Free Shipping on All Orders 1-866-764-1801

Vist our Online Store
+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 62
  1. #1

    Member Sales Rating: (3)

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    In the country Geronimo oklahoma
    Posts
    964

    Default rdo-194 vs rdo-198

    Whats the difference ,,, I have too admit i havent a clue can someone verse me on this ....
    " He who dies with the most equipment wins Right ? "

    Denon 3300 [COLOR="Blue"]Adcom 535 BBe w/sub out 1 pr 4.6s 2 pr of 4 jrs Recent additions Samsung Lns-4095D LCD, Samsung hd-960 DVD, Monster HT-5000 Power center
    ,HPSA-1000 18" sealed DiY home sub.:D
    Black Laquer 1.2tl's w/ upgraded x-overs and Tweets BI-Amped with 2 Carver tfm-35's Knukonceptz 10ga cables

  2. #2

    Member Sales Rating: (0)

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Edmonds, WA
    Posts
    1,726

    Default

    Weell... IDK all the technical bits, but the RDO-194 is designed as a direct replacement for the SL2000 & SL1000 (the SL1000's require a slight modification of the inset)
    The RDO-198 is the direct replacement for the SL2500 & SL3000 tweeters.

  3. #3

    Member Sales Rating: (3)

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    In the country Geronimo oklahoma
    Posts
    964

    Default aaaahhhaa

    Good enough I assumed that they all fit in the same holes being that they looked at a distance so close in size.

    Sonically does anyone know the difference?





    Quote Originally Posted by kcoc321 View Post
    Weell... IDK all the technical bits, but the RDO-194 is designed as a direct replacement for the SL2000 & SL1000 (the SL1000's require a slight modification of the inset)
    The RDO-198 is the direct replacement for the SL2500 & SL3000 tweeters.
    " He who dies with the most equipment wins Right ? "

    Denon 3300 [COLOR="Blue"]Adcom 535 BBe w/sub out 1 pr 4.6s 2 pr of 4 jrs Recent additions Samsung Lns-4095D LCD, Samsung hd-960 DVD, Monster HT-5000 Power center
    ,HPSA-1000 18" sealed DiY home sub.:D
    Black Laquer 1.2tl's w/ upgraded x-overs and Tweets BI-Amped with 2 Carver tfm-35's Knukonceptz 10ga cables

  4. #4

    Member Sales Rating: (1)

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Descending toward the moon in the CLEM (Chinese Lunar Excursion Module), looking for Chang'e
    Posts
    11,469

    Default

    Well, for one thing the 198s are the better of the two because they were used in the HIGHER model Polks and the tweeters they replace were the better/newer designs. So expect a bit better resolution, imaging and detail.

    cnh

  5. #5

    Member Sales Rating: (0)

    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Watertown, MA, USA
    Posts
    120

    Default

    In that case, CNH, why would Polk have brought out two different modern replacements rather than just one? Only having one design instead of two is an advantage for requiring simpler manufacturing and lower warehousing costs.

    The SL-1000 (made by Peerless) was used in my RTA-12's, which were the top of Polk's line back when they were made in 1979.

    I believe there may be a technical reason...
    joel

    "When I grow up, I want to be like me."

  6. #6

    Member Sales Rating: (58)

    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    6 Underground
    Posts
    25,306

    Default

    The xover design dictated the difference.

  7. #7

    Member Sales Rating: (1)

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Descending toward the moon in the CLEM (Chinese Lunar Excursion Module), looking for Chang'e
    Posts
    11,469

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by joelll View Post
    In that case, CNH, why would Polk have brought out two different modern replacements rather than just one? Only having one design instead of two is an advantage for requiring simpler manufacturing and lower warehousing costs.

    The SL-1000 (made by Peerless) was used in my RTA-12's, which were the top of Polk's line back when they were made in 1979.

    I believe there may be a technical reason...
    What Doro said...but also if you read the literature on the SL3000--Polk itself...says that was their BEST tweeter at that TIME! So I assumed it's replacement would have to meet higher standards...my wrong if this is not so....

    But please do read about the SL3000. The Peerless tweeter is 'another' story entirely. And some feel that it is even better than its RDO replacement so what you're talking about is the Exception.

    Also do a search on this site and read what people have to say about their 194s and 198s...yes the crossovers are different...but?

    Sounds like you like specs....A LOT! I'm pulling your leg, of course.....

    cnh
    Last edited by cnh; 02-25-2010 at 11:00 PM.

  8. #8

    Member Sales Rating: (0)

    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Watertown, MA, USA
    Posts
    120

    Default

    I actually don't pay too much attention to specs... but the vintage Polk *sound* on the other hand, is something special.

    I love the Peerless tweeters in my RTA-12s, they really put out a sound I like. Before I had to put them into storage (as I save to buy a house), they were used for 2-channel and as mains in my 5.0 HT system, along with a CS400i center and a pair of EPI A70's for surround. The L-C-R speaker matching sounded really quite good with the Dynamic Balance tri-laminate tweeter in the center.

    If I had a loan of pairs of RDO-194 and 198, I might consider testing them with the RTA-12's... no cabinet modifications needed as the tweeters are just sitting on top of the crossovers atop the cabinets.
    joel

    "When I grow up, I want to be like me."

  9. #9

    Member Sales Rating: (13)

    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    The Mars Hotel
    Posts
    30,460

    Default

    SL1000's......ugh. You definitely need to get the RD0194-1's. Forget the RD0198-1 as they are not designed for your speaker.
    'Political Correctness'.........defined

    "A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

  10. #10

    Member Sales Rating: (3)

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    373

    Default

    When I called Polk to purchase the replacements for my 1.2's I was informed that the correct choice was the 194's. Since I was replacing them all and they were the same price I asked the same question, why not buy the 198's if they were sonically better. I was informed that wasn't necessarily the case, the 194's were the correct choice for my speaker because of the crossover. I could have purchased either but followed Polk techs recommendation. FWIW
    Home Theater
    Amp: sunfire cinema grand signature 5ch 425 wpc
    Side surround amp: Sunfire 2 X 300
    Processor: sunfire theater grand V
    Fronts:: polk sda-srs 1.2
    Rears: Polk LSiFX
    Side surrounds: Fxi5
    Center: (2)polk LSiC's
    Sub: svs pb-13 rosenut
    Hd-Dvd: toshiba xa-2
    Blue Ray: oppo bdp83se
    Projector: sony vw60
    Screen: Da-Lite 106"
    APC S20 Power conditioner

  11. #11

    Member Sales Rating: (0)

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Edmonds, WA
    Posts
    1,726

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by joelll View Post
    ......I love the Peerless tweeters in my RTA-12s
    Quote Originally Posted by joelll
    The SL-1000 (made by Peerless) was used in my RTA-12's, ..
    Joel, do you have silver or black tweeters? Because as far as I know, there is/ was no "Peerless" SL1000. The Peerless tweeters are black, with the angled traces, the SL1000 face plates are silver, and made by Polk. But I always like to find out new stuff about Vintage Polks...

    SL1000 by Polk



    Peerless tweeter
    Last edited by kcoc321; 02-26-2010 at 08:09 PM.

  12. #12

    Member Sales Rating: (3)

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    In the country Geronimo oklahoma
    Posts
    964

    Default

    hmmmmm..... decision decisions !!!
    " He who dies with the most equipment wins Right ? "

    Denon 3300 [COLOR="Blue"]Adcom 535 BBe w/sub out 1 pr 4.6s 2 pr of 4 jrs Recent additions Samsung Lns-4095D LCD, Samsung hd-960 DVD, Monster HT-5000 Power center
    ,HPSA-1000 18" sealed DiY home sub.:D
    Black Laquer 1.2tl's w/ upgraded x-overs and Tweets BI-Amped with 2 Carver tfm-35's Knukonceptz 10ga cables

  13. #13

    Member Sales Rating: (2)

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    El, Paso TX
    Posts
    293

    Default

    Has anyone tried the replacement peerless tweeters on ebay?

  14. #14

    Member Sales Rating: (23)

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Burnsville, MN
    Posts
    1,888

    Default

    At $45/piece, why would you bother? You can get RD0s for nearly the same.

  15. #15

    Member Sales Rating: (2)

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    El, Paso TX
    Posts
    293

    Default

    Well, they are both made in China. Probably in the same factory.

  16. #16

    Member Sales Rating: (58)

    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    6 Underground
    Posts
    25,306

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by joelll View Post
    In that case, CNH, why would Polk have brought out two different modern replacements rather than just one? Only having one design instead of two is an advantage for requiring simpler manufacturing and lower warehousing costs.

    The SL-1000 (made by Peerless) was used in my RTA-12's, which were the top of Polk's line back when they were made in 1979.

    I believe there may be a technical reason...
    It's far easier to provide a high quality replacement tweeter than an entire xover assembly to the customer. Sure, it's not rocket science, PER SE but 99.9% of people are plug and play...who wouldn't be, it's cool. The technical reason is not just xover based either.

    The SL series is an evolution of the tweeter technology that was present at Polk at that time. Some of the same designers are still doing what they do although the cauldrons and animal sacrifices have ceased to be in the lobby area. While I'm sure they appreciate the manufacturing advice, the engineering deptartment has more than enough years under their belt to handle daily sacrif....I mean activities.

    Mark
    Last edited by dorokusai; 05-28-2010 at 10:15 PM.

  17. #17

    Member Sales Rating: (0)

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Annville, PA
    Posts
    246

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BAD ASP View Post
    When I called Polk to purchase the replacements for my 1.2's I was informed that the correct choice was the 194's. Since I was replacing them all and they were the same price I asked the same question, why not buy the 198's if they were sonically better. I was informed that wasn't necessarily the case, the 194's were the correct choice for my speaker because of the crossover. I could have purchased either but followed Polk techs recommendation. FWIW
    Would the same go for a 1.2TL or would the RDO-198 be the correct choice?

    Is switching out SL3000 tweeters for RDO-198's even an 'upgrade'? Has anyone tried it?

    Thanks

    Burson HA-160D > Adcom GFA-5802 > Polk SDA-SRS 1.2tl w/ Mye Sound Spikes, Mills/Sonicap XO, Larry's Rings, Dynamat Extreme, Cardas CCGR Binding Posts and Jumpers, Custom 10ga interconnect, Custom Gaskets, RDO-198

  18. #18

    Member Sales Rating: (13)

    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    The Mars Hotel
    Posts
    30,460

    Default

    The RD0198-1 is the correct replacement for the SL3000 and the SL2500.

    Is switching out SL3000 tweeters for RDO-198's even an 'upgrade'? Has anyone tried it?
    The forum is full of that info.
    'Political Correctness'.........defined

    "A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

  19. #19

    Member Sales Rating: (0)

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Annville, PA
    Posts
    246

    Default

    Thanks, I tried using Google to cull the information out but it wasnt so good, I also only see 4 pages of threads in the vintage speakers forum. I guess I'll keep digging. Thanks.

    Burson HA-160D > Adcom GFA-5802 > Polk SDA-SRS 1.2tl w/ Mye Sound Spikes, Mills/Sonicap XO, Larry's Rings, Dynamat Extreme, Cardas CCGR Binding Posts and Jumpers, Custom 10ga interconnect, Custom Gaskets, RDO-198

  20. #20

    Member Sales Rating: (13)

    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    The Mars Hotel
    Posts
    30,460

    Default

    For future reference, use the advanced search feature.

    The short answer is yes, a great many have tried them and they are a vast improvement.
    'Political Correctness'.........defined

    "A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

  21. #21

    Member Sales Rating: (16)

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    In A Van Down By The River
    Posts
    21,190

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cnh View Post
    Well, for one thing the 198s are the better of the two because they were used in the HIGHER model Polks and the tweeters they replace were the better/newer designs. So expect a bit better resolution, imaging and detail.

    cnh
    Hmmm......so a Monitor 5 series II is a higher end speaker than an SDA 1C?

    H9
    "Appreciation of audio is a completely subjective human experience. Measurements can provide a measure of insight, but are no substitute for human judgment. Why are we looking to reduce a subjective experience to objective criteria anyway? The subtleties of music and audio reproduction are for those who appreciate it. Differentiation by numbers is for those who do not".--Nelson Pass

    Pass Aleph 30; Eastern Electric Mini Max; Adcom GDA600; MIT S3/Z Pc; SDA 1C; Squeezebox; Tubes add soul!

  22. #22

    Member Sales Rating: (1)

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Descending toward the moon in the CLEM (Chinese Lunar Excursion Module), looking for Chang'e
    Posts
    11,469

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by heiney9 View Post
    Hmmm......so a Monitor 5 series II is a higher end speaker than an SDA 1C?

    H9
    Not really Brock...perhaps I should have taken greater care with my wording. What I was going by when I wrote the 'old' post was Polk's own literature on the SL3000....which as you know, was an experiment in vapor metal deposits (JBL also had something similar going on at that time after they developed the O35TI pure titanium dome...they introduced titanium laminates?). My reference was meant ONLY with regards to tweeter tech...not overall speaker design? In Polk's press release--and I was merely extrapolating from that...they touted the SL3000 as their best (at that time?)--so my assumption (then) was that Polk's replacement for that tweeter (RD0-198) would be better (tweeter only technology)? You can think of it as the way people look at Peerless vs. the SL1000 and SL2000--most people prefer the Peerless to those in the Monitor series? In this case--a previous design is seen as more desirable. One certainly would not say that SDA-As with SL2000s are a worse speaker than my Monitor 5As (I own both). But I would say that the Peerless tweeter in my M-5As is the 'better' tweeter? And if that is not the case...if a tweeter can't be better or worse than another...why are so many trying to TL SDA 2Bs among other speakers?

    If I am wrong in my reading of that...I certainly defer to your more nuanced and deeper understanding and experience of Polk Speakers.....

    Thanks for calling attention to my, perhaps, lax, wording.

    cnh
    Last edited by cnh; 11-15-2010 at 02:08 PM.

  23. #23

    Member Sales Rating: (0)

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Annville, PA
    Posts
    246

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by F1nut View Post
    For future reference, use the advanced search feature.

    The short answer is yes, a great many have tried them and they are a vast improvement.
    Thanks, I contacted Polk about getting some. Waiting to hear back.

    Burson HA-160D > Adcom GFA-5802 > Polk SDA-SRS 1.2tl w/ Mye Sound Spikes, Mills/Sonicap XO, Larry's Rings, Dynamat Extreme, Cardas CCGR Binding Posts and Jumpers, Custom 10ga interconnect, Custom Gaskets, RDO-198

  24. #24

    Member Sales Rating: (13)

    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    The Mars Hotel
    Posts
    30,460

    Default

    Call, never email.
    'Political Correctness'.........defined

    "A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

  25. #25

    Member Sales Rating: (16)

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    In A Van Down By The River
    Posts
    21,190

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cnh View Post
    Not really Brock...perhaps I should have taken greater care with my wording. What I was going by when I wrote the 'old' post was Polk's own literature on the SL3000....which as you know, was an experiment in vapor metal deposits (JBL also had something similar going on at that time after they developed the O35TI pure titanium dome...they introduced titanium laminates?). My reference was meant ONLY with regards to tweeter tech...not overall speaker design? In Polk's press release--and I was merely extrapolating from that...they touted the SL3000 as their best (at that time?)--so my assumption (then) was that Polk's replacement for that tweeter (RD0-198) would be better (tweeter only technology)? You can think of it as the way people look at Peerless vs. the SL1000 and SL2000--most people prefer the Peerless to those in the Monitor series? In this case--a previous design is seen as more desirable. One certainly would not say that SDA-As with SL2000s are a worse speaker than my Monitor 5As (I own both). But I would say that the Peerless tweeter in my M-5As is the 'better' tweeter? And if that is not the case...if a tweeter can't be better or worse than another...why are so many trying to TL SDA 2Bs among other speakers?

    If I am wrong in my reading of that...I certainly defer to your more nuanced and deeper understanding and experience of Polk Speakers.....

    Thanks for calling attention to my, perhaps, lax, wording.

    cnh
    Thanks for eloquent post, but I was mostly just busting your balls :tongue:

    H9
    "Appreciation of audio is a completely subjective human experience. Measurements can provide a measure of insight, but are no substitute for human judgment. Why are we looking to reduce a subjective experience to objective criteria anyway? The subtleties of music and audio reproduction are for those who appreciate it. Differentiation by numbers is for those who do not".--Nelson Pass

    Pass Aleph 30; Eastern Electric Mini Max; Adcom GDA600; MIT S3/Z Pc; SDA 1C; Squeezebox; Tubes add soul!

  26. #26

    Member Sales Rating: (1)

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Descending toward the moon in the CLEM (Chinese Lunar Excursion Module), looking for Chang'e
    Posts
    11,469

    Default

    You got me--it's like my sense of humor leaves me at times. It was good seeing you at PolkFest but I am sorry I was not able to stay through the entire period so we could talk a bit and I could thank you for the articles on Pass amp designs and all the info on Adcoms that you have posted on this site. I've found a ton of great advice in your posts. Helped me and my evolving system. At this point...a set of SDA-2Bs, Adcom GFA-555 [original design], (Onkyo/Integra P-304--as a pre till I save the money for the GFP-750 and pop some RDOs in the 2Bs.). As well as the Office system....Monitor 5As and a NAD integrated for now.

    cnh
    Last edited by cnh; 11-16-2010 at 10:50 AM.

  27. #27

    Member Sales Rating: (0)

    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    52

    Default

    If these SL 2000s go out in my Monitor 10s, what should I replace them with? moreover, is there an accessible replacement for the wonderful mid/woofer cones that are in them now. One of them makes an unpleasant sound when driven too hard. Sounds as if it's bottoming out. Also, if I knocked out one of the tweeters with too much volume once, but then it quickly came back after a short rest, do you think I've damaged it permanently? (Lotas questions there....) Love these damned speakers! $200 for the pair? Are ya kiddin' me?

  28. #28

    Member Sales Rating: (0)

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    SW Ohio
    Posts
    2,011

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aural Euphoria View Post
    If these SL 2000s go out in my Monitor 10s, what should I replace them with? moreover, is there an accessible replacement for the wonderful mid/woofer cones that are in them now. One of them makes an unpleasant sound when driven too hard. Sounds as if it's bottoming out. Also, if I knocked out one of the tweeters with too much volume once, but then it quickly came back after a short rest, do you think I've damaged it permanently? (Lotas questions there....) Love these damned speakers! $200 for the pair? Are ya kiddin' me?
    RD0-194s are the direct, drop-in replacement for the SL2000 tweeter. Much smoother, especially at higher volumes. I think you can use either MW6503 or MW6510 for the mid/woofer drivers. Are they Monitor 10Bs?
    "My wife likes my rig......HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!"


    B&W CDM 1NT; B&W CDM CNT; Infinity us 1; Velodyne DEQ-8 x2; Pio Elite VSX-23; Sony SCD-CE595 SACD, Denon DP11-F TT[/COLOR]

  29. #29

    Member Sales Rating: (0)

    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    52

    Default

    I would presume so from what I've read. They have the SL2000 (horizontal, not angled wiring on the outside fascia; clear dome with pinhole) and the passive radiator is black coating with grey surround, nothing with an earth tone or brown tinge. I actually can't tell...

  30. #30

    Member Sales Rating: (0)

    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    52

    Default

    What I don't get is if these are so special--and they do sound very good--why can they be built with a ton of spare parts? Is it just the box that's hard to acquire, or is there that much difference in these replacement parts. And if what i read about the replacement parts being superior is true, why don't people just buy all the parts and make their own?
    Last edited by Aural Euphoria; 03-07-2013 at 08:12 PM.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

     

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts