SDA mod after consultation with Polk Audio engineering. There was nothing "wrong" with the original crossover parts Polk selected. However, the full design performance potential could be realized with an implementation in better parts.

I just don't understand why the desire for improved performance is mistaken for an indictment of Polk's design.

My Monitor 10's sound fabulous with their stock cross-over. Could they sound better... perhaps. But, then they really wouldn't be Polk Audio Monitor 10's would they.

Wow. You are confusing a change in components with a change in design.:rolleyes: If I put a Ferrari engine in a Ford Taurus, would the Taurus still be a Taurus? Sure it would. It would just be a Taurus with a Ferrari engine. See how many chicks you pull with the Ferrari enhanced Taurus. If medical science figured out how to transplant a pig's heart into a man's chest, would the man become a pig? How ludicrous. All a crossover does is filter frequencies and route them to the appropriate driver, hopefully with a minimum of induced noise and distortion. A better quality crossover simply passes a cleaner signal to the drivers.

I trust Polk Audio to do things right the first time.

You are the first engineer I have seen state something like this. This statement, taken to its illogical conclusion, means that there is no room for improvement. However, the five generations of SDA's would seem to indicate that Polk felt there was room for improvement. From Gen 1 through Gen 5, there were improvements in cabinet structure, crossover design, drivers, tweeters, SDA interconnects, and aesthetics. The crossover parts quality remained the same, except for an improved polyswitch. However, according to Polk engineering, the lack of evolution to higher quality film capacitors was due to their limited availability and high cost rather than there being no need for improvement. Indeed, I was specifically advised, by a Polk engineer, that the greatest modification improvement would be gained by replacing the mylar film and electrolytic capacitors with polypropylene film capacitors. I didn't do any post modification laboratory measurements, but my ears told me I had done a very good thing.;)

It would be silly (and incredibly egotistical) to purchase speakers thinking... "Not bad... but, if you swap out the tweeters, re-wire it with silver-wire, change the binding posts to vampires, and replace every capacitor with Sonicaps, re-stuff it with cotton-balls instead of poly-fill, and change the grill fabric... then, it will make an incredible difference and be a "giant killer".

Tweakers. Gotta love em.

Hot rodders buy stock vehicles with every intention of transforming them into giant killers. Some of them buy the mod parts prior to buying the vehicle. Are they being silly and egotistical? I don't think so. They are performance oriented auto enthusiasts pursuing a hobby at a particular level.

I have stated many times how the audio enthusiast in unfairly and unjustifiably looked upon as some weird freak, but hobbiests in other fields, who may even spend way more money, are looked upon as normal. Say, for example, the guy who collects Rolex watches. Some Rolex enthusiasts are not content to collect the stock watches. They have to send them to a custom jeweler for cosmetic and functional enhancements and modifications. Sometimes the modifications cost more than the stock watch. Hey, if that makes them feel special, go for it.

I just think that the x-over tweakers are hopeless audiophiles that make design decisions without the benefit of facts or data. This isn't science. This is just a grape kool-aide phenomina.

If this statement were coming from a credible source, it might give one pause for reflection.

I have owned about 8 SL2000's, and 2 of them sounded great! I replaced them with the RDO's, and I liked the two SL2000's more than the RDO194's. The nasty peak is at 12k. Please feel free to play that with a signal generator. It is very faint, and any music that reaches into 12k is so brief you would hardly notice it. No voices extend into that range. Very few guitar notes will touch that range, and it won't be the main part of the note, just the harmonics.

Some instruments and female voices have significant harmonic energy in the upper frequency ranges.

[heiney9]

Very nice post DK as usual. However, Ron doesn't respond to logic. It doesn't equate in his world. Plus, as you know, he'll take everything your wrote completely out of context and relate it to something that has no significance or relevance on the discussion at hand.

H9

[rskarvan]

Developing a better speaker is more than just randomly replacing components with different ones and saying...uhm.. I think it sounds better now. Why not just purchase a better, higher-end speaker than modifying a factory one?

I would never buy a speaker based upon the fact it had been "upgraded". Instead, I'd be highly suspicious that the tweaker screwed up the original design intent (i.e. Frankenpolks)

Here is my experience with upgrading:
When I purchased my Monitor 10's from Scott Trigg (wangotango), all four 6-1/2" drivers were generic parts-express $7 drivers. So, I immediately called Polk Audio and had four MW6503's shipped to me for $48each.

I listened to these el-cheapo drivers for a few days until the MW6503's arrived. And, surprisingly, they didn't sound too bad. The 6503's sounded better... but, the cheap generics sounded ok.

I then upgraded the tweeters from the SL2500 to the RDO's. BIG IMPROVEMENT. The SL2500's were awful sounding.

[DarqueKnight]

H9,

I realize that Ron and his circular, sixth dimensional logic, is for entertainment purposes only and that he thrives on the attention his off the wall comments generate. It's fun...up to a point.:)

[rskarvan]

Very nice post DK as usual. However, Ron doesn't respond to logic. It doesn't equate in his world. Plus, as you know, he'll take everything your wrote completely out of context and relate it to something that has no significance or relevance on the discussion at hand.

H9

Kiss my hiney, heiney.

[DarqueKnight]

My daily "sport" quota has been fulfilled and I can not respond to any further sixth dimensional type posts. Maybe tomorrow...if I feel like it.

I'm off to the gym now. Nite Nite.:)

[GV#27]

Nelson Pass is wrong. :eek: Everything can be measured and absolutely nothing is subjective about accurately reproducing an audio signal.Measurements can tell a great deal about a design and help an engineer to improve on things like signal-noise,THD etc. but at best it is a 2D view of a 3D event.Measurements can't tell you how a particular piece of electronics will actually sound.

[NJPOLKER]

Ron,
I will have a pair of upgraded/updated crossovers for Monitor 10's with-in a few weeks or so, I will burn them in first. If they are a perfect match to swap out in your Monitor 10's will you try them? I will mail them to you at my cost for your evaluation and you can compare them to the "stock" x-over Monitor 10's. I have no question that you will be fair in your evaluation.
Maybe this is a stretch but I think it could be interesting.
Drew

[michaeljhsda2]

“If medical science figured out how to transplant a pig's heart into a man's chest, would the man become a pig?”

No. But medical science did figure out how to replace a defective human heart valve with a pig’s heart valve, aka, porcine valve. These porcine valves have good durability and usually last for 10 to 15 years. Almost the same amount of time before the caps need to be replaced on your Polks.
Upgrade the caps!

[MillerLiteScott]

Onk Onk

[heiney9]

Ron,
I will have a pair of upgraded/updated crossovers for Monitor 10's with-in a few weeks or so, I will burn them in first. If they are a perfect match to swap out in your Monitor 10's will you try them? I will mail them to you at my cost for your evaluation and you can compare them to the "stock" x-over Monitor 10's. I have no question that you will be fair in your evaluation.
Maybe this is a stretch but I think it could be interesting.
Drew

It won't matter, even if he thought they sounded better he'd never admit it because then where would the controversy be. He couldn't be a star anymore. He has no intention of ever trying it, he just wants to tell us all why we shouldn't do it, why it won't work and how dare we go against the initial design which is now pushing 20 years.

Nice offer, but that isn't the point of why Ron is even posting in this thread.

H9

[dorokusai]

I made sweet love to an SL2000 last night and it was glorious.

[NJPOLKER]

It won't matter, even if he thought they sounded better he'd never admit it because then where would the controversy be. He couldn't be a star anymore. He has no intention of ever trying it, he just wants to tell us all why we shouldn't do it, why it won't work and how dare we go against the initial design which is now pushing 20 years.

Nice offer, but that isn't the point of why Ron is even posting in this thread.

H9

I disagree with you big time!! Ron, don't let me down here.
I have a pair of 10a x-overs with fuse protected tweeters(1 amp fast blow)
that I am getting ready to upgrade. I will probably use Solen caps and Mills resistors which seem to be middle of the road in performance. All wires will be labeled/tagged so the will be no problem with hooking them up.
If I missed anything let me know, I know you will.
I think it would be interesting to see/hear the results from a "non-believer".
Drew

[rskarvan]

Ron,
I will have a pair of upgraded/updated crossovers for Monitor 10's with-in a few weeks or so, I will burn them in first. If they are a perfect match to swap out in your Monitor 10's will you try them? I will mail them to you at my cost for your evaluation and you can compare them to the "stock" x-over Monitor 10's. I have no question that you will be fair in your evaluation.
Maybe this is a stretch but I think it could be interesting.
Drew

My monitor 10's are series 2 with the MW6503 drivers and the SL2500 (upgraded to the RDO) tweeter. If it is a match, I'd be interested in trying it.

[NJPOLKER]

Well now here we go.
The only thing we have to be sure of then is if the x-overs I have here are a perfect match for Series 2 monitor 10's
Each x-over has the following
2) 12uF caps
1) 34uF cap
1) 2.7 resistor
1)2.5 resistor
1 amp fast blow exterior fuse protection
Would the Monitor 10 experts please let us know if this will be a match.
Thanks Drew

[heiney9]

Well now here we go.
The only thing we have to be sure of then is if the x-overs I have here are a perfect match for Series 2 monitor 10's
Each x-over has the following
2) 12uF caps
1) 34uF cap
1) 2.7 resistor
1)2.5 resistor
1 amp fast blow exterior fuse protection
Would the Monitor 10 experts please let us know if this will be a match.
Thanks Drew

Nope, no fuse (polyswitch) and no 2.5 resistor. Those x-overs probably used the peerless tweeter as well.
Also has an 16 uF cap in the series II

[NJPOLKER]

Your right I have Peerless tweeters which sound pretty good. Damn, I was thinking this could be interesting. Oh well I tried.
I better go to bed for I have been Polked out for today!!
Drew

[Ricardo]

Nice thread.


http://bestsmileys.com/big/4.gif

[Marty913]

Nice thread.


http://bestsmileys.com/big/4.gif

It would be even better if it ENDED.

[ben62670]

Some instruments and female voices have significant harmonic energy in the upper frequency ranges.

I absolutely whole heartedly agree with this statement. Allison Kraus is a very good example of this. My experiences with various SL2000's is that most get brittle, and shrill with age. A new pair of SL2000's would IMHO sound very nice. I had a pair of wonderful SL2000's that sounded great even with the occasional spike in the HF spectrum(3 other pairs that really sucked). I have tried the RDO's, and have decided to go with the morel's. If I had a pair of speakers that had nice soft 2000's I would keep them. Am I saying to Polkies keep their SL2000's? Most likely not, but if you are lucky enough to get some nice soft Sl2000's....

[candyliquor35m]

Let doro loosen them up for you. He's been practicing.

[F1nut]

If I could upgrade a Thiel, I'd be a very talented guy.

It's easy to upgrade from Thiel.

[candyliquor35m]

Some instruments and female voices have significant harmonic energy in the upper frequency ranges.

I couldn't agree more. You're not just going to lose percussion when you start swapping out tweeters.

[MarcLazarek78]

I was told JL uses the best components/materials,back in '95. That was by some guy in the install shop tho =)

[avguytx]

We aren't talking Car Audio here I don't think. I sold JL back in '95, too. Nothing to write home about really.

[shadowofnight]

I have seen this " The SL200's have a 5 dB spike around 13K " quoted here on the forum more then once as the reason for most not liking the SL2000.

With Polk using the Progressive Point Source designed crossovers in the larger multiple tweetered SDA's , all you would have to change out is ONE tweeter as all of the others never even go near that high of a frequency.

This might not be a good idea with the SDA's using the metalized domes ( SL3000 ) ...but I bet you the softer more flexible domed SL2000 and RD0 tweeters would work extremely well together and with only one tweeter to change out it would save you a LOT of coin and you would lose the harsh 13K resonance peak...sure as hell worth a try.


http://www.polkaudio.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=31232&d=1202631468

http://www.polkaudio.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=31233&d=1202631468

http://www.polkaudio.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=31234&d=1202631468

[MillerLiteScott]

So if I understand this correctly, in my 1C's, I could only change they top tweeter to effectively ( to a degree ) smooth out the top end.

Is that correct?

Scott

[MarcLazarek78]

bottom and middle,I believe.

So in my SRS 2 it woul be just the bottom?

[shadowofnight]

middle.

Actually his 1c's only have 2 tweeters...not 3 as shown here....besides I was only mentioning the larger multiple tweetered SDA's ( SRS and 2.3 ) as the manual I am looking at only mentions the Progressive Point Source for those in particular....for any other models you would have to look at schematics.

[MarcLazarek78]

if the spike is at 13khz then all would need to be replaced since the drivers produce 2.5khz and up,correct?I thought the spike was at lower khz.

[F1nut]

Hang on!

I tried installing just one new RD0198-1 in each of my 2.3TL's to see if I could hear a difference before spending more money. I did hear a difference, so I went ahead and replaced all of them. There was an obvious improvement when all the tweeters were replaced vs just the one.

You have to keep in mind that the new tweeters are rubberized silk and are going to present a different sonic signature. You have to do them all.

[shadowofnight]

if the spike is at 13khz then all would need to be replaced since the drivers produce 2.5khz and up,correct?I thought the spike was at lower khz.

No...and again this is ONLY for the PPS engineered crossovers ( I know SRS..1.2...2.3 ARE....others YOU have to do the research ) ....as the frequencies go higher...Polk only wanted ONE tweeter at that frequency ( In this 2.3 instance ) to be a POINT source....not multiple drivers emitting the same higher frequencies.

If you look at the pictures you see less and less tweeters active as the frequencies increase...until at 8Khz and above only ONE tweeter is actually emitting that frequency range. Pretty easy to grasp....the pictures tell the whole story.

[shadowofnight]

Hang on!

I tried installing just one new RD0198-1 in each of my 2.3TL's to see if I could hear a difference before spending more money. I did hear a difference, so I went ahead and replaced all of them. There was an obvious improvement when all the tweeters were replaced vs just the one.

You have to keep in mind that the new tweeters are rubberized silk and are going to present a different sonic signature. You have to do them all.


That may very well be Jesse...I had not tried this ...was just looking at new data recently found out by me looking. If the tweeters signature sound are that different this would not work well as you mentioned...it was just something I wanted to try.

[shadowofnight]

Did you change the 8k and above tweeter ? Just curious ? Wait a second your TL's use the metalized SL3000's...the very ones I said would NOT be a good match to swap out....The SL2000's and the RD0 domes would be a much better match to try.

This might not be a good idea with the SDA's using the metalized domes ( SL3000 ) ...but I bet you the softer more flexible domed SL2000 and RD0 tweeters would work extremely well together

[heiney9]

So if I understand this correctly, in my 1C's, I could only change they top tweeter to effectively ( to a degree ) smooth out the top end.

Is that correct?

Scott

No, he is hypothesizing. There are other characteristics that cause the sl2000 to have harshness issues, etc. not just the peak. I would never mix tweeters, but I suppose if one wanted to experiment w/their own speakers. I know in the compendium (which is one person POV) it discourages mixing tweeters.

H9

[heiney9]

Did you change the 8k and above tweeter ? Just curious ? Wait a second your TL's use the metalized SL3000's...the very ones I said would NOT be a good match to swap out....The SL2000's and the RD0 domes would be a much better match to try.

Actually both RD0's are much more similar to the sl3000 than they are to the sl2000. You *might* get by mixing sl3000's w/ RD0's but what's the point the sl3000 is a clearly superior tweeter to the sl2000 in every respect. Have you read the technical paper on the sl3000?

[shadowofnight]

Actually both RD0's are much more similar to the sl3000 than they are to the sl2000. You *might* get by mixing sl3000's w/ RD0's but what's the point the sl3000 is a clearly superior tweeter to the sl2000 in every respect. Have you read the technical paper on the sl3000?

Oh yeah, I read the paper...the tri layer deposition on the dome ( Stiffness ..etc ) Is the only reason I was thinking not a good match. This was only a " What the hell , try it " spur of the moment thing as mentioned in my original post....be fun to try is all.

Then again, a lot of people on the forum don't like the SL3000 tweeter either...or the RD0 wouldnt be so popular with the TL series as well.

[MarcLazarek78]

Then the picture is a little misleading. It should state Tweeter 3 2k-3.5k,tweet 2 3.5k-8k,and tweet 1 8k and up. not all 3 2k and up.Or you are incorrect,since it subtracts only one tweeter when the freq output is upped and still leaves 2.Or I'm reading the reply wrong.

[Joe08867]

Thinking in the just change a certain tweeter vane.

When I upgraded my SDA2's I was only able to get one set of RDO's until they got back in stock. And as i am a patient man I immediately changed out the SL dimensional tweeter for the RDO and the change was amazing.

I have since replaced all four tweeters with the RDO's and haven't been happier.

rskarvan, don't think of changing parts in the crossover as an upgrade more then an update. Manufacturing processes and build quality aside. Parts wear out over time. And I could have used any old caps in my crossovers but I decided to go up the food chain and get some solens caps. There was a noticable improvement in the sound because the old caps were worn out and not working at there full potential.

I did not take measurements to prove this theory but I used my own ears and the ears of my wife to tell the difference. I also used the same music for both and the difference was astounding. They sounded deeper, clearer and wider as they did when I first bought them and smoother now that I had the RDO in place of the SL.

