SDA effect

gmcman

K_M wrote: »

Crosstalk cancellation is what SDA does, and what your head does when wearing headphones.

Realistic is another thing.
That would depend on what the intent of the original recording was.
If it was mixed on headphones, then headphones would be ideal.

Most recordings are mixed to sound "right" on stereo speakers.

IIRC, Polk's idea back in the day was to bring the stage presence of concert experience to your home, headphones don't do this.

I get the brain trying to center the image or try to offset the crosstalk...but my point is, headphones don't replicate a properly set up pair of SDA speakers, not even in the same ballpark.

I prefer to have the stage presence in front of me, not on each side of my head.

I've heard some good cans, they just don't match the depth and width of the nice SDA soundstage.

K_M

gmcman wrote: »

K_M wrote: »

Crosstalk cancellation is what SDA does, and what your head does when wearing headphones.

Realistic is another thing.
That would depend on what the intent of the original recording was.
If it was mixed on headphones, then headphones would be ideal.

Most recordings are mixed to sound "right" on stereo speakers.

IIRC, Polk's idea back in the day was to bring the stage presence of concert experience to your home, headphones don't do this.

I get the brain trying to center the image or try to offset the crosstalk...but my point is, headphones don't replicate a properly set up pair of SDA speakers, not even in the same ballpark.

I prefer to have the stage presence in front of me, not on each side of my head.

I've heard some good cans, they just don't match the depth and width of the nice SDA soundstage.

Oh I meant ones head is a physical barrier to sound with phones.
Each ear hears ONLY the left or right.

With SDA the "Idea" was each ear hears only its respective channel.

Of course with SDA other things make that impossible, as one is on a room that reflects sound to some degree.

gmcman

edwardsprague wrote: »

How can I test to see if SDA effect is working?

I would at least make sure your drivers are operating in phase. With the speaker wires removed from the speaker, using a 1.5V battery, observe polarity and briefly connect the battery to the speaker terminals....the speaker cones should push out.

Generally while playing the speakers, you can sit next to the speaker and remove the SDA cable and can hear the dimensional driver(s) turn off.

gmcman

K_M wrote: »

Oh I meant ones head is a physical barrier to sound with phones.
Each ear hears ONLY the left or right.

That's not what happens.

With headphones each ear still hears the same combined signal that's being sent to the amp.

SDA cancels this before your ear.

K_M

gmcman wrote: »

K_M wrote: »

Oh I meant ones head is a physical barrier to sound with phones.
Each ear hears ONLY the left or right.

That's not what happens.

With headphones each ear still hears the same combined signal that's being sent to the amp.

SDA cancels this before your ear.

I do not understand what you mean.

gmcman

Headphones send the left and right signal to your ear as it was recorded.

Any crosstalk cancellation has to happen within the brain.

SDA technology removes that part of the signal or most of it, before it reaches the ear. The brain doesn't need to filter out the crosstalk or try to filter the crosstalk as it does with headphones.

heiney9

SDA is not an effect. It's implemented in a way to cure a naturally occurring acoustical anomaly. That anomaly being that our ears are positioned on the sides of our head and a typical stereo signal from a hi fi rig reaches our ears at different times. SDA works to minimize the delay, thus opening up the listening sound stage. It varies with the material and recording process of the source material.

Correcting, minimizing something that naturally occurs by acoustical methods is not an effect. Manipulation by electrical means could be referred to as an effect.

H9

heiney9

K_M wrote: »

Oh I meant ones head is a physical barrier to sound with phones.
Each ear hears ONLY the left or right.

With SDA the "Idea" was each ear hears only its respective channel.

Of course with SDA other things make that impossible, as one is on a room that reflects sound to some degree.

No that's incorrect, headphones blend the each channel into the L and R. Headphones also take the delay away like SDA and like SDA they are source dependent as to how well they perform. Beleive it or not reflections surfaces, to a small degree, can help enhance the overall feeling of the recording. You can't get that from headphones.

Personally I find headphones to be a bit too removed from the natural sound and bit more gimmicky sounding than SDA. SDA can "breathe" more since typically one is in a larger room and SDA's have multiple drivers that add realism, heft and scale you just can't get with headphones.

Don't get me wrong, headphones and headphone rigs have their place, but while the concept is similar to SDA, I feel SDA is more real.......or rather closer to what the source material is supposed to sound like based on the recording. (notice I didn't say closer to what it's supposed to sound like in real life). We are always at the mercy of the recording process, engineer and final mix based on what they want to produce in the final product.

Low level details in recordings are better on headphones because of the lack of extraneous noises. I'm not ragging on headphones as they and SDA each have their strong points and weak points when compared. They are more similar than dissimilar, but they are not exactly the same.

H9

heiney9

K_M wrote: »

Schurkey wrote: »

DarqueKnight wrote: »

Schurkey wrote: »

Of course it's an effect. If it wasn't, it wouldn't have been patentable.

The basic definition of "effect" (noun) is "a change which is a result or consequence of an action or other cause."

This is exactly my point. If one devises a method of crosstalk cancellation, and that method works...the result or consequence of that action is to effectively cancel the crosstalk when that method is in use or functional.

If that crosstalk cancellation method goes by a certain trade-name, we could readily call this the..."SDA Effect".

Again, I went back many years on the forum and pretty much that is how it is referred
The "SDA Effect".... and no one back then argued it was not an "Effect"

What changed? ...Seems semantics and a need to argue over nothing.

You must have, all these years, been selectively reading posts. Because it has been debated many, many, many times and I've been here longer than you have. I don't say that in a belittling way, just the fact that I've seen this exact discussion many, many time before.

H9

heiney9

K_M wrote: »

mhardy6647 wrote: »

... and of course, Bob Carver did essentially the same thing at line level via the "Sonic Holography [Effect]"
https://www.bobcarvercorp.com/about-us


(borrowed image, needless to say)

Sonic Holography
"Sonic Holography", as described was first incorporated in the Carver C4000 preamplifier. It enhances stereo imaging by introducing a delayed and equalized signal from the right channel at the left loudspeaker to cancel the signal from the right loudspeaker at the listener's left ear (and vice versa).
In the real world, a sound produces a two sound arrivals, one for our left ear and one for our right. Stereo speakers produce FOUR sound arrivals. Each ear gets a delayed second arrival that muddies the sound stage. Through special processing circuitry, Sonic Holography cancel the second arrival, restoring clarity and realism.

There was also the "Hafler Circuit/Effect" that is essentially what SDA is as far as wiring, but was meant for rear surround speakers, instead of crosstalk cancellation.

We have used the hafler set up in one system and love it. Very simple, but very effective.

Not the same thing at all.

heiney9

K_M wrote: »

Most recordings are mixed to sound "right" on stereo speakers.

And most of these recordings sound even better on SDA's.....

Schurkey

Among my first comments on this forum--LONG before the Vanilla days, so probably not searchable--was that I have a headphone amp from the Tyll Hertsens days of Headroom, a headphones-and-headphone amplifier retailer/manufacturer.

The big-deal marketing feature of those (long-discontinued) headphone amps was a filter-delay-and-blend circuit that ADDED some cross-talk to headphones, the effect of which improved ambience and made headphones more "realistic".

https://www.headphone.com/pages/founders-story

Hop down to page 8 of this .pdf for some entertainment:
http://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0362/2465/files/BitHeadManualWEB.pdf?3921

Compare to SDA and Sonic Holography which restores "channel separation" from loudspeakers to make them...more realistic.

Headphones have too little cross-feed, stereo speakers have too much, and God bless inventors that can help us meet in the middle.

Schurkey

Oh, yeah. One more thought.

SOME folks hear the words "SDA effect", they apparently think "effect" = "sound effect" = ARTIFICIAL.

I hear the words "SDA effect", I think "effect" = "effective" = it does what's claimed for it.

xschop

Whatever your idea on the subject, we can all agree it's been a civil conversation. No one got banned... I think.

edwardsprague

Whatever your idea on the subject, we can all agree it's been a civil conversation. No one got banned... I think.[/quote]

I just wanted to know how to see if the SDA was working! 😊

nooshinjohn

heiney9 wrote: »

SDA is not an effect. It's implemented in a way to cure a naturally occurring acoustical anomaly. That anomaly being that our ears are positioned on the sides of our head and a typical stereo signal from a hi fi rig reaches our ears at different times. SDA works to minimize the delay, thus opening up the listening sound stage. It varies with the material and recording process of the source material.

Correcting, minimizing something that naturally occurs by acoustical methods is not an effect. Manipulation by electrical means could be referred to as an effect.

H9

This is 100% correct. Carver's Sonic Holography would be and effect, as it is added to the signal path in exactly the same manner as an equalizer or reverb unit would be, and is an active solution.

The design of Polk's SDA is part of the natural function of the speaker itself, and is passive by nature.

xschop

nooshinjohn wrote: »

heiney9 wrote: »

SDA is not an effect. It's implemented in a way to cure a naturally occurring acoustical anomaly. That anomaly being that our ears are positioned on the sides of our head and a typical stereo signal from a hi fi rig reaches our ears at different times. SDA works to minimize the delay, thus opening up the listening sound stage. It varies with the material and recording process of the source material.

Correcting, minimizing something that naturally occurs by acoustical methods is not an effect. Manipulation by electrical means could be referred to as an effect.

H9

This is 100% correct. Carver's Sonic Holography would be and effect, as it is added to the signal path in exactly the same manner as an equalizer or reverb unit would be, and is an active solution.

The design of Polk's SDA is part of the natural function of the speaker itself, and is passive by nature.

So is the SDA signal a delayed signal or an anti-phase signal?

nooshinjohn

Out of phase...

boston1450

edwardsprague wrote: »

Whatever your idea on the subject, we can all agree it's been a civil conversation. No one got banned... I think.

I just wanted to know how to see if the SDA was working! 😊[/quote]

Did you try to disconnect to IC cord while listening & if so,what happened ?

K_M

xschop wrote: »

nooshinjohn wrote: »

heiney9 wrote: »

SDA is not an effect. It's implemented in a way to cure a naturally occurring acoustical anomaly. That anomaly being that our ears are positioned on the sides of our head and a typical stereo signal from a hi fi rig reaches our ears at different times. SDA works to minimize the delay, thus opening up the listening sound stage. It varies with the material and recording process of the source material.

Correcting, minimizing something that naturally occurs by acoustical methods is not an effect. Manipulation by electrical means could be referred to as an effect.

H9

This is 100% correct. Carver's Sonic Holography would be and effect, as it is added to the signal path in exactly the same manner as an equalizer or reverb unit would be, and is an active solution.

The design of Polk's SDA is part of the natural function of the speaker itself, and is passive by nature.

So is the SDA signal a delayed signal or an anti-phase signal?

SDA is a "Difference signal"

It is the L-R and R-L component of sound.
Since all dimensional speakers are basically in series across the two positive terminals, and have no ground, they only reproduce sounds that are exclusive to the left or right but nothing that is common to both.


Hook any single speaker across the Positive Left to Positive Right and you have the SDA signal. (on a common ground amp obviously)

headrott

DarqueKnight wrote: »

Schurkey wrote: »

Of course it's an effect. If it wasn't, it wouldn't have been patentable.

The basic definition of "effect" (noun) is "a change which is a result or consequence of an action or other cause."

In that regard, a light bulb shining as a result of flipping a light switch to the on position could correctly be called "the light switch effect".

In the context of audio and video applications, the term "effect" typically means something artificial added to a signal, for example "sound effects", "special effects", "visual effects".

Comb filtering is an unfortunate effect of rendering a naturally occurring point source of sound from two sources. Crosstalk cancellation, in the context of stereo reproduction, would more accurately be called a signal correction, or corrective process, rather than an "effect".

Rather than asking "is the SDA effect working", it would have been more contextually correct to ask "is the SDA working". Some automobile engines run so smoothly and some car interiors are so well insulated that is is difficult to tell whether the engine is running or not. You wouldn't ask "is the engine effect working?". You would ask is the engine running?".

As usual, spot on DK.

K_M

DarqueKnight wrote: »

Schurkey wrote: »

Of course it's an effect. If it wasn't, it wouldn't have been patentable.

The basic definition of "effect" (noun) is "a change which is a result or consequence of an action or other cause."

In that regard, a light bulb shining as a result of flipping a light switch to the on position could correctly be called "the light switch effect".

In the context of audio and video applications, the term "effect" typically means something artificial added to a signal, for example "sound effects", "special effects", "visual effects".

Comb filtering is an unfortunate effect of rendering a naturally occurring point source of sound from two sources. Crosstalk cancellation, in the context of stereo reproduction, would more accurately be called a signal correction, or corrective process, rather than an "effect".

Rather than asking "is the SDA effect working", it would have been more contextually correct to ask "is the SDA working". Some automobile engines run so smoothly and some car interiors are so well insulated that is is difficult to tell whether the engine is running or not. You wouldn't ask "is the engine effect working?". You would ask is the engine running?".

But in the case of SDA speakers, there is something un-natural added to the normal Stereo signal.

You can play semantics, but simply adding another row of speakers several inches apart from the main stereo speakers AND having them play a Stereo Difference signal, sure as heck is adding something un-natural to the signal.

It for sure is no "Signal correction" as the crosstalk cancellation signal, is an additive process, that is usually un-necessary to begin with.

The way 95% of recordings are made precludes the need for crosstalk cancellation.

Its a great idea, sounds great at times, but it simply is not natural.

As I said before in another thread, the cross-talk that is in a recording and playback, is intentional, and is seen as the final sound intended.

We went over all of this before. Recordings are Mixed and Mastered on normal Stereo speakers, therefore, when playing back on SDA the soundstage will be artificially wider.

If recordings were made ON SDA speakers in the mixing and mastering stages, THEN YES it would be how they wanted it to sound.

BlueBirdMusic

I would rate this discussion A+. Enjoyed it immensely.

When I purchased my first set of 2B speakers in the late 80's, I never used headphones again.

headrott

K_M wrote: »

DarqueKnight wrote: »

Schurkey wrote: »

Of course it's an effect. If it wasn't, it wouldn't have been patentable.

The basic definition of "effect" (noun) is "a change which is a result or consequence of an action or other cause."

In that regard, a light bulb shining as a result of flipping a light switch to the on position could correctly be called "the light switch effect".

In the context of audio and video applications, the term "effect" typically means something artificial added to a signal, for example "sound effects", "special effects", "visual effects".

Comb filtering is an unfortunate effect of rendering a naturally occurring point source of sound from two sources. Crosstalk cancellation, in the context of stereo reproduction, would more accurately be called a signal correction, or corrective process, rather than an "effect".

Rather than asking "is the SDA effect working", it would have been more contextually correct to ask "is the SDA working". Some automobile engines run so smoothly and some car interiors are so well insulated that is is difficult to tell whether the engine is running or not. You wouldn't ask "is the engine effect working?". You would ask is the engine running?".

But in the case of SDA speakers, there is something un-natural added to the normal Stereo signal.

You can play semantics all you want, but simply adding another row of speakers several inches apart from the main stereo speakers AND having them play a Stereo Difference signal, sure as heck is adding something un-natural to the signal.

It for sure is no "Signal correction" as the crosstalk cancellation signal, is an additive process, that was un-necessary to begin with.

The way 95% of recordings are made precludes the need for crosstalk cancellation.
Its a great idea, sounds great at times, but it simply is not natural.
You may think it is, but have no argument to prove why we need crosstalk cancellation, when the virtual sound stage of almost all music, was never intended to have this effect added to it.

I like SDA at times, but realize it is simply not needed.
If recordings were made in a binaural process sure......

Listen to a good quality recording with a substantial soundstage (Height, width, and depth, but particularly width) and let me know how different it sound on your SDA's verses (basically) any other speakers.

So, if SDA's and what they reproduce "is not needed", why do you own two sets of some of the most sought after sets of them? I would think if they are not needed, you would want them gone and something replacing them that is much more acceptable, and not producing an effect in your stereo signal. If you are selling them cheap, I will take a second set of 2.3TL's and 3.1TL's.

K_M

headrott wrote: »

K_M wrote: »

DarqueKnight wrote: »

Schurkey wrote: »

Of course it's an effect. If it wasn't, it wouldn't have been patentable.

The basic definition of "effect" (noun) is "a change which is a result or consequence of an action or other cause."

In that regard, a light bulb shining as a result of flipping a light switch to the on position could correctly be called "the light switch effect".

In the context of audio and video applications, the term "effect" typically means something artificial added to a signal, for example "sound effects", "special effects", "visual effects".

Comb filtering is an unfortunate effect of rendering a naturally occurring point source of sound from two sources. Crosstalk cancellation, in the context of stereo reproduction, would more accurately be called a signal correction, or corrective process, rather than an "effect".

Rather than asking "is the SDA effect working", it would have been more contextually correct to ask "is the SDA working". Some automobile engines run so smoothly and some car interiors are so well insulated that is is difficult to tell whether the engine is running or not. You wouldn't ask "is the engine effect working?". You would ask is the engine running?".

But in the case of SDA speakers, there is something un-natural added to the normal Stereo signal.

You can play semantics all you want, but simply adding another row of speakers several inches apart from the main stereo speakers AND having them play a Stereo Difference signal, sure as heck is adding something un-natural to the signal.

It for sure is no "Signal correction" as the crosstalk cancellation signal, is an additive process, that was un-necessary to begin with.

The way 95% of recordings are made precludes the need for crosstalk cancellation.
Its a great idea, sounds great at times, but it simply is not natural.
You may think it is, but have no argument to prove why we need crosstalk cancellation, when the virtual sound stage of almost all music, was never intended to have this effect added to it.

I like SDA at times, but realize it is simply not needed.
If recordings were made in a binaural process sure......

Listen to a good quality recording with a substantial soundstage (Height, width, and depth, but particularly width) and let me know how different they sound on your SDA's verses (basically) any other speakers.

So, if SDA's and what they reproduce "is not needed", why do you own two sets of some of the most sought after sets of them? I would think if they are not needed, you would want them gone and something replacing them that is much more acceptable, and not producing an effect in your stereo signal. If you are selling them cheap, I will take a second set of 2.3TL's and 3.1TL's.

I have listened to MANY recordings on our SDA's with and without the dimensional speakers connected. In fact, we altered one of the connecting cords so that it was able to reach our seating area, and installed a switch to be able to at a whim shut the dimensional speakers on or off, and also tried a few low ohm resistors in the circuit to see how the effect sounded at lower levels.

I found that many recordings I simply felt they sounded somewhat un-natural with the cord connected, but at times, with certain recordings really liked the sound.

The reason we own 2 pairs, and have not sold them, is based on liking the sound overall, but after some time, not really sure that the SDA part was truly what we wanted.

Initially we both thought it was really cool and loved it., But over time, and trying different things, simply found it less real and a bit contrived sounding.

We still love the basic sound of the speakers, but just find the crosstalk cancellation "thing" too much of a good thing.

I can go into it in much more detail, but after reading some discussions on more pro audio forums, realized what it was that sounded not quite right about SDA.

Not bashing it, but simply feel it is "fixing" a problem that is not a problem.

(and yes we may be getting rid of our larger ones in the near future) we have too many speakers!

gmcman

K_M wrote: »

DarqueKnight wrote: »

Schurkey wrote: »

Of course it's an effect. If it wasn't, it wouldn't have been patentable.

The basic definition of "effect" (noun) is "a change which is a result or consequence of an action or other cause."

In that regard, a light bulb shining as a result of flipping a light switch to the on position could correctly be called "the light switch effect".

In the context of audio and video applications, the term "effect" typically means something artificial added to a signal, for example "sound effects", "special effects", "visual effects".

Comb filtering is an unfortunate effect of rendering a naturally occurring point source of sound from two sources. Crosstalk cancellation, in the context of stereo reproduction, would more accurately be called a signal correction, or corrective process, rather than an "effect".

Rather than asking "is the SDA effect working", it would have been more contextually correct to ask "is the SDA working". Some automobile engines run so smoothly and some car interiors are so well insulated that is is difficult to tell whether the engine is running or not. You wouldn't ask "is the engine effect working?". You would ask is the engine running?".

But in the case of SDA speakers, there is something un-natural added to the normal Stereo signal.

You can play semantics, but simply adding another row of speakers several inches apart from the main stereo speakers AND having them play a Stereo Difference signal, sure as heck is adding something un-natural to the signal.

It for sure is no "Signal correction" as the crosstalk cancellation signal, is an additive process, that is usually un-necessary to begin with.

The way 95% of recordings are made precludes the need for crosstalk cancellation.

Its a great idea, sounds great at times, but it simply is not natural.

As I said before in another thread, the cross-talk that is in a recording and playback, is intentional, and is seen as the final sound intended.

We went over all of this before. Recordings are Mixed and Mastered on normal Stereo speakers, therefore, when playing back on SDA the soundstage will be artificially wider.

If recordings were made ON SDA speakers in the mixing and mastering stages, THEN YES it would be how they wanted it to sound.

Sorry not to quote individual lines, but.....

I wouldn't say anything unnatural is being added, but what's not needed is being taken away.

A microphone can't help but to hear other sounds around it. I'm going to speculate that the final mix would welcome a true left only and right only signal..but like your ears, the mic is going to pick up sounds from all around.

Polks "patented" technology of SDA will greatly minimize this crosstalk thus providing a much truer stereo image.

Other speakers have difficulty accomplishing this, however I've heard some nice high-end speakers that do very well in this regard....but for A LOT more money.

95% of recordings may or may not need crosstalk cancellation, but IMO, thats what makes the SDA so special....when you can utilize that added cancellation, the soundstage is that much more dramatic.

SDA is not for everyone, but I don't believe it's making the experience unnatural, but more natural most of the time.

gmcman

I also get the fact the instruments being recorded separately, as well as the singer, can be mixed in such a manner to provide crosstalk, as well as being placed on the left or the right.

Having the speakers remove some or all of the crosstalk thus creating a more dramatic soundstage is what makes the SDA experience that much more enjoyable...but not for all.

pkquat

edwardsprague wrote: »

Whatever your idea on the subject, we can all agree it's been a civil conversation. No one got banned... I think.

I just wanted to know how to see if the SDA was working! 😊[/quote]

I lol'd when I saw the topic. Ah, the passion of forum members. All this repeated discussion over one word and no one linked the manuals or asked which SDA speakers you had. SMH.

Links to manuals with in depth explanations and testing methods are listed below. In short, speakers should be about 6 feet apart, and 3 feet from side wall, and about 6" from the back wall. You should be centered about 6-8 feet from the front of the speakers. This is a good starting point. For a stereo source the sound stage should appear to be wider than the speakers. The sound source should appear to be coming from about 1 to 2 feet to the outside of the speakers. An easy way to check this is to set the balance knob to one side. The sound should appear to be coming from a point wider than the speaker placement. If you are not centered between the speakers or there are reflections from side walls or rear walls, it can be hard to tell. With the balance knob to one side, you can go to the opposite speaker and there should be a quieter version of the source material coming from the dimension speaker.

If you have side by side tweeters, check out this manual. https://polksda.com/pdfs/SDA1.pdf

If there is only one tweeter or multiple tweeters centered and vertically aligned, check out this manual.
https://polksda.com/pdfs/SDA1C.pdf

All the manuals can be found here. https://polksda.com/manuals.shtml

edwardsprague

pkquat wrote: »

edwardsprague wrote: »

Whatever your idea on the subject, we can all agree it's been a civil conversation. No one got banned... I think.

I just wanted to know how to see if the SDA was working! 😊

I lol'd when I saw the topic. Ah, the passion of forum members. All this repeated discussion over one word and no one linked the manuals or asked which SDA speakers you had. SMH.

Links to manuals with in depth explanations and testing methods are listed below. In short, speakers should be about 6 feet apart, and 3 feet from side wall, and about 6" from the back wall. You should be centered about 6-8 feet from the front of the speakers. This is a good starting point. For a stereo source the sound stage should appear to be wider than the speakers. The sound source should appear to be coming from about 1 to 2 feet to the outside of the speakers. An easy way to check this is to set the balance knob to one side. The sound should appear to be coming from a point wider than the speaker placement. If you are not centered between the speakers or there are reflections from side walls or rear walls, it can be hard to tell. With the balance knob to one side, you can go to the opposite speaker and there should be a quieter version of the source material coming from the dimension speaker.

If you have side by side tweeters, check out this manual. https://polksda.com/pdfs/SDA1.pdf

If there is only one tweeter or multiple tweeters centered and vertically aligned, check out this manual.
https://polksda.com/pdfs/SDA1C.pdf

All the manuals can be found here. https://polksda.com/manuals.shtml[/quote]

Thanks. I have the SDA SRS 2's.

Schurkey

pkquat wrote: »

edwardsprague wrote: »

I just wanted to know how to see if the SDA was working! 😊

I lol'd when I saw the topic. Ah, the passion of forum members. All this repeated discussion over one word and no one linked the manuals or asked which SDA speakers you had.l

Wasn't needed. Everything essential that he needed to know was in the first reply--which was already labeled "Best Answer" when I got here (so it may not have been the first reply originally--but it was at the top by the time I showed up.)

codycatalist wrote: »

Use your balance knob if you have one. Turn the knob all the way to the right and the left speaker should only be playing from the outside MW. Repeat for the other speaker.