Fixing an original SDA-1! Yay me!

[Bobsama]

So my new-to-me pair of speakers were dropped off today! I bought a pair of original SDA-1's with the SL1000 tweeters. I was relatively happy about it--I was expecting 1A's with the SL2000 tweeeters, but original 1's are fine too.:p All looks good except for two problems... the first is that the left-channel primary tweeter is blown and the left side of the right cabinet has sun-bleached wood. Other than that, all is good. Losing one of four tweeters is "good enough". They were relatively local and not too expensive ($325), and came delivered by the original owner (she bought them nearly three decades ago). Numbers on these babies is S/N 2047 R and S/N 2047 L.

Even so, I need to fix the little tweeter problem. I have access to an octet of basically unused SL2000 tweeters pulled from a pair of Polk SDA-SRS's when they underwent the 1.3TL upgrade years ago. So here are my options while my uncle tries to repair the blown SL1000 tweeter (it looks like the wire burn right on the dome)...

1) Find a working SL1000 tweeter, pulled from an original pair of Polk speakers.

2) Find a quartet of SL1000-replacement tweeters.

3) Upgrade the crossover boards to work properly with SL2000 tweeters.

To be honest, Option 3 would probably be the best overall. The differences between SDA-1's and SDA-1A's seems limited to the tweeters. I'll take a second look through the in-depth SDA-1A specs. I actually have the original SDA cable and two SDA-1 instruction manual booklets, in addition to the original boxes.:eek::eek::eek:




Dimensions: 12"d x 16"w x 43 1/2"h

Shipping Weight per cabinet: 85 lbs.

Driver Compliment: 2 x MW7600 Mid L.F.
2 x MW7500 Mid L.F.
2 x SL1000 H.F. with litz wire voice coil
1 x D-1200-A Passive

D.C. Resistance: 5Ω

Fuses: 1 amp, 3AG Fast-Blo
Stereo & Dimensional, H.F. only.

Enclosure Type
Low frequencies-- Passive Radiator
Stereo Mid-L.F.-- 4th order vented
Dimensional Mid-L.F.-- 4th order vented
Left-Right Mirror
Imaged Cabinets

Crossover Type (each cabinet)
High Pass-- #1 (Two each) 1st order Gaussian; 125 Hz
High Pass-- #2a (One each) 2nd order Gaussian; Resonance and Inductance Compensated; 2.5 KHz
High Pass-- #2b (One Each) 2nd order Gaussian; Resonance Compensated; 2.5 KHz
Low Pass-- #1 (One each) 2nd order, Impedance Compensated; 125 Hz
Low Pass-- #2 (Two each) 2nd order Butterworth; 2.5 KHz
Dimensional Matrix-- One per system

http://img188.imageshack.us/img188/6227/1041745.th.jpg (http://img188.imageshack.us/i/1041745.jpg/)

[Bobsama]

Some other pictures...
http://img190.imageshack.us/img190/1559/1041737.th.jpg (http://img190.imageshack.us/i/1041737.jpg/)http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/8446/1041738.th.jpg (http://img5.imageshack.us/i/1041738.jpg/)http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/9615/1041739.th.jpg (http://img5.imageshack.us/i/1041739.jpg/)http://img188.imageshack.us/img188/383/1041734.th.jpg (http://img188.imageshack.us/i/1041734.jpg/)http://img6.imageshack.us/img6/537/1041741g.th.jpg (http://img6.imageshack.us/i/1041741g.jpg/)

I really like the finish on these speakers. Looks like real wood too. Very sturdy cabinets. Very little damage. Top of one has some stains, the right channel is faded from the sun, and the bottom front corner of one has been scraped off (probably from moving on carpet). Overall very, very good though.

[Bobsama]

Oh yeah here's a bit of additional information. According to the Speaker Wiring Schematics (http://www.polkaudio.com/forums/showpost.php?p=703997&postcount=7)'s transitional list, I have the earliest version of the SDA-1's. They're SDA-1's with a female SDA cable and with the male portion of the plug on the speaker. It's a "3-prong RTA 12 type SDA interconnect cable"; which came before the SDA-1's with the more standard "blade/blade SDA interconnect cable".

[smglbrth]

Looking good for such "aged" speakers! Isn't it something when you actually still find persons who kept the boxes all these years? You KNOW that they knew what they purchased back then and what the speakers still are, special.

Have fun! (Those silver tweets may not be the best but really keeps them in the "vintage" catagory, looks-wise)

[gdb]

Nice score on a great looking pair of vintage SDAs !! I have some 1As that I really like the looks of. (better than SRS2s) The sun faded veneer should be fairly easy to darken up a little if you can get some tinted tung oil or even some Formby's wipe on finish. One other tweeter option might be to verify if your crossovers need any modifications to be able to use the new RDO 194 or 198 units, instead of the 2000 series. Good luck w/em !!:)

[Bobsama]

Found a pair of SL1000's from a fellow member here. You know who you are. ;) So the tweeter issue should be laid to rest.

Bought 100' of 16-gauge speaker cable with four sets of pins (eight total) off of NewEgg. Just your generic stuff; I don't believe that $1000 speaker cable will do any better than $50 speaker cable, much in the same way with power cords. Too small and you've got a point, poorly terminated you've got a point, but copper cable is copper cable. For the maybe 1% gained going between good cheap stuff and great expensive stuff, I'd much prefer to spend my money on a McIntosh amp.

Bought a set of equipment relatively on the cheap. Kenwood KM-991 amp (150wpc RMS), KC-991 preamp, KT-591 tuner, and a 5-CD changer. Not bad price either. I'm waiting on delivery from Illinois. Before I hook it up to anything, I need to check out the poweramp and preamp.

Can't wait to get this setup running. I figure I'll wait on aesthetics for a bit, maybe turn it into a day project with my stepdad. I'll upload some more pictures as things come in.

[F1nut]

I don't believe that $1000 speaker cable will do any better than $50 speaker cable, much in the same way with power cords. Too small and you've got a point, poorly terminated you've got a point, but copper cable is copper cable. For the maybe 1% gained going between good cheap stuff and great expensive stuff

Wrong.

[lakedmb]

Wrong.

Please, explain with proof to back up your claim.

[Bobsama]

Wrong.
Steady. Explain how. And as the above poster stated, with evidence. I'd prefer to see non-marketing but scientific numbers. All well and fine to see that you get 3Ω less resistance over a kilometer run, but how much will that change the sound? Even 5% is tough to hear for the majority of the population. You'd be hard-pressed to even do an honest side-by-side comparison. I'm sure there IS a difference somewhere, but is it perceivable? Is that difference worth even $200 on a single 1m power cable? I think not.

I'll explain my own viewpoint.

I've heard, in stores, comparisons between various brands and price-points for cables. None of them impressed me any more than your standard 14/16-gauge cables. Cables are the last part I'd spend major money on. Yeah, buy decent 14-gauge (maybe even 12-gauge if you really want to) if you're running a big amp to big speakers. Don't buy the $1-special cables. Overall, I'd rather spend money on a better amp, a cleaner preamp, a clearer DAC, a better CD player, a clearer tuner, better speakers; basically anything but high-end cables. Now if I spent $120,000 on a top-of-the-line setup with the best custom speakers, the highest quality power and source gear, then yes, I'd spend a boatload on cables. But for a system that has run me much less than $1000, there's no logical need to double the price by spending on cables. The money can be better spent elsewhere.

For the amount of power I can run through them, they'd already be too loud to bear. The current amp I have will deliver a solid 75WPC, but I have no use for even 50WPC. Even 16-gauge is overkill; 14-gauge (which I also have) won't even fit properly.

[snow]

Steady. Explain how. And as the above poster stated, with evidence. I'd prefer to see non-marketing but scientific numbers. All well and fine to see that you get 3Ω less resistance over a kilometer run, but how much will that change the sound? Even 5% is tough to hear for the majority of the population. You'd be hard-pressed to even do an honest side-by-side comparison. I'm sure there IS a difference somewhere, but is it perceivable? Is that difference worth even $200 on a single 1m power cable? I think not.

I'll explain my own viewpoint.

I've heard, in stores, comparisons between various brands and price-points for cables. None of them impressed me any more than your standard 14/16-gauge cables. Cables are the last part I'd spend major money on. Yeah, buy decent 14-gauge (maybe even 12-gauge if you really want to) if you're running a big amp to big speakers. Don't buy the $1-special cables. Overall, I'd rather spend money on a better amp, a cleaner preamp, a clearer DAC, a better CD player, a clearer tuner, better speakers; basically anything but high-end cables. Now if I spent $120,000 on a top-of-the-line setup with the best custom speakers, the highest quality power and source gear, then yes, I'd spend a boatload on cables. But for a system that has run me much less than $1000, there's no logical need to double the price by spending on cables. The money can be better spent elsewhere.

For the amount of power I can run through them, they'd already be too loud to bear. The current amp I have will deliver a solid 75WPC, but I have no use for even 50WPC. Even 16-gauge is overkill; 14-gauge (which I also have) won't even fit properly.Considering the fact that you have been wrong about virtually everything you have commented on so far it comes as no surprise that yet once again you are wrong. Just because you cant hear a difference between speaker cables IC's or power cords does not mean there isnt a difference or that other people cant. BTW even though you may only be using 5wpc on average you will very quickly need more than 75wpc for transients if you want to hear the music as it was intended. I do agree though that for you spending 1k on a set of speaker cables may be better spent elsewhere like on a quality amp.



REGARDS SNOW

[Bobsama]

Considering the fact that you have been wrong about virtually everything you have commented on so far it comes as no surprise that yet once again you are wrong. Just because you cant hear a difference between speaker cables IC's or power cords does not mean there isnt a difference or that other people cant. BTW even though you may only be using 5wpc on average you will very quickly need more than 75wpc for transients if you want to hear the music as it was intended. I do agree though that for you spending 1k on a set of speaker cables may be better spent elsewhere like on a quality amp.



REGARDS SNOW

Then point out where I've been wrong and correct me. Saying something to the effect of "because you're always wrong" is not a logical argument, unless you're trying to prove yourself wrong. I'll be honest--for all the years I've listening to music on good-quality speakers, I've only "gotten into" the hobby recently. Even so, the same gimmicks exist in countless other markets. As a student of business, part of my responsibility is separating quality from marketing. Just like "gaming" parts are, in large part, a gimmick, I think your ultra-expensive, high-end, $50-plugs-on-a-$100-length-of-copper-wire-selling-for-$1000 is a bunch of snake-oil by in large.

And what I'm talking about is, "where's the bigger improvement?" I've been a computer enthusiast for years now. Spending $5000 on a new PC may be fun and good, but knowing that I could literally get 80% of the performance when gaming by spending 20% the final sum... that's a big consideration. Spend $5000 now and wait five years or spend $1000 a year for the next five years? I'd personally do the latter; my new system will only depreciate in value. While the actual performance will remain the same, perceived performance gets a definite shift. Building your own teaches quite a bit about what's worthwhile and what's not, in addition to referencing actual task. To me, it's like spending an additional $1000 on the "high-end", "enthusiast", "extreme" processor instead of $100 on doubling (or more) the amount of RAM the computer has--and having the same (or better) performance with the cheaper option.

As for my music--50wpc was more than enough for a pair of CRS+'s. As for the SRS-1.2TL's, a solid 100W is still excessive. The nice thing, however, is that vintage Polk doesn't rely upon a driver for low frequencies. I'm not a bass-head---sending 300+W to a subwoofer is pointless to me. I don't need my seating to be moving across the floor, I don't need my neighbors thinking my house is about to collapse as it resonates. I'm happy with the smaller amount of power; having more is nice, but isn't always necessary. Go crazy if you have the money for the system dreams are made out of, if you have money for the house in the middle of nowhere, if you have money that you can get away from the sound ordinances, and if you have money to buy that hearing aide you'll desperately need after years of listening to a system too loud, just because you spend a fortune on it. Thanks, but until I make $250,000 a year and have a few million for retirement, I don't think I will join you in that lifelong daydream. This isn't about "keeping up with the Joneses". Having the most expensive meter-long power cable isn't a sign of superiority, especially if you can do just about everything while spending a twentieth as much. Pink Floyd sounding 1% better or 1% clearer while doubling (or more) the cost of my system? Hardly worth my time or even my money. Call me when I can get perceivable gains by changing from my rather generic 120VAC-10A power cable and 14- or 16-gauge speaker wire connecting a sub-200wpc amp to speakers. Unless something costs the same, having even 5% better performance everywhere hardly matters. Heck, if I wanted the most accurate sound, I wouldn't be using Polk SDA speakers in the first place.

[Fongolio]

The speaker cable/IC debate never ends nice. If Bobsama is happy with his cables so be it. If F1nut and snow can hear a difference then cool. It's where people start calling other people wrong for believing what they believe that this debate always gets out of hand. Bobsama started his statement with I believe.....I nor anyone else will change his mind by calling him wrong. This has happened over and over and the end result is a gang mentallity beating on the nay sayer. Leave it alone. Please.
Flame on.

[snow]

The speaker cable/IC debate never ends nice. If Bobsama is happy with his cables so be it. If F1nut and snow can hear a difference then cool. It's where people start calling other people wrong for believing what they believe that this debate always gets out of hand. Bobsama started his statement with I believe.....I nor anyone else will change his mind by calling him wrong. This has happened over and over and the end result is a gang mentallity beating on the nay sayer. Leave it alone. Please.
Flame on. I wasnt calling him wrong because of what he believes. I was calling him wrong because if you were to glance through the past posts by him he has been wrong about many things factually. :D

REGARDS SNOW

[snow]

Then point out where I've been wrong and correct me. Saying something to the effect of "because you're always wrong" is not a logical argument, unless you're trying to prove yourself wrong. I'll be honest--for all the years I've listening to music on good-quality speakers, I've only "gotten into" the hobby recently. Even so, the same gimmicks exist in countless other markets. As a student of business, part of my responsibility is separating quality from marketing. Just like "gaming" parts are, in large part, a gimmick, I think your ultra-expensive, high-end, $50-plugs-on-a-$100-length-of-copper-wire-selling-for-$1000 is a bunch of snake-oil by in large.

And what I'm talking about is, "where's the bigger improvement?" I've been a computer enthusiast for years now. Spending $5000 on a new PC may be fun and good, but knowing that I could literally get 80% of the performance when gaming by spending 20% the final sum... that's a big consideration. Spend $5000 now and wait five years or spend $1000 a year for the next five years? I'd personally do the latter; my new system will only depreciate in value. While the actual performance will remain the same, perceived performance gets a definite shift. Building your own teaches quite a bit about what's worthwhile and what's not, in addition to referencing actual task. To me, it's like spending an additional $1000 on the "high-end", "enthusiast", "extreme" processor instead of $100 on doubling (or more) the amount of RAM the computer has--and having the same (or better) performance with the cheaper option.

As for my music--50wpc was more than enough for a pair of CRS+'s. As for the SRS-1.2TL's, a solid 100W is still excessive. The nice thing, however, is that vintage Polk doesn't rely upon a driver for low frequencies. I'm not a bass-head---sending 300+W to a subwoofer is pointless to me. I don't need my seating to be moving across the floor, I don't need my neighbors thinking my house is about to collapse as it resonates. I'm happy with the smaller amount of power; having more is nice, but isn't always necessary. Go crazy if you have the money for the system dreams are made out of, if you have money for the house in the middle of nowhere, if you have money that you can get away from the sound ordinances, and if you have money to buy that hearing aide you'll desperately need after years of listening to a system too loud, just because you spend a fortune on it. Thanks, but until I make $250,000 a year and have a few million for retirement, I don't think I will join you in that lifelong daydream. This isn't about "keeping up with the Joneses". Having the most expensive meter-long power cable isn't a sign of superiority, especially if you can do just about everything while spending a twentieth as much. Pink Floyd sounding 1% better or 1% clearer while doubling (or more) the cost of my system? Hardly worth my time or even my money. Call me when I can get perceivable gains by changing from my rather generic 120VAC-10A power cable and 14- or 16-gauge speaker wire connecting a sub-200wpc amp to speakers. Unless something costs the same, having even 5% better performance everywhere hardly matters. Heck, if I wanted the most accurate sound, I wouldn't be using Polk SDA speakers in the first place. I didnt say you were always wrong just most of the time from what I have read so far :D for example if you think that having 100 wpc for SDA SRS 1.2tl's is excessive you are wrong.



REGARDS SNOW

[Fongolio]

I didnt say you were always wrong just most of the time from what I have read so far :D for example if you think that having 100 wpc for SDA SRS 1.2tl's is excessive you are wrong.



REGARDS SNOW

I have to agree that saying 100 wpc for 1.2tl's is excessive is wrong. I'm running 225 wpc from my Carver amp through my 1A's and they love it. By far the majority of my listening is at low volumes as I live in an apartment and don't need eviction. Large wattage helps articulate bass (and I don't like chair shaking bass much either) at very low volumes. In fact, my speakers are on a switch that changes them between my HT system and 2 channel so I can A/B the difference wattage makes from my Yamaha receiver to my Carver amp and the speakers truly come alive with more wattage especially at low listening levels. The 1.2tl's would only benefit from higher wattage IMHO.

[F1nut]

Please, explain with proof to back up your claim.

Why?

[F1nut]

Steady. Explain how. And as the above poster stated, with evidence. I'd prefer to see non-marketing but scientific numbers. All well and fine to see that you get 3Ω less resistance over a kilometer run, but how much will that change the sound? Even 5% is tough to hear for the majority of the population. You'd be hard-pressed to even do an honest side-by-side comparison. I'm sure there IS a difference somewhere, but is it perceivable? Is that difference worth even $200 on a single 1m power cable? I think not.

I'll explain my own viewpoint.

I've heard, in stores, comparisons between various brands and price-points for cables. None of them impressed me any more than your standard 14/16-gauge cables. Cables are the last part I'd spend major money on. Yeah, buy decent 14-gauge (maybe even 12-gauge if you really want to) if you're running a big amp to big speakers. Don't buy the $1-special cables. Overall, I'd rather spend money on a better amp, a cleaner preamp, a clearer DAC, a better CD player, a clearer tuner, better speakers; basically anything but high-end cables. Now if I spent $120,000 on a top-of-the-line setup with the best custom speakers, the highest quality power and source gear, then yes, I'd spend a boatload on cables. But for a system that has run me much less than $1000, there's no logical need to double the price by spending on cables. The money can be better spent elsewhere.

For the amount of power I can run through them, they'd already be too loud to bear. The current amp I have will deliver a solid 75WPC, but I have no use for even 50WPC. Even 16-gauge is overkill; 14-gauge (which I also have) won't even fit properly.

We all start somewhere. I can't count the number of folks here over the years who thought just like you and then one day they discovered they were wrong. Perhaps, if you open your mind, you will too.

Here's your first lesson, forget looking at scientific numbers.....total waste of time in this hobby.


Heck, if I wanted the most accurate sound, I wouldn't be using Polk SDA speakers in the first place.


I think you'd be surprised how good they really are, IF you feed them well.

[JohnLocke88]

Then point out where I've been wrong and correct me. Saying something to the effect of "because you're always wrong" is not a logical argument, unless you're trying to prove yourself wrong. I'll be honest--for all the years I've listening to music on good-quality speakers, I've only "gotten into" the hobby recently. Even so, the same gimmicks exist in countless other markets. As a student of business, part of my responsibility is separating quality from marketing. Just like "gaming" parts are, in large part, a gimmick, I think your ultra-expensive, high-end, $50-plugs-on-a-$100-length-of-copper-wire-selling-for-$1000 is a bunch of snake-oil by in large.

And what I'm talking about is, "where's the bigger improvement?" I've been a computer enthusiast for years now. Spending $5000 on a new PC may be fun and good, but knowing that I could literally get 80% of the performance when gaming by spending 20% the final sum... that's a big consideration. Spend $5000 now and wait five years or spend $1000 a year for the next five years? I'd personally do the latter; my new system will only depreciate in value. While the actual performance will remain the same, perceived performance gets a definite shift. Building your own teaches quite a bit about what's worthwhile and what's not, in addition to referencing actual task. To me, it's like spending an additional $1000 on the "high-end", "enthusiast", "extreme" processor instead of $100 on doubling (or more) the amount of RAM the computer has--and having the same (or better) performance with the cheaper option.

As for my music--50wpc was more than enough for a pair of CRS+'s. As for the SRS-1.2TL's, a solid 100W is still excessive. The nice thing, however, is that vintage Polk doesn't rely upon a driver for low frequencies. I'm not a bass-head---sending 300+W to a subwoofer is pointless to me. I don't need my seating to be moving across the floor, I don't need my neighbors thinking my house is about to collapse as it resonates. I'm happy with the smaller amount of power; having more is nice, but isn't always necessary. Go crazy if you have the money for the system dreams are made out of, if you have money for the house in the middle of nowhere, if you have money that you can get away from the sound ordinances, and if you have money to buy that hearing aide you'll desperately need after years of listening to a system too loud, just because you spend a fortune on it. Thanks, but until I make $250,000 a year and have a few million for retirement, I don't think I will join you in that lifelong daydream. This isn't about "keeping up with the Joneses". Having the most expensive meter-long power cable isn't a sign of superiority, especially if you can do just about everything while spending a twentieth as much. Pink Floyd sounding 1% better or 1% clearer while doubling (or more) the cost of my system? Hardly worth my time or even my money. Call me when I can get perceivable gains by changing from my rather generic 120VAC-10A power cable and 14- or 16-gauge speaker wire connecting a sub-200wpc amp to speakers. Unless something costs the same, having even 5% better performance everywhere hardly matters. Heck, if I wanted the most accurate sound, I wouldn't be using Polk SDA speakers in the first place.

Very well articulated. Very factual.


The speaker cable/IC debate never ends nice. If Bobsama is happy with his cables so be it. If F1nut and snow can hear a difference then cool. It's where people start calling other people wrong for believing what they believe that this debate always gets out of hand. Bobsama started his statement with I believe.....I nor anyone else will change his mind by calling him wrong. This has happened over and over and the end result is a gang mentallity beating on the nay sayer. Leave it alone. Please.
Flame on.

Agreed 100%. They're arguing apples to oranges. They're price sensitivities are completely different. I have to side with Bobsama (in the sense that I simply don't have the money to spend on $200 cables. Like him, I am going for the 'bang for the buck.' But by all means, if I could afford going totally bananas on this hobby, you bet your ass I'd have a set of these:

http://www.transparentcable.com/products/show_product.php?recID=24&perfID=1&catID=1&modCAT=1



I didnt say you were always wrong just most of the time from what I have read so far :D for example if you think that having 100 wpc for SDA SRS 1.2tl's is excessive you are wrong.


While I agree that there is a significant possibility that 100 watts may be completely reasonable, and in some cases, inadequate, making blanket, I'm not listening to you because you've been wrong before is not the best 'debate' strategy either.


Why?

Because he is obviously a very 'facts' oriented person. For him, it's maximizing 'bang for the buck' and subtle differences/improvements may be very difficult for him to actually 'hear.' As such, he may rely (as often I do) on facts, statistics and specifications in the absence of actually being able to do a side by side comparison... for whatever reason.

[snow]

.
Very well articulated. Very factual. Not even close.


While I agree that there is a significant possibility that 100 watts may be completely reasonable, and in some cases, inadequate, making blanket, I'm not listening to you because you've been wrong before is not the best 'debate' strategy either. Its a good place to begin with one though. :D



Because he is obviously a very 'facts' oriented person. You can be as factual as you want but when 90% of your facts are wrong then your wrong 90% of the time :p



REGARDS SNOW

[JohnLocke88]

You can be as factual as you want but when 90% of your facts are wrong then your wrong 90% of the time :p



REGARDS SNOW

Define 'wrong.'

[comfortablycurt]

I really get a kick out of it...

Every time someone brings up the cable debate, they say "I'm not wasting my money spending $1000 on cables!". If you were to look around, you'd realize that there are literally hundreds of options out there for quality cables that cost under $200.

Don't exaggerate.

You don't have to spend multiple thousands of dollars on cables to get good cables. You have to be able to justify it.

The total value of my 2 channel rig is in the neighborhood of $1000...obviously I'm not going to go and spend $1000 on cables. That wouldn't make sense.

I have spent around $200 total on cables though, and they've made a very big difference in the way my rig sounds. I don't need scientific evidence to back up what I hear through MY ears on MY rig.

Someday when I have more expensive gear...I'll buy more expensive cables. Until then, I'll be happy with the cables that I got at very affordable prices. It would seem foolish IMO to hook up my $1000 rig with 8 dollars worth of cabling. To each their own though.

[F1nut]

Very well articulated. Very factual.

I'm with Snow on this one, not even close.




Agreed 100%. They're arguing apples to oranges. They're price sensitivities are completely different. I have to side with Bobsama (in the sense that I simply don't have the money to spend on $200 cables. Like him, I am going for the 'bang for the buck.'

That all fine and certainly understandable. However, that's a far cry from his original comment......


I don't believe that $1000 speaker cable will do any better than $50 speaker cable, much in the same way with power cords. Too small and you've got a point, poorly terminated you've got a point, but copper cable is copper cable. For the maybe 1% gained going between good cheap stuff and great expensive stuff

or this one......


I think your ultra-expensive, high-end, $50-plugs-on-a-$100-length-of-copper-wire-selling-for-$1000 is a bunch of snake-oil by in large.

[hearingimpared]

I'll be honest--for all the years I've listening to music on good-quality speakers, I've only "gotten into" the hobby recently.

If true then how can you make blanket authoritarion statements about cables and 1.2 TL amp power with no experience the way you do. Experience is the best teacher in this hobby. You can debate theory all you want.

[george daniel]

man,, this one went to hell quick :rolleyes:

[nooshinjohn]

As for my music--50wpc was more than enough for a pair of CRS+'s. As for the SRS-1.2TL's, a solid 100W is still excessive. The nice thing, however, is that vintage Polk doesn't rely upon a driver for low frequencies.

Here is a great example of where you are wrong. My Yamaha reciever runs at 105wpc. It is hopelessly inadequate for driving the 1.2TL's, as it rapidly looses the ability to control the drivers due to lack of power. The sound from them is muffled, lacking clarity and definition, and bass response is muddy and lacking the kind of authority I expect from them. Introduce the Sunfire Cinema Grand Signature 7x400 to the mix and the speakers come ALIVE. They are crisp, clear and precise. Imaging and depth of soundstage are truly remarkable, to the point of the speakers being able to paint images in your mind of the performers being in the room with you. You can almost smell what kind of perfume Linda Ronstadt was wearing when she recorded What's New with Nelson Riddle, or smell the cigarettes(and other substances) smoked when the Beatles laid down Abbey Road. Detail, warmth, passion, it's all there to be heard and felt... That is the difference power makes to these speakers, and why they are so beloved to those that own them.

Your second point is also factually wrong. Vintage Polks DO RELY on the mid-drivers for producing deep bass, as they are the only means by which a passive radiator moves, and the type and quality of power hitting the drivers will have a dramatic effect upon the passive radiator being able to produce coherent bass. Poor quality power equates to muddy and undefined bass response.

The more quality power you hit the SDA's with, the better your experience with them shall be. Those that have told me they don't like them have never hit them with anything better that a 75wpc reciever.

[Bobsama]

I didnt say you were always wrong just most of the time from what I have read so far :D for example if you think that having 100 wpc for SDA SRS 1.2tl's is excessive you are wrong.REGARDS SNOW
100W from a solid-state McIntosh is plenty. If they say you get 100W, you get it the full range. For the style of house I live in (a small ranch), very few of our rooms are really "optimal" for big speakers like this. So putting 100-quality-watts through to a pair of SRS 1.2TL's (which I've seen and heard in said ranch-style house) will still make the windows rattle, will still disturb the neighbors, and will still leave your ears ringing if you turn it up too much. Everything's there. Similarly, on a good 2x300W amp, the SRS1.2TL's can get louder and do everything I said before, with maybe the added benefit of making things walk off tables. You don't need insane amounts of power. Now 100wpc for the 1.2TL's would be anemic in larger rooms, but it's plenty for small rooms.


I have to agree that saying 100 wpc for 1.2tl's is excessive is wrong. I'm running 225 wpc from my Carver amp through my 1A's and they love it. By far the majority of my listening is at low volumes as I live in an apartment and don't need eviction. Large wattage helps articulate bass (and I don't like chair shaking bass much either) at very low volumes. In fact, my speakers are on a switch that changes them between my HT system and 2 channel so I can A/B the difference wattage makes from my Yamaha receiver to my Carver amp and the speakers truly come alive with more wattage especially at low listening levels. The 1.2tl's would only benefit from higher wattage IMHO.
Agreed, though my point is you don't need a 300+Wpc amp in a small room. A general rule of thumb is to go twice as fast/loud, you need four times the power.


We all start somewhere. I can't count the number of folks here over the years who thought just like you and then one day they discovered they were wrong. Perhaps, if you open your mind, you will too.

Here's your first lesson, forget looking at scientific numbers.....total waste of time in this hobby.



I think you'd be surprised how good they really are, IF you feed them well.
They are good speakers. My point is they need quality power before they need extreme OMFGWTFBBQMYELECTRICITYBILL power. For anything more than a 5 minute, per-purchase test, I wouldn't bother with a truly low-wattage or low-quality power source for these.


If true then how can you make blanket authoritarion statements about cables and 1.2 TL amp power with no experience the way you do. Experience is the best teacher in this hobby. You can debate theory all you want.
I've got a bit of experience with them. But I'll stop repeating myself over and over, short of saying "McIntosh 2x100W solid-state power amplifier".



Your second point is also factually wrong. Vintage Polks DO RELY on the mid-drivers for producing deep bass, as they are the only means by which a passive radiator moves, and the type and quality of power hitting the drivers will have a dramatic effect upon the passive radiator being able to produce coherent bass. Poor quality power equates to muddy and undefined bass response.

The more quality power you hit the SDA's with, the better your experience with them shall be. Those that have told me they don't like them have never hit them with anything better that a 75wpc reciever.
Where did I say that about midwoofers? I don't remember. Anyways--I know how passive-radiators work.

[hearingimpared]

I was referring more to your statements about cables.

[snow]

100W from a solid-state McIntosh is plenty. If they say you get 100W, you get it the full range. For the style of house I live in (a small ranch), very few of our rooms are really "optimal" for big speakers like this. So putting 100-quality-watts through to a pair of SRS 1.2TL's (which I've seen and heard in said ranch-style house) will still make the windows rattle, will still disturb the neighbors, and will still leave your ears ringing if you turn it up too much. Everything's there. Similarly, on a good 2x300W amp, the SRS1.2TL's can get louder and do everything I said before, with maybe the added benefit of making things walk off tables. You don't need insane amounts of power. Now 100wpc for the 1.2TL's would be anemic in larger rooms, but it's plenty for small rooms.


Agreed, though my point is you don't need a 300+Wpc amp in a small room. A general rule of thumb is to go twice as fast/loud, you need four times the power.


They are good speakers. My point is they need quality power before they need extreme OMFGWTFBBQMYELECTRICITYBILL power. For anything more than a 5 minute, per-purchase test, I wouldn't bother with a truly low-wattage or low-quality power source for these.


I've got a bit of experience with them. But I'll stop repeating myself over and over, short of saying "McIntosh 2x100W solid-state power amplifier".


Where did I say that about midwoofers? I don't remember. Anyways--I know how passive-radiators work.Stop now while your still behind. You attempting to tell us what is and isnt excessive and what does or doesnt work best only makes you appear well.... foolish, most of us that actually own and listen to SDA SRS 1.2TL's on a daily basis have tried any combination of low powered receivers, amps, high powered amps, tube amps etc,and no it isnt all about wpc some tube amps that have far less than 100wpc sound wonderful with 1.2TL's so do some class A amps.

But trust me on this no matter the size of the room and even at low volumes a high current SS amp that is in excess of 100wpc is not overkill and as a general rule will sound better. I will give you an example of what in "my experience" sounded better. I had hooked up a McIntosh 2125 and it sounded okay but not great or spectactular at lower volumes perhaps it was because the damping factor was only 20 at 8 ohms, fast forward to a Sunfire 300 x 2 the music came alive at lower volumes much more dynamic bass notes were far more realistic tighter, highs were more defined at both lower and higher volumes. Blanket type statements that 100wpc is all you will ever need for great sound reproduction in small rooms with 1.2TL's is in my my experience misleading and doesnt hold true.

I am not running down the McIntosh name because they make some very nice equipment and im certain that some of there products would be spectacular with 1.2TL's. For me I dont listen at ear bleeding volumes so it isnt about how loud will it go it is about how good it sounds at lower volumes in a smaller room and most 100wpc amps simply dont have the current to replicate the music at lower volumes as well as more powerful ones do.



REGARDS SNOW

[F1nut]

Stop now while your still behind. You attempting to tell us what is and isnt excessive and what does or doesnt work best only makes you appear well.... foolish

Bob, I've got to agree with Snow. You've been making all kinds of misinformed comments since you arrived. Hit the pause button and get your learn on. We're here to help.

[nooshinjohn]

As for my music--50wpc was more than enough for a pair of CRS+'s. As for the SRS-1.2TL's, a solid 100W is still excessive. The nice thing, however, is that vintage Polk doesn't rely upon a driver for low frequencies.

Look familiar? Here you said vintage Polk does not rely upon a driver for low frequencies... As others have said, it is tome for you to step back and learn something before trying to pretent you have all the answers, as clearly you do not.

[nooshinjohn]

As for my music--50wpc was more than enough for a pair of CRS+'s. As for the SRS-1.2TL's, a solid 100W is still excessive. The nice thing, however, is that vintage Polk doesn't rely upon a driver for low frequencies.

And my response...


Your second point is also factually wrong. Vintage Polks DO RELY on the mid-drivers for producing deep bass, as they are the only means by which a passive radiator moves, and the type and quality of power hitting the drivers will have a dramatic effect upon the passive radiator being able to produce coherent bass. Poor quality power equates to muddy and undefined bass response.


Look familiar? Here you said vintage Polk does not rely upon a driver for low frequencies, and I explain to you that in fact they do... As others have said, it is time for you to step back and learn something before trying to pretent you have all the answers, as clearly you do not. Talking out your a$$ only proves that you are full of $hit.

[Fongolio]

Welcome to Club Polk Bobsama. If you are happy with your Mac and how it drives your 1.2tl's who gives a crap what we think anyway. Same as cables. If what you are using works for you then all of this thread is moot. I apologize for participating in the beat down and really do hope you hang around. There are some really great people here with tons of knowledge and experience. We just some times get carried away with the "I'm right and you're wrong" stuff. Be teflon.

[F1nut]

We just some times get carried away with the "I'm right and you're wrong" stuff.

Speak for yourself. The OP has been acting like he knows all, when obviously he doesn't. Correcting misinformation is the only way to stop it from spreading.

[snow]

Im not picking on you when I say the things I have... Well maybe I am but not for the reasons you most likely think. When someone says that a 100wpc is excessive it is as Jesse says misinformation and I would hate to have someone except this at face value.

When I first started out on my audio journey I thought an old Sony receiver and a pair of Bose 401's sounded pretty good because they were better than a clock radio or a boombox.

