Differences in sl2000's

ben62670

nduitch wrote: »

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?

A fool makes up his mind without experience. I don't go with the flow, but I know what members have experience and don't yap about something they don't know about. General rule is ask the audience. Well the RDO thing is over %90 with those who have done it. Real simple.

F1nut

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.

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

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?

Your assumptions are incorrect and your insult is unwarranted.

reeltrouble1

seems another who came with his agenda now needs to shout it from the mountain top, this "just because you have posts" seems to be the latest ploy of the me-in wannabies who desire to stir the pot.

The tweeter was not called an upgrade because the original was identified by Polk as having a flaw, accordingly the new one is a drop in replacement. Or as Matt Polk told me and others "the sl2000 is not by any means my favorite tweeter"

cnh--very astute of you, you see the Club is headed into our "gathering" time, very similiar to a "rut", this happens each year, sabres usually rattle during this time, but like so many Ents we will travel long distances to gather and take time to say very little but drink and eat very much, however, at each Fest new legends will form and be added to the Club History Rock, during the "gathering" wounds are healed resulting in a Euphoria that lasts a few months afterwards, one note of caution, during the euphoric period it is a very dangerous time for any loud mouth newbs as the seniors stand together. Of course the cycle repeats.

RT1

rayslifecycle

Isn't there a way to make the SL2000 sound just like the RDO by adding a resistor to the circuit..........



hahahahaha- couldn't help it.........:D


Actually - I do like the way my SL2000s sound in my CRS's - they are clear - but I wouldn't say bright........I never cringe........I have heard SL2000s that sound way worse then mine.......so I guess it all depends on how they age......I do plan to do the RDO conversion though........when I do the crossovers.....

heiney9

clarknova_666 wrote: »

Isn't there a way to make the SL2000 sound just like the RDO by adding a resistor to the circuit..........



hahahahaha- couldn't help it.........:D

No you need to add a small cap :)

cfrizz

:eek: Oh NO! Please lets NOT go there!:eek::D

clarknova_666 wrote: »

Isn't there a way to make the SL2000 sound just like the RDO by adding a resistor to the circuit..........



hahahahaha- couldn't help it.........:D


Actually - I do like the way my SL2000s sound in my CRS's - they are clear - but I wouldn't say bright........I never cringe........I have heard SL2000s that sound way worse then mine.......so I guess it all depends on how they age......I do plan to do the RDO conversion though........when I do the crossovers.....

heiney9 wrote: »

No you need to add a small cap :)

Ron Temple

SL2000 + Chicklet = audio nirvana...don't let anyone fool ya.

skrol

It is really cool that Polk Audio didn't just come up with some grade B replacement but actually set out to upgrade. How many companies do that?

Thank you Polk Audio!

Tony M

I can't believe nduitch commented on F1nuts' involvement with Polk Audios forum in such a way either.

I, along with many, love the fact that there is a plethora of information to be learned about Polk Audios' products and UPGRADES:D pluss extra about other manufacturers' products FOR FREE.
I had to learn it's free the hard way and it cost me some great knowlege for sure from Dorockusai....
And the knowledge is only the start of what I see hear. Generosity beyond compare, Compassion to help others until the end of their problems, etc.

When I have problems to ask about my Polks' it's usually the Veteran posters that are the first to respond. Like the fireman,policeman, medical responders, They all have EXPIERENCE,...PERIOD. Thank you POLK VETERAN posters! I really am glad your there and waiting to help us. Thanks again for all you've helped me with, are helping me with now and surely will help me with in the future!!!!!!
Ohhh By the way my RTO-194's sound great.;)

bluecomet

Well said.

skrol

Interesting read on the history and manufacture of the SL2500 and SL3000. In my days working in NASA's parts analysis branch, we used to use cyanide to etch metals such as gold plating. It may be that if there is residual cyanide from manufacturing that over time it may attack the vapor deposited aluminum. I imagine the vapor deposited stainless steel would be ok. This may explain why some seem to degrade in SQ with age.

nduitch

skrol wrote: »

Interesting read on the history and manufacture of the SL2500 and SL3000. In my days working in NASA's parts analysis branch, we used to use cyanide to etch metals such as gold plating. It may be that if there is residual cyanide from manufacturing that over time it may attack the vapor deposited aluminum. I imagine the vapor deposited stainless steel would be ok. This may explain why some seem to degrade in SQ with age.

Thank you for this explanation supported by factual information and experience. This is what I was looking for in the first place, instead F1nut said, "anyone who enjoys the sound of the sl2000 is kidding themselves." Then everyone jumped on the band wagon and pack mentality took over.

skrol

I am not familiar with the build of the SL2000. Did it use vapor deposited metal and did it use cyanide too?

F1nut

This may explain why some seem to degrade in SQ with age.

The main problem with the SL3000's as they age is that the ferro fluid dries and becomes a sticky mess resulting in a diminished ability to dissipate heat, which in turn makes it much easier to cook the tweeter. I have not experienced or heard of the sound quality degrading over time with the SL3000's unless they become damaged from overheating. The issue with the cyanide was from the manufacturer over health concerns.

To the best of my knowledge, the SL2500 was a silk dome tweeter, not a tri-laminate and therefore no cyanide was used to make them.

While it may be true that the sound quality of the SL2000's degrade over time, to my ears they always sounded bright/shrill/edgy/tizzy when brand new, right from the factory. Yuk!




nduitch, I gave you factual information and my personal experience much earlier in this thread. The fact that you continue to ignore it reflects poorly on you and your troll like mentality.

One other thing. If you're going to quote me, at least get it right. This is what I said, "I submit that anyone who thinks the SL2000 or SL3000 is an acceptable sounding tweeter is kidding themselves."

I stand by my comment.

PolkClyde

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!

I replaced my sl2000 last year........ I like them both to be honest. I haven't broken my RDO's in yet. I was living in an apartment and my landlord said that some of the other tennants were complaining that my music was too loud.Therefore I shut my systerm down for a while. Now Im in a house I played some music a little the other day. I guess it will be awhile before I get my RDO'S really broken in....

F1nut

skrol wrote: »

I am not familiar with the build of the SL2000. Did it use vapor deposited metal and did it use cyanide too?

No metal or cyanide, the dome is polyamide.

gidrah

Econo-wave them.

skrol

F1nut wrote: »

No metal or cyanide, the dome is polyamide.

Scratch what I said then unless they use hydrazine or something else that attacks polyamide:D.

When I bought my RTA11TLs in 1991 they did sound a tad edgy compared the Bostons that I was also considering but much smoother than the Klipsch. At that time I felt that they were better suited to the music that I was listening to (hard rock, jazz). I had been fairly satisfied with the SL3000 until I thought one had gone bad and replaced both with the RDO198.

If you are content with the SL2000, SL2500 or SL3000 then keep them and save $100. Just don't listen to the RDO's.

Kenshiro

Hi all, I just picked up a pair of RTA-11Ts in good condition and I'm trying to find some of these RDO-194s. I already e-mailed polk asking about their availability and I got back a message saying "The SL2000 Tweeters are available at $60.00 each + S&H". Anyone know where I can get the RDO-194s? Thanks!

bluecomet

I believe they are the same thing. The Sl2000 tweeters that polk is talking about are the RDO's you are looking for.

skrol

Kenshiro wrote: »

Hi all, I just picked up a pair of RTA-11Ts in good condition and I'm trying to find some of these RDO-194s. I already e-mailed polk asking about their availability and I got back a message saying "The SL2000 Tweeters are available at $60.00 each + S&H". Anyone know where I can get the RDO-194s? Thanks!

Tell them you are a Club Polk member to get the discount. Mine were $46 each and free shipping. And welcome to Club Polk.

lightman1

Would I be wrong in saying I like both tweeters? I like the 194's in the 1C's and prefer the 2k's in the 1A's, stock. The other set of 1A's sound nice with the x-over mod I tried.
I'm confused as to what I should be hearing......

Kenshiro

bluecomet wrote: »

I believe they are the same thing. The Sl2000 tweeters that polk is talking about are the RDO's you are looking for.

Ok that makes sense then, thanks for the clarification

skrol wrote: »

Tell them you are a Club Polk member to get the discount. Mine were $46 each and free shipping. And welcome to Club Polk.

I'll do that, hopefully I can get a similar deal.. And thanks for the Welcome!

treitz3

The RDO's are not the same tweeter as the SL2000's. Make no mistake about it. They are just a replacement offered by Polk.

Tony M

I'll bet Polk Cust. Serv. has a time with this tweeter senario. Imagine trying to explain "It's the replacement but it's not the same"..

I'm glad I'm not answering the phone..;)

bluecomet

Yes the RDO is the replacement for the SL2000 and it is better than the original. When you call Polk they will say they have replacement tweeters for the SL2000 and SL1000. It comes with paperwork stating that. They are the RDO 194's Kenshiro is looking for.