What gives on the new tweeters?

OrangeToupee
OrangeToupee Posts: 488
edited February 2002 in Technical/Setup
Sorry if I've missed it, but why have they decided to scrap the tri-lam? Naturally I'm curious, as I've got them all over my house with a grand total of nine. If they are inferior to the new ones, I would like to know why and in what way. Interestingly, when auditioning my 35i's at a friends not long after I bought them, I thought that I might have heard a couple of spitting s's here and there; I'm not sure if it was his receiver, the age of my tweeter, or god forbid a design problem with the tweeter itself! I haven't heard that in my own environment, so, I'll assume it was an anomaly indigenous to his equipment or simply the need for the speakers to break-in.
Post edited by OrangeToupee on
· Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Comments

  • johnnyamerika
    johnnyamerika Posts: 382
    edited February 2002
    I've heard a couple scratchy ssss' sounds out of mine, but I am pretty sure it was the source material (old jazz stuff). Plus I haven't had mine too long yet (2 1/2 weeks)

    That new radiating tweeter does look interesting, I want to hear it pretty bad!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • OrangeToupee
    OrangeToupee Posts: 488
    edited February 2002
    Oh, I am not referring to the LSi line, I understand that it's a higher quality tweeter and the price of the speaker reflects that. I'm referring to the RTi line, which is essentially the same speaker as our RT??*i line, except for the change in tweeter. I'm wondering what it was that promted Polk to make the change. What's better (if anything) about the new line's tweeter that made them swap out? There is a reason, I'm sure, not that it has to be of great consequence or anything, but a reason nonetheless.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • jcaut
    jcaut Posts: 1,849
    edited February 2002
    I think "new improved formula" sums it up. Not supposed to be a night-and-day difference, but improved nonetheless. That's pretty much what Paul said here:
    http://clubpolk.polkaudio.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2034

    Jason
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • OrangeToupee
    OrangeToupee Posts: 488
    edited February 2002
    Thanks, jcaut, I obviously missed that thread. Now that I've seen it in print, I can go on ahead with my plans of becoming jealous and weird without reservation.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • johnnyamerika
    johnnyamerika Posts: 382
    edited February 2002
    ahhh, I see...makes sense, no?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • trubluluc
    trubluluc Posts: 2,067
    edited February 2002
    Do the new tweeters fit the old(er)rti's.
    As in, be cheaper to swap out the tweeters,
    than replace speakers, for all of us with piles of rti's.

    -luc
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • CHRIS
    CHRIS Posts: 454
    edited February 2002
    Luc-I'm sure there would be a crossover problem. If anyone is really wanting to do the swap, I would definitely call Ken Swauger at Polk tech.
    Chris :)
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • trubluluc
    trubluluc Posts: 2,067
    edited February 2002
    Thanks Chris-

    I was more curious than expectant.
    Tri-lams still sound fine to me.

    -luc
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • johnnyamerika
    johnnyamerika Posts: 382
    edited February 2002
    Speaking of Scratchy ssss's out of the tweaters, I watched godfather II the other night, and the scene where Michael is screaming at Frankie from NY, when Pacino hit the high notes I got alot of scratches out of the cs400. If anyone has godfather II and could test this out to see if it happens on their system, I would be intersted to find out. I have an Onkyo 595 driving it, and was listening at about 45 on the dial (=above reference level)
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • lax01
    lax01 Posts: 496
    edited February 2002
    johnnyamerika: I noticed the crackle more with the CS245i than with the 400i. Though the 400 isn't perfectly crystal clear in the very high dB scenes. I have watched some movies, Dr.Doolitle 2 and have had to stop watching it because of the crackle.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • johnnyamerika
    johnnyamerika Posts: 382
    edited February 2002
    Really? Damn! I wonder if that's just because it's TOO revealing?!? Dr. Doolittle 2 probably wouldn't have poorly recorded sound, though. Hmmm...anyone else with insight into this step up!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • lax01
    lax01 Posts: 496
    edited February 2002
    I have a feeling that the tech supervisor feel asleep at the wheel when remastering Dr Doolitle 2. I don't think the speakers are too revealing, it is just poor mastering.

    :)
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • johnnyamerika
    johnnyamerika Posts: 382
    edited February 2002
    :D

    Ha ha ha! Didn't see it, but I figured it would be better than that, being such a current movie. Godfather II is a tad older (albeit remastered).

    I just meant the 400 catches a huge frequency, making good stuff sound awesome, and revealing the 'flaws' in bad recordings :D
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter