SDA 3.1 questions

geppy1

Hi, I am wondering what a reasonable price for a pair of SDA 3.1TLs. There is a pair in my area for sale. I also am concened because I have tried two other SDAs and found them to be to laidback for my tastes. Are the 3.1s anymore forward sounding?? Thanks,

bluecomet

What other pairs of SDAs have you tried?

Barefoot

Aren't 3.1's the rarest ones? I wonder how does their SDA effect work when compared to the 2.3's and the 1.2's. I think the 3.1's only have one driver each fit for SDA duty.

engtaz

3.1TL's have less SDA effects then the others.

heiney9

geppy1, what gear are you running. I'd never say the SDA's are laid back in stock form. The 1C's in stock are the most laid back of the bunch, but still aren't considered a "laid back" speaker.

After adding Sonicaps, and RD0's their character seemed a bit more laid back, smooth, open and effortless.

Gear, especially source and postioning has a lot to do with it.

H9

stubby

engtaz wrote: »

3.1TL's have less SDA effects then the others.

I would definitely say they are the most material sensitive of the bunch. If there isn't a lot of seperation on the recording, they won't go very wide with the image. When there is plenty of strong left/right or surround encoding, they are every bit as wide as the bigger SRS's.
With "average" recordings, you get some ambient or hall effect to the outside of the cabinets, but not much for solid images.
As far as prices, $400-$500 for average, $600-$800 for nice.

stubby

engtaz

agreed mine are the studio ver.

geppy1

H9, Here is the quote from Stereo Review while testing the 1Cs Bear in mind they did like them ( and I do not dislike them just do not seem to be for me) but said "It is certainly an acquired taste and not everyone will prefer it to the more sharply defined imaging of some conventional speakers." "The speaker does not project the stereo image forward of the grill (except along the side walls) but tend to have a more laid back quality. The sound has depth beyond the wall behind the speakers as well as with, but the very techniques that create the SDA effect probably keeps it from achieving the pinpoint positioning of certain sounds"...blah blah blah. This has been my experience with SDA1s and SDA2s. In fact i just talked to a guy the other night who was comparing monitor 10s to SDAs and he had the same impression.

I use an Exposure 2010S Intergrated (amazing) , Sony SACD XA 777ES, Cardas neutral Reference IC and Anysis Plus Oval 9 wire..

He is asking $1000 which seems like a bit much and when you do not have it ,it is really too much. Still would be fun to try.
I do like the sound of the 10s and RTA 12s. In fact a group of us compared the RTA 12s to LS90 and RTA 15 TLs and everyone picked the RTA 12s. Way more open and clear . The 3.1s do look nice.

heiney9

Yep, I've read that review atleast a hundred times . I just don;t get that impression with my 1C's. Of course I have RD0's and Sonicaps so it's not a fair comparison. Mine are laid back but they also project a bit in front of the speaker plane if the material is recorded that way. One recording that comes to mind is Jewel - Spirit; it's like she's right in front of me singing. My equipment is pretty neutral and a tad laid back and I just don't experience what you are describing.

My soundstage is high, wide and has multiple layers of depth (when in the recording). Very crisp, smooth, dynamic and never harsh and yes, I'd say a little laid back but not missing any detail.

Good luck on your quest; perhaps the SDA sound just isn;t for you.

H9

P.s. $1000 for a pair 3.1TL's is a bit ridiculous.

P.s.s. I strongly disagree with this part of the review "but the very techniques that create the SDA effect probably keeps it from achieving the pinpoint positioning of certain sounds"...blah blah blah.