Upgrades available for CRS+ blade/blade

Bigbang

I just picked up a pair of SDA CRS+ 1986 version with the blade/blade interconnect and 6510 drivers. I just read where you cannot TL the blade/blade CRS's. I was wondering what that leaves me with/without?

I assume I can still upgrade/replace the caps and resistors. JB Weld the baskets. Dynamat the passive and drivers. Mortite all speakers. Replace the bindings. Replace the factory interconnect but I cannot replace the tweeters to the RDO's? Is that correct or is there a way to upgrade the tweeters?

If i can replace the tweeters what all does the TL upgrade accomplish?

Thanks,

David

TennMan

You can upgrade the tweeters to RDO-194s and upgrade the caps. The TL upgrade uses RDO-198s and it requires adding and additional cap. I don't think you can TL blade/blade CRS+ versions but I may be wrong.

VR3

A list of all of the upgrades are on my site under the learning center

teekay0007

Instead of using the Mortite, most people around here (including me) seem to prefer using Armaflex insulation tape - available at Home Depot for about $8 for a 30' x 2" roll - if you are going to re-gasket your tweeters, MW drivers and your PRs. It's much cleaner, easier to handle and much easier to deal with when you want to remove/replace anything later because it's only adhesive on one side and doesn't "glue down" your drivers. Be sure to remove what's left of the old gaskets first and cut the Armaflex into 1/2" wide strips before applying it around the speaker basket perimeters.

You can also make sure your cabinets have a good seal around all interior seams. If not, you may want to re-seal them with a rubberized caulk or silicone.

westmassguy

You can do every single upgrade short of the TL/RDO-198. The crossover in the 1986 CRS+ is the same as the 2As. One of the down sides to this generation (3rd) is the massive capacitors you'll need to buy for the 2nd order, low-pass shunt. Two 130uf caps in parallel. When I originally recapped my 2As, I couldn't afford the Metalized Polypropylenes at the time, so installed new NP Electrolytics. I've since replaced those with three 90uf Dayton caps mounted on a separate board. The Daytons were the least expensive option.
Regarding the Gasket Material, you can purchase the 2" Armaflex tape, and cut it in strips, but Parts Express sells rolls of gasket material which is essentially Armaflex that's pre-cut to 3/8" or 1/2" widths.

EndersShadow

Dont forget Larry's Ring's if he has got any more of them....

westmassguy

EndersShadow wrote: »

Dont forget Larry's Ring's if he has got any more of them....

Hurricane nuts are quite good also, not as nice as Larry's Rings, but effective

Toolfan66

Don't use Mortite!!!!!


Mortite Sucks ****!!!


And I have a set of rings if thats what you want to do!!!

westmassguy

Toolfan66 wrote: »

Don't use Mortite!!!!!


Mortite Sucks ****!!!


And I have a set of rings if thats what you want to do!!!

+1^^^^^

Malbec

If you decide to seal the cabinet seams and insist on using silicone caulk, make sure you use a non-corrosive rtv type.

pitdogg2

teekay0007 wrote: »

You can also make sure your cabinets have a good seal around all interior seams. If not, you may want to re-seal them with a rubberized caulk or silicone.

Do Not use silicone this is bad advice or anything that has silicone in it.

Hot melt glue or liquid nails type stuff

westmassguy

pitdogg2 wrote: »

Do Not use silicone this is bad advice or anything that has silicone in it.

Hot melt glue or liquid nails type stuff

Agreed, Silicone is the worst. Hot glue really doesn't hold up well over time. I use clear acrylic caulk. Applies easily, smooths out with your finger tip so you can get into all the nooks and crannies, and cleanup with soap and water. More professional looking results when fully cured.

Bigbang

You guys are the best forum group ever! Such great support here and great suggestions. Thanks for all the input.

I'll trust you guys on the Mortite but I thought Ray did some extensive testing with it and found it to be better than anything else. That was a while ago and I've been away for a while so I'll trust you guys and stay away from it. It was kinda hard to work with. Really messy.

Larry can you PM me th cost of those rings if you still have some. That is one of the best ideas I've ever seen and I don't know if I can stand to let them sit there and just sound good. Some tinkering must be done. I like to start small and work my way up to the expensive caps and tweets (I do still have a mortgage and three kids) but in this case you can't ever make those rings again. Thank Larry. You are a true craftsman. Those stands are really something. I wish I had half your skill with metal or half of F1's skill with wood.

Not to start something new and I'm way out of my league here but is there a running debate over the 194's and the 198's? Not in terms of what you can use with what speaker but I thought I remember reading that the 194's had a more laid back sound and not as bright as the 198's or as harsh as the sl2000's?

Can anybody weigh in on what to expect with 194's over sl2000's?

Thanks again guys! Best group on the Internet!

David

Schurkey

Bigbang wrote: »

Mortite all speakers.

You'll regret that one. I do.

F1nut

I thought I remember reading that the 194's had a more laid back sound and not as bright as the 198's or as harsh as the sl2000's?

There is definitely a difference between the RD0's, but the RD0198-1's are not bright. I'd say they are more transparent.

Can anybody weigh in on what to expect with 194's over sl2000's?

You can expect a smoother, more detailed top end.

teekay0007

westmassguy wrote: »

Agreed, Silicone is the worst. Hot glue really doesn't hold up well over time. I use clear acrylic caulk. Applies easily, smooths out with your finger tip so you can get into all the nooks and crannies, and cleanup with soap and water. More professional looking results when fully cured.

Why no love for the silicone? The clear silicone sealant in a tube worked very well for me to seal up a few short stretches of cabinet seams that weren't coated with hot glue as well as the screw holes that remained in the cabinet bottom after I removed the original fiberboard pedestal in favor of my hardwood ones, when I spiked my SDA-2Bs up. The small tube was much easier to handle/maneuver inside of the confined space of the speaker cabinet interior. Also, I wasn't much concerned about "professional looking results" inside of a cabinet that looks like someone set a hot glue sprinkler going in there. :eek:

westmassguy

teekay0007 wrote: »

Why no love for the silicone? The clear silicone sealant in a tube worked very well for me to seal up a few short stretches of cabinet seams that weren't coated with hot glue as well as the screw holes that remained in the cabinet bottom after I removed the original fiberboard pedestal in favor of my hardwood ones, when I spiked my SDA-2Bs up. The small tube was much easier to handle/maneuver inside of the confined space of the speaker cabinet interior. Also, I wasn't much concerned about "professional looking results" inside of a cabinet that looks like someone set a hot glue sprinkler going in there. :eek:

Many reasons. Most Silicone adhesives release an "off-gas" as they cure. This gas is corrosive to certain metals. The Molex and Spade Connectors, Copper Traces on the Crossovers, exposed wiring on Capacitors, Resistors etc, would all be vulnerable to this. http://www.intertronics.co.uk/articles/tb008.htm
In addition, Silicone is not the best choice for adhering porus materials such as wood or wood by-products. Solvent based construction adhesives, water based/acrylic adhesives, or even the newer urethane glues will bond better.
"Professional Looking Results" are a personal preference. Just because the guy before my did a lousy job, doesn't mean I have to. I was taught at an early age, if you're not going to do it right, don't do it all (thanks Mom). If I did a sloppy job, even though it would not be visable, every time I looked at the speaker, it would be the first thing that popped into my head. But that's just me.
The clear acrylic adhesive I use is available in cartridge form, or small tubes.

nspindel

One idea here may be to turn these into 4.1TL's even though they are the 1986 version. Why not buy a pair of boards from Tony and build the later version crossovers? You'd need to get a pair of 6511's and the right inductors, but all of these things are easily obtainable. Then you'd have the latest design and be able to use the RD-0198 tweeters. It's a bit of an investment in parts, but highly subsidized by not having to buy four 130uF caps.

F1nut

westmassguy wrote: »

Many reasons. Most Silicone adhesives release an "off-gas" as they cure. This gas is corrosive to certain metals. The Molex and Spade Connectors, Copper Traces on the Crossovers, exposed wiring on Capacitors, Resistors etc, would all be vulnerable to this. http://www.intertronics.co.uk/articles/tb008.htm
In addition, Silicone is not the best choice for adhering porus materials such as wood or wood by-products. Solvent based construction adhesives, water based/acrylic adhesives, or even the newer urethane glues will bond better.

^This^

In addition, silicone creeps. That is, its properties tend to spread and silicone contamination can be problematic in ways that aren't always obvious.

to seal up a few short stretches of cabinet seams that weren't coated with hot glue

Some folks don't realize.....just because you don't see the glue Polk used oozing out of a seam doesn't mean there isn't glue in the joint. The panels are interlocked, not just butt jointed.

PolkieMan

I would love to go down to Goodwill today and find some just for that.
Polk said they quit making SDA because too big and wide could not get proper demo from dealers (so that still the same with any speakers ever been to Fry's? :biggrin:).The CRS is not that big.
Klipsch still makes their Heritage line,hmmmm...but not cheap.
I think we could get the plans for the SDA CRS cabinets and find a shop to get them made buy the parts and there you are.

nspindel wrote: »

One idea here may be to turn these into 4.1TL's even though they are the 1986 version. Why not buy a pair of boards from Tony and build the later version crossovers? You'd need to get a pair of 6511's and the right inductors, but all of these things are easily obtainable. Then you'd have the latest design and be able to use the RD-0198 tweeters. It's a bit of an investment in parts, but highly subsidized by not having to buy four 130uF caps.

nspindel

There's only one flaw with that plan – the passive radiator. That is the only part that is not easily replaced. Otherwise it would be doable.

PolkieMan

Yea your right, but maybe there is something close?
I still think we have really smart people here and that know people inside Polk that could make it happen.
Polk has no interest in reviving them so why would they care if we were to make newer, better technology clones.

nspindel wrote: »

There's only one flaw with that plan – the passive radiator. That is the only part that is not easily replaced. Otherwise it would be doable.

westmassguy

PolkieMan wrote: »

Yea your right, but maybe there is something close?
I still think we have really smart people here and that know people inside Polk that could make it happen.
Polk has no interest in reviving them so why would they care if we were to make newer, better technology clones.

Oh I think the powers that be and their legal eagles, are, and would be very protective about their intellectual property. This forum, support from past and present Polk personnel, availability of oem replacement parts, and improved technology for decades old speakers, are all gifts. Treat them as such, and don't pursue something that could ruin everything.

PolkieMan

Well the first thing to find out would be if they even care, if we/someone did.
That's why someone that knows them would have to ask for the cabinet plans.
That would be the only thing that copies their design.
But it would not be a copycat anyway since most of the parts would be from other sources.
+ It would give Polk a chance to sell more drivers which should be profitable for them.

Schurkey

PolkieMan wrote: »

Well the first thing to find out would be if they even care, if we/someone did.
That's why someone that knows them would have to ask for the cabinet plans.
That would be the only thing that copies their design.
But it would not be a copycat anyway since most of the parts would be from other sources.
+ It would give Polk a chance to sell more drivers which should be profitable for them.

First Guess: An individual, making speakers for personal use, would get considerable support; and as you said--they'd be happy to sell the drivers.

Second Guess: Someone making SDA-knockoff speakers for resale would be met by an army of lawyers; and a "cease-and-desist" order.

nspindel

Here's how you should think about this. SDA speakers are like Ford Thunderbirds. A classic product from a bygone era. I can go out right now, and buy myself a beat up 1956 Thunderbird. And I can restore it to original glory. Parts are available, I could have a good body shop bring it back to factory shine. Does Ford like me doing that? You bet! It promotes the brand, it's great for image. Ford can't buy advertising that's better than a shiny '56 T-bird cruising down the highway with the top down, every car that passes by will be gawking at that car. The kids in the back seat will be asking their parents "What kind of car is that????" That's extremely positive reinforcement of the Ford image driving all over for everyone to see and have a "Ford is awesome!" thought planted in their brains. Does that help them sell new Fords? Absolutely! No doubt about it. So even though Ford, Inc. won't make a dime off of me restoring that '56 T-bird, I bet there are people who work for Ford right now who would be happy to talk to me, give me advice, point me towards parts, introduce me to other enthusiasts that they know, etc.

BUT!!!!

If I owned a sheet metal shop and decided I could manufacture my own replica 1956 Thunderbird bodies, and decided hey, Ford's not selling the Thunderbird any more, so I think I'll make the body myself and then buy all the parts I need, and start selling 1956 Ford Thunderbirds, what's Ford going to say then? Ummmmmm...... They'd shut my **** down in a New York minute.

Moral of the story is. This is a hobby. Enjoy it for what it is. Go find yourself a nice vintage pair of SDA's. The better condition they're in, the better off you are. Just as the better condition the T-Bird is when I buy it, the less work it is to restore. Follow the advice of the other enthusiasts around here, and build yourself a great set of speakers. Polk will be happy to help you, because when you show off your speakers to your friends and they ask "Wow, what are those??? They sound AMAZING!!!" and you answer "They're 25 year old Polks," the company knows your friends are thinking "Wow, I gotta go buy me some Polk speakers!" But that's as far as it goes. Try to go commercial with it, and the ball game is over.

Schurkey

nspindel wrote: »

BUT!!!!

If I owned a sheet metal shop and decided I could manufacture my own replica 1956 Thunderbird bodies, and decided hey, Ford's not selling the Thunderbird any more, so I think I'll make the body myself and then buy all the parts I need, and start selling 1956 Ford Thunderbirds, what's Ford going to say then? Ummmmmm...... They'd shut my **** down in a New York minute.
, because when you show off your speakers to your friends and they ask "Wow, what are those??? They sound AMAZING!!!" and you answer "They're 25 year old Polks," the company knows your friends are thinking "Wow, I gotta go buy me some Polk speakers!" But that's as far as it goes. Try to go commercial with it, and the ball game is over.

BRAND NEW (Stamped from too-thin sheetmetal in Asia, then welded together in...I think...Georgia.) MUSTANG, CHEVELLE, and CAMARO bodies are NOW AVAILABLE and have been for several years. There are full cabs available for '50's Chevy pickups, and almost certainly Chrysler repops also.

Search on "Dynacorn International".

The difference it that this junk is licensed by Ford and GM, and they get a cut of the action.

Don't be misled--the reproduction body panels are NOT as good as the originals, but they're better than rusty originals.

You present a business case to the owner of Polk for licensing the SDA patents 'n' trademarks AND have financing to back it up...I bet they'll give you every blueprint in the file cabinet.

PolkieMan

Well they would not be made to sell, I have a 50 hours :rolleyes:a week job.
It would just be an enjoyable project.
And of course asking them for the cabinets plans would give them
a chance to say yes or no. Yes they may not like the cabinets copied.
The ones you did nspindel were almost from scratch except the bear cabinets.

TennMan

I don't see why getting the cabinet plans from Polk is a factor. They are just a box with a few large holes in them. A few minutes with a tape measure and a sheet of paper and you have your plans.

To me having the proper machines to cut the holes, and make the joints, and having the skills to use them is the important things you will need. If you are working 50 hours a week I don't think you will be able to make enough speakers for Polk to worry about. If you go into full time production making them that is a different story.

nspindel

PolkieMan wrote: »

Well they would not be made to sell, I have a 50 hours :rolleyes:a week job.
It would just be an enjoyable project.
And of course asking them for the cabinets plans would give them
a chance to say yes or no. Yes they may not like the cabinets copied.
The ones you did nspindel were almost from scratch except the bear cabinets.

I hear where you're coming from. The only original parts in my 4.1TL's are the cabinets (which I modified with new veneer), the wires that connect the 16mH inductor to the crossover boards, the wiring harnesses (which I may swap out for new based on Raife's ongoing research), the passive radiators, the polyfill, and the binding post cups (which I modified with new Cardas posts and a post instead of the pin/blade connector).

But yet.... there's something that makes it a completely "different" speaker if you don't start with an original cabinet. Not to mention, there's still that pesky passive radiator. As for me, I find it very rewarding to take something that is old and restore it. To me that feels more enjoyable than starting with all new parts and building from scratch. To each his own, I guess.