I Love SL2000 Tweeters

heiney9

dorokusai wrote: »

Why is it about "getting it" exactly?

I recall a conversation with a Polk engineer about tweaking the LSi and guess what the first comment was? Add some dampening to the port tube. Second? Upgrade the woofer. Third? Upgrade the crossover....if you want to.

Just because it's old doesn't automatically mean it needs repair. I have a 25+ year old pair of DQ10's that still sound great and I didn't notice the crossovers on my to-do list.

Enjoy yourself, upgrade what you want, that's why the hobby is fun but don't get mad at those who don't care.

First off Mark I'm not talking about the Lsi's we can cover that in 20 years. They are new, the paerts are new and they use higher quality parts than the Monitor or old RTi line. Could the x-over be improved, sure but probably not very noticeable.

2nd of all I have a friend who just rebuilt perfectly good DQ-10's and mirror imaged them, used premium x-over components and the the difference was night and day so there is some merit for people to consider these types of things.

Tweaking is not necessary to enjoy the products as they are but good things can come out of it if the person is so inclined to take an interest.

As far as the "not getting it" part, I don't tweak because I think I can do it better than the manufacturer as Ron implied in his post.

rskarvan

H9,

You are completely right. I have never tried "tweaking" a perfectly good speaker. I also keep my cars "factory original" also.

I've done lots of tweaking on the job as an engineer. I've run dozen of studies to optimize the selection of material properties for a particular application. Subtle shifts in metallurgy can have huge effects on a particular design. I truly understand the importance of tweaking things for optimization purposes.

But, my tweaking is done scientifically. I form a hypothesis. I design a test. I measure the test variables. I evaluate any gage error. I take into account all known sources of other variations that may have contributed to the test results. I modify my math model of the system to match the newly acquired data. I run a simulation on the new math model. Finally, I confirm the model with a 2nd set of test test data and study the variation that occurs.

I just don't have the resources in my home to make proper design improvements in a methodical manner. That is why the good people at Polk Audio make the big bucks!

Finally, if it can't be measured, it is not real. Everything can be measured. If you feel its "subjective"... I will argue that you are just too lazy to have established a proper measurement system.

dorokusai

H9 - I agree and I'm not arguing the fact that it has it's advantages. I have issues with the fact that its implied that it HAS to be done. You'll find an "upgrade the crossover" comment within 10 posts of anyone asking about their vintage Polk. It's ridiculous.

If I'm here in 5 years I'd be suprised, let alone 20.

What happened to listening to a speaker based on its merits?

I've heard complete overhauls of DQ10's, some good, bad and terrible. In the DQ10 world, your "friend" would be the rskarvan of that forum....for perspective of course. You can ruin the sound of a loudspeaker as easily as you can tweak it.

rskarvan

Upgrading cross-overs is a perfect example of the Polk Audio forum "sheep mentality". Congratulations Doro for separating yourself from the herd. Beware though, the emperor now has no clothes.

NJPOLKER

The definition of merit is, worth, value, excellence, something deserving praise, taken right out of the dictionary. My feeling is I have more "merit" after tweeking my Polks to bringing out the best possible sound. After listening to my upgraded/updated Polks I feel an awful lot of pride I was able to increase the performance noticeably. That being said I feel "everyone" should do the similar things to increase the performance of there Polks. I might be wrong but I doubt it. My feelings are that most of the members here like the upgrading/updating ideas.
So it can't be ridiculas, can it?
I sure do not need to be a chemist or engineer I just need my fellow Club Polk members to assist in my upgrades/updates. You guys are the best!
Drew

rskarvan

Birds of a feather....

NJPOLKER

rskarvan,
What do you think some of the members here work for Solen and or Sonic Craft?
Baahhaa
Drew
BTW, I think I have too much time on my hands these days.

rskarvan

I just think that the x-over tweakers are hopeless audiophiles that make design decisions without the benefit of facts or data. This isn't science. This is just a grape kool-aide phenomina.

Face

This is turning into a cable type debate. You don't know until you try it for yourself.

DK and others have reported that cap values can drift over time. I updated 2 pairs of 20+ year old speakers so fa,r and saw a significant difference both times. I wouldn't hesitate to do it again with a vintage speaker.

rskarvan

I've got a 20 year old amp... should I open it up and upgrade all the caps in that too? How about the preamp... are the capacitors in that also in need of upgrade too?

My goodness... I think the time to upgrade a component is when it is BROKEN. Signs of a broken component are usually pretty obvious. It crackles a lot. It's burnt. Its leaking goo all over the place, etc.

If we are going to start upgrading electronic components just because its getting old.... then that is just silly.

NJPOLKER

Grape kool-aide phenomina? Last time I had Cool-Aide was in Jonestown Guyana. Maybe thats why I am this way or that I live in NJ.
I love the SL-2000 in a way its just that the RDO is far superior and try to share that with fellow members.
Drew

F1nut

ronnie's rolling, zero credibility, but he's rolling.

rskarvan

I agree entirely that the RDO tweeters are worthy upgrades!!!

NJPOLKER

I understand that if is ain't broke don't fix it. However, status quo is not a good thing especially in this hobby, kinda boring too. I'd hate to listen to the same song over and over again.
Damn, I have too much time on my hands. Thank goodness the golf course opens March 1st.
Drew

ben62670

I have owned about 8 SL2000's, and 2 of them sounded great! I replaced them with the RDO's, and I liked the two SL2000's more than the RDO194's. The nasty peak is at 12k. Please feel free to play that with a signal generator. It is very faint, and any music that reaches into 12k is so brief you would hardly notice it. No voices extend into that range. Very few guitar notes will touch that range, and it won't be the main part of the note, just the harmonics. Basically what he did when adding a 2.2mfd cap in series it became a 6db bass blocker at around 10-12k depending on speaker impedance. Seeing that Polk has not released this info we shall (I will) never know!

Here is a chart on what is really going on with music. I am not saying that harmonics don't occur, but 95% of music is below 3.5k


Edit another good one
http://www.studystack.com/studytable-27242

rskarvan

Ben, thank you for your nice factual post. It is refreshing!

candyliquor35m

Donald Fagen - Nightfly
Carver m1.0t amp
AI M3A pre with telefunkens
Ah! 99 cd with telefunken e188cc's
stock sda 2b's

Ok I just pulled the cap off my right 2b and it was definitely brighter but also had more detail. The left 2b sounded a little dull but was a pretty good compromise to eliminate any harshness. It's something I can live with.

For kicks I put in a rd0194 in the right 2b and it sounded twangy with no depth, soundstage or resonance.

For kicks I added the cap to the 194 and it opened up quite nicely and had more depth, soundstage and resonance and it's something I could live with if I had to but I still prefer the sl2000.

With the sl2000 on the left with the cap, it loses some of the brightness and harshness but retains that little edge that you get from tubes. The guitar has that magical warmth and fullness. Fagen's voice sounds full and masculine.

I hate to say it but the 194 makes Fagen sound a little like he was castrated as a teenager.

I have nothing against the 194 and I'm not bashing it and I'm glad so many of you like it but I prefer the sl2000 hands down.

The 194 makes my 2b's almost sound like any old generic speaker you can buy these days with nothing special about it.

ben62670

rskarvan wrote: »

Ben, thank you for your nice factual post. It is refreshing!

If I wanted to hear something from an A-hole I would have farted:D
You suck Ron.

Edit
BTW I still use my ears for final judgement.

strider

ben62670 wrote: »

If I wanted to hear something from an A-hole I would have farted:D
You suck Ron.

Edit
BTW I still use my ears for final judgement.

Game, set, and match.

heiney9

rskarvan wrote: »

I've got a 20 year old amp... should I open it up and upgrade all the caps in that too? How about the preamp... are the capacitors in that also in need of upgrade too?

My goodness... I think the time to upgrade a component is when it is BROKEN. Signs of a broken component are usually pretty obvious. It crackles a lot. It's burnt. Its leaking goo all over the place, etc.

If we are going to start upgrading electronic components just because its getting old.... then that is just silly.

Performance diminishes over time and rarely do you realize it until you get something new. By the time it crackles, pops, burns or leaks goo.....it's way too late and it usually does other damage as a result. And yes, you could go into your 20 year old amp and replace caps, etc. Those parts that have a finite life span.

Too each their own the whole sheep and grape koolaid comment is way over the top. Personally I have never stated that upgrades are mandatory, just a suggestion, and I personally relay the results I have experienced.

To think that an electronic component you buy, at the consumer level no less, will last indefinitely is ridiculous; and you call yourself an engineer. Ask any amp designer worth anything and they'll tell you capacitors have a useful life of around 10-12 years for high quality components and less for crap components. As always some will last longer and some will not. It's not so much of it completely failing as it will dramatically change it operating parameters over time.

Mark, you and I agree more than we disagree. Just because you upgrade components, etc. doesn't always mean an improvement. Having done it a couple times now, I'm a firm believer the cost and effort is worthwhile.

H9

Anyways, my head is bloody from banging it against the wall. I need to clean up and move on.

heiney9

candyliquor35m wrote: »

Donald Fagen - Nightfly
Carver m1.0t amp
AI M3A pre with telefunkens
Ah! 99 cd with telefunken e188cc's
stock sda 2b's

Ok I just pulled the cap off my right 2b and it was definitely brighter but also had more detail. The left 2b sounded a little dull but was a pretty good compromise to eliminate any harshness. It's something I can live with.

For kicks I put in a rd0194 in the right 2b and it sounded twangy with no depth, soundstage or resonance.

For kicks I added the cap to the 194 and it opened up quite nicely and had more depth, soundstage and resonance and it's something I could live with if I had to but I still prefer the sl2000.

With the sl2000 on the left with the cap, it loses some of the brightness and harshness but retains that little edge that you get from tubes. The guitar has that magical warmth and fullness. Fagen's voice sounds full and masculine.

I hate to say it but the 194 makes Fagen sound a little like he was castrated as a teenager.

I have nothing against the 194 and I'm not bashing it and I'm glad so many of you like it but I prefer the sl2000 hands down.

The 194 makes my 2b's almost sound like any old generic speaker you can buy these days with nothing special about it.

Please let Matt and the gang know about your scientific findings. They need to issue a service bulletin to all SDA and Monitor owners with the sl2000. :rolleyes:

NJPOLKER

The difference between the SL-2000 and the RDO maybe a matter of preference.The RDO's sound better to me in my SRSII, SDA2a's and Monitor 10's. However no one can say that the properly upgraded/updated crossovers don't make a huge difference over the originals.
So I'll say this again, if you have original crossovers in your Polks upgrade/update them ASAP. Not my opinion, FACT.
Drew

heiney9

rskarvan wrote: »

I just don't have the resources in my home to make proper design improvements in a methodical manner. That is why the good people at Polk Audio make the big bucks!

Ronnie, we are not reinventing the wheel here. We are replacing worn parts with the same value parts established by Polk. In many instances the new same value parts perform better than the old parts because of improved technology. We aren't redesigning anything, you really need to pay attention.

Finally, if it can't be measured, it is not real. Everything can be measured. If you feel its "subjective"... I will argue that you are just too lazy to have established a proper measurement system.

Read my sig...................you'll see we are on opposite side of the scale here.

H9

rskarvan

Nelson Pass is wrong. Everything can be measured and absolutely nothing is subjective about accurately reproducing an audio signal.

ben62670

If you removed the crap from a certain members head, and the small amount left was petrified it would sound like a pea rolling through the grand canyon:D

heiney9

You stick to absolute measurements and what's printed in black and white and I'll stick to enjoying the music I hear on a subjective level and they way I hear it and it makes me feel. Talk about a sheep mentality...........everything has to be black and white in your world. Baaaaa.......Baaaaa......Baaaaa.

There's room for both types in the audio world.

Boywonder

Not that I want to jump into the fire, but.....I consider myself an audio skeptic, especially with things like cables, etc. but I do notice (much to my astonishment) an improvement in my monitor 10's with Solen Caps over the stock mylar/electrolytic 20 year old ones.

When folks speak of "upgrading" the crossover they are really meaning "refreshing" or "renewing" without changing the values of anything. It is well understood in speaker design that film caps will outperform electrolytics in most applications; electrolytics are used for cost considerations easpecially in larger values.

I have a pr of completely stock 10B's and a pr with new Solen caps that i have been doing a direct comparison between. Both are fed the exact same signal with one stock 10B and one modified 10B connected such that I can switch between the two speakers quickly.

My two observations (after about 2 hrs of listening) are: The "refreshed" crossover seems to have more dynamic range than stock, and the SL-2000 sounds a little more annoying in the "refreshed" speaker. To me, dynamic range goes a long way toward an engaging system. The "refreshed" speaker also seems to have a crisper "attack" on drums, cymbals, etc.

I am also aware that "you cannot polish a ****" so if your source is a compressed lo res MP3 file, or your source components are not very dynamic or resolving all the speaker technology in the world won't matter much.

I cannot comment on "air", "airyness", "chestiness", blah, blah, blah because I am an audio skeptic.

Ron: I also have a couple of unmolested preamps and power amps from the late 70's and early 80's that sound rather flat (compressed). They used to be very entertaining to me so one of two things have occured: The caps need refreshing or I have moved up the food chain and these components sound the same as the day I bought them. I think that the caps need refreshing.

I am also an engineer (ME) involved in product development of electro-mechanical devices on a daily basis so I completely agree with you on the merits of rigorous testing of new designs. Not too many folks here are second guessing Polk's design intent when they speak of "crossover upgrades".

I would suggest "refreshing" a crossover, leave the other speaker stock, conduct your own listening test, and draw your own conclusions.

NJPOLKER

I just got done listening to my SRSII's over the past few hours and they sound wonderful and thats really my major concern. The RDO's with the Mills resistors and Sonic Caps WOW. Soon comes Dynamat and binding posts!
There is not a graph of any description that can change what I actual hear.

Ben, my head is almost as big as the Grand Canyon but big head big brain!

ben62670

rskarvan wrote: »

Nelson Pass is wrong. Everything can be measured and absolutely nothing is subjective about accurately reproducing an audio signal.

Ron super simple. Take two different amps with the same specs, and they both will not sound the same. Take two CD players with the same specs, and they will not sound the same. Measuring something is not going to tell you what is better. Audio, food, clothes, nearly anything on this planet(or yours). Keep up the good work. I appreciate a good laugh.

BTW
I am not that impressed with the components in the LSI series speakers. I would definitely mod the caps.

NJPOLKER

I don't want to be the one to "polish the ****" but it will look alittle more appealing all cleaned up and shinny than old and moldy ready to blow away in the wind like old caps and resistors.