SDA
Options
Comments
-
You just can't beat doped paper cones, very natural sound.
I agree but I havent gone crazy listening to 30k speakers. I love the sound of paper being driven hard. I think the good electrostatics could be said to "beat" the paper in ways in midrange but not for bass thump obviously.
The advantage of SDA's is largely dependent on the source material and how it was mixed. I think most folks with SDA's have had a recording playing when suddenly we are struck with "what the heck is THIS song! I've never heard anything sound so glorious in my whole life!" lol The same song in your GM tape deck gets fast-forwarded right past.
When freedom is outlawed, only outlaws are free... -
They didn't know much about audio.
I would say they are more engineer type personalities (or wanna-bes) focused on paradigms and principles rather than relaxing and listening for natural beauty. The industry was full of those folks when transistors first came out. The transistors OBVIOUSLY sounded better...all you had to do was check the graphs to prove that lol!
When freedom is outlawed, only outlaws are free... -
To get the best idea of what SDA speakers can do with improved components, if Polk is interested in doing some R&D, I would recommend getting access to a couple of versions fully modified by enthusiasts to benchmark.
They can borrow a pair of my modded CRS+'s!
Proud and loyal citizen of the Digital Domain and Solid State Country! -
Yeah you guys have me psyched to recap my 1984 CRS when I still havent done all my Fender's lol. Do you have RDO-194's in yours?When freedom is outlawed, only outlaws are free...
-
I did the "TL" mod for my CRS+s which allows them to use the RD0198 tweeter.Proud and loyal citizen of the Digital Domain and Solid State Country!
-
yeah I thought I read that...dont remember who's who yet.When freedom is outlawed, only outlaws are free...
-
My question is, why haven't any other manufacturers used sda tech in their speakers? I'm trying to wrap my head around it, as sdas have a cult following. Is there some patent law preventing anyone from doing this?
It would not be a patent issue today, at least for any patented technology in use in the mid-1980s or early '90s. Any relevant patent(s) would have long since expired. -
You must have missed Polk's response to that question.Highly patented with lots of IP around it.
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 -
There have been patents since.
-
Pretty sure you can renew parent's. Any changes to original can also extend the patent I believe.My question is, why haven't any other manufacturers used sda tech in their speakers? I'm trying to wrap my head around it, as sdas have a cult following. Is there some patent law preventing anyone from doing this?
It would not be a patent issue today, at least for any patented technology in use in the mid-1980s or early '90s. Any relevant patent(s) would have long since expired.
-
I think if you took the SDA technology, re worked the cabinets and used updated quality drivers.....you'd have something there. That can be an expensive proposition in a world of declining spendable income. Still, people would buy something like that, just maybe not in the numbers that todays manufacturing requires to make boat loads of money.
In my view, when Matt Polk sold the farm, that connection between the loyalists to the brand fell apart. Nobody takes care of a product the same as the guy/girl who invented it. Polk needs to re-connect with it's base, getting back to it's roots of 2 channel reproduction, and getting out of the office to meet up with the common folks. I mean not just trade shows either.
We baby boomers get it, but there is a lot of aging younger generations who are inept at 2 channel stereo reproduction. There is a reason after all, so many little companies have popped up over the last decade or so that offer good quality 2 channel speakers. Tyler, Salk....just 2 examples. Their success depends mainly on the product obviously, but also in that connection one can have with the people who build them or the owner themselves.
Polk has a unique product in the SDA technology, why they don't use it is beyond me because that separates them from the pack of mediocracy in audio. Incorporate it into new designs, new drivers to accommodate todays world. You might find a whole new level of customers knocking on your door......supported by old ones too, and this forum. Just my .02 from the cheap seats.HT SYSTEM-
Sony 850c 4k
Pioneer elite vhx 21
Sony 4k BRP
SVS SB-2000
Polk Sig. 20's
Polk FX500 surrounds
Cables-
Acoustic zen Satori speaker cables
Acoustic zen Matrix 2 IC's
Wireworld eclipse 7 ic's
Audio metallurgy ga-o digital cable
Kitchen
Sonos zp90
Grant Fidelity tube dac
B&k 1420
lsi 9's -
Pretty sure you can renew parent's. Any changes to original can also extend the patent I believe.My question is, why haven't any other manufacturers used sda tech in their speakers? I'm trying to wrap my head around it, as sdas have a cult following. Is there some patent law preventing anyone from doing this?
It would not be a patent issue today, at least for any patented technology in use in the mid-1980s or early '90s. Any relevant patent(s) would have long since expired.
In the U.S., patents cannot be renewed. Ditto in most, probably all, other countries.
New patents can be issued on subsequent novel innovations, of course.
I just did a quick patent search. Polk is not sitting on its laurels. There are recent patents, and at least one patent application, by or assigned to Polk Audio, dealing with topics related to SDA, as well as other topics. -
Digging up an old thread, but D2Lo, how's this little project going?2-channelBelles 22A Pre, Emotiva XPA-2 Gen 2, Marantz SA8005, Pro-Ject RPM-10 Turntable, Pro-Ject Phono Box DS3B, Polk Audio Legend L800's, AudioQuest Cable throughout.
-
Digging up an old thread, but D2Lo, how's this little project going?
After the acquisition that just transpired......I wouldn't expect too much in the "true" SDA realm. -
Acquisition?2-channelBelles 22A Pre, Emotiva XPA-2 Gen 2, Marantz SA8005, Pro-Ject RPM-10 Turntable, Pro-Ject Phono Box DS3B, Polk Audio Legend L800's, AudioQuest Cable throughout. -
I just read it.
2-channelBelles 22A Pre, Emotiva XPA-2 Gen 2, Marantz SA8005, Pro-Ject RPM-10 Turntable, Pro-Ject Phono Box DS3B, Polk Audio Legend L800's, AudioQuest Cable throughout. -
Digging up an old thread, but D2Lo, how's this little project going?
Obviously I can't comment on unreleased product but I think you guys will be happy.
It takes time to make a new line, conceive it, design it, test it, comertialize it.... 12 months on the short side. Throw in working on new patents and technologies, new construction techniques, getting retailers on board with something different and it can double.
-
^^ I'll except that as positive news regarding future SDAs!2ch rig:Speakers: LSi9s with VR3's Fortress modsPreamplifier: Parasound P5Amplifier: Parasound A23CDP: Pioneer DV-563ACables: Wireworld Equinox 7 XLR ICs, Wireworld Ultraviolet 7 USB, AudioQuest Q2s, AudioQuest NRG X(preamp)
-
Digging up an old thread, but D2Lo, how's this little project going?
Obviously I can't comment on unreleased product but I think you guys will be happy.
It takes time to make a new line, conceive it, design it, test it, comertialize it.... 12 months on the short side. Throw in working on new patents and technologies, new construction techniques, getting retailers on board with something different and it can double.
Thank you.
2-channelBelles 22A Pre, Emotiva XPA-2 Gen 2, Marantz SA8005, Pro-Ject RPM-10 Turntable, Pro-Ject Phono Box DS3B, Polk Audio Legend L800's, AudioQuest Cable throughout. -
Any quick renderings you can share to get our imaginations fired up, and perhaps prepare our wallets?The Gear... Carver "Statement" Mono-blocks, Mcintosh C2300 Arcam AVR20, Oppo UDP-203 4K Blu-ray player, Sony XBR70x850B 4k, Polk Audio Legend L800 with height modules, L400 Center Channel Polk audio AB800 "in-wall" surrounds. Marantz MM7025 stereo amp. Simaudio Moon 680d DSD
“When once a Republic is corrupted, there is no possibility of remedying any of the growing evils but by removing the corruption and restoring its lost principles; every other correction is either useless or a new evil.”— Thomas Jefferson -
Interesting to see what they will come up with for sure!
But I have to wonder, outside this small forum, how well it would go over.
Most audiophiles I know, would never consider this a valid way to listen to 2 channel music.
Same with tone controls, equalizers, or DSP sound enhancements, it is effectively not keeping the signal pure and accurate, but adding an effect to what was already there.
Its fun at times, but think it's time has come and gone.
-
Interesting to see what they will come up with for sure!
But I have to wonder, outside this small forum, how well it would go over.
Most audiophiles I know, would never consider this a valid way to listen to 2 channel music.
Same with tone controls, equalizers, or DSP sound enhancements, it is effectively not keeping the signal pure and accurate, but adding an effect to what was already there.
Its fun at times, but think it's time has come and gone.
There WAS a time that SDA WAS considered audiophile even in that environment. From what I understand, it was snootiness because of Polk fishing downstream that hurt them with the audiophile. NOT the technology.
2-channelBelles 22A Pre, Emotiva XPA-2 Gen 2, Marantz SA8005, Pro-Ject RPM-10 Turntable, Pro-Ject Phono Box DS3B, Polk Audio Legend L800's, AudioQuest Cable throughout. -
SDA offers the most realistic presentation possible of live music in your living room, bar none.
It is a great idea, and fun sound, but recordings are not made in the manner Polk describes in their advertising from back in the day.
That alone makes them simply an enhanced stereo effect, and less accurate.
We like ours a lot in some ways, but they are taking recordings that were optimized for normal speakers, in the mixing and mastering room and creating a wider than real image, that was never there to begin with.
-
SDA offers the most realistic presentation possible of live music in your living room, bar none.
It is a great idea, and fun sound, but recordings are not made in the manner Polk describes in their advertising from back in the day.
That alone makes them simply an enhanced stereo effect, and less accurate.
We like ours a lot in some ways, but they are taking recordings that were optimized for normal speakers, in the mixing and mastering room and creating a wider than real image, that was never there to begin with.
You really don't understand how flawed normal stereo speakers are nor how music is mastered.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 -
Interesting to see what they will come up with for sure!
But I have to wonder, outside this small forum, how well it would go over.
Most audiophiles I know, would never consider this a valid way to listen to 2 channel music.
Same with tone controls, equalizers, or DSP sound enhancements, it is effectively not keeping the signal pure and accurate, but adding an effect to what was already there.
Its fun at times, but think it's time has come and gone.
Actually, SDA is the exact opposite of what you stated. Rather than adding an effect that was not there, it GREATLY DIMINISHES the unnatural comb filtering effects of interaural crosstalk. That is why SDA loudspeakers were/are called "true stereo loudspeakers". In brief, the left and right speaker of pair of conventional stereo loudspeakers each produce a delayed crosstalk signal at the opposite ear that diminishes the perception of stereophonic, three dimensional sound. When this crosstalk signal is diminished, the reproduced sound is more faithful to a live sound field full of individual point sources.
It is actually quite laughable and quite ridiculous to say that SDAs are an "invalid" way of listening to 2 channel music when the comb filtering effects of conventional loudspeakers significantly mask the spatial information that is in the original performance and in the original recording. This is a perfect example of "the lie becoming the truth".
The attached technical article by Matthew Polk describes SDA in detail.
The effects of interaural crosstalk are also discussed in detail in section 9.1.3 (pages 151-155) of Dr. Floyd Toole's book, "Sound Reproduction". The title of that section is
"An Important One-Toothed Comb—A Fundamental Flaw in Stereo".
Proud and loyal citizen of the Digital Domain and Solid State Country! -
You really don't understand how flawed normal stereo speakers are nor how music is mastered.
Looks like we were posting the same thoughts at the same time F1.
Proud and loyal citizen of the Digital Domain and Solid State Country! -
There is certainly science behind the SDA technology, but either it's your cup of tea or it isn't....why does it have to be an argument ? If you like them rock on, if not look elsewhere. Why do some always want to bash what others like ? Nature of the beast I guess.HT SYSTEM-
Sony 850c 4k
Pioneer elite vhx 21
Sony 4k BRP
SVS SB-2000
Polk Sig. 20's
Polk FX500 surrounds
Cables-
Acoustic zen Satori speaker cables
Acoustic zen Matrix 2 IC's
Wireworld eclipse 7 ic's
Audio metallurgy ga-o digital cable
Kitchen
Sonos zp90
Grant Fidelity tube dac
B&k 1420
lsi 9's -
There is certainly science behind the SDA technology, but either it's your cup of tea or it isn't....why does it have to be an argument ? If you like them rock on, if not look elsewhere. Why do some always want to bash what others like ? Nature of the beast I guess.
Agree! I really like them, and yes there is a science behind them, but it remains an effect, that is not accurate.
I think those that do not understand how recordings are made, will automatically assume them to be more accurate, but having a very good understanding of the recording process, shows the flaw in the SDA theory.
It is not matter of liking or not. I like them a lot, but realize it is just is. -
It is a great idea, and fun sound, but recordings are not made in the manner Polk describes in their advertising from back in the day.
That alone makes them simply an enhanced stereo effect, and less accurate.
We like ours a lot in some ways, but they are taking recordings that were optimized for normal speakers, in the mixing and mastering room and creating a wider than real image, that was never there to begin with.
It is impossible for SDA's interaural crosstalk cancellation technology to create a wider than original image. All they can do is diminish the comb filtering effects caused by convention speakers and ALLOW the stereo image in the recording to be reproduced with less distortion.
There is a popular misconception about SDAs in that they "add" something to the original recording. SDA is a subtractive process. Therefore, buy design, the process cannot "add" anything to the recording, it can only subtract a measure of distortion caused by comb filtering effects.
Some recording engineers, in an attempt to mitigate the sound stage compromises of conventional speakers, will mix the music with an unnatural amount of stereo separation. Of course, when such recordings are played on SDAs, they will sound very unnatural because they were recorded in a very unnatural way. But that is not the fault of SDAs. It is the fault of the recording engineer who ADDED more stereo separation to the recording than was there originally.
On my recordings that were recorded with simple microphone placement and no unnatural messing around with the pan pots, the soundstage is very lifelike in proportion. For example, on Dave Brubeck's "Time Out", the four musicians are spread out in a sound stage 16 feet wide by 10 feet deep, the the drum kit at the far left, piano at the far right, bass in the middle, and saxophone left of center.
Proud and loyal citizen of the Digital Domain and Solid State Country! -
SDA offers the most realistic presentation possible of live music in your living room, bar none.
It is a great idea, and fun sound, but recordings are not made in the manner Polk describes in their advertising from back in the day.
That alone makes them simply an enhanced stereo effect, and less accurate.
We like ours a lot in some ways, but they are taking recordings that were optimized for normal speakers, in the mixing and mastering room and creating a wider than real image, that was never there to begin with.
You really don't understand how flawed normal stereo speakers are nor how music is mastered.
Music is mastered and mixed with normal stereo speakers in mind, flawed or not.
SDA speakers are not even remotely considered when mixing and mastering.
All the choices they make with regards to soundstage, and placement of instruments and sounds are done with a different set of standards in place.
You failed to address, why recordings are not made in the manner that Polk advertised they were.
If they were made that way, the SDA effect would be more viable, but as it is, almost no recording have ever been made with 2 microphones 7" apart where are ears are.
That is the flaw in the SDA is accurate argument.
They make an assumption that is not true.
I have nothing against the SDA effect, it is a great idea, sounds great at times, but it is based on a flawed premise.
