3.1tl or 1C?

Bugstyvy
Bugstyvy Posts: 119
edited June 2014 in Vintage Speakers
Which would you go for and why?
Mcintosh MC2300
Mcintosh 2105
Integra Pre amp 9.8
Pro-ject Record Player
Sony 200 disc CD Changer
Basic Wiring
60" Samsung Series 8
SDA-1.2TL
SDA-3.1TL (unused at the moment)
Post edited by Bugstyvy on
· Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Comments

  • bluecomet
    bluecomet Posts: 1,118
    edited June 2014
    You are going to get a lot of people rooting for both speakers. I am lucky enough to own both speakers. I see you have the SRS 1.2tl speakers. The 3.1tl's will sound similar to those speakers due to them sharing the same tweeter. Personally I would lean toward
    the SDA 1c's musically. The 3.1tl seems to dig deeper bass wise. It will really boil down to lessoning to them yourself and the
    condition of the speaker.
    3.1tl's are much more difficult to find than 1c's.
    Polk HT system 1: LSIC, LSI25 mains, LSI F/X rears, Lsi F/X rear centers,
    Yamaha RX-V2500 System, Carver A753 3 channel amp.

    Polk HT system 2: , SRT system with f/x 1,000's rear speakers on 7.1 system currently using Onkyo TX-RZ820 receiver, powered by Sunfire Grand Theater amp

    Polk Speaker collection: SDA SRS 1.2tl x 2, SRT system, SDA SRS 2 P/B, SDA 2A, SDA 1C Studio, SDA CRS+, Monitor 7B & 4, SRS 3.1tl, RTA 15tl, LS90, LSI 9
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • MAD
    MAD Posts: 105
    edited June 2014
    Good question

    I believe if you wanted to upgrade either eventually, the 1c would need the rdo 194 where as the 3.1tl would need the rdo 198 and it seems like the rdo 198 tweeter is the one to get.

    But with that said, the 1c have two tweeters vs. 1 in the 3.1. Would that effect the height of the soundstage?

    More questions, sorry.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Bugstyvy
    Bugstyvy Posts: 119
    edited June 2014
    But the mids on the 3.1's are spread out farther top to bottom which might open up the sound. The one tweeter upgrade is half the cost of the 1c. But I just want an answer which is better out of the box.
    Mcintosh MC2300
    Mcintosh 2105
    Integra Pre amp 9.8
    Pro-ject Record Player
    Sony 200 disc CD Changer
    Basic Wiring
    60" Samsung Series 8
    SDA-1.2TL
    SDA-3.1TL (unused at the moment)
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • bluecomet
    bluecomet Posts: 1,118
    edited June 2014
    Out of the box the 3.1tl is the better speaker, mostly because of the SL2000 stock tweets on the SDA 1c's.
    Polk HT system 1: LSIC, LSI25 mains, LSI F/X rears, Lsi F/X rear centers,
    Yamaha RX-V2500 System, Carver A753 3 channel amp.

    Polk HT system 2: , SRT system with f/x 1,000's rear speakers on 7.1 system currently using Onkyo TX-RZ820 receiver, powered by Sunfire Grand Theater amp

    Polk Speaker collection: SDA SRS 1.2tl x 2, SRT system, SDA SRS 2 P/B, SDA 2A, SDA 1C Studio, SDA CRS+, Monitor 7B & 4, SRS 3.1tl, RTA 15tl, LS90, LSI 9
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Mike Reeter
    Mike Reeter Posts: 4,315
    edited June 2014
    I own both and prefer the 3.1TL's over the 1C's. The 3.1's are of the last generation of the SDA technology and have one of the flattest response curves of any SDA model.

    The 1C's are a very good speaker, I just think with some material the midrange areas sounds a little congested at times, but still a fine speaker and a little more compact.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • MAD
    MAD Posts: 105
    edited June 2014
    Interesting...

    As Bugstyvy mentioned the mids are spread out more from top to bottom on the 3.1tl. I wonder how the SDA effect compares having 1 sda driver on the 3.1 vs. 2 drivers on the 1c's. Does the sound seem to go wider?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter