Differences in sl2000's

nduitch

I have been waiting for my replacements to come lately so I have been giving my sl2000s a good look and noticed something. 2 of them are from 1991 and the other two appear to be original. The original(1985) have a flat soft piece of felt with about a 1/4 inch of space between that and the clear dome. The 1991's have a much tighter space between the domes and are hard to the touch, also more dome shaped.

nduitch

Note to self: No one cares about the sl2000 anymore.

skrol

nduitch wrote: »

Note to self: No one cares about the sl2000 anymore.

You may be right. Do you have photos that you can post to show the difference?

cnh

I've only seen photos so I can't tell! Will have my SDA-2Bs in a couple weeks--they have SL2000s so I'll be able to see what those look like and compare. Probably originals! There was a time when the SL2000s were ubiquitous. I remember seeing them in Polk bookshelves used in record stores in NYC in the 80s!

cnh

F1nut

No one cares about the sl2000 anymore.

That would be an accurate statement.

nduitch

thankyou for the confirmation.

cnh

Most people replace the SL2000s with the RDO versions. Then there are some who have such exorbitant tastes and sums of money that LSIs and even the best SDAs are pedestrian for them.

I wouldn't worry about any of this. This site has a lot of amusing things happening on it at the moment as membership shifts and power is challenged every so often. As someone who studies these very phenomena, I find it all fascinating--keep my distance and watch--and record. Great Data here.

Just between us nduitch, do you 'like' your SL2000s? Can you hear the supposed 5db bump in it, etc. No reason we can't mid-brow it here.

There is room for 'everyone'. Really...and senior members are no less subjective than us. In fact, some of us might even have a better 'musical' ear. Perfect pitch or something of that order that would nullify the expertise of the audiophile for example. Unless they were also so musically gifted.

cnh

bluecomet

That's an interesting post. I now feel like I am a part of a study group. Despite all my rage I am still just a rat in a cage. I can't wait for the senior members to chime in on this one. Maybe this site should change its name from Polk Forum to Lord of the Flies. You know because of all the shifts in power. Personally I just see a group of men and maybe women sharing there thoughts on music, speakers and sometimes life. For the most part I see constuctive advise and a wealth of free information that has enlightened many newbies and educated audiofiles of all stages. I think it is great to see guys stick up for each other when then is a hint of wrongdoing on this site. It is a breathe of fresh air. I have met great guys who have taught me a great deal in a short time. I am not sure why you would take a shot at senior members when most of them, if not all are here to help.

cnh

I'm not really taking a shot at anyone....blue...Power is just a fact of life....it exists in most groups. Some wield it, others suffer from it. Some stupidly try to fight it. Some are simply trolls. And most of the senior guys/gals are great. But haven't you noticed that 'recently' some of them have gone after each other?

What's that about?? That's what fascinates me. The occasional newbie bashing that's all part of normal entry into a group. Learning the rules, the hierarchy, accepting the order. You'll find that in any organization. There's nothing wrong necessarily. And I'm NOT passinng judgment. I'm a social scientist by profession and I can't help but notice it all--and this is part of what we 'study'. No I'm not doing an official study of this site....it's just an occupational hazard.

And you're right, when it works, its a community, but all communities have seniors and elders whose authority carries more weight as it should be unless it becomes irrational. Which, in most instances, it does NOT here!

All authority, though is challenged at a certain point, it is not 'self-generated' but dependent upon the consensus within the group. The group cultural norms, etc. Surely everyone here, if they have children has noticed that even if you are a Noble Prize winning scientist...it doesn't mean anything to your rebellious teen. And regardless of how formidable you are your son or daughter remains equal to you in their humanity so they can just say 'NO' to you and that's that! When that happens...well..
cnh

Tony M

Bravo cnh;). That schooling is really spot on!..
This is a different direction but EGO is an important factor too, isn't it? I was fired from a 7 yr. job due to it.(that's how I see it any way)

Conradicles

Maybe it is just me, but I have heard SL2000's that sounded "Good" and a couple that sounded "Terrible". I tend to think they get more harsh sounding over time/use/elements, but I have no proof, and again not that anybody really cares.

NJPOLKER

The cost of a pair of RDO's is only $100. I don't really see what the big deal is!
Pay for them now or later but you will be best served by doing it now instead of waisting time.