Now I say if you like the SL series tweeters more power to you. My ears prefer the RDO's. Why would polk have adopted them as the replacement if they thought they weren't the equivalent or better then the original????

[shadowofnight]

Then the picture is a little misleading. I should state Tweeter 3 2k-3.5k,tweet 2 3.5k-8k,and tweet 1 8k and up. not all 3 2k and up.

The pictures aren't misleading....they make the tweeters disappear in the next picture in the series so you know it is now out of the frequency range.

You need to see the 3 pics in a series for it to make perfect sense :D

[Boywonder]

I replaced the top tweeters in my SDA-1C's with the RD-0914 leaving the SL-2000's in the lower position and it is an improvement. I had a pr of RD-0194's waiting to go into my monitor 10 project, so I put them in the SDA's last week. I just received 4 additional RD-0194's from Polk yesterday so I will complete the conversion shortly. If I do not hear any difference with 4 RD-0's in the SDA's I'll use 2 in the SDA's, 2 in the monitor 10's and 2 in the RTA-12's

[Joe08867]

I am positive you will hear a difference. Will it be an improvement? It is up to your ears.

[heiney9]

Oh yeah, I read the paper...the tri layer deposition on the dome ( Stiffness ..etc ) Is the only reason I was thinking not a good match. This was only a " What the hell , try it " spur of the moment thing as mentioned in my original post....be fun to try is all.

Then again, a lot of people on the forum don't like the SL3000 tweeter either...or the RD0 wouldnt be so popular with the TL series as well.

I was speaking of the sound of the RD0's and sl3000 not the construction, in case I wasn't clear :o.

Yes, many still prefer the RD0198-1 to the sl3000, but it is so much better than the sl2000. If you do decide to experiment keep us posted.

If one was on a very strict budget you could probably get away with replacing an sl3000 w/ an RD0198-1 and not notice the difference. But, me personally I would replace them all :).

The same couldn't be said for the RD0194-1 and the sl2000. They are just too different to not notice the difference. But messing with the placement in a progressive point source might diminish the difference enough to be tolerable, especially in the big SRS's. Again personally I don't do things that way.

H9

[shadowofnight]

Money is no object for myself ( Even though I would need 16 of them ...SRS...2.3 and some CRS+'s if I wanted to swap...I havent felt that need yet) ....I was only mentioning it because of learning intimately how the crossovers work the other night while researching the SDA effect in the said same speakers.

I have installed 194's in 2 pair of SRS's before and 198's in some 1.2TL's ( Polk should have been shot when they used the crappy looking philips screws in the RD0 series tweeters ...I think they look terrible ) so I know what they sound like. I just thought it would be cool to try one RD0 in the 8K and above point source spot is all :)

That we are even discussing these 20+ year old speakers is what is so cool and amazing :D



I was speaking of the sound of the RD0's and sl3000 not the construction, in case I wasn't clear :o.

Yes, many still prefer the RD0198-1 to the sl3000, but it is so much better than the sl2000. If you do decide to experiment keep us posted.

If one was on a very strict budget you could probably get away with replacing an sl3000 w/ an RD0198-1 and not notice the difference. But, me personally I would replace them all :).

The same couldn't be said for the RD0194-1 and the sl2000. They are just too different to not notice the difference. But messing with the placement in a progressive point source might diminish the difference enough to be tolerable, especially in the big SRS's. Again personally I don't do things that way.

H9

[heiney9]

That we are even discussing these 20+ year old speakers is what is so cool and amazing :D

Yep, you got it! :). I love my SDA 1C's. When I sold Polks (worked at a high end retailer) back in college I could never afford them even at accommodation pricing. I bought RTA 11T's instead and that was a lot of money to me 20 years ago.

Well roughly 15-20 years later with new tweets and Sonic Caps I'm as happy as can be.

H9

[candyliquor35m]

Maybe you don't have the right equipment to make the sl2000's sing like angels. Try some telefunkens and you'll be blown away. Or just put a $3 cap on them if you want to experiment a little with them before giving them all to me.

http://www.polkaudio.com/forums/attachment.php?&attachmentid=30823

http://www.polkaudio.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=31246

[avguytx]

I still don't understand the philosophy of a cap being inline on a tweeter. Did someone call customer service and this was the recommendation they had or was it just pulled out of thin air? In all my years of being in this business (since 1979), I've never added a cap inline on a tweeter AFTER the main crossover network....just a resistor for padding. Unless it was a Zobel network but that requires both a cap AND a resistor.

[ben62670]

/////\\\\\

[heiney9]

I still don't understand the philosophy of a cap being inline on a tweeter. Did someone call customer service and this was the recommendation they had or was it just pulled out of thin air? In all my years of being in this business (since 1979), I've never added a cap inline on a tweeter AFTER the main crossover network....just a resistor for padding. Unless it was a Zobel network but that requires both a cap AND a resistor.

Kip, if you haven't figured it out yet....................he is CLUELESS. It works for him so I can't say in his particular instance it's wrong, but it's not how one goes about experimenting unless one is a mad scientist type.

He punted and whether the change is real or perceived he's convinced it worked to his advantage.

[ben62670]

I changed my mind
\\\\\/////

[Marty913]

Maybe you don't have the right equipment to make the sl2000's sing like angels. Try some telefunkens and you'll be blown away. Or just put a $3 cap on them if you want to experiment a little with them before giving them all to me.

http://www.polkaudio.com/forums/attachment.php?&attachmentid=30823

http://www.polkaudio.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=31246

Oh my god, not the cap discussion again with the little "pig-in-a-blanket" pictures of the cap. Very disturbing when you start to "clothe" your electronic parts.

[ShinAce]

A Zobel network has the cap and resistor across the speaker.

Why would anyone warrant the use of a Zobel network on a tweeter? My head is going to explode.

The only option left is a first order high pass crossover, meaning the cap is in series.

[F1nut]

Maybe you don't have the right equipment to make the sl2000's sing like angels. Try some telefunkens and you'll be blown away. Or just put a $3 cap on them if you want to experiment a little with them before giving them all to me.

It's a shame I can't post what needs to be said here.

[dorokusai]

Start tattooing yourself like Max Cady and recite scripture as you walk around the house.

[F1nut]

I'll pass, but let me know how it works out for you.

[candyliquor35m]

I replaced the top tweeters in my SDA-1C's with the RD-0914 leaving the SL-2000's in the lower position and it is an improvement. I had a pr of RD-0194's waiting to go into my monitor 10 project, so I put them in the SDA's last week. I just received 4 additional RD-0194's from Polk yesterday so I will complete the conversion shortly. If I do not hear any difference with 4 RD-0's in the SDA's I'll use 2 in the SDA's, 2 in the monitor 10's and 2 in the RTA-12's

I recommend you only upgrade one channel (left or right) at a time and that way you can do a side by side comparison of your new tweeters (rd0194) and the old tweeters (sl2000). Let the new tweeters burn in for the recommended 50 hours before you make any conclusions.

[Gary Batson]

I've tried many times to replace them and each time I end up putting them back in.

Without them I lose the magical smooth airyness and pure silk sounds that happen at the top end.

I put a cap on them to tame them down a bit as illustrated in the 2 attachments.

http://www.polkaudio.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=30823

I know this thread's run it's course and I'm kinda late joining in but I gotta say what I gotta say. I bought my SDA1's new and never liked them. They hurt my ears and spent many years stored in their boxes untill last summer when I got them out and they still sounded horrible. I replaced the SL1000 tweeters with the RDO replacements and I thought that was an improvement. But they had an irritating ring or spike in the 3-4 killohertz range. I thought it was a problem with the two side by side tweeters resonating together. That was just a guess. So I pulled the fuses on the demensional tweeters. The problem was still there so I put the fuses back in. Then I put two ohm resisters behind all the tweeters to tame the exagerated high end AND THAT HELPED A LOT...but the tweeters were still irritating so I pulled them and put the original SL1000's back in and they sound great with the resisters behind them. You couldn't make me put the RDO's back in. The speakers sound more smooth and natural than I ever thought they could. Not as good as my brothers B&W's, But they do sound good!!!

I think the RDO"s sounded better at first because they're not as loud as the SL1000's. But after adding the resisters, Even with it's faults the SL1000's were the better tweeter. BY FAR!!! You can't convince me otherwise.

[F1nut]

Thanks for sharing your experiences Gary. I know Polk sells the RD0194-1 as an replacement for the SL1000, but it was really designed to replace the SL2000, which may explain, in part, your experience. I also noted that you like the sound of B&W's, which I can't stand, so I'd say it's safe to say we hear things very differently. Trust me, no one is trying to convince you otherwise.

Enjoy!

[Boywonder]

I recommend you only upgrade one channel (left or right) at a time and that way you can do a side by side comparison of your new tweeters (rd0194) and the old tweeters (sl2000). Let the new tweeters burn in for the recommended 50 hours before you make any conclusions.

Well, I've now got 6 RD-0194's so doing 2 in one speaker and leaving SL-2000's in the other shouldn't be a problem......I already know that they are going to be an improvement since a single RD-0194 and an SL-2000 in each speaker sounds less harsh than stock.

[nms]

I've just put SL2000s back in my SDAs and my M10s. To me, unless I'm listening to music very loud and it has vocals, the 12k peak is not annoying. After doing a side-by-side comparison between the SDAs with the RD0s and the M10s with the SL2000s I felt the 2ks let more detail in the highs through. To my ears, (and I'm betting this is mostly because of my equipment), piano and stringed instruments sounded more natural through the SL2000s. Since classical music makes up a significant portion of my listening, I decided to switch back to the SL2000s for a while and see what I think.

Also, a multi-band equalizer could easily take care of the 12k peak the tweeters have... I know a lot of you guys don't like extra stuff in the chain, but I'm just sayin' :D

[candyliquor35m]

I still don't understand the philosophy of a cap being inline on a tweeter. Did someone call customer service and this was the recommendation they had or was it just pulled out of thin air? In all my years of being in this business (since 1979), I've never added a cap inline on a tweeter AFTER the main crossover network....just a resistor for padding. Unless it was a Zobel network but that requires both a cap AND a resistor.

Kip,

I wish I could find the thread where someone recommended this a couple of years ago but so far I haven't been able to find it.

I'm not a EE :D so I can't explain how it works or why it works but as I said earlier, I did a side by side comparison of sl2000's and the one with the cap was noticeably less bright than the one without the cap.

I did some more listening tonight with my srs's. I used the cj pv7 on them tonight because my first impressions of the pv10 are it's more detailed than the pv7 thus it's also going to sound brighter.

Yes the pv7 was less detailed which slightly diminished the brightness but not as much as I thought it might. I still had the sl3000's in the right speaker and the sl3000 sounds almost identical to the rd0194 from my listening so far.

The right speaker sounded hollow and lifeless. The left speaker was alive and I could every minute fluctuation in the singer's voice. I felt like I could physically hear his vocal chords vibrating and the reed in the sax vibrating and the brass in the sax resonating especially on certain notes when the musician is pushing the sax to its limit without making the reed squeak. Every voice and instrument in the songs were full and rich sounding.

The right speaker sounded like someone singing into a mr microphone. Yes it was that bad.

Edit: I did find the receipts for the caps and it was nov 2006 so if anyone can find the thread which most likely would have been in sept, oct, or nov 2006. There was no discussion on the matter. The suggestion was made and it was left at that. It's not important because I'm sure I wrote the info down somewhere to make sure I ordered or bought the right caps, 2.2 uf mylar.

[ben62670]

a low value cap inline with the tweeter is a 6db roll off in the upper frequencies.

[Dennis Gardner]

I found that when I put a cap over my SL2000s it rolled off the upper freqs alot.....especially when I changed from a John Deere cap to a ski mask.;)

[F1nut]

I still had the sl3000's in the right speaker and the sl3000 sounds almost identical to the rd0194 from my listening so far.


Another tidbit that goes to show your credibility in this matter is zero. They sound nothing alike.

[MarcLazarek78]

will this thread die?

MG


SL2000 scream

RDO good replacement

both and all could benefit from newer crossovers.

and 5 pages worth.


Ur getting fantasticsised?

[candyliquor35m]

Another tidbit that goes to show your credibility in this matter is zero. They sound nothing alike.

Please report back after you've done your own side by side comparison like I have.

[Joe08867]

I have done a side by side and they sound nothing alike! The RDO's are so much smoother and don't cause the headache the SL's did. Even before they were completely burned in.

Why would Polk go Silk if the original was so good??????

They listened to customers and continued to improve the line even after they stopped producing them. That is why they are Number 1 with customer service Period.......

If you like them fine. But you are not going to convince many others that the SL's are just as good as the RDO's. They are not. What's next? Metal Domes??? If you like shrill that would be the way to go.

[candyliquor35m]

Did you do a left vs right comparison?

I'm running all tubes except 1 carver m1.0t on one rig. The sl2000's sound warm, rich and full. The rd0194's do not.

[Ricardo]

I think I read somewhere that we all have our own preferences, and what sounds good to me might sound horrible to you.

candyliquour likes his SL2000's, he has confirmed that doing A/B tests or whatever.

So why are people trying to force him to think otherwise?

To each his/her own. Damn it.

[Joe08867]

I did a left right comparison. I tried a tube amp (Heathkit & Mac) and SS amps (B&K & Adcom) and still found the SL's Shrill with that high end peak that causes a headache. It wasn't as bad with the Heathkit at moderate volumes but bad on all at higher listening levels.

Hey it's cool if you like them and they work with your setup it's all good.

I say we agree to disagree. BTW: The Carver M1.0t is a nice amp. Had one a while back always liked the sound.

[NJPOLKER]

Nice thread.


http://bestsmileys.com/big/4.gif

Here's to you Ricardo

[NJPOLKER]

By the way I agree to each his or her own when it comes to the actual sounds they here.
I wonder how much longer these subjects are going to be covered in this thread. I think we have covered too many subjects in this one thread but I guess its all good.
Drew

[candyliquor35m]

I did a left right comparison. I tried a tube amp (Heathkit & Mac) and SS amps (B&K & Adcom) and still found the SL's Shrill with that high end peak that causes a headache. It wasn't as bad with the Heathkit at moderate volumes but bad on all at higher listening levels.

Hey it's cool if you like them and they work with your setup it's all good.

I say we agree to disagree. BTW: The Carver M1.0t is a nice amp. Had one a while back always liked the sound.

I applaud your perseverance in trying out all your options before making a final decision. I am worried that most everyone else is just slapping in the new rd0's and listen for a bit and conclude 'yep that took care of the harshness and brightness'.

But at what cost I ask. I don't think most are evaluating what they've lost to get rid of harshness and brightness.

Since you've tried everything else, why not try the $3 cap and see what happens if you still have any sl2000's laying around.

The cap also improved the sound of the rd0194 when I tested it.

[Ricardo]

But at what cost I ask. I don't think most are evaluating what they've lost to get rid of harshness and brightness.



According to who? You? Same thing applies here; if others like their RDO's, they do so because they didn't lose anything, according to their ears.

One more Damn it.

[candyliquor35m]

According to who? You? Same thing applies here; if others like their RDO's, they do so because they didn't lose anything, according to their ears.

One more Damn it.

Damn it Janet (I forget the rest of Brad's line).

I'm glad you are questioning everything I say and I hope everyone else is doing the same. Most of everything we discuss here is personal opinion based hopefully on what our own ears have experienced and not something we've read on the internet or in a book.

All I'm saying is 'don't throw the baby away with the bathwater' (i.e. there might be something very special about the sl2000 that we are overlooking and just throwing it away to get rid of the dirty bathwater).

My perception is with the rd0194, I lose that light airy almost floating in thin air sound that many tube lovers spend all their life trying to obtain and perfect. And if you've never heard it then you won't know what I'm talking about it.

The sl3000's come close in my 2.3's but no cigar.

[rskarvan]

Lots of people used to think the SL2000's were magical tweeters (especially in their time). They aren't bad at all. I personally think they are much, much better than the SL2500's... but, don't hold a candle to the SL3000's.

I like the RDO's too though. They are both very good.

[jakelm]

The Peerless beat them all out....:p

[shadowofnight]

As long as nobody says they disconnect the tweeters and run BOSE cubes on top of their Polks I'm good ;)

[candyliquor35m]

Lots of people used to think the SL2000's were magical tweeters (especially in their time). They aren't bad at all. I personally think they are much, much better than the SL2500's... but, don't hold a candle to the SL3000's.

I like the RDO's too though. They are both very good.

Wow, someone that likes all 3. Maybe we're debating over nothing.

I'm listening to the 3000's in my left 2.3 right now and 2000WC's (with cap) in the right and both are silky smooth and impressive.

The 3000's help project the mids much quicker and further than the laid back 2000WC's.

The CD is digitally recorded smooth, mellow and laid back alto sax music.

[jakelm]

Wow, someone that likes all 3. Maybe we're debating over nothing.

I'm listening to the 3000's in my left 2.3 right now and 2000WC's (with cap) in the right and both are silky smooth and impressive.

The 3000's help project the mids much quicker and further than the laid back 2000WC's.

The CD is digitally recorded smooth, mellow and laid back alto sax music.


Ok, now turn your treble UP to 9 o'clock...:p:p


j/k...

[Face]

Wow, someone that likes all 3. Maybe we're debating over nothing.

I'm listening to the 3000's in my left 2.3 right now and 2000WC's (with cap) in the right and both are silky smooth and impressive.

The 3000's help project the mids much quicker and further than the laid back 2000WC's.

The CD is digitally recorded smooth, mellow and laid back alto sax music.

Lots of people used to think the SL2000's were magical tweeters (especially in their time). They aren't bad at all. I personally think they are much, much better than the SL2500's... but, don't hold a candle to the SL3000's.

I like the RDO's too though. They are both very good.

Two peas in a pod.

[nms]

For those of you who are sick of this thread I apologize for keeping it going...

After listening for a day to my SDAs with the SL2000s in them here's what I think:

For symphonic, organ, some jazz and some non-vocal stuff, the SL2000s sound much more detailed and natural to my ears. Poorly recorded music in these genres will still sound bad, it's not a forgiving tweeter by nature. The SL2000 brings out more detail in the instruments: I can hear the "sharpness" of the violins and the oily deep thrum of the string bass much better through this tweeter than I can through the RD0. The RD0 will sound fine to me until I switch over to the SL2000 for a while and then go back, and it's like listening to the music through a thick curtain. The RD0 certainly sounds good, but I feel like I'm missing stuff in the highs compared to the SL2000.

However, on ANYTHING with vocals, the SL2000 gave me a headache. The 13 KHz harmonic peak is truly unbearable at high listening levels. I found that on well recorded stuff (Norah Jones, for example), the peak was not quite as bad. At low volumes I still prefer it over the RD0. But at moderate levels, even when the 13 KHz peak was not really noticeable, the SL2000 would still give me a headache after an extended listening session. On poorly recorded selections the cymbals and drums could be a bit too "forward" and prevalent in the overall sound. But this varied quite a bit from piece-to-piece.

I wish there was a way to run both tweeters in my speakers so I could use one or the other depending on what I was listening to. I truly love how the SL2000 does with classical music.

As they say, your mileage may vary.

[candyliquor35m]

nms,

I think the cap on the sl2000 will surprise you and may just make the sl2000wc the best of both what the sl2000 and the rd0 has to offer.

[F1nut]

Please report back after you've done your own side by side comparison like I have.

This from the guy that doesn't know a resistor from a capacitor.....oh please. :rolleyes:
I wouldn't trust anything you have to say on the matter.

[OldmanSRS]

a low value cap inline with the tweeter is a 6db roll off in the upper frequencies.

I have to respectfully disagree here. An inline cap is a high pass filter. That 6dB attenuation will occur in the lower frequencies sent to the tweet from the XO. A low value cap accross the tweet will provide some high frequency shunting (rolloff) of the higher frequencies.

[Marty913]

I have to respectfully disagree here. An inline cap is a high pass filter. That 6dB attenuation will occur in the lower frequencies sent to the tweet from the XO. A low value cap accross the tweet will provide some high frequency shunting (rolloff) of the higher frequencies.

Good write-up of your experience, nms. I also agree this thread (and all threads involving SL2000 caps/resistors) is getting tiresome.

HOWEVER, we have an open disagreement as to whether the cap should be a resistor. Can we at least clear that up for those that might want to try it?

[candyliquor35m]

nms,

I'll even mail you a cap to try if you promise to pass it on to the next person that wants to try it. PM me your address if you're interested.

[TroyD]

nms,

Do it. I'll give you twenty bucks if you dip it in mercury and send it back.

BDT

[ShinAce]

Oldman, and ben, you're both correct.

Ben just forget to put the word 'high pass' in his post. No biggie. The idea is still clear.

Oldman, even a single resistor is incorrect. You need a network for attenuation. Better yet, do not attenuate, bi-amp. Get rid of all caps and resistors.

It still seems like the cap is being used as a first order high pass Butterworth filter. We won't know until we get an in-use pic or a schematic. Any more questions?

[OldmanSRS]

Oldman, and ben, you're both correct.

Ben just forget to put the word 'high pass' in his post. No biggie. The idea is still clear.

Oldman, even a single resistor is incorrect. You need a network for attenuation. Better yet, do not attenuate, bi-amp. Get rid of all caps and resistors.

It still seems like the cap is being used as a first order high pass Butterworth filter. We won't know until we get an in-use pic or a schematic. Any more questions?

Ace, No matter how it's described a small value cap placed in series with a tweeter will attenuate the lower frequecies and pass the higher frequencies less attenuated. The small cap has a high impedance at low F and and a low Z at high F. XL=1/2P F C. You don't nessecarily need a L C R network, only a single cap will block low F and act as a simple XO passing high F to a tweeter. Look at cheap speakers or coaxial car speakers for examples.

I think the objective of this effort is to add a samll cap to attenuate the lower part of the signal to the tweeter and make the tweeter sound better by reducing it's percieved volume by virture of it not reproducing the lower end of it's frequency response.

I didn't mention anything about resitors.

[jakelm]

This might sound stupid, but please excuse me.

If I would add a 1uF cap. 1uF @ 8ohms, give about a 15khz pass. If I add this 1uF cap BEFORE another that yields a much lower xover point, wouldnt the first 1uF cap screw up the whole chain of crossovers?

When runing a cap in series, does it devide, like ohms?

I know parallel you add the values.

But if I run a 1uF in series before a 12uF. What is my total cap value?

I have worked on xovers, in my Polks, but never seen a cap in series with another.

[OldmanSRS]

The total capacitance of capacitors in series is equal to the reciprocal of the sum of the reciprocals of their individual capacitances:

so: 1/12 uF + 1/1 uf = 1/C total = .083 + 1 = 1/1.083 = .92 uF

At 15Khz the 1 uF cap has an impedance of 10 Ohms in your 8 Ohm circuit. It will provide roughly 3 dB of attenutation at 15K Hz or about 1/2 the power to the device.

[jakelm]

The total capacitance of capacitors in series is equal to the reciprocal of the sum of the reciprocals of their individual capacitances:

so: 1/12 uF + 1/1 uf = 1/C total = .083 + 1 = 1/1.083 = .92 uF

At 15Khz the 1 uF cap has an impedance of 10 Ohms in your 8 Ohm circuit. It will provide roughly 3 dB of attenutation at 15K Hz or about 1/2 the power to the device.


So we just went from a XO point of ~1.2khz, to a XO point of ~16khz. By adding a very small cap before the xover. That cant be good.

[Face]

So we just went from a XO point of ~1.2khz, to a XO point of ~16khz. By adding a very small cap before the xover. That cant be good.
Jake, I believe he meant between the crossover and the driver.

[jakelm]

Jake, I believe he meant between the crossover and the driver.

Hmm.. So if your HP signal comming out the XO is being attenuated 3dbs @ 1.2khz and you add a 1uF cap, that attenuates 15khz @ 3dbs. Then what is the end result?

[OldmanSRS]

Basically adding the 1 uF cap in series with the existing 12 uF cap will cause the XO point to raise. If it was 1.2K Hz before it will go up to around 15K Hz. This is a generalization because to calculate it more precisely one would have to know the layout of the curcuit ie, wiring diagram, inductors, caps, and resistors that are all players.

[avguytx]

So, basically it's just half ass stuck in there not totally correct, right? I can't think of a good analogy here. I'm spent on this topic but I'm sure more will come out of it.

[OldmanSRS]

I have not read all the pages but isn't the idea with the added cap to improve the harshness of a treeter? A series cap of a certain value, arrived at using experimentation, could accomplish this by removing some of the lower frequency component of the tweeter's operation where the tweeter is percived as harsh. There may be no exact value, it's likey going to be subjective.

[jakelm]

I have not read all the pages but isn't the idea with the added cap to improve the harshness of a treeter? A series cap of a certain value, arrived at using experimentation, could accomplish this by removing some of the lower frequency component of the tweeter's operation where the tweeter is percived as harsh. There may be no exact value, it's likey going to be subjective.

So the basic objecting here, is to xo the tweeter above the point where it is harsh?

But the gap between the mid and the tweeter also increase, leaving a hole in the midrange..

And increasing the range of the mids, to compensate for increase in tweeter, might cause phase issues..

[jakelm]

Instead of adding, I would have just pulled the XO out and changed the value of the HP cap and resistor to attenuate where I liked it..

[GV#27]

Instead of adding, I would have just pulled the XO out and changed the value of the HP cap and resistor to attenuate where I liked it..Yes that would be a better approach.

Is there a link to a diagram of this crossover?

Does this crossover have a shunt inductor after the 12uf and before the mystery 1uf cap?If so then you have created a third order hi pass filter,but it it is nowhere near the theoretical component values one would expect.The second cap is usually larger than the first.This config is back a**wards.If there is no shunt coil (from pos to neg)then you really have problems.As Jake suggested you will have a big suck out between the mid and tweet.Either way I can't see how this cap is doing you any good at all.

[candyliquor35m]

I tried a 1.0mfd today but it wasn't strong enough. A 2.0 or 2.2mfd sounds better to me.

[Disc Jockey]

Yes that would be a better approach.

Is there a link to a diagram of this crossover?



all sda crossovers are here:

http://www.polkaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?t=55888

[nms]

To update my previous post: the SL2000s suck for anything but symphonic, orchestral, and organ music. That is all.

[jakelm]

Yes that would be a better approach.

Is there a link to a diagram of this crossover?

Does this crossover have a shunt inductor after the 12uf and before the mystery 1uf cap?If so then you have created a third order hi pass filter,but it it is nowhere near the theoretical component values one would expect.The second cap is usually larger than the first.This config is back a**wards.If there is no shunt coil (from pos to neg)then you really have problems.As Jake suggested you will have a big suck out between the mid and tweet.Either way I can't see how this cap is doing you any good at all.

Yep....

[candyliquor35m]

I'm lucky enough to have a local place to go buy caps and such without having to wait on shipping: http://epohouston.com/index.htm

[OldmanSRS]

I know EPO well, being an ex-Houstonian. Tell Dan hello if he's not retired yet.

[candyliquor35m]

I may have talked to him yesterday on the phone. I didn't catch the name. They were out of the caps I've been using.

[candyliquor35m]

After about a week I finally got the new 2.3's unloaded from the pathfinder and the old ones loaded hopefully to sell next weekend.

I hooked them up and was pleasantly surprised at how impressive the stock sl2000 tweeters are. Lively and robust with just a slight amount of brightness.

Since I had good luck on the old pair with upgrading the sl2000 tweeter to the sl2000wc tweeter by installing a 2.2 uf (mfd), 250 v mylar cap on their positive terminal and had 3 extra ones laying around, I didn't have anything to lose for trying them in the right speaker since I'm right handed :D

After the install, the right speaker sounded less bright of course but when I compared it to the left speaker, I could tell the vocals/mids weren't as full and rich sounding as they were in the left speaker.

Hmmm, not good. I don't want to lose anything except the bright highs if possible. I listen for a few more days to make sure and keep hearing the same veil of darkness over the right speaker. I go buy 1.0 uf (mfd) 250 v mylar caps and install them which seemed to help very little.

I focus on the tweeters cupping my hand around each one and then putting my ear up to my cupped hands to make sure I'm only hearing one tweeter at a time.

I notice the middle tweeter is diminished the most. On the uncapped middle tweeter in the left speaker when I cup my hands around it and listen, it's deafening and nearly ear drum shattering. The 2 other tweeters aren't as bright sounding so this gives me an idea to remove the caps on those 2 tweeters in the right speaker which I do.

I list