What did you notice after removing your polyswitch

geppy1

Wondering what people noticed after removing their polyswitch??

george daniel

the tweeters always play--even at really loud levels---seriously,, more peace of mind for me,,my ears are not good enough to discern any audible difference.Maybe someone will chime in with more data.

pitdogg2

george daniel wrote: »

the tweeters always play--even at really loud levels---seriously,, .

Then they just up and stop and never come back on.........I didn't really notice any difference BUT before i recapped my SDA2a's I put new poly switches in and blew a tweeter before the poly tripped. To be honest i really wasn't playing them too loud. My gear was TFM 45 with a C16pre. On the Amp meter it was bouncing to the 50watt mark so at 4ohm maybe 90-125 clean power. Recapped took out the poly's and was listening one night BAM another tweeter. On the older poly's when i got the speakers(2nd hand) when played on the same gear I really couldn't turn up the sound at all they(poly's) just tripped all the time with little power. To be fare my amps are at Rolands right now been there since April getting a complete rebuild I would hear a slight distortion in the right channel shortly after turning the TFM45 on but it would go away after a few minutes 5min max so i would not play anything through it for 25 min it sounded fine then I could hear no distortion at all. So we'll see if that made any difference in the tweeter cooking.

long story short i could hear no difference.

Joe08867

The problem is when you do the polyswitches. I redid my crossovers and removed the switches at the same time. So there was an audible difference but what was caused by the switch or by the caps I don't know.

george daniel

good point--but I must admit,,I have never blown a tweeter after removing polyswitches--now I'm sure that,along the way it's partially because I upgraded my amplification,,YMMV

nadams

I noticed that I was cleaner and more detailed after removing my polyswitch

stubby

^^^ What he said!! Clarity was much improved. More stable imaging as well.

stubby

F1nut

Detail and clarity my a$$. Way too bright, added a .5 ohm resistor......perfect!

george daniel

F1nut wrote: »

Detail and clarity my a$$. Way too bright, added a .5 ohm resistor......perfect!

dosen't everyone replace the poly with a .5 ohm resistor--I know I did

geppy1

And F1 nut steps up like clockwork. I was listening pretty loud and the tweeters were cutting out. I have listened louder with other polks with polys and never had this happen so i assume they were on the edge. I stopped took them apart cut them out then listened again I found it to be every so slightly more crisp and defined. More stable and seemed a touch more open. I am for now using a Marantz PM 7000 which is a touch warm When listening to Bonnie R live with just her and guitar I kept thinking the guitar lacked the usual zip After cutting out the polys it had more twang and her voice did not seem so overly warm. I felt I could lift my head up verses feeling like I was having to look at the floor. Little more elevated stage. Pretty small differences but it is there. I also coat my tweeter tabs on the 194s with Walker SST which sharpens up the image.

dorokusai

Nothing but then again, I never found it neccesary to the signal path.

drumminman

george daniel wrote: »

dosen't everyone replace the poly with a .5 ohm resistor--I know I did

The RTA 12_'s? I thought you didn't like the 194's b/c they squashed the soundstage, didn't have the sparkle?

The reason I ask is that I'm debating on whether or not I should replace the SL1000's (in RTA 12C's) with the 194's. I just can't find anything wrong with the former, and I'm usually sensitive to high end artifact/tizziness/distortion.

I'm hesitant to fix something that doesn't sound broke, but most here on the forum swear by the 194's.

Joe08867

If you are usually sensitive to high end artifact/tizziness/distortion then the RDO is the best way to go. But you also have the Peerless so it isn't as big an issue. If you had the SL2000 I wouldn't hesitate but the Peerless is an awesome tweeter and what I think Polk used to get the sound for the RDO's.

I will say the RDO is much more laid back and has Zero Sizzle compared to all of the original tweeters the Peerless included.

pitdogg2

george daniel wrote: »

dosen't everyone replace the poly with a .5 ohm resistor--I know I did

actually no some just jump the switch.....way to bright

nadams

When I removed my Poly's, I cut them at the base of the switch, leaving the legs in the board. I then just bent the legs to cross each other, and soldered them together.

Now, I also have removed my outside tweeters (original SDA2's), and never modified the crossovers to make up for the lack of tweeter. Apparently, there's another resistor you're supposed to add to bring the level of the remaining tweeter back up to where it should be when stock with two tweeters. So, perhaps the two mods together cancelled each other out in terms of loudness from the tweeters.

Either way, I've been happy with them, even when running the SL2000's.

geppy1

drumminman, I still feel that way for the 12s but i could use Peerless or an SL1000.

When comparing SL2000s to RDOs in the SDA 2As and Bs I find the SL2000 is more open, have more of an elevated stage,and more transparent. I know of many other who have heard the same thing but are to afraid to say anything least they get ripped for it. HOWEVER the Sl2000 can depending gear be to much. In order for me not to feel like the 194S are too dull I put Walker SST on the termnals and that sharpens up the image.

I found I could tolorate the 2000s in the SDA2Bs but in the SDA 2As they are more annoying and I prefer the RDO194s. I think gear matching is very important .

george daniel

pitdogg2 wrote: »

actually no some just jump the switch.....way to bright

I suppose you are right,, jumped mine initially,,years ago-- a phone call to Jesse fixed that.

stubby

george daniel wrote: »

dosen't everyone replace the poly with a .5 ohm resistor--I know I did

While reworking my crossovers I debated adding the .5 ohm resistor in place of the polys. I figured I could add it later if things were too sibilant or edgy (bright). After allowing full break in time I have to say that I am quite happy with no resistor. Not too bright for my ears.

stubby

quadzilla

After TL'ing my CRS+s, I tried a jumper. I found that, while I wouldn't say they were bright, there was just the slightest touch of sibilance here an there. I then tried the .5 ohm Mills I got for the build, and found that they make the highs sound thin and... not veiled, but not right either. More like just very slightly muted and missing all traces of sparkle, and not in a good way. I'm going to get some Cardas posts for these soon, and I'll pick up some .1 and .2 ohm Mills at the same time. The .2s will be very close to the resistence of the polyswitches, and so probably most true to the way Matthew Polk intended them to sound, but if the highs are still a bit muted, then .1s it'll be.

dark rider

I recently picked up near mint original (late-1979) RTA12s with the fast blow fuses and original Peerless tweeters rather than the polyswitch. I'm thinking at some point of rebuilding the crossovers. Do the fuses have a similar impact on the SQ as the polys? Personally, I love the sound of the Peerless tweeters and have no intentions on replacing them.

I did pick up some gently used SW120 PRs off of eBay to swap out the original PRs, which were in tact and sounded decent, but had significant bubbling on one of them. I was surprised to see that they went from Plastic cones in the original PRs to Styrofoam. The only ofther difference was the newer PRs have black baskets versus unfinished on the originals. SQ between them was similar with the newer versions being tighter but not reaching as deep. I prefer the faster response times of the newer SW120's, since I've got active subs in my setup, so it was a worthwhile switch. I plan to keep the originals as backups, or if I ever sell them, which is unlikely based on what I've heard thus far!

inspiredsports

Whether you can hear it or not, polyswitches, fuses (and even resistors if used to make up for the polyswitches resistance) all add noise to the circuit.

The biggest benefit of replacing/bypassing is that it is likely the polyswitch will eventually get noisy to the point you can hear it.

quadzilla

After replacing the .5 with the .2 ohm Mills and upgrading the speaker terminals to Cardas CCGRs, my 4.1 TLs are wow! The sibilance is completely gone, but I have that great shine and detail in my highs. The speaks also have a very balanced sound, where with the .5 they were heavy on the bottom and missing the highs. So for my tastes, the .2 Ohm Mills is the perfect replacement for the polyswitch. The .5 is just wrong, and actually made them sound rather bad. Might be ok if you're running SL2000s or just have a painfully bright system, but not otherwise.