The Tale Of 3 Tweeters
Options
Comments
-
Ok, but you are wrong.Political Correctness'.........defined
"A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a t-u-r-d by the clean end."
President of Club Polk -
Whether frame or dome, some of the 194s have resonance issue/s. Confirmed by other member complaints/feedback as well. The 10B crossover was recapped as well as the CRS+ crossover.Don't take experimental gene therapies from known eugenicists.
-
"So saying anything at all that might actually get through to the OP that he does not have TL speakers even though he is using the wrong tweets, no matter how thick headed the individual might be, is off limits and he should be allowed to live with his delusion, and to try and convince others here that he is correct in his false belief?"
No, that's not what I said. This forum requires participants to act in a civil manner to other members. You can't call them "fools" or "morons" either directly or in quotes from other people. If you do the post will be either edited or removed. If someone posts something that you don't agree with, fine state your disagreement in a reasonable manner. If they choose to disregard your sage wisdom or temper it with their particular experience, fine let it go. In the big scheme of things having the right or wrong tweeter (according to you) in a pair of +25 year old speakers isn't much of a crime.
I can tell you from direct experience neither Matt Polk nor Stu Lumsden would want uncharitable treatment of anyone concerning their designs. -
-
SoundMann1 wrote: »
You'll be gone LONG before I am.Political Correctness'.........defined
"A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a t-u-r-d by the clean end."
President of Club Polk -
SoundMann1 wrote: »So you are saying that Polk was wrong for labeling the RTA 8 with the SL2500 TriLaminate tweeter a TL?
Polk wasn't "wrong" for labeling the RTA 8TL, as a Tri-Laminate speaker. But the labeling choice is curious considering that the other speakers with the "TL" designation use the SL3000 tweeter: SDA SRS 1.2TL, SDA SRS 2.3TL, SDA SRS 3.1TL, RTA 11TL, RTA15TL. There is also the official "TL" modification for the 1989 version SDA CRS+ which specified the SL3000 tweeter, along with the addition of a 5.8 uF capacitor. Note that Polk didn't just pop in an SL3000 into the CRS+ and call it a TL speaker. The Polk schematic for the CRS+ TL modification can be found here:
https://us.v-cdn.net/5021930/uploads/attachments/1/8/5/1/1/26710.pdf
It is interesting to note that speakers in the Monitor Series II line, which also used the SL2500 tweeter, were not designated as "TL" models. This would lead one to think that there is more to a "TL" designated speaker than just the addition of a Tri-Laminate tweeter. There must have been something special about the RTA 8TL's crossover and SL2500 tweeter combination that warranted the "TL" designation. It would be great if @KennethSwauger would ask Stu Lumsden why the RTA 8TL carried the "TL" designation, although it did not use the SL3000 tweeter.
I am guessing that Polk originally planned to modify the RTA 8T to use the SL3000, but couldn't make it work. They were probably able to modify the RTA 8T's crossover enough to get it close to the theoretical level it would have had with the SL3000, hence the "TL" designation.
Before we get carried away with the prestige of Tri-Laminate techology, we should note that, in strict technical terms, Polk could have named any of their speakers with a "TL" designation because all Polk speakers used drivers that used Tri-Laminate techonology:
Figure 1. Description of 6-1/2" Trilaminate driver from 1990 brochure on the SDA SRS TL series.
Figure 2. Description of 6-1/2" Trilaminate driver from 1987 comprehensive brochure on Polk speakers.
The capture below from the 1990 SDA SRS TL series brochure makes it clear that the "TL" designation refers to the SL3000 Tri-Laminate tweeter that was, at the time, exclusive to the 1989-1990 vintage SDA SRS series:
Figure 3. Explanation of "TL" designation from 1990 SDA SRS series brochure.
Here is a link to the entire 1990 SDA SRS TL series brochure:
https://polksda.com/pdfs/SRSTLBrochure1990.pdfSoundMann1 wrote: »TL tweeters make TL speakers!
No. TL Tweeters do not make TL speakers any more than a Ferrari engine makes a Corvette a Ferrari. You have to consider the total system in which a component is used.SoundMann1 wrote: »That's exactly what you are doing when you use run-of-the-mill SEAS/RDO textile dome tweeters, and pretend that you have TL-modified speakers, let alone pretend that they are an upgrade of the actual TriLaminate models!
Now you are impugning the honesty and integrity of Polk's engineering department by implying that they were lying when they said the RD0 series tweeters are upgrades from the SL series tweeters. While some people have expressed a preference for the original SL tweeters, most, myself included, much prefer the sound performance of the RD0 tweeters.
Proud and loyal citizen of the Digital Domain and Solid State Country! -
DarqueKnight wrote: »SoundMann1 wrote: »So you are saying that Polk was wrong for labeling the RTA 8 with the SL2500 TriLaminate tweeter a TL?
Polk wasn't "wrong" for labeling the RTA 8TL, as a Tri-Laminate speaker. But the labeling choice is curious considering that the other speakers with the "TL" designation use the SL3000 tweeter: SDA SRS 1.2TL, SDA SRS 2.3TL, SDA SRS 3.1TL, RTA 11TL, RTA15TL. There is also the official "TL" modification for the 1989 version SDA CRS+ which specified the SL3000 tweeter, along with the addition of a 5.8 uF capacitor. Note that Polk didn't just pop in an SL3000 into the CRS+ and call it a TL speaker. The Polk schematic for the CRS+ TL modification can be found here:
https://us.v-cdn.net/5021930/uploads/attachments/1/8/5/1/1/26710.pdf
It is interesting to note that speakers in the Monitor Series II line, which also used the SL2500 tweeter, were not designated as "TL" models. This would lead one to think that there is more to a "TL" designated speaker than just the addition of a Tri-Laminate tweeter. There must have been something special about the RTA 8TL's crossover and SL2500 tweeter combination that warranted the "TL" designation. It would be great if @KennethSwauger would ask Stu Lumsden why the RTA 8TL carried the "TL" designation, although it did not use the SL3000 tweeter.
I am guessing that Polk originally planned to modify the RTA 8T to use the SL3000, but couldn't make it work. They were probably able to modify the RTA 8T's crossover enough to get it close to the theoretical level it would have had with the SL3000, hence the "TL" designation.
Before we get carried away with the prestige of Tri-Laminate techology, we should note that, in strict technical terms, Polk could have named any of their speakers with a "TL" designation because all Polk speakers used drivers that used Tri-Laminate techonology:
Figure 1. Description of 6-1/2" Trilaminate driver from 1990 brochure on the SDA SRS TL series.
Figure 2. Description of 6-1/2" Trilaminate driver from 1987 comprehensive brochure on Polk speakers.
The capture below from the 1990 SDA SRS TL series brochure makes it clear that the "TL" designation refers to the SL3000 Tri-Laminate tweeter that was, at the time, exclusive to the 1989-1990 vintage SDA SRS series:
Figure 3. Explanation of "TL" designation from 1990 SDA SRS series brochure.
Here is a link to the entire 1990 SDA SRS TL series brochure:
https://polksda.com/pdfs/SRSTLBrochure1990.pdfSoundMann1 wrote: »TL tweeters make TL speakers!
No. TL Tweeters do not make TL speakers any more than a Ferrari engine makes a Corvette a Ferrari. You have to consider the total system in which a component is used.SoundMann1 wrote: »That's exactly what you are doing when you use run-of-the-mill SEAS/RDO textile dome tweeters, and pretend that you have TL-modified speakers, let alone pretend that they are an upgrade of the actual TriLaminate models!
Now you are impugning the honesty and integrity of Polk's engineering department by implying that they were lying when they said the RD0 series tweeters are upgrades from the SL series tweeters. While some people have expressed a preference for the original SL tweeters, most, myself included, much prefer the sound performance of the RD0 tweeters.
I thought I was reading a Doc Hardy post
-
Pay particular attention when you see a DarqueKnight post @mlistens03 Micah.I thought I was reading a Doc Hardy post
You will learn things.Post edited by tonyp063 on -
mlistens03 wrote: »DarqueKnight wrote: »SoundMann1 wrote: »So you are saying that Polk was wrong for labeling the RTA 8 with the SL2500 TriLaminate tweeter a TL?
Polk wasn't "wrong" for labeling the RTA 8TL, as a Tri-Laminate speaker. But the labeling choice is curious considering that the other speakers with the "TL" designation use the SL3000 tweeter: SDA SRS 1.2TL, SDA SRS 2.3TL, SDA SRS 3.1TL, RTA 11TL, RTA15TL. There is also the official "TL" modification for the 1989 version SDA CRS+ which specified the SL3000 tweeter, along with the addition of a 5.8 uF capacitor. Note that Polk didn't just pop in an SL3000 into the CRS+ and call it a TL speaker. The Polk schematic for the CRS+ TL modification can be found here:
https://us.v-cdn.net/5021930/uploads/attachments/1/8/5/1/1/26710.pdf
It is interesting to note that speakers in the Monitor Series II line, which also used the SL2500 tweeter, were not designated as "TL" models. This would lead one to think that there is more to a "TL" designated speaker than just the addition of a Tri-Laminate tweeter. There must have been something special about the RTA 8TL's crossover and SL2500 tweeter combination that warranted the "TL" designation. It would be great if @KennethSwauger would ask Stu Lumsden why the RTA 8TL carried the "TL" designation, although it did not use the SL3000 tweeter.
I am guessing that Polk originally planned to modify the RTA 8T to use the SL3000, but couldn't make it work. They were probably able to modify the RTA 8T's crossover enough to get it close to the theoretical level it would have had with the SL3000, hence the "TL" designation.
Before we get carried away with the prestige of Tri-Laminate techology, we should note that, in strict technical terms, Polk could have named any of their speakers with a "TL" designation because all Polk speakers used drivers that used Tri-Laminate techonology:
Figure 1. Description of 6-1/2" Trilaminate driver from 1990 brochure on the SDA SRS TL series.
Figure 2. Description of 6-1/2" Trilaminate driver from 1987 comprehensive brochure on Polk speakers.
The capture below from the 1990 SDA SRS TL series brochure makes it clear that the "TL" designation refers to the SL3000 Tri-Laminate tweeter that was, at the time, exclusive to the 1989-1990 vintage SDA SRS series:
Figure 3. Explanation of "TL" designation from 1990 SDA SRS series brochure.
Here is a link to the entire 1990 SDA SRS TL series brochure:
https://polksda.com/pdfs/SRSTLBrochure1990.pdfSoundMann1 wrote: »TL tweeters make TL speakers!
No. TL Tweeters do not make TL speakers any more than a Ferrari engine makes a Corvette a Ferrari. You have to consider the total system in which a component is used.SoundMann1 wrote: »That's exactly what you are doing when you use run-of-the-mill SEAS/RDO textile dome tweeters, and pretend that you have TL-modified speakers, let alone pretend that they are an upgrade of the actual TriLaminate models!
Now you are impugning the honesty and integrity of Polk's engineering department by implying that they were lying when they said the RD0 series tweeters are upgrades from the SL series tweeters. While some people have expressed a preference for the original SL tweeters, most, myself included, much prefer the sound performance of the RD0 tweeters.
I thought I was reading a Doc Hardy post
They can run neck and neck on extended verbage posting... -
But they speak from experience
2-channel: Modwright KWI-200 Integrated, Dynaudio C1-II Signatures
Desktop rig: LSi7, Polk 110sub, Dayens Ampino amp, W4S DAC/pre, Sonos, JRiver
Gear on standby: Melody 101 tube pre, Unison Research Simply Italy Integrated
Gone to new homes: (Matt Polk's)Threshold Stasis SA12e monoblocks, Pass XA30.5 amp, Usher MD2 speakers, Dynaudio C4 platinum speakers, Modwright LS100 (voltz), Simaudio 780D DAC
erat interfectorem cesar et **** dictatorem dicere a -
True.
-
I have been banned for less than calling someone a fool, and a moron, you should consider yourself lucky you are still here now. I think Ken is giving you the benefit of the doubt that you are here for the right reasons. Everyone here is doing nothing but trying to help you understand the facts of the TL process...
Ken, I think we have reached 30 year old speakers!!
Edit: you did post +25 year old speakers.. LOL!! -
Soundmann1 are you a Whoopie Goldberg fan?2-channel: Modwright KWI-200 Integrated, Dynaudio C1-II Signatures
Desktop rig: LSi7, Polk 110sub, Dayens Ampino amp, W4S DAC/pre, Sonos, JRiver
Gear on standby: Melody 101 tube pre, Unison Research Simply Italy Integrated
Gone to new homes: (Matt Polk's)Threshold Stasis SA12e monoblocks, Pass XA30.5 amp, Usher MD2 speakers, Dynaudio C4 platinum speakers, Modwright LS100 (voltz), Simaudio 780D DAC
erat interfectorem cesar et **** dictatorem dicere a -
SoundMann1 wrote: »
You'll be gone LONG before I am.
Already circling the drain here. I put him on ignore.The Gear... Carver "Statement" Mono-blocks, Mcintosh C2300 Arcam AVR20, Oppo UDP-203 4K Blu-ray player, Sony XBR70x850B 4k, Polk Audio Legend L800 with height modules, L400 Center Channel Polk audio AB800 "in-wall" surrounds. Marantz MM7025 stereo amp. Simaudio Moon 680d DSD
“When once a Republic is corrupted, there is no possibility of remedying any of the growing evils but by removing the corruption and restoring its lost principles; every other correction is either useless or a new evil.”— Thomas Jefferson -
KennethSwauger wrote: »If they choose to disregard your sage wisdom or temper it with their particular experience, fine let it go. In the big scheme of things having the right or wrong tweeter (according to you)in a pair of +25 year old speakers isn't much of a crime.
