vintage speakers

leroyjr1
leroyjr1 Posts: 8,785
edited July 2008 in Speakers
How does the vintage SDA's, and monitors compare to the new polk speakers
RTI, LSI, monitors, etc.

Thanks
Post edited by leroyjr1 on
· Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Comments

  • schwarcw
    schwarcw Posts: 7,341
    edited July 2008
    I like the sound of the vintage SDA's and Monitors. I also like the older RTA and RTi line of speakers. The LSi series of Polk speakers are excellent. The newer R and Monitor series are fine and offer good quality. The LSi's like the SDA's need a lot of good clean power to live up to their potential as they are 4 ohm speakers. The LSi monitor size speakers are great for both HT and 2 channel music.
    Carl

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • jon s
    jon s Posts: 905
    edited July 2008
    The older Polks are more open than the newer ones which seems a bit laid back. The newer Polks treble is smoother on top, the bass goes lower and is tighter since the most of the older speakers use passive radiators rather than actively driven woofers.

    The nice thing about the older Polks is that you can easily upgrade the crossovers to really improve the sound. Instead of spending several hundred dollars on a new pair, you can spend a few hundred buying a 20-year old speaker and upgrade the crossovers. The really nice thing about Polks is that the drivers usually have butyl rubber surrounds so you do not have to worry about foam rot.

    After doing a crossover upgrade using Sonicaps and replacing any older polymide (plastic) tweeters with cloth domes, the older speakers have a lot better soundstage with a more open, focused image with greater depth than the new Polks. However, the older Polks do seem to be a tad "colored" compared to the newer models.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • F1nut
    F1nut Posts: 50,812
    edited July 2008
    the bass goes lower and is tighter since the most of the older speakers use passive radiators rather than actively driven woofers.

    Huh? The bass in the SDA's goes deeper and is tighter because they use passive radiators rather than the ports in the newer models.
    Political Correctness'.........defined

    "A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a t-u-r-d by the clean end."

    President of Club Polk

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Face
    Face Posts: 14,340
    edited July 2008
    F1nut wrote: »
    Huh? The bass in the SDA's goes deeper and is tighter because they use passive radiators rather than the ports in the newer models.
    The older models do have better bass, there's more of it and it's more controlled. But, I wouldn't blame the newer model's lack of good bass on the ported enclosure.
    "He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And when you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you." Friedrich Nietzsche
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • george daniel
    george daniel Posts: 12,096
    edited July 2008
    I'll take the SDA bass anyday, it was easier for me to control/setup than the LSI series,YMMV,, setup and driven properly,,both are very good speakers.
    JC approves....he told me so. (F-1 nut)
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • MillerLiteScott
    MillerLiteScott Posts: 2,561
    edited July 2008
    The Stereo Reviews that were posted not to long ago on various SDA models said the bass from the SDA's was one of the lowest (if not the lowest) distortion they had ever recorded.
    I like speakers that are bigger than a small refrigerator but smaller than a big refrigerator:D
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter