Hypnotoad
Active Member
Must have been it, they would go really loud with very little distortion.
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Polk's New Flagship, Legend Series Speaker: Reintroduces upgraded SDA Technology
- Thread starter TitaniumTroy
- Start date
Must have been it, they would go really loud with very little distortion.
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2018
- Messages
- 3,741
- Likes
- 6,457
Did the out of phase (or whatever it was) cancellation drivers run on a one to one power ratio with the main drivers? Interesting. I can appreciate one the idea in favor of the speaker--an attempt to eliminate the 'box' from the box speaker. That is a good thing as an ideal. I just have reservations about it in practice. In any case, I'm not their customer.
As an aside, Polk now is not the old Polk. Now part of a group also selling Def Tech--both brands selling at a similar price-range. I don't know if they are competing against themselves, attempting to enhance market share, or what? They also own Boston Acoustics, but there doesn't appear to be much going on with BA these days.
Disclaimer: I've written before that I owned Polk. The company began by offering sound quality that you usually didn't get at their price point. I remember demoing Polk's RTA-12 (not SDA, but a 'time aligned' box they sold in the late '70s) and found it to be in many respects superior to the then popular Dahlquist DQ-10.
OP
TitaniumTroy
Active Member
- Thread Starter
- #23
https://www.soundandvision.com/content/polk-audio-legend-l800-loudspeaker-review
S&V has the first review, I highlighted the part I thought was interesting.
Setup of the L800 towers didn't follow nearly the same template I'm used to when positioning speakers for best sound in my listening room. Not only is no toe-in required, but Polk Audio recommends that you place the towers 6-8-foot from one another—an unusually close distance. Such tight positioning ensures you are getting maximum effect from SDA-Pro, and it also reduces the impact of side walls and other reflective surfaces on the sound.
Read more at https://www.soundandvision.com/content/polk-audio-legend-l800-loudspeaker-review#mUZDugjEBYG7tUb0.99
S&V has the first review, I highlighted the part I thought was interesting.
Setup of the L800 towers didn't follow nearly the same template I'm used to when positioning speakers for best sound in my listening room. Not only is no toe-in required, but Polk Audio recommends that you place the towers 6-8-foot from one another—an unusually close distance. Such tight positioning ensures you are getting maximum effect from SDA-Pro, and it also reduces the impact of side walls and other reflective surfaces on the sound.
Read more at https://www.soundandvision.com/content/polk-audio-legend-l800-loudspeaker-review#mUZDugjEBYG7tUb0.99
I do not know but cancellation is the basis of the operation.
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2018
- Messages
- 3,741
- Likes
- 6,457
If you have a large listening area and don't mind the feng shui, and if SDA is your sonic ticket, then I guess. But in fairness all speakers impose a certain listener and placement compromise. I wonder how the Polk's off axis SDA experience is?
PS: I had to laugh when I read how the SDA effect on a Pink Floyd tune was "in no way artificial or enhanced..." That's sort of like reviewing a Big Mac and saying it in no way tasted like fast food! Do these reviewers think before they fire up the Smith Corona?
Actually it rules out most bridged amplifiers no matter their configuration. And note some mono blocks and dual mono amplifiers work fine with common ground connections.
I didn't really care for the original SDA, have not heard the new, but suspect it would be the same -- impressive (or at least interesting) initially but rapidly losing its appeal due to messing up the imaging.
I didn't really care for the original SDA, have not heard the new, but suspect it would be the same -- impressive (or at least interesting) initially but rapidly losing its appeal due to messing up the imaging.
OP
TitaniumTroy
Active Member
- Thread Starter
- #28
Hey Don, have you had the chance to hear the M2's or the 4367's yet? I am still in love with my 4367's, will make the trip to NYC to hear the M2's soon hopefully. Also have you heard the LRS yet, blew me away at the last AXPONA. With it's stellar imaging and revealing clarity, right up there with the Quad 57's I heard at the show too.
Last edited:
Hi @TitaniumTroy ! Nice to see you posting again!
No, I missed my chance to hear John Schuermann's M2 vs. Salon2 shoot-out; work and life has been crazy the past few years (couple 60-80+ hour workweeks with kids graduating college and several deaths in the family and my free time has been nil). Technically I have heard the 4367's but not long enough to comment. They were impressive. And I have never heard the LRS -- the local Maggie dealer, well, I was underwhelmed a few years ago at the way a friend and I were treated (totally independent visits) and have not been back. I am hoping they bring the new hybrid design out west and I am able to check it out.
Many years ago I spent a lot of time listening and trying things, back when I was "in the biz" and had ready access (and much more time). I keep wanting to check out local dealers and RMAF but always seems something else comes up. I keep thinking things will slow down a bit and Ill be able to make the rounds again. For now, closest I come is living vicariously via ASR and such.
@dallasjustice traded his 4367 for M2
I heard the M2, but I'm not qualified to subjectively review, other than they sounded fine to me.
I'd probably prefer the M2 because I like big stuff that you have to fiddle with.
---
As for the Polks, they just look wrong...
Last edited:
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2019
- Messages
- 1,172
- Likes
- 2,321
They were supposed to work on the same principal. I have an outboard sonic hologram generator sitting on a shelf if anyone wants to try and measure what it does.
i have the original sda 1.2 TL's. rebuilt crossovers and newer replacement tweeters. Powered by a parasound hca 3500
interesting reading thie thread.
I was doing a blind test with some friends between this and the rti12's. The results I was getting were all over the place.
With some material the SDA"s were miles ahead. Other material the rti12's won.
interesting reading thie thread.
I was doing a blind test with some friends between this and the rti12's. The results I was getting were all over the place.
With some material the SDA"s were miles ahead. Other material the rti12's won.
I believe that Carver's patent is given a credit on the back of the speaker or in the manual. There's a back story which should come from Polk.
i think the principle behind the design is that each speaker plays its own channel from 1 set of drivers and the second set of drivers play the out of phase version of the other speaker. the distance between the 2 vertical sets of drivers is about even with the distance of your ears. and its supposed to give you a more accurate representation of the sound stage my only allowing the original channel into each ear and preventing the other channel from influencing the opposite ear.
how true this is. I am not educated enough to defend or dispute. I think they sound miles better on some songs. but on others not so much
Speedskater
Major Contributor
The Polk forum still has a section on these speakers.
https://forum.polkaudio.com/categories/vintage-speakers
https://forum.polkaudio.com/categories/vintage-speakers
They're also still manufacturing new parts for them, and there's a cottage industry around them, with new improved crossover PCBs, and various mods.
STC
Active Member
The out phase signal will be lower and send to the opposite speakers. Usually, it is about 2.5dB lower.
STC
Active Member
It is due to the implementation of the crosstalk itself and nothing to do with amplifiers unless the amplifiers phase accuracy between the two channels are not accurate or deliberately slightly off to create some sense of large soundstage.
Some recordings may have a soundstage of 60 degrees but in reality their image would have been arbitrarily assigned a spot using headphones. So the real image position can be artificially appears to be too be at far extreme when the ITD between the channels were big ( more than 300 μs).
In other cases, the drum attack is usually enhanced by the doubling effect of the crosstalk but with cancellation you lose some bass. All these can be addressed provided you can control them using the software. I am not sure if that option is available with Polk.
Some recordings may have a soundstage of 60 degrees but in reality their image would have been arbitrarily assigned a spot using headphones. So the real image position can be artificially appears to be too be at far extreme when the ITD between the channels were big ( more than 300 μs).
In other cases, the drum attack is usually enhanced by the doubling effect of the crosstalk but with cancellation you lose some bass. All these can be addressed provided you can control them using the software. I am not sure if that option is available with Polk.
