To be clear, SDA-SRS b/b I/Cs are least desirable due to limited modification choices

GlennDog

and they cannot be TL'd . . . correct-da-mundo?

TY

G

michaeljhsda2

AFAIK, they cannot be TL'd.

Toolfan66

There are Cable debates, there is Emotiva debates, but my biggest pet peeve on this Fourm is the whole they need to be TL or they are not desirable enough to own..

I'm not saying everyone thinks that way but I have seen peeps pass on 1C's / 2.3's / 1.2's / SRS B-B's, all because they read that the TL model is the be all end all of Polk speakers..

Some upgraded 1C's / 2.3's ect. With RDO-194's hold their own against the infamous TL models..

Are the TL models better? sure with the same upgrades using the RDO-198's to push them above them.

And where is there limited modifications to the other models?

All I'm saying is there is no shame in owning the other models, mod the hell out of them and have years of listening pleasure..

SDA1C

+1^^^ After some recent eye opening I am firmly in the idea that it takes nearly OCD type behavior to push the all "TL'd man" attitude. There are way bigger fish to fry else where before gaining the elitist view fo a 198.

PolkieMan

Now what was the big thing about the TL version as I remember it was the new SL-3000 tweeter which we found out later for all the extra money paid for the 2.3 Tls over the the 2.3 still do not sound as good as the $48 RDO-198's which can be had without any hype.