Tony M

I just replaced my sl2000's and I'm glad I could afford to in these belt tightening times. I found it was well worth it!

nduitch

tony millard wrote: »

I just replaced my sl2000's and I'm glad I could afford to in these belt tightening times. I found it was well worth it!

Did you hear that cymbals have less ring now? Sl2000 are also noticeably louder with the same amount of juice. I really think its apples and oranges with these rdo's and sl2000's.

they really sound nothing like the tweeter they replace, sound almost exactly like how my sl2500's sound in my monitor 7's.

ben62670

Conradicles wrote: »

Maybe it is just me, but I have heard SL2000's that sounded "Good" and a couple that sounded "Terrible". I tend to think they get more harsh sounding over time/use/elements, but I have no proof, and again not that anybody really cares.

Thank you. I will repeat that SL 2000's age more like milk than wine. Depending on environment they can get very harsh. I have had a pair that sounded pretty good, and have had others that made me want to stick an ice pick in my ears.
Ben

StevieB

NJPOLKER wrote: »

The cost of a pair of RDO's is only $100. I don't really see what the big deal is!
Pay for them now or later but you will be best served by doing it now instead of waisting time.

And if you don't like the sound, I'm sure you could sell them very easy. Its a no risk investment.

Tony M

The ones I replaced were of the Ice Pick variety. They do sound like two different tweeters.
I think Polk engineers and a concensuss of judjes agreed to tone down the shrillness or metal equivalent of an aged sl2000. I've read over the years that "audiophile" ears prefer this silkier sound to the metalic sound like JBL has in their titanium tweeters. I own several nice Jbl speakers and they sound wonderful except on some jazzy horn sections. Arrrgh.It sounds like your head is one foot from the horns sometimes,and that's not good at all.
I haven't heard a tweeter that can mimic the sound of a symbal like JBL's but it has it's drawback.
I own several pr. of monitor 7's and they sound great with the sl2000s. Maybe when you get a few or more together something happens.Now the ones I replaced looked aged and discolored. The black rings were not solid anymore except on one. I think there was delamination around their edges too. I'll look at my 7's a little closer soon.

cfrizz

I have originals in my 19 year old RTA-8T's. I have never had a problem with them. I listen to my system all day long without a hint of fatigue. A hot tweeter is something I'm very aware of. I HATE metal tweeters for this very reason.

If your ears aren't giving you any problems with the sl2000 then keep them.

CNH, you made me feel like I was back in Psych 101!:eek::D

Freud needed a shrink himself!:eek::D

F1nut

I think Polk engineers and a concensuss of judjes agreed to tone down the shrillness or metal equivalent of an aged sl2000.

Polk decided along time ago that the inherent flaws of the SL2000 could be improved upon and developed the SL3000.

It was deceided to introduce the SL3000 in our best speaker, the SRS 1.2. Immediately we heard dramatic, though expected, sonic benefits; high frequencies were smoother, extended and more detailed. What surprised us were the improvements in sound quality in frequencies below those reproduced by the tweeter. Voices and mid-range instruments were stripped of all coloration and inner detail was vastly improved.

Research showed that frequency response peaks in a tweeter draw the listener's attention, thereby masking detail in the mid-range. Additionally, by changing the harmonic structure, tweeters with resonant peaks create colorations in low and mid-frequency fundamentals.

I originally owned a brand new pair of SDA 2B's with the SL2000 tweeters. There was one thing that always bugged me about them, the tweeter. It was bright/shrill/edgy/tizzy. Down the road, I picked up a pair of 2.3TL's with SL3000's and noticed a vast improvement over the SL2000. Years later after stubbornly resisting changing to the RD0's I can say they (194 and 198) are a HUGE improvement over both the SL2000 and the SL3000.

I submit that anyone who thinks the SL2000 or SL3000 is an acceptable sounding tweeter is kidding themselves.

Tony M

Thanks F1nut. Very informative . Even the sl3000 can be improved upon.

nduitch

I submit that anyone who thinks the SL2000 or SL3000 is an acceptable sounding tweeter is kidding themselves.[/QUOTE]

Why doesn't polk just call them the "rdo upgrade" then? and not just replacements?

Of course they decided to change the design, of course it was unanimous because no company makes the same product while their competitors are changing their tweeters to the new and greatest thing. Let's face it, no one is safe from the powers of marketing, they tell us what to buy whether we know it or not. If a couple people with 20,000 posts say they prefer the rdo's then a lot of people are going to take their word for it. Whether they like it or not, when they put those new ones in they will be effected but what others have said.

I'm not going to say they are better, or they are worse because right now they are neither.

F1nut

Oh boy :rolleyes:

Let's put it this way. I know a lot more about how and why the new tweeters were designed and they were, in fact, made to be better than the originals.

nduitch

F1nut wrote: »

Oh boy :rolleyes:

Let's put it this way. I know a lot more about how and why the new tweeters were designed and they were, in fact, made to be better than the originals.

Okay, enlighten me.

ben62670

I'll enlighten you:) F1nut has probably helped more people out with vintage Polk's than anyone here. He has been to Polk many times. He has heard many many Vintage Polk's. He knows that plastics degrade much faster than treated textiles.
I hope I covered it well enough. Not trying to be a smart-****, but straight to the point.
Ben

F1nut

nduitch wrote: »

Okay, enlighten me.

I thought I just did.

they were, in fact, made to be better than the originals.

What else do you want to know?

nduitch

ben62670 wrote: »

I'll enlighten you:) F1nut has probably helped more people out with vintage Polk's than anyone here. He has been to Polk many times. He has heard many many Vintage Polk's. He knows that plastics degrade much faster than treated textiles.
I hope I covered it well enough. Not trying to be a smart-****, but straight to the point.
Ben

Okay, makes sense. Since I can tell people 17000 times "how to unplug a toilet," then that makes me a master plumber.

Conradicles

I perceive you are a troll nduitch...

muncybob

hmmm, forum member for almost 3 months commenting about a seasoned member without knowing much about him except that he has 17k posts. I think you have not done your homework.

Can't paint all speakers (or forum members) with the same brush.

nduitch

Conradicles wrote: »

I perceive you are a troll nduitch...

Ha, no. Just not afraid to make up my own mind about things apart from what other people think. Not afraid of being called a troll(first time for everything) either.

And it's great that F1 is such a seasoned forum member, and he does make great contributions. I have nothing against that. I Just disagree with him about tweeters. Is everyone so afraid to shake things up and really express their opinions on here? Would you rather just go with the flow?

heiney9

nduitch wrote: »

I submit that anyone who thinks the SL2000 or SL3000 is an acceptable sounding tweeter is kidding themselves.

Why doesn't polk just call them the "rdo upgrade" then? and not just replacements?

Of course they decided to change the design, of course it was unanimous because no company makes the same product while their competitors are changing their tweeters to the new and greatest thing. Let's face it, no one is safe from the powers of marketing, they tell us what to buy whether we know it or not. If a couple people with 20,000 posts say they prefer the rdo's then a lot of people are going to take their word for it. Whether they like it or not, when they put those new ones in they will be effected but what others have said.

I'm not going to say they are better, or they are worse because right now they are neither.

Also take into account the sl2000, sl2500 and sl3000 are and can no longer be manufactured. Polk looked ahead and R & D'd an even better replacement in the RD0194-1 and RD0198-1.

The sl2500 and sl3000 used cyanide based chemicals to apply the tri-laminate material. The company that manufactured them for Polk (to Polk's specs) stopped this process partly for environmental reasons.

After the sl3000 (which was first) and the sl2500 were manufactured to replace the sl2000........the sl2000 stopped being mass produced. Only enough to serve as replacements for previous models that used this tweeter. Eventually the stock was depleted and now the RD0's are the equivalent replacement (only better).

H9

P.s. They were NEVER considered upgrades by Polk.......they are replacements. It just so happens they ARE an upgrade over the originals

NJPOLKER

I put my spare Peerless Tweeters in my SDA2a's and they sound great. And my SDA2a's with all the mods do sound awesome. Generally I'll have the RDO's in there but a change is nice sometimes. I'm not saying the Peerless are an exact replacement for the 2000's but sound nicer to my ears.

nduche, listen to what ever you want and enjoy it. Not everyone would say what I do is correct but I am not going to argue it.

H9, some do not understand this and probably never will but well spoken anyway.

P.s. They were NEVER considered upgrades by Polk.......they are replacements. It just so happens they ARE an upgrade over the originals