How do the new L800 SDA compare to the Original Legend SDA-SRS 1.2TL?

mhardy6647

changing XO capacitors isn't quite analogous to sticking a turbocharger on an engine.
In fact, it's not really like doing anything to an engine (i.e., anything that engine tweakers do) -- except, e.g., changing the spark plug wires.

Now, if one redesigned the XO, changed the frequencies; slopes, added (or removed) a Zobel network or changed EQ/contouring... that's more analogous, I would think.

It could, e.g., be argued that removing the Polyswitch from the ol' Polk XOs that used them for driver protection would be a non-conservative modification that might have... ahh... negative unintended consequences.

DarqueKnight

DSkip wrote: »

SIHAB wrote: »

HOWEVER,

Allen Shaw is not a fan of the upgraded crossover route and didn't
think it did anything to the voicing of his speakers. (paraphrasing)
His comment was about his anniversary editions.

I'm not saying that modifications aren't useful if you know what
you are doing. I'm just saying that there are exceptions to the
Mod is better rule.

Alan Shaw also believes that amplifiers and speaker stands don’t matter. Look, I’m a Harbeth dealer, but I don’t sign off on his perception of audio. Sometimes I wonder if these ideas he spouts are simply veiled marketing to make people believe the speaker is the only thing that matters so spend all your money on those.

Thanks for the additional perspective Skip.

skrol

gmcman wrote: »

K_M wrote: »

If you ask the guys that design/engineer speakers, most do not believe in the botique crossover parts route.
Yes some speakers use truly mediocre crossover parts, and can be improved, but not all..

Safe bet the engineers aren't going to use caps in the neighborhood of $200 to $1K per cap or more, especially when trying to get a series of speakers back on its feet.....throws the profit margin out the window as well as potential sales.

It's up to the consumer to take the product to that last possible 10% if they so desire....that's what makes this hobby even more fun.

Based on what a former speaker engineer told me (I won't say it was Polk but I am sure it happens many places), he would voice the speaker with better quality parts (film caps) but the budget guys would come in and push for more economical substitutes. He would apply measures like damping material to the PR and MW baskets that were nixed for the production product to save cost. It becomes a balancing act between what is best and what is cost effective for the production units.

halo

If someone were to go all out with a DIY design and then stick with those speakers for the long term, then the time and money invested is totally worth it. Unfortunately, audio enthusiasts are a fickle bunch. We tend to gush all over our latest acquisition and then part with it, shortly thereafter, for the latest and greatest thing. This doesn’t apply to everyone but it does apply to the majority.

mhardy6647

In hifi, as in much about life -- some things are more durable than others

Jim Shearer

halo wrote: »

If someone were to go all out with a DIY design and then stick with those speakers for the long term, then the time and money invested is totally worth it. Unfortunately, audio enthusiasts are a fickle bunch. We tend to gush all over our latest acquisition and then part with it, shortly thereafter, for the latest and greatest thing. This doesn’t apply to everyone but it does apply to the majority.

As an amateur designer/builder of speakers, let me say: you just don't get it!

Speaker building is like eating potato chips. You can't stop with just one. It's fun and addicting. Choose drivers, then work up a design. After months of planning, build. Agonize over which veneer to use & how to finish it.

I have had much more return on my money with speaker building than I used to get from just buying a box someone else built!

And about selling them: WHAT!!! sell my babies!!! I have a house full of speakers. Then there are the ones I have given to family, friends, etc. But sell them, oh no!

Cheers, Jim

stones89

Bet they sound great Jim. Not to mention pride!

verb

Jim Shearer wrote: »

halo wrote: »

If someone were to go all out with a DIY design and then stick with those speakers for the long term, then the time and money invested is totally worth it. Unfortunately, audio enthusiasts are a fickle bunch. We tend to gush all over our latest acquisition and then part with it, shortly thereafter, for the latest and greatest thing. This doesn’t apply to everyone but it does apply to the majority.

As an amateur designer/builder of speakers, let me say: you just don't get it!

Speaker building is like eating potato chips. You can't stop with just one. It's fun and addicting. Choose drivers, then work up a design. After months of planning, build. Agonize over which veneer to use & how to finish it.

I have had much more return on my money with speaker building than I used to get from just buying a box someone else built!

And about selling them: WHAT!!! sell my babies!!! I have a house full of speakers. Then there are the ones I have given to family, friends, etc. But sell them, oh no!

Cheers, Jim

For sure! Hey post some pics! Maybe start a new thread with pictures of your babies!

Viking64

verb wrote: »

For sure! Hey post some pics! Maybe start a new thread with pictures of your babies!

ZaPHoN

Can we please get back on topic as I'm trying to track a demo of these down in Ontario Canada.

How do the new L800 SDA compare to the Original Legend SDA-SRS 1.2TL?

F1nut

ZaPHoN wrote: »

Can we please get back on topic as I'm trying to track a demo of these down in Ontario Canada.

How do the new L800 SDA compare to the Original Legend SDA-SRS 1.2TL?

Both do SDA. The L800 doesn't go as low, is smaller and lighter than the 2.3TL. That said, the only way you will truly know what they sound like is to hear them.

K_M

tonyb wrote: »

Dropping a 4 cylinder engine in a Camaro is "adequate" too, gets you around town, back and forth no problem. Who the heck wants that though. No doubt some will, but most won't.

People have to remember that a speaker company is a business, guided by profits. It's not there to swap dollars so you can afford them. The challenge is always going to be, how to put out a product, year after year, that offers improvements, in a market where your customer base has disposable income that keeps shrinking.....and the cost of doing business keeps rising.

Not as easy as one may think, to build mass produced speakers in such an environment, let alone ones that sound good to boot, and keep them reasonably affordable.

I personally think Polk has excelled in that endeavor. It's easy to see why higher end crossovers are not offered, not because they don't matter, but to keep costs and profits in line so they stay in business.

I would say WRONG!
Ask a dozen great DIY speaker engineers, who a few or more might also design for actual speaker companies, and the opinion on botique stuff is pretty well agreed on.

Has NOTHING to do with cost, but it is not seen as an improvement.
There is a small contingent in the audio community, that "believe" huge improvements are there when simply substituting parts of a higher cost, but some companies use them to pacify the ones expecting expensive caps and fancy binding posts.

A competently well designed crossover, is measure, simulated and can be improved by altering crossover slopes, high frequency attenuation and phase angles and notch filters and many other things, that will indeed alter the sound.

Money has to be put where it does the most good.
A non resonant cabinet, and decent drivers and a well designed and measured crossover.

Kind of silly to use $50.00 caps on woofers and tweeters that cost the company only a few dollars in bulk each.

K_M

F1nut wrote: »

ZaPHoN wrote: »

Can we please get back on topic as I'm trying to track a demo of these down in Ontario Canada.

How do the new L800 SDA compare to the Original Legend SDA-SRS 1.2TL?

Both do SDA. The L800 doesn't go as low, is smaller and lighter than the 2.3TL. That said, the only way you will truly know what they sound like is to hear them.

Also the older ones are for sure more efficient!

DarqueKnight

K_M wrote: »

I would say WRONG!
Ask a dozen great DIY speaker engineers, who a few or more might also design for actual speaker companies, and the opinion on botique stuff is pretty well agreed on.

The designers at Sonus faber and other high end speaker companies would disagree with this. Most speaker companies aren't going to come out and say "well, yes, our products could be improved if you replace the cheap, crappy crossover parts with higher quality parts".

Pass Laboratories is a boutique electronics manufacturer which uses boutique parts on their circuit boards. Even with that, Nelson Pass said that further improvements could be made. For example, when Nelson Pass was asked if it was possible to make a ''perfect'' X250.5 or X350.5 amplifier, he replied:

"No. The design is not perfect. When I create a perfect amplifier, I will disappear in a puff of smoke.

The X series is most easily improved by increasing the bias, which generally means better heat sinking and power supply.

There are the usual tweaks, your favorite capacitors, wire, resistors, etc, many of which work, adding some small measure of improvement.

It's not hard to form a list - unfortunately the items on it cost a lot of money. We have used all the economical approaches we know, and some that are not."

K_M wrote: »

Has NOTHING to do with cost, but it is not seen as an improvement.
There is a small contingent in the audio community, that "believe" huge improvements are there when simply substituting parts of a higher cost, but some companies use them to pacify the ones expecting expensive caps and fancy binding posts.

A Polk engineer wasn't trying to pacify me when he advised me replace the electrolytic caps in my SDAs with high quality "boutique" film caps and to replace the lower quality mylar film caps with higher quality "boutique" polypropylene caps. He was quite forthright in explaining that some of their parts selections were due to cost and some were due to not being able to source higher quality components in sufficient quantities. Matthew Polk wasn't trying to pacify when he recommended replacing the stock SDA inductor with a large, high current toroidal inductor.

K_M wrote: »

A competently well designed crossover, is measure, simulated and can be improved by altering crossover slopes, high frequency attenuation and phase angles and notch filters and many other things, that will indeed alter the sound.

You don't understand. The reason for using higher quality parts is not to "alter" the sound. The reason is to improve the sound by removing noise and distortions caused by lower quality parts.

VR3

Anyone not believing in high quality parts, contact @treitz3 his speakers are designed and built to change between stock and modified on the fly, two separate crossovers in one enclosure.

pitdogg2

Careful Ray you'll be "trolling"

F1nut

K_M wrote: »

tonyb wrote: »

Dropping a 4 cylinder engine in a Camaro is "adequate" too, gets you around town, back and forth no problem. Who the heck wants that though. No doubt some will, but most won't.

People have to remember that a speaker company is a business, guided by profits. It's not there to swap dollars so you can afford them. The challenge is always going to be, how to put out a product, year after year, that offers improvements, in a market where your customer base has disposable income that keeps shrinking.....and the cost of doing business keeps rising.

Not as easy as one may think, to build mass produced speakers in such an environment, let alone ones that sound good to boot, and keep them reasonably affordable.

I personally think Polk has excelled in that endeavor. It's easy to see why higher end crossovers are not offered, not because they don't matter, but to keep costs and profits in line so they stay in business.

I would say WRONG!
Ask a dozen great DIY speaker engineers, who a few or more might also design for actual speaker companies, and the opinion on botique stuff is pretty well agreed on.

Has NOTHING to do with cost, but it is not seen as an improvement.
There is a small contingent in the audio community, that "believe" huge improvements are there when simply substituting parts of a higher cost, but some companies use them to pacify the ones expecting expensive caps and fancy binding posts.

A competently well designed crossover, is measure, simulated and can be improved by altering crossover slopes, high frequency attenuation and phase angles and notch filters and many other things, that will indeed alter the sound.

Money has to be put where it does the most good.
A non resonant cabinet, and decent drivers and a well designed and measured crossover.

Kind of silly to use $50.00 caps on woofers and tweeters that cost the company only a few dollars in bulk each.

But wait, you stated the following in this very thread.

K_M wrote: »

Yes some speakers use truly mediocre crossover parts, and can be improved, but not all.

HELLO!!!

nooshinjohn

You guys make it hard to ignore stupidity if you keep quoting posts ....

mhardy6647

nooshinjohn wrote: »

You guys make it hard to ignore stupidity if you keep quoting posts ....

It's dangerous to ignore stupidity. Ask (e.g.) Boeing.

WLDock

Feedback about crossovers is no different than anything else in audio. There will be different opinions and experiences. There are no right or wrongs. Some will say a passive with exotic components are worth it, others will say that an all active system is 100 times better, etc, etc, etc.

I think all agree that quality parts are needed for audio..... but at what cost does the point of diminishing returns begin?

This is an interesting read on the subject.
https://www.audioholics.com/loudspeaker-design/crossovers


Rick Craig / Selah Audio has some interesting opinion on the subject also:

CROSSOVER PARTS
January 6, 2015
One of the questions I'm often asked is something like "what crossover parts do you use or what upgrades do you offer"? Before I founded Selah Audio I worked as a component buyer in the electronics industry. Part of my responsibility included working with design engineers to find suitable parts for a variety of products.

Some of the equipment we manufactured worked at very high frequencies way beyond the audio band. Slight deviations in passive components (resistors, inductors, and capacitors) often became critical to circuit performance.

The same can be true for high end audio; however, it seems that the claims made for exotic parts often have no scientific basis and lack the documentation to show that there's an audible difference (let alone if it's even closer to the source material you're listening to). Of course there are many opinions on this subject and if you ask 99 audiophiles you might receive 100 answers. Stay tuned as I discuss my thoughts on this and other subjects in the coming year...

In my experience bypass caps make no audible improvement. Same for many of the exotic caps. If your speaker has electrolytic caps in a tweeter or midrange circuit switching to a film cap can actually change the response in a negative way. It all depends on how the circuit was designed and quality of the electrolytic parts. I have modified speakers from B&W and Wharefdale where the ESR resistance of the cap was factored into the response. in those cases I observed about 2db of increased output when replacing the caps.

Changing inductors can actually make things worse depending on how the circuit was designed - lower resistance is not always better. Resistors are pretty straightforward which is why you don't see as much snake oil with them.

One of the problems is that the cap manufacturers virtually offer no metrics to show how their parts are superior. I have participated in a few blind tests with caps and having seen (and heard) the results is why I am skeptical of most claims. There are a few companies who do some scientific testing; however, nothing has ever come out to show one type clearly superior to another.

just because a part is more expensive doesn't mean that it's automatically better.Prices can be higher for many reasons - greed, cost of manufacturing (labor, equipment, small production runs, inefficiency, government taxes/duties, etc.). None of these have any bearing on what makes the component better than a comparable part of lower cost.

Most of the parts I use are made by Clarity. In some situations I use other brands if I cannot get the same component value from Clarity. There are also situations where the case size is too large and then alternative caps are used. If customers want something different I try to accommodate their requests as much as possible. BTW, the best sounding caps I've ever heard were 30+ year-old Solens - incredible break-in! jk

DarqueKnight

mhardy6647 wrote: »

nooshinjohn wrote: »

You guys make it hard to ignore stupidity if you keep quoting posts ....

It's dangerous to ignore stupidity. Ask (e.g.) Boeing.

Ask the space shuttle Challenger astronauts.
Ask the crew and passengers of the Titanic.

While we are on the theme of stupidity, I, and others, have documented many times that Polk Audio's co-founder and certain members of their engineering staff have recommended higher quality crossover parts. It is the height of stupidity for someone to come along and outright claim, or insinuate, that following such performance improvement advice is foolish because of what some other manufacturer said about their own speakers.

It's like:

Ford says: "We recommend the following modification to improve brake performace.
Naysayer says: "Every other car manufacturer in the world universe says that modification is not necessary for their cars and therefore and won't do any good on Ford vehicles. Ford is lying.

WLDock wrote: »

Feedback about crossovers is no different than anything else in audio. There will be different opinions and experiences. There are no right or wrongs. Some will say a passive with exotic components are worth it, others will say that an all active system is 100 times better, etc, etc, etc.

It depends on the interests and goals of the individual. Most participants of a hobby are not high performance enthusiasts and therefore are not going to be interested in whatever gains can be achieved by modifying a stock item, no matter how great or small the improvement might be.

It is interesting to note that performance enthusiasts are often criticized for indulging in incremental or "diminishing returns" performance improvements, yet you rarely, if ever, see a performance enthusiast criticizing someone, or calling someone crazy, if they prefer to leave their gear in stock form.

WLDock wrote: »

Rick Craig / Selah Audio has some interesting opinion on the subject also:

"In my experience bypass caps make no audible improvement. Same for many of the exotic caps. If your speaker has electrolytic caps in a tweeter or midrange circuit switching to a film cap can actually change the response in a negative way. It all depends on how the circuit was designed and quality of the electrolytic parts. I have modified speakers from B&W and Wharefdale where the ESR resistance of the cap was factored into the response. in those cases I observed about 2db of increased output when replacing the caps.

Changing inductors can actually make things worse depending on how the circuit was designed - lower resistance is not always better."

This highlights why it is important to consult the manufacturer before doing modifications.

tonyb

Ray hits another one out of the park.

F1nut

Will there be another hit and run?

K_M

tonyb wrote: »

Ray hits another one out of the park.

No, you mean you happen to agree with what he says.

MOST speaker designers or "engineers" do not believe what he claims someone told him.
The reason for not using botique caps is for the price there is very little advantage sound wise.

There are some audiophiles that believe they make a big difference but if you read several audio forums, there is NEVER a consensus, and never any proof of this.

That is why opinions are all over the place.

But gonna stand my ground, MOST speaker engineers do not believe in expensive caps.
One or two saying they do is just that.

K_M

WLDock wrote: »

Feedback about crossovers is no different than anything else in audio. There will be different opinions and experiences. There are no right or wrongs. Some will say a passive with exotic components are worth it, others will say that an all active system is 100 times better, etc, etc, etc.

I think all agree that quality parts are needed for audio..... but at what cost does the point of diminishing returns begin?

This is an interesting read on the subject.
https://www.audioholics.com/loudspeaker-design/crossovers


Rick Craig / Selah Audio has some interesting opinion on the subject also:

CROSSOVER PARTS
January 6, 2015

The same can be true for high end audio; however, it seems that the claims made for exotic parts often have no scientific basis and lack the documentation to show that there's an audible difference (let alone if it's even closer to the source material you're listening to). Of course there are many opinions on this subject and if you ask 99 audiophiles you might receive 100 answers. Stay tuned as I discuss my thoughts on this and other subjects in the coming year...

In my experience bypass caps make no audible improvement. Same for many of the exotic caps. If your speaker has electrolytic caps in a tweeter or midrange circuit switching to a film cap can actually change the response in a negative way. It all depends on how the circuit was designed and quality of the electrolytic parts. I have modified speakers from B&W and Wharefdale where the ESR resistance of the cap was factored into the response. in those cases I observed about 2db of increased output when replacing the caps.

Changing inductors can actually make things worse depending on how the circuit was designed - lower resistance is not always better. Resistors are pretty straightforward which is why you don't see as much snake oil with them.

One of the problems is that the cap manufacturers virtually offer no metrics to show how their parts are superior. I have participated in a few blind tests with caps and having seen (and heard) the results is why I am skeptical of most claims. There are a few companies who do some scientific testing; however, nothing has ever come out to show one type clearly superior to another.

just because a part is more expensive doesn't mean that it's automatically better.Prices can be higher for many reasons - greed, cost of manufacturing (labor, equipment, small production runs, inefficiency, government taxes/duties, etc.). None of these have any bearing on what makes the component better than a comparable part of lower cost.

Most of the parts I use are made by Clarity. In some situations I use other brands if I cannot get the same component value from Clarity. There are also situations where the case size is too large and then alternative caps are used. If customers want something different I try to accommodate their requests as much as possible. BTW, the best sounding caps I've ever heard were 30+ year-old Solens - incredible break-in! jk

People in this forum (in general) are never open to the possibility they are wrong, and all cling to ideas they tend to agree with, and bash on people that dare to say they are wrong, or have a different opinion, or personally have found what they say to simply be wrong.

Outside this forum (fortunately) other views are seen more regularly.

Most of the approximately 40 people either banned or that left the forum due to several jerks that try to gang up on people here, tended to not agree with those jerks.

The jerks are afraid to be told their opinion could be wrong.
So they huddle together agree with each other, and applaud each other and so on.

You ever notice, how they all tend to post literally one after the other?

mhardy6647

Col. Paul W. Klipsch believed that his enclosure designs (and, presumably, his midrange horns) were the value-added part of his loudspeakers and that the drivers used were irrelevant. Early on, he (they) used pretty good drivers (EV, University -- that sort of thing), but by the 1970s, Klipsch was using mostly inexpensive commodity drivers (although they used the EV T35 tweeter for a long time). Some time spent listening to the "Heritage" Klipsch models of that era will, I would opine, quickly convince one of the fallacy of Klipsch's logic.

In terms of crossover design and choice of passive components used therein (capacitors, inductors and resistors), at least in the case of mass-market loudspeakers, there is simply no question that the 'bean counters' held/hold at least some sway in the choice of components based (presumably) on COGs (cost of goods sold).

Basic economics, I think.

F1nut

Well, not one but two and completely ignoring the egg on their face.....as usual.

K_M

DSkip wrote: »

The speaker designers I talk to believe you don’t need world class drivers. You can take good drivers, get the electroacoustics right and use quality capacitors and draw out incredible sound.

The reason this is even up for debate is that many don’t know how to listen for the qualities these components bring. Case in point, only roughly 10% of guys who came to my room at lsaf heard the incredible depth I was getting. Those guys who did had expletives immediately. The problem with this hobby is that if you don’t know what to listen for, you won’t get it. If you do catch what is going on, that sound doesn’t leave your register.

.

That comment is borderline offensive.
Some of the rest I agree with, but you are saying that if someone does not agree with your opinion, they have bad hearing or listening qualities right??

But those pros that have done their homework and do not agree with you, and from well known companies, are all wrong?

Some will make huge claims for caps. I agree there is some difference to be had, for sure, but a tiny to small difference.

If you think the caps are the bottleneck in Polk speakers, are you aware they are using drivers that usually are usually under $10.00 each in the bulk purchases they make?

K_M

mhardy6647 wrote: »

Col. Paul W. Klipsch believed that his enclosure designs (and, presumably, his midrange horns) were the value-added part of his loudspeakers and that the drivers used were irrelevant. Early on, he (they) used pretty good drivers (EV, University -- that sort of thing), but by the 1970s, Klipsch was using mostly inexpensive commodity drivers (although they used the EV T35 tweeter for a long time). Some time spent listening to the "Heritage" Klipsch models of that era will, I would opine, quickly convince one of the fallacy of Klipsch's logic.

In terms of crossover design and choice of passive components used therein (capacitors, inductors and resistors), at least in the case of mass-market loudspeakers, there is simply no question that the 'bean counters' held/hold at least some sway in the choice of components based (presumably) on COGs (cost of goods sold).

Basic economics, I think.

The enclosures are by far the most expensive part in most retail speakers, that are not really high priced.

F1nut

WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA...........WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA