rdo-194 vs rdo-198

Deadof_knight
Deadof_knight Posts: 980
edited April 2013 in DIY, Mods & Tweaks
Whats the difference ,,, I have too admit i havent a clue can someone verse me on this ....
:cool: " He who dies with the most equipment wins Right ? "

Denon 3300 Adcom 535 BBe w/sub out 1 pr 4.6s 2 pr of 4 jrs Recent additions Samsung Lns-4095D LCD, Samsung hd-960 DVD, Monster HT-5000 Power center,HPSA-1000 18" sealed DiY home sub.:D
Black Laquer 1.2tl's w/ upgraded x-overs and Tweets BI-Amped with 2 Carver tfm-35's Knukonceptz 10ga cables
Post edited by Deadof_knight on
· Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
«13

Comments

  • kcoc321
    kcoc321 Posts: 1,788
    edited February 2010
    Weell... IDK all the technical bits, but the RDO-194 is designed as a direct replacement for the SL2000 & SL1000 (the SL1000's require a slight modification of the inset)
    The RDO-198 is the direct replacement for the SL2500 & SL3000 tweeters.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Deadof_knight
    Deadof_knight Posts: 980
    edited February 2010
    Good enough I assumed that they all fit in the same holes being that they looked at a distance so close in size.

    Sonically does anyone know the difference?




    kcoc321 wrote: »
    Weell... IDK all the technical bits, but the RDO-194 is designed as a direct replacement for the SL2000 & SL1000 (the SL1000's require a slight modification of the inset)
    The RDO-198 is the direct replacement for the SL2500 & SL3000 tweeters.
    :cool: " He who dies with the most equipment wins Right ? "

    Denon 3300 Adcom 535 BBe w/sub out 1 pr 4.6s 2 pr of 4 jrs Recent additions Samsung Lns-4095D LCD, Samsung hd-960 DVD, Monster HT-5000 Power center    ,HPSA-1000 18" sealed DiY home sub.:D
    Black Laquer 1.2tl's w/ upgraded x-overs and Tweets BI-Amped with 2 Carver tfm-35's Knukonceptz 10ga cables
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • cnh
    cnh Posts: 13,284
    edited February 2010
    Well, for one thing the 198s are the better of the two because they were used in the HIGHER model Polks and the tweeters they replace were the better/newer designs. So expect a bit better resolution, imaging and detail.

    cnh
    Currently orbiting Bowie's Blackstar.!

    Polk Lsi-7s, Def Tech 8" sub, HK 3490, HK HD 990 (CDP/DAC), AKG Q701s
    [sig. changed on a monthly basis as I rotate in and out of my stash]
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • joelll
    joelll Posts: 120
    edited February 2010
    In that case, CNH, why would Polk have brought out two different modern replacements rather than just one? Only having one design instead of two is an advantage for requiring simpler manufacturing and lower warehousing costs.

    The SL-1000 (made by Peerless) was used in my RTA-12's, which were the top of Polk's line back when they were made in 1979.

    I believe there may be a technical reason...
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • dorokusai
    dorokusai Posts: 25,577
    edited February 2010
    The xover design dictated the difference.
    CTC BBQ Amplifier, Sonic Frontiers Line3 Pre-Amplifier and Wadia 581 SACD player. Speakers? Always changing but for now, Mission Argonauts I picked up for $50 bucks, mint.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • cnh
    cnh Posts: 13,284
    edited February 2010
    joelll wrote: »
    In that case, CNH, why would Polk have brought out two different modern replacements rather than just one? Only having one design instead of two is an advantage for requiring simpler manufacturing and lower warehousing costs.

    The SL-1000 (made by Peerless) was used in my RTA-12's, which were the top of Polk's line back when they were made in 1979.

    I believe there may be a technical reason...

    What Doro said...but also if you read the literature on the SL3000--Polk itself...says that was their BEST tweeter at that TIME! So I assumed it's replacement would have to meet higher standards...my wrong if this is not so....

    But please do read about the SL3000. The Peerless tweeter is 'another' story entirely. And some feel that it is even better than its RDO replacement so what you're talking about is the Exception.

    Also do a search on this site and read what people have to say about their 194s and 198s...yes the crossovers are different...but?

    Sounds like you like specs....A LOT! I'm pulling your leg, of course.....

    cnh
    Currently orbiting Bowie's Blackstar.!

    Polk Lsi-7s, Def Tech 8" sub, HK 3490, HK HD 990 (CDP/DAC), AKG Q701s
    [sig. changed on a monthly basis as I rotate in and out of my stash]
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • joelll
    joelll Posts: 120
    edited February 2010
    I actually don't pay too much attention to specs... but the vintage Polk *sound* on the other hand, is something special.

    I love the Peerless tweeters in my RTA-12s, they really put out a sound I like. Before I had to put them into storage (as I save to buy a house), they were used for 2-channel and as mains in my 5.0 HT system, along with a CS400i center and a pair of EPI A70's for surround. The L-C-R speaker matching sounded really quite good with the Dynamic Balance tri-laminate tweeter in the center.

    If I had a loan of pairs of RDO-194 and 198, I might consider testing them with the RTA-12's... no cabinet modifications needed as the tweeters are just sitting on top of the crossovers atop the cabinets. :cool:
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • F1nut
    F1nut Posts: 50,649
    edited February 2010
    SL1000's......ugh. You definitely need to get the RD0194-1's. Forget the RD0198-1 as they are not designed for your speaker.
    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
  • BAD ASP
    BAD ASP Posts: 361
    edited February 2010
    When I called Polk to purchase the replacements for my 1.2's I was informed that the correct choice was the 194's. Since I was replacing them all and they were the same price I asked the same question, why not buy the 198's if they were sonically better. I was informed that wasn't necessarily the case, the 194's were the correct choice for my speaker because of the crossover. I could have purchased either but followed Polk techs recommendation. FWIW
    Home Theater
    Amp: sunfire cinema grand signature 5ch 425 wpc
    Side surround amp: Sunfire 2 X 300
    Processor: sunfire theater grand V
    Fronts:: polk sda-srs 1.2
    Rears: Polk LSiFX
    Side surrounds: Fxi5
    Center: (2)polk LSiC's
    Sub: svs pb-13 rosenut
    Hd-Dvd: toshiba xa-2
    Blue Ray: oppo bdp83se
    Projector: sony vw60
    Screen: Da-Lite 106"
    APC S20 Power conditioner
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • kcoc321
    kcoc321 Posts: 1,788
    edited February 2010
    joelll wrote: »
    ......I love the Peerless tweeters in my RTA-12s
    joelll wrote:
    The SL-1000 (made by Peerless) was used in my RTA-12's, ..
    Joel, do you have silver or black tweeters? Because as far as I know, there is/ was no "Peerless" SL1000. The Peerless tweeters are black, with the angled traces, the SL1000 face plates are silver, and made by Polk. But I always like to find out new stuff about Vintage Polks...

    SL1000 by Polk
    attachment.php?attachmentid=46562&d=1266121670

    Peerless tweeter
    attachment.php?attachmentid=46563&d=1266121670
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Deadof_knight
    Deadof_knight Posts: 980
    edited March 2010
    hmmmmm..... decision decisions !!!
    :cool: " He who dies with the most equipment wins Right ? "

    Denon 3300 Adcom 535 BBe w/sub out 1 pr 4.6s 2 pr of 4 jrs Recent additions Samsung Lns-4095D LCD, Samsung hd-960 DVD, Monster HT-5000 Power center    ,HPSA-1000 18" sealed DiY home sub.:D
    Black Laquer 1.2tl's w/ upgraded x-overs and Tweets BI-Amped with 2 Carver tfm-35's Knukonceptz 10ga cables
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • nduitch
    nduitch Posts: 316
    edited May 2010
    Has anyone tried the replacement peerless tweeters on ebay?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • dane_peterson
    dane_peterson Posts: 1,903
    edited May 2010
    At $45/piece, why would you bother? You can get RD0s for nearly the same.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • nduitch
    nduitch Posts: 316
    edited May 2010
    Well, they are both made in China. Probably in the same factory.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • dorokusai
    dorokusai Posts: 25,577
    edited May 2010
    joelll wrote: »
    In that case, CNH, why would Polk have brought out two different modern replacements rather than just one? Only having one design instead of two is an advantage for requiring simpler manufacturing and lower warehousing costs.