When I first got my Polks I thought they sounded pretty good hooked up to a Sony DA5-ES receiver but when I heard them hooked up to a Adcom GFA-555 amp I went wow there is a pretty big difference, when I heard them hooked up to a Carver TFM-35X I went wow they sound better, when I heard them hooked up to a Sunfire 300 x 2 I went wow they sounded quite a bit better. Everone of these upgrades were better and not because I needed more power so I could play them louder they sounded better at all volumes.


Perhaps instead of trying to tell us the facts as you know them ask others what there expeirence has been and what has worked for them you will be accepted a lot easier and most likely like myself learn a lot in the proccess.



REGARDS SNOW

[Fongolio]

Speak for yourself. The OP has been acting like he knows all, when obviously he doesn't. Correcting misinformation is the only way to stop it from spreading.

You are correct F1, I should only speak for myself. No offense intended.

[snow]

Welcome to Club Polk Bobsama. If you are happy with your Mac and how it drives your 1.2tl's who gives a crap what we think anyway. Same as cables. If what you are using works for you then all of this thread is moot. I apologize for participating in the beat down and really do hope you hang around. There are some really great people here with tons of knowledge and experience. We just some times get carried away with the "I'm right and you're wrong" stuff. Be teflon. This thread is not a beatdown it is a disscussion and hopefully one that we all learn something. Who cares what we think if what you are using sounds good to you now? that is an awful statement to make, If you ever want to grow and learn you have to try new things otherwise you would remain oblivious to anything better. I agree that if he is happy with the Mac and it sounds good to him then great no reason that he should change unless he wants to but dont say that anything more or better is exccessive.

Hell we all make mistakes and we all are learning I almost bought a pair of Studio 1C's the other day but thankfully I was told in advance that the tweeters would not mate well with my 1.2TL's as surround speakers even if I changed them to 194's.





REGARDS SNOW

[Bobsama]

You have quite a few valid points. The only problem with misinformation is it's tough to figure out what was real and what was fake, and then to figure out what was right. I prefer to talk or read in technical terms; it's easier to see the graph that tells me X is 1, Y is 2, and Z is 3, instead of reading a ten-page review which says X is either 1, 2, or 3, Y could be 4, but sounds more like 1, and Z your bank sum minus your common sense; buy if negative. Now then; point out where I am wrong. For where I've listened, 100W on a pair of 1.2TL's has been enough. 100W on on CRS+'s has been more than enough.

What I'm still interested in is real, non-marketing numbers that conclusively say that better quality interconnect cables and better quality power cables will really give cleaner, fuller sound. I'm not talking about generic v. Monster, I'm talking about whether or not Furutech FI-25M connectors, which run something like $250 each, are more than marketing fluff. I'm talking about whether or not Moon Audio's Silver Dragon RCA interconnects, which cost $300 plus $100/ft, will really make a big difference when connected to your standard $0.25-$5 female plugs as found on most all gear. Whether or not spending $600+ on 10' of speaker wire is going to really improve my sound or power-handling when compared to the generic equivalent. The same thing with most any other cable. I'm not saying grab it out of the bargain bin--I'm asking whether or not 1% is worth a four-plus digit price tag. I'm asking whether or not that 1% by better cables would be better spent on other gear; a more neutral preamp, a more stable poweramp, &c.

I've seen too often distorted testing in computers. One of a few dozen companies that literally pay big names for big reviews. I always love when one part is experiencing problems (unable to do part of the test) yet its result ends better. I love when companies will literally cripple games or other programs because the competitor's part runs better. I love when you have a comparison among five different manufacturer's renditions of exactly the same hardware. When they use overclocking to say that Card A is better than B or C, yet they're EXACTLY THE SAME. Luckily, very little in audio is strictly that way. From power to control to sources, there are so many different designs that you don't have five companies marketing the same exact piece.

The biggest place I'm still skeptical is in cables. I'll spend a few dollars on them, but I won't spend a fortune. I've never seen or been shown conclusive and independent results from half a dozen sources. That's too bad, really, as those are the types of reviews that I enjoy. Looking at rival product launches, you literally get two dozen reviewers going over each piece and publishing results. To me, that's good.

One day I may see the benefits in spending coin on cables. One day I may see the benefits of a 500wpc McIntosh-quality amp. But until then, I'll stick to technical discussion. I'm basically a newbie, by no fault of my own.

[snow]

I dont know what to say other than you need to try it out for yourself and see whether it makes a difference in your system and to your ears. I have no interest in finding technical data for you to study to prove that cables IC's or anything else makes a difference. Most people here seem to think so read through a couple hundred threads and thousands of posts on the subject and draw your own conclusions as to whether it's worth a shot to you.

The same on the wpc issue if you want start a thread and or take a poll of the SDA SRS SDA SRS 1.2 and SDA SRS 1.2TL owners to see what they think from there own personal experience to see what they are currently using and why.


If you decide that you want to try a set of new cables or IC's I suggest you buy a used pair here or on Ebay or Audiogon try them if you dont like them then re sell them for what you paid no loss this way and you will have satisfied your curiosity or simply ignore everythng we say without technical data, your choice.

My thoughts are read a lot, try a few things and let your ears be the judge not the technical data.



REGARDS SNOW

[concealer404]

Now who was it that said yesterday that all SDA SRS are 6ohm speakers? ;)

[lakedmb]

This is a very good and interesting article by Roger Russell.

Link about speaker cables. (http://www.roger-russell.com/wire/wire.htm#thetruth)

Link to his Homepage. (http://www.roger-russell.com/)

[snow]

This is a very good and interesting article by Roger Russell.

Link about speaker cables. (http://www.roger-russell.com/wire/wire.htm#thetruth)

Link to his Homepage. (http://www.roger-russell.com/)Yeah yeah we have all seen this before :rolleyes: Let YOUR ears be the judge or dont your choice.

It's times like these I wish I was in charge of the ban button :D



REGARDS SNOW

[nooshinjohn]

This is a very good and interesting article by Roger Russell.

Link about speaker cables. (http://www.roger-russell.com/wire/wire.htm#thetruth)

Link to his Homepage. (http://www.roger-russell.com/)

this link is meaningless... I just swapped out my monster thx1000 cables for set of Canare 4s11, and I can hear an appreciable difference between the two, and as far as price is concerned, they are similar, but the performance so far with the Carare is a bit cleaner and more balanced than the Monster was. I can only imagine the difference as one goes towards progressively better designed wires. There is however a very valid law of deminishing returns, which means that the money and effort spent in persuit of that last bit of perfection comes at a higher and higher cost for increasingly smaller improvements in performance. For the cable naysayers, I can only say that it is your system and your ears, and therefore up to you as to how and where you spend the coin to upgrade your setup. For those that can truly appreciate the sonic improvement a cable can make to their setups, then that is their choice as well. I am still on the fence a bit on this issue myself, but am eager to try something better.

But for you to post that rehashed piece of BS here is doing nothing to add to the discussion and does not in any way change the minds of anyone.

[hearingimpared]

This is a very good and interesting article by Roger Russell.

Link about speaker cables. (http://www.roger-russell.com/wire/wire.htm#thetruth)

Link to his Homepage. (http://www.roger-russell.com/)

What is YOUR experience with differerent ICs and speaker wires? That link you posted is worthless and done to death.

[lakedmb]

When doing a true A/B blind test, not knowing what speaker cables were being used, I was unable to tell any difference. :eek: Whenever I was told which cable was being used, my mind did believe that it could hear a difference. ;)

I believe that if you are happy spending the extra money on the cables, then by all means enjoy your setup, but I don't think that you are hearing anything that I am not. ;)

[snow]

When doing a true A/B blind test, not knowing what speaker cables were being used, I was unable to tell any difference. :eek: Whenever I was told which cable was being used, my mind did believe that it could hear a difference. ;)

I believe that if you are happy spending the extra money on the cables, then by all means enjoy your setup, but I don't think that you are hearing anything that I am not. ;)Someone ban this troll please.



REGARDS SNOW

[F1nut]

The truth about blind tests.....


Now back to the question of the blinded testing. Here is what the now publisher (Robert Harley) of one of the major magazines wrote a few years ago....


Quote:
Blind tests nearly universally appear to indicate that no differences exist between electronics, cables, capacitors, etc. In fact, one infamous test "revealed" that no sonic differences exist between power amplifiers. Mark Levinson, NYAL Futterman OTL tube monoblock, NAD, Hafler, and Counterpoint power amplifiers were all judged to be sonically identical to each other and to a $219 Japanese receiver (footnote 7). This very test, wielded by the objectivists as proof that all amplifiers sound alike, in fact calls into question the entire blind methodology because of the conclusion's absurdity. Who really believes that a pair of Futterman OTL tube amplifiers, a Mark Levinson, and a Japanese receiver are sonically identical? Rather than bolster the objectivist's case, the "all amplifiers sound the same" conclusion of this blind test in fact discredits the very methodology on which hangs the objectivist's entire belief structure.

If differences do exist between components, why don't blind tests conclusively establish the audibility of these differences? I believe that blind listening tests, rather than moving us toward the truth, actually lead us away from reality.

First, the preponderance of blind tests have been conducted by "objectivists" who arrange the tests in such a way that audible differences are more difficult to detect. Rapid switching between components, for example, will always make differences harder to hear. A component's subtleties are not revealed in a few seconds or minutes, but slowly over the course of days or weeks. When reviewing a product, I find that I don't really get to know it until after several weeks of daily listening. Toward the end of the review process, I am still learning aspects of the product's character. Furthermore, the stress of the situation—usually an unfamiliar environment (both music and playback system), adversarial relationship between tester and listener, and the prospect of being ridiculed—imposes an artificiality on the process that reduces one's sensitivity to musical nuances.

Going beyond the nuts and bolts of blind listening tests, I believe they are fundamentally flawed in that they seek to turn an emotional experience—listening to music—into an intellectual exercise. It is well documented that musical perception takes place in the right half of the brain and analytical reasoning in the left half. This process can be observed through PET (Positron-Emission Tomography) scans in which subjects listening to music exhibit increased right-brain metabolism. Those with musical training show activity in both halves of the brain, fluctuating constantly as the music is simultaneously experienced and analyzed. Forcing the brain into an unnatural condition (one that doesn't occur during normal music listening) during blind testing violates a sacrosanct law of science: change only one variable at a time. By introducing another variable—the way the brain processes music—blind listening tests are rendered worthless.

[JohnLocke88]

man,, this one went to hell quick :rolleyes:

Just sit back, get some popcorn, and watch the train wreck...


Blind tests nearly universally appear to indicate that no differences exist between electronics, cables, capacitors, etc. In fact, one infamous test "revealed" that no sonic differences exist between power amplifiers. Mark Levinson, NYAL Futterman OTL tube monoblock, NAD, Hafler, and Counterpoint power amplifiers were all judged to be sonically identical to each other and to a $219 Japanese receiver (footnote 7). This very test, wielded by the objectivists as proof that all amplifiers sound alike, in fact calls into question the entire blind methodology because of the conclusion's absurdity. Who really believes that a pair of Futterman OTL tube amplifiers, a Mark Levinson, and a Japanese receiver are sonically identical? Rather than bolster the objectivist's case, the "all amplifiers sound the same" conclusion of this blind test in fact discredits the very methodology on which hangs the objectivist's entire belief structure.

Why? Perhaps it's just the fact that I'm just coming from a LSAT practice test, so I'm in hardcore logic mode, but just because the results of a test are 'unlikely' doesn't invalidate them.



If differences do exist between components, why don't blind tests conclusively establish the audibility of these differences? I believe that blind listening tests, rather than moving us toward the truth, actually lead us away from reality.

Again, just because the conclusion is not the one that one wants, or expects to be true, doesn't necessarily invalidate the conclusion. If there is no difference, this could also be a reason why 'blind tests [don't] conclusively establish the audibility of these differences.'


First, the preponderance of blind tests have been conducted by "objectivists" who arrange the tests in such a way that audible differences are more difficult to detect.
1. Rapid switching between components, for example, will always make differences harder to hear. A component's subtleties are not revealed in a few seconds or minutes, but slowly over the course of days or weeks. When reviewing a product, I find that I don't really get to know it until after several weeks of daily listening. Toward the end of the review process, I am still learning aspects of the product's character.

I'd imagine it's harder to perform a week long blind test under controlled conditions... just a guess though.


Furthermore, the stress of the situation—usually an unfamiliar environment (both music and playback system), adversarial relationship between tester and listener, and the prospect of being ridiculed—imposes an artificiality on the process that reduces one's sensitivity to musical nuances.
Valid. White coat syndrome is evident in medical practice as well. So, not a surprise.


Going beyond the nuts and bolts of blind listening tests, I believe they are fundamentally flawed in that they seek to turn an emotional experience—listening to music—into an intellectual exercise.

Debate ended. Win.

The justification of high end cables is a logical exercise. Cost benefit analysis, concept of diminishing returns, etc. These are not emotional excercises.

The end result, listening to music / watching a movie, is NOT an intellectual experience.

Because you cannot effectively argue the "effects," you cannot argue the causes.

(Again, logic class for the win...If A -> B, B, therefore, you know NOTHING about A)

[Fongolio]

Someone ban this troll please.



REGARDS SNOW

Why?

[F1nut]

Why? Perhaps it's just the fact that I'm just coming from a LSAT practice test, so I'm in hardcore logic mode, but just because the results of a test are 'unlikely' doesn't invalidate them.


Do you seriously believe there are no sonic differences between the following?


Mark Levinson, NYAL Futterman OTL tube monoblock, NAD, Hafler, and Counterpoint power amplifiers were all judged to be sonically identical to each other and to a $219 Japanese receiver

[JohnLocke88]

Do you seriously believe there are no sonic differences between the following?

No... I'm sure there are many... but just because I seriously doubt that those components are the same, doesn't invalidate the possibility that I am wrong. If you're willing to overlook the flaw in logic to reach a conclusion that is otherwise true, then fine. But again, it is not a valid conclusion, as it may be true, but the logical process used to obtain it is FLAWED.

I'm not debating the truth to something, but merely the thought process used to obtain that truth.

[F1nut]

You'd make a good lawyer.

[JohnLocke88]

You'd make a good lawyer.

Yep... and then, when I am one... I can afford all the high end cables and other stuff.

See! I'm on your side... just need to get the fundage first :D

[nooshinjohn]

Well.... I guess it would depend entirely upon what the definition of the word "IS" is....

[Bobsama]

Yep... and then, when I am one... I can afford all the high end cables and other stuff.

