Bruce and MIT - No more as we know it.

Yes ,Agreed ,Step back and consider that geography does indeed play a part in how the English language is perceived.

Just to clarify my question. What Mit cables would be an equal substitute to the level Transparent cables I have?

I believer Mits are a great investment !

Any Knowledgeable feed back would be appreciated, thanks.

Regarding F1, Sorry.

nooshinjohn wrote: »

ptrooper wrote: »

You must be sad as by now ,flogging off (sold)your big boys! ☹️no way in hell I’d sell The “Monoliths!” Or any 1.2s for that matter.
The small TC cables in the pic do the height modules on my L800s. The L8’s are also on their way out !
Come to PaPa Mola Mola

After the Legends broke in properly, I have not thought about my 1.2TL's even once. The imaging and soundstage in my listening space is breathtaking. It can be an intimate private concert or it can become Albert Hall. The problem I was facing was that the TL's were simply too much speaker for the room... way too much. The addition of the Mcintosh C2800 and Shunyata Hydra/Typhon have taken things to a place where I can't even tell you when the last time I actively looked at changing something.

We are talking about a full set of modded 1.2'tls. with Rings,BH5,Dynomatted baskets and to at least Vr3's Abbot equivalent crossover builds?

The L800's are a superb speaker, don't get me wrong and worth every cent. I run both my systems with the exact same old stuff except the Transparent cable lvls. The L800's have reference biwire speaker cables with mm2 ,the xlr's are reference Xl's for the interconnects., not the full Reference mm2 like everything in the theatre /monlith's room. All cables were set by transparent for my equipment.

I also run JLIT oppo205's direct to amp's and set its maxed volume to 80% for safety reasons and to roughly match the amps input sensitivity on both systems.

In the Monolith/theatre room ,when I turn the volume on and its first lvl increment is 1 of 80. ,this gives around 43-50 db depending on music ,in no way is it missing any dynamic range or micro details, at this level the speakers fade away and my wife and self can talk for hours amongst it.

Thank god she hasn't looked into my bank account but to be honest, Whats coming out of them right now ,is over riding any concern of finances. hooked.

May I ask what volume lvl where the 1.2's to much? they take up less floor space than the L800's and seem much easier to drive?

Agreed ,Their tweeter position definitely lifts the sound stage,This is what they were designed to do. Xschop always mentions building a stumpy version. lmoa.

F1nut wrote: »

You really don't get it and the rest...laughable!

That issue with the 1.2TL is a major design flaw and why the 2.3TL is the better speaker.

Like a Band on a stage at a concert Go Mathew .
He refused to compromise the physics of a large acoustic system to fit standard furniture heights.When designing a true "no-compromise" flagship like the SDA SRS 1.2TL, Polk prioritizing two strict acoustic engineering laws over real world furniture ergonomics
When engineering a top-tier flagship speaker, designers do not build around the constraints of a small living room or low-slung, plush home theatre recliners. Matthew Polk engineered the 1.2TL for large, dedicated listening spaces where the listener would naturally sit far enough back (15+ feet) for the acoustic drivers to integrate flawlessly at a standard head height.

The 2.3TL wasn't a "fix," it was a compromise,While the Club Polk community views the shorter 2.3TL as the "better, fixed design," Matthew Polk likely viewed it as a scaled-down consumer compromise. The 2.3TL was shrunk to meet a lower price point and fit smaller rooms. To get the smaller footprint, engineers had to give up some cabinet volume, midrange drivers, and ultimate low-end scale.

The Verdict: Two Different Definitions of "Flaw"The Engineer's View (Matthew Polk): The speaker perfectly manipulates soundwaves to avoid room boundaries and recreate a 1:1 scale concert. It functions exactly as the mathematics intended. Result.. .....Perfect Design.

The User's View (Club Polk): The speaker shoots its primary treble over the head of anyone sitting on a modern couch in an average room, requiring custom risers or cabinet tilting just to hear it correctly. Result.................. Practical Flaw.

A room with a bigger platform maybe? for the seating positions.

2.3TL’s work better in my room, should have made the change many moons ago..

I vastly prefer my 1.2tls over the 2.3s they replaced. But my seating isn't conventional in a recliner or a sofa as it's a hassle for me to get up out of. Standing works very well or when I do sit and listen it's on a wooden bar stool about 12' back which sits up high and is the right height for the tl's tweeters. The room is good sized and a bit on the lively side. A fair amount of speakers have come and gone here in the 15 years I've owned them and nothing has come close to dethroning the 1.2s no matter how I've tried.