I Love SL2000 Tweeters

heiney9

NJPOLKER wrote: »

Ron,
I will have a pair of upgraded/updated crossovers for Monitor 10's with-in a few weeks or so, I will burn them in first. If they are a perfect match to swap out in your Monitor 10's will you try them? I will mail them to you at my cost for your evaluation and you can compare them to the "stock" x-over Monitor 10's. I have no question that you will be fair in your evaluation.
Maybe this is a stretch but I think it could be interesting.
Drew

It won't matter, even if he thought they sounded better he'd never admit it because then where would the controversy be. He couldn't be a star anymore. He has no intention of ever trying it, he just wants to tell us all why we shouldn't do it, why it won't work and how dare we go against the initial design which is now pushing 20 years.

Nice offer, but that isn't the point of why Ron is even posting in this thread.

H9

dorokusai

I made sweet love to an SL2000 last night and it was glorious.

NJPOLKER

heiney9 wrote: »

It won't matter, even if he thought they sounded better he'd never admit it because then where would the controversy be. He couldn't be a star anymore. He has no intention of ever trying it, he just wants to tell us all why we shouldn't do it, why it won't work and how dare we go against the initial design which is now pushing 20 years.

Nice offer, but that isn't the point of why Ron is even posting in this thread.

H9

I disagree with you big time!! Ron, don't let me down here.
I have a pair of 10a x-overs with fuse protected tweeters(1 amp fast blow)
that I am getting ready to upgrade. I will probably use Solen caps and Mills resistors which seem to be middle of the road in performance. All wires will be labeled/tagged so the will be no problem with hooking them up.
If I missed anything let me know, I know you will.
I think it would be interesting to see/hear the results from a "non-believer".
Drew

rskarvan

NJPOLKER wrote: »

Ron,
I will have a pair of upgraded/updated crossovers for Monitor 10's with-in a few weeks or so, I will burn them in first. If they are a perfect match to swap out in your Monitor 10's will you try them? I will mail them to you at my cost for your evaluation and you can compare them to the "stock" x-over Monitor 10's. I have no question that you will be fair in your evaluation.
Maybe this is a stretch but I think it could be interesting.
Drew

My monitor 10's are series 2 with the MW6503 drivers and the SL2500 (upgraded to the RDO) tweeter. If it is a match, I'd be interested in trying it.

NJPOLKER

Well now here we go.
The only thing we have to be sure of then is if the x-overs I have here are a perfect match for Series 2 monitor 10's
Each x-over has the following
2) 12uF caps
1) 34uF cap
1) 2.7 resistor
1)2.5 resistor
1 amp fast blow exterior fuse protection
Would the Monitor 10 experts please let us know if this will be a match.
Thanks Drew

heiney9

NJPOLKER wrote: »

Well now here we go.
The only thing we have to be sure of then is if the x-overs I have here are a perfect match for Series 2 monitor 10's
Each x-over has the following
2) 12uF caps
1) 34uF cap
1) 2.7 resistor
1)2.5 resistor
1 amp fast blow exterior fuse protection
Would the Monitor 10 experts please let us know if this will be a match.
Thanks Drew

Nope, no fuse (polyswitch) and no 2.5 resistor. Those x-overs probably used the peerless tweeter as well.
Also has an 16 uF cap in the series II

NJPOLKER

Your right I have Peerless tweeters which sound pretty good. Damn, I was thinking this could be interesting. Oh well I tried.
I better go to bed for I have been Polked out for today!!
Drew

Ricardo

Nice thread.

Marty913

Ricardo wrote: »

Nice thread.

It would be even better if it ENDED.

ben62670

DarqueKnight wrote: »

Some instruments and female voices have significant harmonic energy in the upper frequency ranges.

I absolutely whole heartedly agree with this statement. Allison Kraus is a very good example of this. My experiences with various SL2000's is that most get brittle, and shrill with age. A new pair of SL2000's would IMHO sound very nice. I had a pair of wonderful SL2000's that sounded great even with the occasional spike in the HF spectrum(3 other pairs that really sucked). I have tried the RDO's, and have decided to go with the morel's. If I had a pair of speakers that had nice soft 2000's I would keep them. Am I saying to Polkies keep their SL2000's? Most likely not, but if you are lucky enough to get some nice soft Sl2000's....

candyliquor35m

Let doro loosen them up for you. He's been practicing.

F1nut

rskarvan wrote: »

If I could upgrade a Thiel, I'd be a very talented guy.

It's easy to upgrade from Thiel.

candyliquor35m

DarqueKnight wrote: »

Some instruments and female voices have significant harmonic energy in the upper frequency ranges.

I couldn't agree more. You're not just going to lose percussion when you start swapping out tweeters.

MarcLazarek78

I was told JL uses the best components/materials,back in '95. That was by some guy in the install shop tho

avguytx

We aren't talking Car Audio here I don't think. I sold JL back in '95, too. Nothing to write home about really.

shadowofnight

I have seen this " The SL200's have a 5 dB spike around 13K " quoted here on the forum more then once as the reason for most not liking the SL2000.

With Polk using the Progressive Point Source designed crossovers in the larger multiple tweetered SDA's , all you would have to change out is ONE tweeter as all of the others never even go near that high of a frequency.

This might not be a good idea with the SDA's using the metalized domes ( SL3000 ) ...but I bet you the softer more flexible domed SL2000 and RD0 tweeters would work extremely well together and with only one tweeter to change out it would save you a LOT of coin and you would lose the harsh 13K resonance peak...sure as hell worth a try.

MillerLiteScott

So if I understand this correctly, in my 1C's, I could only change they top tweeter to effectively ( to a degree ) smooth out the top end.

Is that correct?

Scott

MarcLazarek78

bottom and middle,I believe.

So in my SRS 2 it woul be just the bottom?

shadowofnight

MarcLazarek78 wrote: »

middle.

Actually his 1c's only have 2 tweeters...not 3 as shown here....besides I was only mentioning the larger multiple tweetered SDA's ( SRS and 2.3 ) as the manual I am looking at only mentions the Progressive Point Source for those in particular....for any other models you would have to look at schematics.

MarcLazarek78

if the spike is at 13khz then all would need to be replaced since the drivers produce 2.5khz and up,correct?I thought the spike was at lower khz.

F1nut

Hang on!

I tried installing just one new RD0198-1 in each of my 2.3TL's to see if I could hear a difference before spending more money. I did hear a difference, so I went ahead and replaced all of them. There was an obvious improvement when all the tweeters were replaced vs just the one.

You have to keep in mind that the new tweeters are rubberized silk and are going to present a different sonic signature. You have to do them all.

shadowofnight

MarcLazarek78 wrote: »

if the spike is at 13khz then all would need to be replaced since the drivers produce 2.5khz and up,correct?I thought the spike was at lower khz.

No...and again this is ONLY for the PPS engineered crossovers ( I know SRS..1.2...2.3 ARE....others YOU have to do the research ) ....as the frequencies go higher...Polk only wanted ONE tweeter at that frequency ( In this 2.3 instance ) to be a POINT source....not multiple drivers emitting the same higher frequencies.

If you look at the pictures you see less and less tweeters active as the frequencies increase...until at 8Khz and above only ONE tweeter is actually emitting that frequency range. Pretty easy to grasp....the pictures tell the whole story.

shadowofnight

F1nut wrote: »

Hang on!

I tried installing just one new RD0198-1 in each of my 2.3TL's to see if I could hear a difference before spending more money. I did hear a difference, so I went ahead and replaced all of them. There was an obvious improvement when all the tweeters were replaced vs just the one.

You have to keep in mind that the new tweeters are rubberized silk and are going to present a different sonic signature. You have to do them all.

That may very well be Jesse...I had not tried this ...was just looking at new data recently found out by me looking. If the tweeters signature sound are that different this would not work well as you mentioned...it was just something I wanted to try.

shadowofnight

Did you change the 8k and above tweeter ? Just curious ? Wait a second your TL's use the metalized SL3000's...the very ones I said would NOT be a good match to swap out....The SL2000's and the RD0 domes would be a much better match to try.

shadowofnight wrote: »

This might not be a good idea with the SDA's using the metalized domes ( SL3000 ) ...but I bet you the softer more flexible domed SL2000 and RD0 tweeters would work extremely well together

heiney9

MillerLiteScott wrote: »

So if I understand this correctly, in my 1C's, I could only change they top tweeter to effectively ( to a degree ) smooth out the top end.

Is that correct?

Scott

No, he is hypothesizing. There are other characteristics that cause the sl2000 to have harshness issues, etc. not just the peak. I would never mix tweeters, but I suppose if one wanted to experiment w/their own speakers. I know in the compendium (which is one person POV) it discourages mixing tweeters.

H9

heiney9

shadowofnight wrote: »

Did you change the 8k and above tweeter ? Just curious ? Wait a second your TL's use the metalized SL3000's...the very ones I said would NOT be a good match to swap out....The SL2000's and the RD0 domes would be a much better match to try.

Actually both RD0's are much more similar to the sl3000 than they are to the sl2000. You *might* get by mixing sl3000's w/ RD0's but what's the point the sl3000 is a clearly superior tweeter to the sl2000 in every respect. Have you read the technical paper on the sl3000?

shadowofnight

heiney9 wrote: »

Actually both RD0's are much more similar to the sl3000 than they are to the sl2000. You *might* get by mixing sl3000's w/ RD0's but what's the point the sl3000 is a clearly superior tweeter to the sl2000 in every respect. Have you read the technical paper on the sl3000?

Oh yeah, I read the paper...the tri layer deposition on the dome ( Stiffness ..etc ) Is the only reason I was thinking not a good match. This was only a " What the hell , try it " spur of the moment thing as mentioned in my original post....be fun to try is all.

Then again, a lot of people on the forum don't like the SL3000 tweeter either...or the RD0 wouldnt be so popular with the TL series as well.

MarcLazarek78

Then the picture is a little misleading. It should state Tweeter 3 2k-3.5k,tweet 2 3.5k-8k,and tweet 1 8k and up. not all 3 2k and up.Or you are incorrect,since it subtracts only one tweeter when the freq output is upped and still leaves 2.Or I'm reading the reply wrong.

Joe08867

Thinking in the just change a certain tweeter vane.

When I upgraded my SDA2's I was only able to get one set of RDO's until they got back in stock. And as i am a patient man I immediately changed out the SL dimensional tweeter for the RDO and the change was amazing.

I have since replaced all four tweeters with the RDO's and haven't been happier.

rskarvan, don't think of changing parts in the crossover as an upgrade more then an update. Manufacturing processes and build quality aside. Parts wear out over time. And I could have used any old caps in my crossovers but I decided to go up the food chain and get some solens caps. There was a noticable improvement in the sound because the old caps were worn out and not working at there full potential.

I did not take measurements to prove this theory but I used my own ears and the ears of my wife to tell the difference. I also used the same music for both and the difference was astounding. They sounded deeper, clearer and wider as they did when I first bought them and smoother now that I had the RDO in place of the SL.

Now I say if you like the SL series tweeters more power to you. My ears prefer the RDO's. Why would polk have adopted them as the replacement if they thought they weren't the equivalent or better then the original????

shadowofnight

MarcLazarek78 wrote: »

Then the picture is a little misleading. I should state Tweeter 3 2k-3.5k,tweet 2 3.5k-8k,and tweet 1 8k and up. not all 3 2k and up.

The pictures aren't misleading....they make the tweeters disappear in the next picture in the series so you know it is now out of the frequency range.

You need to see the 3 pics in a series for it to make perfect sense