Comparing Monitor 5 series models and upgrades

Crashdot

Greetings,

I currently have the following speakers:

Polk Monitor 5jr. 6.5" 2-way with Polk SL-2000 dome tweeter. Ported.
Polk Monitor 5B. 6.5" 2-way, Polk SL-2000 dome tweeter and 8" PR.
Polk Monitor 5jr+. 6.5" 2-way, Polk SL-2000 dome tweeter. and 6.5" PR.

In comparing these side by side to each other, everyone here seemed to prefer the 5jr, as the others sounded tinny and harsh in spite of having more bass.

What I am wondering is if there is any way to improve the sound of the larger models, such as to replace the tweeters with a more recent drop in model (RD0194-1?), or to replace with other tweeters and make changes to the crossovers.

I would appreciate any suggestions,

Thanks

Crashdot

I had one other thought - is it possible that the 5jr's I have use a different revision or generation of SL2000?

cnh

WELCOME TO CLUB POLK!

If you're running SL2000s then the RDO-194s will yield a significant improvement in that series. The only tweeter you might consider keeping is a Peerless if you're fortunate to find an M5 with one of those. I have a set of Monitor 5As with that configuration. In fact I'm listening to them, now, in my office! A true step UP from the SL2000s. As are the RDOs if you don't have the Peerless.

cnh

Crashdot

I have ordered a set of RDO-194's, and do not have any configured with Peerless tweeters. I remain curious about some of the posts I have seen here indicating that some SL-2000's sound good, while others do not. That would seem to suggest a manufacturing difference with some of them.

One person has suggested the cabinets are responsible for the difference in sound between the tweeters in the 5jr, 5jr+, and 5b, although I thought these were a sealed back tweeter design. Otherwise, I wonder if the crossovers between each of these may not all be identical.

Thanks!

Joe08867

The only way the cabinets would really change the way the tweeter sounds is where the driver and tweeter cross paths in frequency. The SL2000 was a pretty darn good tweeter in its day but the RDO-194 puts it to shame.

If you polish a **** you just have a shiny ****.

I will agree with cnh in the peerless front. It was the original tweeter used in the Monitor series and is still the best original tweeter in my opinion. They do have different capacitance needs compared to the SL2000, SL2500 and the RDO-replacement. So even if you find them you would have to modify the crossover to work with them correctly.

My personal preference has always been the 5b in the series, I believe it had the most controlled sound and a bit more in the low end. As i don't like using subs i prefer my speakers to have a decent bottom.

Crashdot

So should I conclude that it may be frequency overlap or just my imagination that the SL-2000s in the 5jr's seems to sound better than those in the 5b's and 5jr+'s? Do all of these have the same crossover specs?

I was somewhat expecting to hear that the sound of the SL-2000 might be dependent on the year of manufacture, or the factory that made them, since at least two other posters here have discussed the matter that some of these tweeters sound better than others.

What I will probably do is remove all of them to see if there is any difference in labeling, and try transplanting the good sounding ones into the 5b's. I am happy to replace the SL-2000s in the 5b's or 5jr+ with the RD0 model, but am hesitant to do so with the 5jr's that seem to have an inexplicably good sounding set of SL-2000's. If I can't get improvement out of these others, I will probably be on a mission to find 3-4 more 5jr's and just set up the home theater with a matched set.

I will probably use the sub for frequencies below 60hz if I end up using the 5jr's. If I could find the frequency response graph for each of these models it might help to determine if that is the right crossover point.

Thanks for your consideration