SDA2 Vs SDA-1C

Ron Temple

PW47 wrote: »

IALREADY SEND IMAIL TO SUPORT TO FIND OUT ABOUT THE CABLE INTERCONNECTION TO SDA 2 WE ARE IN THE FORUM NOBOBY CAN GIVE LITLLE HELP ? MODEL R SDA 2 ONE ROUND PIN AND BELLOW AN HORIZONTAL . WITHOUTH THOSES CABLES SDA2 WORKS RIGHT? CAN I BUY ONE CABLE ? THANKS PWILSON

SDA 2Bs have the pin/blade interconnect. The have a pair of MWs, a single tweeter and a 12" PR. They are the best SDA 2 rev. If they are not empty boxes and totally beat to ****, then $70 is a steal. Mint 2Bs go for $250 - $300. They do much better with a pre/pro + common ground amplifier than with an AVR (though it's doable). The pin side of the IC is the only hot connection. The blade is an anchor. You can use a collarless rca cable with no downside. You can also contact Ben, he makes them.

PW47

Nj polker thanks for your help . I just like to have your opinion about thoses sda 2 ? Ihave to decided before ilost them (bargain) let see comparing to rt8 ihave an pair ,iam not impress by rt8 . P w .

PW47

Ron temple thanks ,they are in excelent shape . Iapreciated your help . Let me get them ,if it still there !

Hillbilly61

cnh wrote: »

Considering the fact that Polk must have done a lot of R&D on the SDA series? How could 'they' have possibly missed a +5 decibel bump in their SL2000--wouldn't it have been EASY to spot something like that in their own testing and fixed it!

I am still very puzzled as to how a silk treated RDO replacement does not radically alter the sound of an original SDA with an SL2000 tweeter. Am I just dense or am I missing something. I thought the whole idea of the SL2000 plus series was that they are, in fact, superior tweeters to silk/domes currently used by Polk? So why replace them with silk? And if the SL2000 sounds so 'bad' why did so many so equipped SDAs sell so 'well'?

thanks,
cnh

cnh, an excellent question! I am not a SDA expert, cannot answer, but own SDAs and could consider a swap out to the silk dome tweeters. Can any SDA experts here answer cnh's question?

F1nut

I thought the whole idea of the SL2000 plus series was that they are, in fact, superior tweeters to silk/domes currently used by Polk? So why replace them with silk?

The SL2000's are not superior in any way. Silk dome tweeters, like doped paper cones have been and still are considered by many to be the best.

And if the SL2000 sounds so 'bad' why did so many so equipped SDAs sell so 'well'?

SDA's have many positive attributes, which I suspect outweighed the issue with the SL2000's. Even Polk knew they could do better, hence the SL3000's used in the last generation.

heiney9

One very important thing to keep in mind guys is the sl2000 was around before digital audio players were the norm. I suspect early digital as well as today digital sources really exacerbated the frequency spike. Also as the sl2000 ages it sounds much worse. I always thought even if you could lessen the spike, they resonated at certain female vocal frequencies as well as with some brass instruments and piano.

The RD0's are far superior and Polk spent a lot of time and effort R & D'ing the RD0's so as not to alter the signature sound. But did away with all the nastiness in the sl2000.

Do yourself a favor and get RD0;s......you can thank us later

Hillbilly61

Thanks! Does anyone have any definitive material on this matter? Like a test, graph, etc? I am not challenging what you state, but would like to see where the basis for this originates from.

heiney9

It's all here on the forum. The graphs, tests, freq, etc. are all proprietary so you won't find any of that. I used to have all the info pretty well book marked. But, that was on an old computer. Take our word for it or better yet take the plunge and get the RD0's if you don't like them you can flip 'em for very little loss.

Good luck searching as the search function sucks with vBulletin. I believe most of the discussion info took place around 2001 which was about the time the RD0's came about give or take a year. Try also searching sl2000T as it was called that as well very early on. RD0 xxxx was the stock number and it stuck.

H9

Some graphs and discussion of the sl2000 and sl3000 appear in Darqueknight's SDA Compendium and 2nd Ed. if you have a copy. He did some excellent tests which he got permission from Polk to publish. No graphs, freq plots, etc for the RD0's however.

geppy1

I think it is mentioned in the Compendium that the spike is not in the tweeters natural response but is coming from the crossover.

PW47

r Sda 2 its fabulus speakers there is any upgrade for it , to get better? Ialways hear that the original is always the best and best value ? So i like to have an sincere opinion about it . Upgrade for better ? and what can be done . Thanks . This is my second polk audio ihave also rt8 . And now r sda2 , the sda2 change completely my opinion about polk audio . smooth easy listen ,inever get tired to hear ,ivery happy with it . the rt8 never impress me at all . Bw601 . Altec lansing and center klipsch quartet , mcintosh 5 passive radiator , kg4 , fortes ii. power mcintosh 1125 .altec 9440 , pioneer spect 2 , hafler500 mc2200 . marantz 250 .

Ender

I always feel like I am growing a brain tumor whenever I read your posts...

PW47

ender wrote: »

i always feel like i am growing a brain tumor whenever i read your posts...

please dont read you already have it .

PW47

ender wrote: »

i always feel like i am growing a brain tumor whenever i read your posts...

you are in usa ? ....... Oh yes california