I can tell you from direct experience neither Matt Polk nor Stu Lumsden would want uncharitable treatment of anyone concerning their designs.
I also tend to think they would want a Polk employee, (such as yourself) to step in and offer the OP the correct information, even if they are a 25 year old speaker. Nobody here wants to give the OP a hard time, but it would be really nice to have Polk’s representive to the forum step in and support the members in cases like this rather than look the other way while bad information is being spread.
That’s just my two cents.The Gear... Carver "Statement" Mono-blocks, Mcintosh C2300 Arcam AVR20, Oppo UDP-203 4K Blu-ray player, Sony XBR70x850B 4k, Polk Audio Legend L800 with height modules, L400 Center Channel Polk audio AB800 "in-wall" surrounds. Marantz MM7025 stereo amp. Simaudio Moon 680d DSD
“When once a Republic is corrupted, there is no possibility of remedying any of the growing evils but by removing the corruption and restoring its lost principles; every other correction is either useless or a new evil.”— Thomas Jefferson -
Fair enough, I'll ask Stu about the "TL" designation. He may be awhile before he answers.
-
Whether frame or dome, some of the 194s have resonance issue/s. Confirmed by other member complaints/feedback as well. The 10B crossover was recapped as well as the CRS+ crossover.
The resonance reported by some was an issue isolated to a certain batch of RD0194 tweeters. That issue is far different than the alleged ringing heard by only one individual.Political Correctness'.........defined
"A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a t-u-r-d by the clean end."
President of Club Polk -
The tale of 3 Tweakers..
-
SoundMann1 wrote: »motorstereo wrote: »Well I know I'll take the word of long time knowledgeable members 9 days a week and twice on Sunday over that of a confused newbie.
I am an inventor and engineer who has been involved with the audio industry for 40 years!
I am hardly a confused newbie!
Have you upgraded your speaker cables? As an engineer involved in audio you must know how critical cables are to achieving good sound.
Lumin X1 file player, Westminster Labs interconnect cable
Sony XA-5400ES SACD; Pass XP-22 pre; X600.5 amps
Magico S5 MKII Mcast Rose speakers; SPOD spikes
Shunyata Triton v3/Typhon QR on source, Denali 2000 (2) on amps
Shunyata Sigma XLR analog ICs, Sigma speaker cables
Shunyata Sigma HC (2), Sigma Analog, Sigma Digital, Z Anaconda (3) power cables
Mapleshade Samson V.3 four shelf solid maple rack, Micropoint brass footers
Three 20 amp circuits. -
Tale of tweaker 2
-
Tale of tweaker 1
-
I've brought this point up before regarding the information in the TL brochure saying that the drivers were also tri-laminate and I was told that it was a marketing error or something like that. And that it was only the tweeters that were tri-laminate.DarqueKnight wrote: »Before we get carried away with the prestige of Tri-Laminate techology, we should note that, in strict technical terms, Polk could have named any of their speakers with a "TL" designation because all Polk speakers used drivers that used Tri-Laminate techonology:
Stu Lumsden just posted in another thread, so maybe he can clear this up.
-
DarqueKnight wrote: »Before we get carried away with the prestige of Tri-Laminate techology, we should note that, in strict technical terms, Polk could have named any of their speakers with a "TL" designation because all Polk speakers used drivers that used Tri-Laminate techonology:
Stu Lumsden just posted in another thread, so maybe he can clear this up.
Where is this thread??
-
-
Here's my Q&A with Stu:
Q: The question has come up on the forum has been raised, "what makes a TL speaker?" Is it called that because it has a trilaminate tweeter or more an overall TL design encompassing a TL tweeter and a TL specific crossover?
In other words, if I take an older Monitor speaker and replace the stock tweeter with a TL tweeter (because I like the sound of the TL tweeter more than the stock) and not change the crossover can I now call it a TL speaker?
A:Well, yes you can replace the tweeter and call it a TL but the best thing to do would be to slightly modify the crossover to fit the tweeter to whatever speaker you are updating – assuming that there is no spec for that change.
I hope this is helpful. -
Key words,the best thing to do would be to slightly modify the crossover to fit the tweeter to whatever speaker you are updatingPolitical Correctness'.........defined
"A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a t-u-r-d by the clean end."
President of Club Polk
![[Deleted User]](https://w8.vanillicon.com/83b82048d67877ca27bbc25d5d38f9d3_100.png)
This discussion has been closed.