See! I'm on your side... just need to get the fundage first :D

You too? And I thought I was the only one who did dual-enrollment in high school and course overload in college, just to get ahead for grad school! (or in my case, law school)

[snow]

Why?
You figure it out, look up the meanig of troll then look up the rules here.

REGARDS SNOW

[lakedmb]

Troll? Hardly, just an enthusiast who doesn't believe in stroking my ego with the price of my cables.

I have lately become quite interested in Polk Audio speakers, due to some very nice finds on Craigslist. I recently picked up some M5Jr+'s that I have really enjoyed. I snagged a set of LS-70's, but wasn't very impressed with them. After, reading another forum members review of the LS-90's, I am very interested in giving them a listen.

Have a great day.

[nooshinjohn]

they will sound fantastic if you get a set of these...

http://www.nordost.com/productdetail.asp?ProdID=33 I don't know how much they cost, but hey who cares, it's just wire right?

[JohnLocke88]

they will sound fantastic if you get a set of these...

http://www.nordost.com/productdetail.asp?ProdID=33 I don't know how much they cost, but hey who cares, it's just wire right?

I'd be afraid of breaking those things.....

And since this is now officially 'let's argue speaker cables' part 1,000,000,007, check these out

http://viperav.com/index_files/Page720.htm

actual prices shipped = about $150 for a full 5 cable set, or $40 for a set of stereo cables... they look pretty nice to me. :D

[nooshinjohn]

Gonna have to do better than that John... in order to run my SDA-SRS 1.2TL's, I would need 88k worth of the wires I selected to make the runs from amp to speakers! I cannot wait for them to get here so I can experience Audio Nirvana!

[F1nut]

Hardly, just an enthusiast who doesn't believe in stroking my ego with the price of my cables.


And with that comment you have basically verified Snow's opinion.

The truth........It's got nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with ego and everything to do with the sound.

Lose the attitude and ye shall be rewarded.

[JohnLocke88]

Gonna have to do better than that John... in order to run my SDA-SRS 1.2TL's, I would need 88k worth of the wires I selected to make the runs from amp to speakers! I cannot wait for them to get here so I can experience Audio Nirvana!

Well, I'm not going to argue... that amp you have is awesome... I asked about it a while ago but you didn't answer. You're running the Cinema Seven by Sunfire right?

400 watts into 8 ohms... that's crazy cool.

[nooshinjohn]

I am sorry that I did not get back to you... yes I am, and this amp is all I could ever want for HT... I would love a dedicated two channel for the big Polks though.

[JohnLocke88]

I am sorry that I did not get back to you... yes I am, and this amp is all I could ever want for HT... I would love a dedicated two channel for the big Polks though.

PM incoming... I think I've jacked this thread enough ;)

[snow]

Troll? Hardly, just an enthusiast who doesn't believe in stroking my ego with the price of my cables.

I have lately become quite interested in Polk Audio speakers, due to some very nice finds on Craigslist. I recently picked up some M5Jr+'s that I have really enjoyed. I snagged a set of LS-70's, but wasn't very impressed with them. After, reading another forum members review of the LS-90's, I am very interested in giving them a listen.

Have a great day.It has nothing to do with stroking ones ego, my comment has everything to do with someone who has never tried the gear that he is putting down but jumps in with negative comments and or links simply to stir up the shit that bothers me, that is being a troll ;)

The total value retail of my 2 channel system speakers preamp amp source is less than 15k so for me buying anything that costs more than lets say $1500.00 speaker cable or IC wise would most likely be money not spent wisely even if I were to get 10% better sound quality by upgrading either my cables or IC's I would in my mind barely break even with cost versus gain but I do know from my own experience that yes changing your speaker cables and IC's can result in better sound.

Anything more than this $$ value would be highly likely better spent elsewhere, if I ever felt that I had achieved everything I could on components and had no place else to make improvements then perhaps the amount spent on cables wouldnt matter.



REGARDS SNOW

[hearingimpared]

Troll? Hardly, just an enthusiast who doesn't believe in stroking my ego with the price of my cables.



That's like saying one buys high end gear to stroke ones ego . . . cut me a break!

[george daniel]

still goin' at it,,eh ?

[Bobsama]

still goin' at it,,eh ?

After coming to a form of agreement with nooshinjohn, apparently there is still a lot of discussion on something off-topic. Oh well.

[JohnLocke88]

That's like saying one buys high end gear to stroke ones ego . . . cut me a break!

Are you denying that there are those that DO buy high end audio gear, cars, houses, etc. because they are indeed status symbols? Don't you take pride in your gear? In it's quality, value and price? I do. Most people do to a certain extent.

Just because you don't doesn't mean EVERYONE doesn't.

[AudioGenics]

Chaos in mission control
I'm being followed wherever I go
Somebody's wearing my clothes
My mirror image is starting to show

I've been in and out
Had my turnabouts
Baiting the hook that broke on...
On neutral ground

CHORUS
I'm the leader of the two-track
I'm going through Stereo Madness
I'm not a mono-maniac
Had enough of this Stereo Madness

And someone lives on the fringe
And one who's left has come back again
Who thinks I'm taming the shrew
When I'm involved in a dual rendezvous?

I've been up and down
Had my turnarounds
Wasting advice to fuse
A few of us

CHORUS
i'm the leader of the two-track
I'm going through Stereo Madness
I'm not a mono-maniac
Had enough of this Stereo Madness

ref: http://www.lyricsmode.com/lyrics/d/dalbello/stereo_madness.html

[Bobsama]

Hate to do this but I've got some more pictures. L SDA 2075 & R SDA 2075. :)

[hearingimpared]

are you denying that there are those that do buy high end audio gear, cars, houses, etc. Because they are indeed status symbols? Don't you take pride in your gear? In it's quality, value and price? I do. Most people do to a certain extent.

Just because you don't doesn't mean everyone doesn't.

I said, "one," you said everyone.

[JohnLocke88]

Are you denying that there are those that DO buy high end audio gear, cars, houses, etc. because they are indeed status symbols? Don't you take pride in your gear? In it's quality, value and price? I do. Most people do to a certain extent.

Just because you don't doesn't mean EVERYONE doesn't.


I said, "one," you said everyone.

What's your point? If you want to argue semantics, I don't think you're going to win.

The point I was making, and that everyone else but you seems to be getting, is that some people do buy gear for the brag factor.

Go ask any logician (or anyone with a third grade education), my statement was valid.

You're response has no merit or import.

Bye. :rolleyes:

[JohnLocke88]

Hate to do this but I've got some more pictures. L SDA 2075 & R SDA 2075. :)

Nice... what is the peerless going into?

[Bobsama]

Nice... what is the peerless going into?

ATM, nowhere. :p I'm willing to trade it and a few bucks for a pair of SL1000's, though. In all likelihood, I'll hang onto it because I'm sure that, eventually, I'll need it as a spare.

[JohnLocke88]

ATM, nowhere. :p I'm willing to trade it and a few bucks for a pair of SL1000's, though. In all likelihood, I'll hang onto it because I'm sure that, eventually, I'll need it as a spare.

You can never have too many parts. Most of my parts are in working speakers, but they're ready to give their lives to science if something further up the speaker food chain comes along and needs organ donors. :D