Speaker ID please

ZillaRam
ZillaRam Posts: 11
edited April 2011 in Vintage Speakers
Need help with Polk Speaker ID.
New here, member over at Audiokarma for a while, but figured you guys are the Polk Gurus!!
Found these locally, but person selling can't find any model numbers. Told them to look at pack near terminals, but the only numbers were:
Polk Audio 11 1625 & 11 1980
Any ideas?
Thanx,
Robbie
Post edited by ZillaRam on

Comments

  • pitdogg2
    pitdogg2 Posts: 25,450
    edited April 2011
    it's just a guess without taking the grill off so we could see the speaker.
    SDA2a
  • Joe08867
    Joe08867 Posts: 3,919
    edited April 2011
    Polk SDA2. My guess is the original model with dimensional tweeters.

    Take a shot with the grills off if you can.
  • ZillaRam
    ZillaRam Posts: 11
    edited April 2011
    I guess the best choice is to go by and take a look. I have owned bookshelf Polk's in the past, but I'm just not familiar with their Floor Standers.
    Any pointers, other than the usual?
    Are they any harder to refoam?
    How would they compare to my
    DCM TF600s
    or Boston Acoustics BA200
    Thanks for you input
  • On3s&Z3r0s
    On3s&Z3r0s Posts: 1,013
    edited April 2011
    Lasareath's site (polksda.com) says there was such a thing as a Monitor 11, but I'd guess also that they are some of the original SDA II's. As stated, the best way to tell is to get a pic with the grilles off or a description of the driver complement (number and position of tweeters and mids and whether the big passive radiator at the bottom has a flat foam disc covering the entire face of the PR or part of the cone is visible).

    You shouldn't have to worry about re-foaming because Polk used butyl rubber for the surrounds. There are various tests you can perform to see if they are in good shape. You can gently push in on the face of the passive radiator and hold it to see if the mid-woofers push out and how long it takes them to recede. This tells you how well sealed the speaker is. (They should take at least 10 seconds to recede.) If any mids don't push out, they could be frozen because of a damaged magnet, which requires replacing the driver. If they are the SDA speakers, a special interconnect cable is required to run between the speakers. If that cord is missing you'll have to find or make one.
  • Joe08867
    Joe08867 Posts: 3,919
    edited April 2011
    I have a question. How much is he asking.
    Anything over $250.00 I would say walk away. Unless they are in pristine condition. And looking at the pic I would say they are probably in decent shape maybe. Considering the Polk Audio tag is falling off.

    You can find the newer SDA2B for around 250-300.
  • ZillaRam
    ZillaRam Posts: 11
    edited April 2011
    I appreciate the info.
    Took a quick peak at the polksda website. It seems if they do not have the interconnect that they are going to be useless, at least for me?
    Looks they are asking 100.00.
  • halo71
    halo71 Posts: 4,603
    edited April 2011
    Aren't those Monitor 11s? :confused:

    Those have rubber surrounds no foam.



    EDIT: Opps, neverminds.....

    http://www.polksda.com/sda2.shtml
    --Gary--
    Onkyo Integra M504, Bottlehead Foreplay III, Denon SACD, Thiel CS2.3, NHT VT-2, VT-3 and Evolution T6, Infinity RSIIIa, SDA1C and a few dozen other speakers around the house I change in and out.
  • F1nut
    F1nut Posts: 50,567
    edited April 2011
    Polk Audio 11 1625 & 11 1980
    Those are without question, Monitor 11's.
    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 t-u-r-d by the clean end."


    President of Club Polk

  • Joe08867
    Joe08867 Posts: 3,919
    edited April 2011
    halo and F1 you guys are right. Oops!!!!

    With that said 100 bucks for Monitor 11's is a good deal in my book. Anybody else?
  • TennMan
    TennMan Posts: 1,266
    edited April 2011
    Joe08867 wrote: »
    halo and F1 you guys are right. Oops!!!!

    With that said 100 bucks for Monitor 11's is a good deal in my book. Anybody else?
    would they be better than 10s at the same price?
    • SDA 2BTL · Sonicaps · Mills resistors · RDO-198s · New gaskets · H-nuts · Erse inductors · BH5 · Dynamat
    • Crossover upgrades by westmassguy
    • Marantz 1504 AVR (front speaker pre-outs to Adcom 555)
    • Adcom GFA-555 amp · Upgrades & speaker protection added by OldmanSRS
    • Pioneer DV-610AV DVD/CD player
    • SDA CRS+ · Hidden away in the closet
  • F1nut
    F1nut Posts: 50,567
    edited April 2011
    Considering the Polk Audio tag is falling off.

    It's not falling off. The logo is held on with one pin in the center, therefore it gets out of whack easily.

    Great speakers, kinda like Monitor 10's on steroids with better bass, Peerless tweeters and distinct left and right channels. At $100.00, they are a steal.
    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 t-u-r-d by the clean end."


    President of Club Polk

  • DON73
    DON73 Posts: 516
    edited April 2011
    A pair of Monitor 11s sold on e-bay in 04. The photos look identical with the Monitor 10 with the long grille. A pair that look like the ones in question sold on e-bay and they have the short grille and flat passive were called SDAs
    TO ERR IS HUMAN. TO FORGIVE IS CANINE.
  • pitdogg2
    pitdogg2 Posts: 25,450
    edited April 2011
    F1nut wrote: »
    Those are without question, Monitor 11's.

    I had thought that he just mis-read the roman numeral 2 as 11 instead of II

    good catch F1 if it is I still want to see the face with out a grill the M11 have a cone passive woofer from what i saw on the Polksda.com site....whats with the "fluid coupled woofer" I now they use that on tweeters to cool so i would think it is just to slow down the woofer. Why not a weight like the other passives in the polk line up?
  • pitdogg2
    pitdogg2 Posts: 25,450
    edited April 2011
    F1nut wrote: »
    Great speakers, kinda like Monitor 10's on steroids with better bass, Peerless tweeters and distinct left and right channels. At $100.00, they are a steal.


    Why would they have distinct left and right channels?
  • Bobsama
    Bobsama Posts: 526
    edited April 2011
    IIRC they're imaged loudspeakers; the interior 6.5" woofer is for midrange and the exterior 6.5" woofer is tuned for bass.
    polkaudio Monitor 5 Series II
    polkaudio SDA-1 (with the SL1000)
    TEAC AG-H300 MK III stereo receiver
    beyerdynamic DT-880 Premium (600 Ω) headphones
    SENNHEISER HD-555 headphones
    Little Dot MK IV tube headphone amp
    Little Dot DAC_I balanced D/A converter
  • F1nut
    F1nut Posts: 50,567
    edited April 2011
    A pair of Monitor 11s sold on e-bay in 04.
    The pictures on the Polk SDA.com site from that eBay auction are not like any Monitor 11 that I have seen before. You need to keep in mind that what is on that site is not always correct as other errors are known. That said, they might still be Monitor 11's, but of a later vintage as they are sporting the SL2000 tweeters and cone PR's, while the Monitor 11's that I have seen use Peerless tweeters and flat PR's.
    whats with the "fluid coupled woofer" I now they use that on tweeters

    That's a "fluid coupled sub-woofer", which is another term for passive radiator. The tweeters do not use a fluid coupled anything.
    IIRC they're imaged loudspeakers; the interior 6.5" woofer is for midrange and the exterior 6.5" woofer is tuned for bass.

    That is correct. One mid-driver per cabinet has acoustic foam mounted under it to tune it for midrange. The other is "open" to allow it to couple with the PR.
    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 t-u-r-d by the clean end."


    President of Club Polk

  • xoaphexox
    xoaphexox Posts: 246
    edited April 2011
    I have owned Monitor 11s. Looks just like them. The fact that it says Monitor 11 on the rear sticker is a dead giveaway. $100 is a decent price.

    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
  • halo71
    halo71 Posts: 4,603
    edited April 2011
    YAY, I was right after all. :biggrin: There was a pair of these local to me last year but I didn't, never do, have the cash. lol
    --Gary--
    Onkyo Integra M504, Bottlehead Foreplay III, Denon SACD, Thiel CS2.3, NHT VT-2, VT-3 and Evolution T6, Infinity RSIIIa, SDA1C and a few dozen other speakers around the house I change in and out.
  • ZillaRam
    ZillaRam Posts: 11
    edited April 2011
    Old saying, you snooze and you lose.
    They sold before I could get there yesterday.
    Darn it!
    I do appreciate all the guidance, though.
  • pitdogg2
    pitdogg2 Posts: 25,450
    edited April 2011
    F1nut wrote: »

    That's a "fluid coupled sub-woofer", which is another term for passive radiator. The tweeters do not use a fluid coupled anything.


    yes i knew Polk never used Ferro Fluid tweeters I was just stating I had known other manufactures did on the tweeters to keep the VC cool.
    I had just never heard the term used in a passive woofer situation
    Jesse your a fountain of info my friend
  • F1nut
    F1nut Posts: 50,567
    edited April 2011
    To avoid further confusion...... Polk has used ferro fluid in their tweeters, but the term fluid coupled would not apply to the use of that material. Fluid cooled would be the proper term. Polk was trying to describe the relationship between the mid-drivers and PR, which are coupled by air and since air contains water molecules, they used the term fluid coupled.
    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 t-u-r-d by the clean end."


    President of Club Polk

  • nadams
    nadams Posts: 5,877
    edited April 2011
    F1nut wrote: »
    To avoid further confusion...... Polk has used ferro fluid in their tweeters, but the term fluid coupled would not apply to the use of that material. Fluid cooled would be the proper term. Polk was trying to describe the relationship between the mid-drivers and PR, which are coupled by air and since air contains water molecules, they used the term fluid coupled.

    Actually, air is a fluid, and not just because it carries water molecules. It can't be considered a gas, because it contains multiple gases bonded together.

    The "fluid coupled" woofer is only fluid coupled because of the sealed cabinet forcing the air to move the passive radiator.

    Ferro fluid is a liquid with ferrous material that can be used (among other things) for cooling tweeters. Wiki!

    "Ferrofluids are commonly used in loudspeakers to remove heat from the voice coil, and to passively damp the movement of the cone. They reside in what would normally be the air gap around the voice coil, held in place by the speaker's magnet. Since ferrofluids are paramagnetic, they obey Curie's law, thus become less magnetic at higher temperatures. A strong magnet placed near the voice coil (which produces heat) will attract cold ferrofluid more than hot ferrofluid thus forcing the heated ferrofluid away from the electric voice coil and toward a heat sink. This is an efficient cooling method which requires no additional energy input"
    Ludicrous gibs!
  • PolkMaster1
    PolkMaster1 Posts: 847
    edited April 2011
    I would have said that these were the SDA2's.
    Statistics show that 98% of us will die at some point in our lifetime.

    The other 2% will work for WalMart.
  • F1nut
    F1nut Posts: 50,567
    edited April 2011
    nadams wrote: »
    Actually, air is a fluid, and not just because it carries water molecules. It can't be considered a gas, because it contains multiple gases bonded together.
    There ya go. :smile:
    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 t-u-r-d by the clean end."


    President of Club Polk

  • aboroth00
    aboroth00 Posts: 1,106
    edited April 2011
    nadams wrote: »
    Actually, air is a fluid, and not just because it carries water molecules. It can't be considered a gas, because it contains multiple gases bonded together.

    I just can't let this quote in good conscience go...

    1) Air is a fluid; gases and liquids are fluids. Pretty much anything that flows.
    2) Air doesn't carry water molecules (water vapor). Multiple gases constitute air including water vapor.
    3) Air is gas. No buts ifs what not. If air ain't a gas I don't know what is.
    4) Air does not contain multiple gases bonded together. They just are there in air in varying proportions.

    Now I feel better...
    2Ch Tube Audio Convert
  • F1nut
    F1nut Posts: 50,567
    edited April 2011
    Since we're getting specific....http://education.jlab.org/glossary/abund_atmos.html
    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 t-u-r-d by the clean end."


    President of Club Polk

  • nadams
    nadams Posts: 5,877
    edited April 2011
    aboroth00 wrote: »
    I just can't let this quote in good conscience go...

    1) Air is a fluid; gases and liquids are fluids. Pretty much anything that flows.
    2) Air doesn't carry water molecules (water vapor). Multiple gases constitute air including water vapor.
    3) Air is gas. No buts ifs what not. If air ain't a gas I don't know what is.
    4) Air does not contain multiple gases bonded together. They just are there in air in varying proportions.

    Now I feel better...

    Sorry... it's been a while since my last science class :)

    I at least got the fluid part right... do I get a point for that?
    Ludicrous gibs!
  • aboroth00
    aboroth00 Posts: 1,106
    edited April 2011
    nadams wrote: »
    Sorry... it's been a while since my last science class :)

    I at least got the fluid part right... do I get a point for that?

    Of course! :tongue:
    2Ch Tube Audio Convert