Polk SDA 2b vs Ohm Walsh 4
- Thread starter 20minc
- Start date
The OHM Walsh speakers are a good deal at $300 if all drivers are in good condition. The SDA 2Bs had magnet shifting issues on the woofers, and require a SDA cable to work correctly. If any parts are missing and item condition is less than near mint I would say $300 is about the top end.
I don`t know about condition of driver. He said sound is no problem and out side looks little dusty but ok.
With SDA 2b every thing looks good with custom made interconnect cable, and he replaced tweeter with RD0194.
I don`t know which one, I want to buy both but I only have $300.
With SDA 2b every thing looks good with custom made interconnect cable, and he replaced tweeter with RD0194.
I don`t know which one, I want to buy both but I only have $300.
mars_volta
Super Member
Ohm 4 will need new foam surrounds if they haven't been replaced.
Ooh, that Polk tweeter upgrade is a $100 upgrade right there, and really improves the sound. If it were me I'd take the Polks over the Ohms.
However, if you have a chance to listen to each before deciding, that may be a good idea ...
However, if you have a chance to listen to each before deciding, that may be a good idea ...
mars_volta
Super Member
Ohms now that I see those are the older SDA. The Ohms have beautiful veneer. That's a good deal.
Last edited:
Can you listen before you buy and take home the pair that sounds best to you? My experience was my factory upgraded Ohm 4's did not last long here once I brought home a pair of Polk 2.3 sda's.. Your ears and set up may tell a different story.
mars_volta
Super Member
All Ohm 4s had foam.
bhunter
The Spherical Cow
The Ohms are the better speaker, but will cost more to repair, need better amplification, and are more diificult to place. My Walsh 3s get rotation with my ESL-63s and Magnepans, whereas my Polks M10s get office duty. I like and enjoy Polks, but I find the Ohms get timbre and the midrange right. They also have bookmatched veneer and are much rarer than the Polks.
Last edited:
bhunter
The Spherical Cow
I've listen to the entire line both when they were new and in the systems of friends that still have the totl models; thus, I'm using more to judge than just my M10s. I do like Polk speakers, but I find the Ohms to be better for my listening pleasure. A lot of what the Ohms do well, I think is because they have a very high crossover point. The SDA effect was intitially interesting, but I always felt something wasn't quite right with sound staging and imaging.
F1nut
Super Member
But you only used your Monitor 10's as an example.
SDA is not an effect. It corrects the inherent flaw in typical stereo speakers, interaural crosstalk and therefore presents an excellent and accurate soundstage along with pinpoint imaging. If anything typical stereo speakers are an effect.
SDA is not an effect. It corrects the inherent flaw in typical stereo speakers, interaural crosstalk and therefore presents an excellent and accurate soundstage along with pinpoint imaging. If anything typical stereo speakers are an effect.
bhunter
The Spherical Cow
You're speaking of the different arrival times to the left and right ear of sound waves emanating from the two speakers and negating that by flipping the phase and source localization? The Polk method was rather crude IMHO compared to ambiotronic DSP solutions. That said, it was certainly different and Polk offered a lot of value back in the 1980s. Polk should reintroduce SDA using DSP in their higher end products. I also felt that the SDAs tended to be more effective as the sound level increased; however, that introduced some midrange resonance that I didn't like. Polk sure managed to squeeze a lot out of that 6.5 inch driver. BTW, The first time I listened to an SDA was at an audio boutique store in the 1980s sitting in a room with Magnepan Tympanis, Vandy 2s, B&W 801s, and a small forest of LS3/5As. IIRC, the source was the ubiquitous Linn LP12 together with an ARC preamp and various upper end amps of the time.