    The SL-1000 (made by Peerless) was used in my RTA-12's, which were the top of Polk's line back when they were made in 1979.

    I believe there may be a technical reason...

    It's far easier to provide a high quality replacement tweeter than an entire xover assembly to the customer. Sure, it's not rocket science, PER SE but 99.9% of people are plug and play...who wouldn't be, it's cool. The technical reason is not just xover based either.

    The SL series is an evolution of the tweeter technology that was present at Polk at that time. Some of the same designers are still doing what they do although the cauldrons and animal sacrifices have ceased to be in the lobby area. While I'm sure they appreciate the manufacturing advice, the engineering deptartment has more than enough years under their belt to handle daily sacrif....I mean activities.

    Mark
    CTC BBQ Amplifier, Sonic Frontiers Line3 Pre-Amplifier and Wadia 581 SACD player. Speakers? Always changing but for now, Mission Argonauts I picked up for $50 bucks, mint.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • xoaphexox
    xoaphexox Posts: 246
    edited November 2010
    BAD ASP wrote: »
    When I called Polk to purchase the replacements for my 1.2's I was informed that the correct choice was the 194's. Since I was replacing them all and they were the same price I asked the same question, why not buy the 198's if they were sonically better. I was informed that wasn't necessarily the case, the 194's were the correct choice for my speaker because of the crossover. I could have purchased either but followed Polk techs recommendation. FWIW

    Would the same go for a 1.2TL or would the RDO-198 be the correct choice?

    Is switching out SL3000 tweeters for RDO-198's even an 'upgrade'? Has anyone tried it?

    Thanks

    Burson HA-160D > Adcom GFA-5802 > Polk SDA-SRS 1.2tl w/ Mye Sound Spikes, Mills/Sonicap XO, Larry's Rings, Dynamat Extreme, Cardas CCGR Binding Posts and Jumpers, Custom 10ga interconnect, Custom Gaskets, RDO-198
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • F1nut
    F1nut Posts: 50,649
    edited November 2010
    The RD0198-1 is the correct replacement for the SL3000 and the SL2500.
    Is switching out SL3000 tweeters for RDO-198's even an 'upgrade'? Has anyone tried it?

    The forum is full of that info.
    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
  • xoaphexox
    xoaphexox Posts: 246
    edited November 2010
    Thanks, I tried using Google to cull the information out but it wasnt so good, I also only see 4 pages of threads in the vintage speakers forum. I guess I'll keep digging. Thanks.

    Burson HA-160D > Adcom GFA-5802 > Polk SDA-SRS 1.2tl w/ Mye Sound Spikes, Mills/Sonicap XO, Larry's Rings, Dynamat Extreme, Cardas CCGR Binding Posts and Jumpers, Custom 10ga interconnect, Custom Gaskets, RDO-198
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • F1nut
    F1nut Posts: 50,649
    edited November 2010
    For future reference, use the advanced search feature.

    The short answer is yes, a great many have tried them and they are a vast improvement.
    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
  • heiney9
    heiney9 Posts: 25,197
    edited November 2010
    cnh wrote: »
    Well, for one thing the 198s are the better of the two because they were used in the HIGHER model Polks and the tweeters they replace were the better/newer designs. So expect a bit better resolution, imaging and detail.

    cnh

    Hmmm......so a Monitor 5 series II is a higher end speaker than an SDA 1C? :smile:

    H9
    "Appreciation of audio is a completely subjective human experience. Measurements can provide a measure of insight, but are no substitute for human judgment. Why are we looking to reduce a subjective experience to objective criteria anyway? The subtleties of music and audio reproduction are for those who appreciate it. Differentiation by numbers is for those who do not".--Nelson Pass Pass Labs XA25 | EE Avant Pre | EE Mini Max Supreme DAC | MIT Shotgun S1 | Pangea AC14SE MKII | Legend L600 | BlueSound Node 3 - Tubes add soul!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • cnh
    cnh Posts: 13,284
    edited November 2010
    heiney9 wrote: »
    Hmmm......so a Monitor 5 series II is a higher end speaker than an SDA 1C? :smile:

    H9

    Not really Brock...perhaps I should have taken greater care with my wording. What I was going by when I wrote the 'old' post was Polk's own literature on the SL3000....which as you know, was an experiment in vapor metal deposits (JBL also had something similar going on at that time after they developed the O35TI pure titanium dome...they introduced titanium laminates?). My reference was meant ONLY with regards to tweeter tech...not overall speaker design? In Polk's press release--and I was merely extrapolating from that...they touted the SL3000 as their best (at that time?)--so my assumption (then) was that Polk's replacement for that tweeter (RD0-198) would be better (tweeter only technology)? You can think of it as the way people look at Peerless vs. the SL1000 and SL2000--most people prefer the Peerless to those in the Monitor series? In this case--a previous design is seen as more desirable. One certainly would not say that SDA-As with SL2000s are a worse speaker than my Monitor 5As (I own both). But I would say that the Peerless tweeter in my M-5As is the 'better' tweeter? And if that is not the case...if a tweeter can't be better or worse than another...why are so many trying to TL SDA 2Bs among other speakers?

    If I am wrong in my reading of that...I certainly defer to your more nuanced and deeper understanding and experience of Polk Speakers.....

    Thanks for calling attention to my, perhaps, lax, wording.

    cnh
    Currently orbiting Bowie's Blackstar.!

    Polk Lsi-7s, Def Tech 8" sub, HK 3490, HK HD 990 (CDP/DAC), AKG Q701s
    [sig. changed on a monthly basis as I rotate in and out of my stash]
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • xoaphexox
    xoaphexox Posts: 246
    edited November 2010
    F1nut wrote: »
    For future reference, use the advanced search feature.

    The short answer is yes, a great many have tried them and they are a vast improvement.

    Thanks, I contacted Polk about getting some. Waiting to hear back.

    Burson HA-160D > Adcom GFA-5802 > Polk SDA-SRS 1.2tl w/ Mye Sound Spikes, Mills/Sonicap XO, Larry's Rings, Dynamat Extreme, Cardas CCGR Binding Posts and Jumpers, Custom 10ga interconnect, Custom Gaskets, RDO-198
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • F1nut
    F1nut Posts: 50,649
    edited November 2010
    Call, never email.
    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
  • heiney9
    heiney9 Posts: 25,197
    edited November 2010
    cnh wrote: »
    Not really Brock...perhaps I should have taken greater care with my wording. What I was going by when I wrote the 'old' post was Polk's own literature on the SL3000....which as you know, was an experiment in vapor metal deposits (JBL also had something similar going on at that time after they developed the O35TI pure titanium dome...they introduced titanium laminates?). My reference was meant ONLY with regards to tweeter tech...not overall speaker design? In Polk's press release--and I was merely extrapolating from that...they touted the SL3000 as their best (at that time?)--so my assumption (then) was that Polk's replacement for that tweeter (RD0-198) would be better (tweeter only technology)? You can think of it as the way people look at Peerless vs. the SL1000 and SL2000--most people prefer the Peerless to those in the Monitor series? In this case--a previous design is seen as more desirable. One certainly would not say that SDA-As with SL2000s are a worse speaker than my Monitor 5As (I own both). But I would say that the Peerless tweeter in my M-5As is the 'better' tweeter? And if that is not the case...if a tweeter can't be better or worse than another...why are so many trying to TL SDA 2Bs among other speakers?

    If I am wrong in my reading of that...I certainly defer to your more nuanced and deeper understanding and experience of Polk Speakers.....

    Thanks for calling attention to my, perhaps, lax, wording.

    cnh

    Thanks for eloquent post, but I was mostly just busting your balls :tongue:

    H9
    "Appreciation of audio is a completely subjective human experience. Measurements can provide a measure of insight, but are no substitute for human judgment. Why are we looking to reduce a subjective experience to objective criteria anyway? The subtleties of music and audio reproduction are for those who appreciate it. Differentiation by numbers is for those who do not".--Nelson Pass Pass Labs XA25 | EE Avant Pre | EE Mini Max Supreme DAC | MIT Shotgun S1 | Pangea AC14SE MKII | Legend L600 | BlueSound Node 3 - Tubes add soul!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • cnh
    cnh Posts: 13,284
    edited November 2010
    You got me--it's like my sense of humor leaves me at times. It was good seeing you at PolkFest but I am sorry I was not able to stay through the entire period so we could talk a bit and I could thank you for the articles on Pass amp designs and all the info on Adcoms that you have posted on this site. I've found a ton of great advice in your posts. Helped me and my evolving system. At this point...a set of SDA-2Bs, Adcom GFA-555 [original design], (Onkyo/Integra P-304--as a pre till I save the money for the GFP-750 and pop some RDOs in the 2Bs.). As well as the Office system....Monitor 5As and a NAD integrated for now.

    cnh
    Currently orbiting Bowie's Blackstar.!

    Polk Lsi-7s, Def Tech 8" sub, HK 3490, HK HD 990 (CDP/DAC), AKG Q701s
    [sig. changed on a monthly basis as I rotate in and out of my stash]
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Aural Euphoria
    Aural Euphoria Posts: 52
    edited March 2013
    If these SL 2000s go out in my Monitor 10s, what should I replace them with? moreover, is there an accessible replacement for the wonderful mid/woofer cones that are in them now. One of them makes an unpleasant sound when driven too hard. Sounds as if it's bottoming out. Also, if I knocked out one of the tweeters with too much volume once, but then it quickly came back after a short rest, do you think I've damaged it permanently? (Lotas questions there....) Love these damned speakers! $200 for the pair? Are ya kiddin' me?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • deronb1
    deronb1 Posts: 5,021
    edited March 2013
    Aural Euphoria wrote: »
    If these SL 2000s go out in my Monitor 10s, what should I replace them with? moreover, is there an accessible replacement for the wonderful mid/woofer cones that are in them now. One of them makes an unpleasant sound when driven too hard. Sounds as if it's bottoming out. Also, if I knocked out one of the tweeters with too much volume once, but then it quickly came back after a short rest, do you think I've damaged it permanently? (Lotas questions there....) Love these damned speakers! $200 for the pair? Are ya kiddin' me?

    RD0-194s are the direct, drop-in replacement for the SL2000 tweeter. Much smoother, especially at higher volumes. I think you can use either MW6503 or MW6510 for the mid/woofer drivers. Are they Monitor 10Bs?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Aural Euphoria
    Aural Euphoria Posts: 52
    edited March 2013
    I would presume so from what I've read. They have the SL2000 (horizontal, not angled wiring on the outside fascia; clear dome with pinhole) and the passive radiator is black coating with grey surround, nothing with an earth tone or brown tinge. I actually can't tell...
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Aural Euphoria
    Aural Euphoria Posts: 52
    edited March 2013
    What I don't get is if these are so special--and they do sound very good--why can they be built with a ton of spare parts? Is it just the box that's hard to acquire, or is there that much difference in these replacement parts. And if what i read about the replacement parts being superior is true, why don't people just buy all the parts and make their own?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • deronb1
    deronb1 Posts: 5,021
    edited March 2013
    Aural Euphoria wrote: »
    What I don't get is if these are so special--and they do sound very good--why can they be built with a ton of spare parts? Is it just the box that's hard to acquire, or is there that much difference in these replacement parts. And if what i read about the replacement parts being superior is true, why don't people just buy all the parts and make their own?

    Buying all new drivers for the Monitor 10s (not including the PRs) would cost over 300.00. I have seen used pairs in VGC for 100.00 - 150.00. Then you have the cost of xovers and internal wiring. If you started with a blank cabinet, you would still spend close 400.00 to build one yourself with quality new Polk parts.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter