SDA 2A vs. Monitor 10A

gmcman

While on the hunt to upgrade from the RT800's I have stumbled across some SDA 2A's with the silver tweeter, not peerless and some Monitor 10A's with the peerless.

I have never heard any of the vintage speakers, are they more of a nostalgia thing or do they really wipe the floor with the current RT line?

Given the ages of the vintage models am I looking at a recap or something else in the crossovers? I don't mind but just curious.

helipilotdoug

gmcman wrote: »

While on the hunt to upgrade from the RT800's I have stumbled across some SDA 2A's with the silver tweeter, not peerless and some Monitor 10A's with the peerless.

I have never heard any of the vintage speakers, are they more of a nostalgia thing or do they really wipe the floor with the current RT line?

Given the ages of the vintage models am I looking at a recap or something else in the crossovers? I don't mind but just curious.

Can't comment on if either will wipe the floor with the RT line, since I've not had my ears on any RT's. However, the SDA 2A and Monitor 10A are both great speakers, and well worth spending time and a little money to update them. The SDA 2A's can be updated with the RDO-194 tweeters, which most feel is a great improvement over the SL-2000. There are some though who feel the 2000 is superior, so best to get your ears on them and decide for yourself after some time. The 10A's with the peerless tweeters are the model most would rather have. That being said, if you ever blow a tweeter, the RDO's do not fit the peerless hole, and IDK if there is a replacement that will. Both sets of speakers would improve if the crossovers were rebuilt. They are 20 something years old, and replacing caps and resistors would not only improve the sound, but would make them last for many more years. If you look around here, you will find many tweaks and mods that can be done to improve the overall sound, and make them wipe the floor of most any other speaker on the market today. The SDA speakers have a sound stage that is head and shoulders above any other speakers I've ever heard. Best of luck with these.

HTguru1982

You can see my system in my sig. I used to have the RT1000i's with the matching center and while they were good speakers, I think my current system is much better. I haven't upgraded the tweeters or crossovers yet but will do so in the near future. If you can swing the cash, I say get both the SDA2's and Monitor 10's. If you have to choose one though, definitely get the SDA's.

Mr. Bubbles

I own a pair of the SDA2a's and they sound great with no crossover updates whatsoever. I probably will update the crossovers in the future but am currently involved with a different project. I have not heard the Monitor 10's but have a pair of RTA12B's(?) with the Peerless tweets and they also sound great with no crossover updates (yet). I do prefer the peerless tweets over the SL2000's but have no experience with either of the RDO tweets. Either is a great model but IMO if you do not want to get both pairs and try them i would base the descision off of how you listen; ie, if you like to sit and listen from a "sweet spot", I would probably go with the SDA's for the expanded sound-stage and depth (a great experience if you have never heard it) or if you do not listen from that "sweet spot", I would probably choose the Monitor 10's as they are not necessarily designed around a specific listening position.

I will add that my SDA2A's are currently my favorite pair of all that I own. This list is comprised of the 2A's, 1C's, SRS's RTA12B's, Cizek's, Several DCM TF models and more. The @A's are very easy to listen to and have a great dimensional effect. sound quality is awesome. however, they are not the most powerful speaker i have.

good luck with the decision and enjoy the Vintage road. (I believe) you will find it to be better than most current designs.

Joe08867

Being a person that owns and has owned several SDA's and Monitor series speakers. I will say they are very different animals for the RT or LSi or any other line Polk currently offers.

Remember most of these speakers were designed when music was at its pinnacle of sound quality (my opinion of course). So they react smoother and with more defined mids than most newer speakers. B&W and a few other high priced guys being the exception of this. I still hold my SDA2's as the best all around speakers I have ever heard for the money and quite frankly can't be beat with upgrades and tweaks.

Like Oliver I have owned several, SDAII , SDA2B's, 1C's, RTA12's, Monitor 5,7,10 and 12's, as well as AR1's, Boston Acoustic A150's, Klipschorns, Lascala, Cornwalls and Heresey's just to name a few.

I still have the SDA2's.

gmcman

The SDA's I'm looking at have the 3 mids and 2 tweets.....cabinets are in perfect cond and the cable is included.

I think I can get them for about $280....not sure if its a great price.

cnh

Do your speakers look like this:

http://www.polksda.com/ebay/5731248375_SDA2.pdf

Then they are straight up SDA-2s and not 2As. They 2 have an extra mid-woofer and a dimensional tweeter. Some like the dimensional tweeter, some disconnect it. Later models did not have that.

But still probably worth a couple hundred or less?

cnh

Joe08867

Two tweets and three mids makes them the original SDA2 not an A or B. 280.00 is a bit steep for those. I paid 250 almost 15yrs ago.

I still have my originals. And still prefer them to the SDA2A's and B's even 4.1TL modded 2B's. I do not use the dimensional tweeter and have upgraded the crossovers with Sonicaps and Mills resistors and the tweeter with the RD-0194 from Polk.

gmcman

Here's a pic of the SDA's...cabinets look great.

gmcman

I guess my main dillema is the SDA pictured above and the SDA 2A I'm also looking at, are basically the same price and condition......not sure which to go after.

wayne3burk

if i had to choose between monitors with peerless tweeters and SDA 2s with... whatever those are.... I'd take the montior 10s

I had a pair of SDA1C stuidios with sl2000 tweeters and a pair of monitor 10s with the peerless and I prefered the Monitor 10s for
"sound" quality.

but as it turns out i don't have either pair now and my main speakers are Wharfedale W70s a pair of W60s, a pair of Advent Loudspeaker U3s, etc etc. for what it's worth

wayne

gmcman

I'm really racking my brain on this now....I appreciate all the helpful information.

I have a few more questions to help narrow my hunt. Within an hour of me, there are either a pair of Monitor 10A's pair of 10B's, SDA 2A..near perfect, SDA 2B, or the early SDA-2. The Monitor 10B's are practically like new with stands.

With the SDA's in mind...now I know everyone's ears are different but it seems there isn't as much love for the early SDA-2 as opposed to the SDA-2B...how does the 2A fit in here? I assume the 2A and 2B are just more refined?

With these SDA's, if we unhook the cable and go to straight 2CH listening..is this where one model over the other really shines or not? Just trying to grasp as much as I can here with as much current info as possible.

cnh

You shouldn't be put off of the 2s. Look at Joe above. There are others here who also run that model and like it fine...most just disconnect the dimensional tweeter and they're off to the races.

You really won't like the SDAs as much without their cable...they're not meant to be run that way. They put out a bigger/wider sound-stage than the 10s do. Placement is more important, though, with SDAs. As I point out above you need about 14' of free wall space and have to be able to get them fairly close to the back wall with 'nothing' protruding in front of their plane, etc.

I have both SDA-2Bs and recently picked up some 10As. I use them for different purposes.

Run the 10s with an old Vintage receiver, and the SDAs with an integrated tube amp.

cnh

gmcman

I failed to mention the versions with the single tweeter over the double tweeter for the early SDA-2. I may be wrong on this but wasn't the later SDA-2 with the single tweeter almost the same as the SDA-2A, or are they the same? The SDA-2 appears to be almost identical but the mids are closer together, is it the tweeter version that was different?

With the SDA-2 in question, why is it suggested to unhook the dimensional tweeter? Is this part of the SDA or is that just the mids?

gmcman

I went and listened to a pair of Monitor 10A's w/ the peerles and a pair of SDA-2A's with the silver silk dome tweeter, my first time hearing a pair of SDA's.

First was the Monitor....I really like the tweeter...very smooth but the midrange was not what I was expecting.

I then hooked up the SDA-2A and it took a couple songs to get over my ears trying to play tricks, but the soundstage left the dimensions of the room...wow.
I'm not sure if I like the SDA as of yet....could it be the fact it's the older model or do all of them sound this way? I think the sound was very smooth and detailed, but this is also coming from 12 years of RT800 listening so perhaps I forgot what good music sounded like.

I listened to some Fleetwood Mac Rumors, DSOTM, Peter Gabriel, and I could have stayed there all day...makes me question if I actually have the room dimensions for the SDA.

What can I expect in comparison with the SDA 2B or early SDA-2 over the 2A? I believe the mids could have been slightly more detailed with the SDA-2A....that's really the only detail that I remember the most that would concern me. We didn't have a sub playing either but none of the music had really demanding bass.

Overall they are definately much smoother than my RT800...that's for sure.

gmcman

Here's a pic of the SDA-2A I listened to...the pair is practically like new, comes with the boxes and the factory cable. The wood is the dark finish and has no blemishes, this is the 2nd owner and between the two, they have been pampered while the 1st owner barely worked them.

Trying to understand all this SDA business and correct me if i'm wrong, but with the peerless tweeters, if they need replacement then i'm kinda SOL or is there a direct-fit?

With TL'ng these, I understand all can be done but with the 2A the end result is arguably superior to the early SDA-2?

With the SDA 2A and 2B, what's the main difference as from the exterior they look the same. I read the x-over is more refined but what about the cabinets?

If I TL either the 2A or 2B then I guess it's a toss between the two correct?

Also, the 2 tweeters on the SDA2, why do some disconnect one of them? Any help is appreciated as it's getting down to the wire for me...I have to drop the hammer on one of these....:razz:

cnh

OK,

I'm hardly the SDA expert here. But this will get you the 'bump' you need for those guys to chime in.

First. SDAs do not use peerless tweeters, but SL-2000,2500, and 3000 models depending on which SDAs you have.

Two, SDAs that use SL-2000s take the RDO-194 replacements. To TL an SDA you have to have higher than an SL-2000 so that you can drop in the RDO-198s, etc.

SDA 2As only have SL-2000s for the most part so you can't TL them unless you completely redo the crossovers--change them.

Three, people disconnect the Dimension Effect tweeters in the 2s because Polk found that they interfere with the SDA effect and that it is better to center the SDA effect on the mid-drivers and not also carry them to the highs in the tweeters.

Four, Peerless tweeters are found in the Monitor series, usually earlier than later models. If you have an SL tweeter in your Monitors, you'd probably prefer the RDO replacements (they are simple drop-ins).

Now we'll wait for the real SDA aficionados to weigh in!

cnh

gmcman

Thanks......clears some things up. I thought the very early SDA had a peerless but if not no worries, was mainly debating the TL and obviously I need to see which tweeter these have.

I don't mind doing a full-blown crossover upgrade if needed, guess it comes down to cost.

When I was listening to te SDA-2A, I may have been slightly too close which is why I was debating even getting a SDA after I left. I was about 7' away and was in a smaller room...about 20x14 and the listening area was across the narrow part of the room.

I bet if I could get 3 or 4 feet more away then they would prob sound much better but the effect was there anyway.

Joe08867

gmcman wrote: »

Trying to understand all this SDA business and correct me if i'm wrong, but with the peerless tweeters, if they need replacement then i'm kinda SOL or is there a direct-fit?

You can use the RD-0194 to replace the Peerless, SL1000 and SL2000 tweeters. You would need to do some woodwork to get the RDO in the spot the peerless was in. Not a problem for SDA's as the Peerless was never used in the SDA's. The speaker you are showing has the SL2000 tweeter. Like CNH said the RD-0194 is a great replacement and I suggest it to anyone with the SL2000.

With TL'ng these, I understand all can be done but with the 2A the end result is arguably superior to the early SDA-2?

You can TL certain models and it has to do with the boards the crossovers are on. There is a mod to make them TL's it is called the 4.1TL mod and is the only mod sactioned by Polk. SDA2A's cannot be TL'd.

With the SDA 2A and 2B, what's the main difference as from the exterior they look the same. I read the x-over is more refined but what about the cabinets?

There are differences in the boards. If you look at the schematics at the top of this forum section you can look for yourself.

If I TL either the 2A or 2B then I guess it's a toss between the two correct?

Just so we are clear you can only TL SDA2B's.

Also, the 2 tweeters on the SDA2, why do some disconnect one of them? Any help is appreciated as it's getting down to the wire for me...I have to drop the hammer on one of these....:razz:

The Dimensional tweeter adds a musical artifact to the sound and can be fatiguing to the ear. Later versions of SDA's never had a dimensional tweeter. Kind of telling in it's own way. I have run my Original SDA2's with and without and can honestly say they are better without the dimensional tweeter.

pitdogg2

SDA2a's can be 4.1TL'd as per F1nut

http://www.polkaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?97536-SDA2A-RDO198-Upgrade&highlight=sda2a

post #7

Joe08867

I stand corrected, it looks like all you need to know is whether or not they are Blade/Blade or Pin/Blade for the interconnect. If they are blade/blade your are good to go for the 4.1tl mod.

gmcman

pitdogg2 wrote: »

SDA2a's can be 4.1TL'd as per F1nut

http://www.polkaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?97536-SDA2A-RDO198-Upgrade&highlight=sda2a

post #7

That's a very informative link...thanks. Still makes me question even more on going after the 2B over the 2A, in which case I will either do the 194 or the 198 mod to either. The fact the 2B has the updated mid drivers makes me want to pursue that route.

After modding both the 2A and 2B, can anyone testify that the 2B takes the mod better than the 2A? Does the 2B gain more of a "lead" with the TL mod over a 2A? How does the more "delicate" sweet spot of the 2A change with the 194 mod, does it open up anymore?