Monitor 5b's x-over upgrade w/pics

Ricardo · April 2007

Great job/thread. You'll love the new tweeters.

Here's the Vampire web for your next purchases:

http://www.vampirewire.com/

engtaz · April 2007

What is the differences in the different Monitor 5's?

engtaz

heiney9 · April 2007

engtaz wrote: »

What is the differences in the different Monitor 5's?

engtaz

Not much other than the tweeters they used over the years and some minor x-over changes which may or may not follow the tweeter changes.

Early versions of the 5b's (including most of the monitor series as well) had either the peerlees or sl1000 tweeter. I'm not sure which was first (probably the peerless). The early models were fused instead of using a poly switch for tweeter protection. Early 1st gen monitor's also had a paper coned mid driver (if I remember correctly).

What I call 2nd generation monitors had the sl2000 tweeter which were also fused (but at some point they delete the fuse and put in a poly switch) but some of the early models had 2.7 ohm 5W resistor in tweeter signal path which was later changed to a 2.0 ohm 5W resistor. That change seemed to coincide with the addition of the poly switch. Perhaps the poly switch added a bit of resistance

.

What I call 3rd generation was the last production run and Polk refered to those as Monitor xx Series II and those had the sl2500 tweeter which had similar sonic charateristics to the sl3000 used in upper end SDA's and RTA's. The sl2500 & sl3000 were designed to get rid of the +6 db @ 13kHZ peak the sl2000 has. The sl2000 uses a silver coil whereas the sl2500 and sl3000 use a tri-laminate material.

I don't think the peerless version or the sl2500 version schematic is posted in the schematic area. If you have these versions it's best to call Ken and find out the best way to upgrade those, or pull the x-over and get the values from there.

There is a schematic for a 5b sl3000 mod that is interesting because they add a 5.8 uF cap in parallel with the resistor for the tweeter as well as a slightly higher value inductor. Not sure what effect this has on the output of the tweet, but I may try it down the road as an experiment.

If I missed anything please add.

H9

mhardy6647 · April 2007

If you guys want a drop in replacement that is cheap but sounds very good, try the LS00058's from MCM electronics. They are made by a company in Denmark and look uncanningly like the Peerless tweeters that use to be used. I put a couple in my model 10's. I am real happy with them and they only cost $14.25 each. I compared them with the Peerless and thought they sounded spot on. $28.50 isn't much to gamble with.

Interesting! Can you tell/do you know what material the domes are made of? They look kind of plastic-y/shiny in the photo at MCM.

heiney9 · April 2007

foxhounds2 wrote: »

If you guys want a drop in replacement that is cheap but sounds very good, try the LS00058's from MCM electronics. They are made by a company in Denmark and look uncanningly like the Peerless tweeters that use to be used. I put a couple in my model 10's. I am real happy with them and they only cost $14.25 each. I compared them with the Peerless and thought they sounded spot on. $28.50 isn't much to gamble with.

Are you recommending these as replacements for just the peerless models or all the tweeter types used? If you look at the x-overs for the peerless it's quite different than for the other tweets used.

H9

engtaz · April 2007

Which series are these?

Thanks
engtaz

jakelm · April 2007

Here you go Engtaz

http://polksda.com/monitor5b.shtml

heiney9 · April 2007

engtaz wrote: »

Which series are these?

Thanks
engtaz

What I call 2nd gen. You have the sl2000 tweeter and no fuse (so you have a poly switch). You would follow the 2nd Monitor 5b schematic. You have (1) 12uF and (1) 34uF cap and (1) 2.0 ohm 5W resistor. If you are going to upgrade/rebuild your x-overs you can use a 33uF cap in place of the 34uF w/o any consequences.

Polk will also send you new poly switches for free and if you are going to replace parts then might as well put new poly's in as they can wear out over time.

Use mylar or polypropelene caps and I highly rec the Mills resistor. Some feel a larger resistor (more resistance) will really tone down the tweeter. The best rec. is to get the new Silk dome replacements from Polk (RD0194-1) for $102 a/pr. shipped.

H9

engtaz · April 2007

Which tweeter??

engtaz

heiney9 · April 2007

heiney9 wrote: »

What I call 2nd gen. You have the sl2000 tweeter and no fuse (so you have a poly switch).

Read it's there

H9

engtaz · April 2007

H9
I was typing as you were posting your reply. same time of postings

Sorry I got you upset but I type slow and this sight hangs up on me sometimes,

engtaz

heiney9 · April 2007

engtaz wrote: »

H9
I was typing as you were posting your reply. same time of postings

Sorry I got you upset but I type slow and this sight hangs up on me sometimes,

engtaz

LOL, I'm not upset at all, that's why I put the smiley. I miss things in posts or post at the same time all the time

H9

engtaz · April 2007

Hey,
I really appreciate your help and guidance on the Monitor 5's.

engtaz
And Adcom advice

foxhounds2 · April 2007

heiney9 wrote: »

Are you recommending these as replacements for just the peerless models or all the tweeter types used? If you look at the x-overs for the peerless it's quite different than for the other tweets used.

H9

I would like some of you folks with more Polk experience to try these out just to see what you think. I was just recommending them for a trial to see what everyone else thinks. When I bought my model 10's a couple of weeks ago I had one with a SL1000 and the other with a Peerless. The peerless seems to be the original but I am not sure. I haven't pulled the crossovers yet to see what parts values are present. When I recieved these tweeters I placed one in the cabinet with the SL1000 and left the Peeerless in the other one. When I compared them I thought that they sounded very much alike in all aspects.I know that this is a subjective process but I have been building, designing speakers for many years and feel like these tweeters are worth a shot for the money. If anyone else tries them I would like to hear your opinion of them.

engtaz · April 2007

george what part # did you order.

engtaz

foxhounds2 · April 2007

mhardy6647 wrote: »

Interesting! Can you tell/do you know what material the domes are made of? They look kind of plastic-y/shiny in the photo at MCM.

If you compare them side by side with the Peerless, they appear to be the same material. I think the picture is reflecting alot of light. In person they aren't as shiny.

heiney9 · April 2007

I just got the new RD0194-1 silk dome tweeters and just installed them.

engtaz · April 2007

How do you like the sound of the 5's now.

engtaz

george daniel · April 2007

engtaz wrote: »

george what part # did you order.

engtaz

Vampire bp hex from partsconnexion,, I thought that I pm'd the parts #

heiney9 · April 2007

engtaz wrote: »

How do you like the sound of the 5's now.

engtaz

I'll wait to comment in depth. It wasn't as dramatic as expected but I only have a total of about 2 hours on the tweets and less than 10 hours on the new x-over parts. The main rig has LSi's and going between the two is hard because they are completely different speakers top to bottom and sound totally different.

If I had to sum it up right now, I'd say the money was very much worth it. I have just under $200 in these 5's and if I didn't have LSi's in the other room I'd be even more thrilled. Judging them just on their own they have really improved and expect as they "break-in" they will get better.

I highly recommend the tweets and x-over refreshening

H9

engtaz · April 2007

Did you change the post and why don't you show off your 5's with some pics with the new tweets.

engtaz

heiney9 · April 2007

engtaz wrote: »

Did you change the post and why don't you show off your 5's with some pics with the new tweets.

engtaz

No, I didn't change the binding posts. I have enough $$$ invested in these 5b's considering it's for use with a secondary system. I'm sure it's a worthwhile change, but I've gone as far as I will on these.

I don't currently own a working camera, but my bro does (he's the one who took the x-over pics) so perhaps over the weekend I can post some shots with the new tweeters.

H9

P.s. Have the RD0 series always had Polk Audio engraved in the plate around the dome? Seems I remember reading the RD0's were kinda flimsy and had no markings. These are very well built units comparable in weight and build quality to the originals.

engtaz · April 2007

I am using my 5's as center channel so they are on most of the time, so I listened to them before and after install. The A B comparison after changing from 2000 to RDO194 is that the sound spectrum is smoother (even). Voices are more natural. I can't wait for them to break in because it will only get better.

jakelm · April 2007

OK..I just bought the same tweeter.

http://www.mcminone.com/product.asp?catalog_name=MCMProducts&product_id=LS00058

Since I believe my peerless is failing , I will see how it sounds in my center chanell.

WilliamM2 · April 2007

Have the RD0 series always had Polk Audio engraved in the plate around the dome? Seems I remember reading the RD0's were kinda flimsy and had no markings. These are very well built units comparable in weight and build quality to the originals.

Don't know about always, but the RDO's I bought for my SDA's two years ago have the Polk logo molded in them. And I also thought they were built just as well as the originals.

foxhounds2 · April 2007

jakelm wrote: »

OK..I just bought the same tweeter.

http://www.mcminone.com/product.asp?catalog_name=MCMProducts&product_id=LS00058

Since I believe my peerless is failing , I will see how it sounds in my center chanell.

Great, let us all know what you think of it when you get a good comparison. I think it is incredibly smooth and neutral sounding which is what we should really be trying to achieve.

jakelm · April 2007

Just got it in. It looks idintical to the peerless except for the exposed wires on the plate that the peerless have. It sure is a good looking tweeter, if I must say. Not shinny at all, seems to be made up of the same material. (Cloth dome)

The specs on the back read

DT-100
60W/8ohm
30Wrms (2.5khz/12dB)

Looks like it has a natrual roll off at almost the same point as the Peerless.

Very heavy. It feels alittle heavier than the Peerless. It does seem to be built very well.

heiney9 · April 2007

jakelm wrote: »

Just got it in. It looks idintical to the peerless except for the exposed wires on the plate that the peerless have. It sure is a good looking tweeter, if I must say. Not shinny at all, seems to be made up of the same material. (Cloth dome)

The specs on the back read

DT-100
60W/8ohm
30Wrms (2.5khz/12dB)

Looks like it has a natrual roll off at almost the same point as the Peerless.

Very heavy. It feels alittle heavier than the Peerless. It does seem to be built very well.

Of course we want to know how it sounds?

Do you know yet if it's a drop-in or will some slight mods to the cabinet be nec.?

H9

engtaz · April 2007

How are you speakers sounding?

jakelm · April 2007

As soon as I get it home tonight, I will drop it in. I recieved it here at work this morning. But as soon as I get home I will give you my thoughts on Sq. I dont have the 2 to compare right now, but it look like the exact same size. But I will see tonight.

Monitor 5b's x-over upgrade w/pics

Comments