Does recapping really improve sound? Or is it just "psycho-acoustics?"

nspindel

Oh, by the way - WELCOME TO THE RABBIT HOLE!

scottyboy76

:eek:

george daniel

deep and dark it is

cnh

What do you mean, the psycho-acoustic guy just made a slip of the tongue, he really just meant PSYCHO. A pretty "good" description of most of us? lol

cnh

pglbook

I am very glad to be the "down the rabbit hole" with you Polkies. Thanks!

skrol

I just stand at the edge of the rabbit hole, looking in, wondering what is down there, afraid to take that step. ... Ok, afraid of what my wife might do to me if I did :eek:.

BlueFox

It isn't so much a rabbit hole, but a realization that there is ALWAYS something better. Of course it is perfectly possible to be completely happy with a low cost system, but never make the same mistake that many do and think your gear cannot be better. And that applies to every part of any system.

transmaster

Recapping does make a difference. No Voodoo science, no psycho-acoustics. the facts. I recapped My Polk Monitor 10B's which I purchased new in 1989. I have music I have played on them from the very beginning. To be sure The Onkyo that is powering them now is the best I have ever had in that department but the Sansui, JVC, and Sony gear they where powered with in past years where no slouches in their days. From the very beginning the 10B's sounded better it took perhaps 400 hours for the cap's to burn in a slow process that did not call attention to it's self. I didn't notice the improvement until I loaded a selection I had not played since right after the installation of the new SoniCap Gen 1's. There was nothing subtle about the difference with the Onkyo set in Pure Audio mode which is a pure stereo setting what I was hearing was very clear, smooth, I heard more of the bottom end the 10B's have, crystal clear highs. and interior details like the scrape of a brush on a tophat. For me money well spent.

skrol

BlueFox wrote: »

It isn't so much a rabbit hole, but a realization that there is ALWAYS something better. Of course it is perfectly possible to be completely happy with a low cost system, but never make the same mistake that many do and think your gear cannot be better. And that applies to every part of any system.

I think that is where I am at. My system is quite humble and there is far better but there will always be better. In some ways I am comfortable with that but still I stare down that rabbit hole, curious how good it could be.

transmaster

What happened to me was learning that the latest and greatest isn't always the best. I refurbished the Polk 10B's to buy me some time while I looked around for something better the replace them with. As it turns out now it is what can I get that is going to sound as good.

nspindel

Better Polks :twisted:

halo71

scottyboy76 wrote: »

pglbook, take it from a once innocent victim of these ghouls on cp, i just stopped in to see if a set of polks for sale locally were worth it, they answered my question politely, even explaining things about the speakers i didnt know.

WELL, little by little, these hellhounds have caused me to spend money on gear i never even knew existed, now i am unexplainably drawn to the flicking of power switches, the unplugging and plugging back speaker connectors to listen to multiple sets of speakers, and worst of all, i have been coaxed, ney forced to have new capacitors installed on two sets of speakers, bringing them back to a state of performance I would not have expected.

If they ever tell you, WELCOME TO THE RABBIT HOLE, its over, did you get that,WELCOME TO THE RABBIT HOLE is the phrase to watch for, its over then, you are theirs.

RUN

Ive got to go now, i think they are watching

+1! I came here looking for something Polk. Ken gave me some Monitor 10's....among many other things. And I really got back into listening to music other than MP3 players. In the last 3 years I have went from 1 pair or poor speakers.....to the 10's....to 8 various pairs of speakers with a few DIY's in there. Searching GW's and SA's in whatever town I go to. Scouring Craigslist search engines.....I think I am still scratching the surface of that rabbit hole! :cheesygrin:

gmjungbluth

+2 +

I never considered all the tinkering and playing around that I could do with stereo equipment, or how much fun I would have doing it. I didn't have a hobby before, but I sure do now - for me chiseling capacitors out of ancient speaker enclosures beats bowling league any day! And my wife is even into demoing new speakers with me and so far hasn't been too skeptical every time I bring a new set of boxes into the basement, as long as one set leaves relatively soon after....

halo71 wrote: »

+1! I came here looking for something Polk. Ken gave me some Monitor 10's....among many other things. And I really got back into listening to music other than MP3 players. In the last 3 years I have went from 1 pair or poor speakers.....to the 10's....to 8 various pairs of speakers with a few DIY's in there. Searching GW's and SA's in whatever town I go to. Scouring Craigslist search engines.....I think I am still scratching the surface of that rabbit hole! :cheesygrin:

pglbook

Well said transmaster. I totally agree that the most expensive (or most highly touted) equipment is not always the best for one. What is most important is what one likes. It all depends on taste and preference, not what others tell you is the best and greatest nor how much a specific component costs, but what you like. For example, I recently bought a pair of Dahlquist DQ 10 speakers because I kept on hearing how those were among the greatest speakers of all time etc. They have such a cult following it is incredible. I was so excited to connect the DQ 10s and experience my own sonic nirvana but, from the first, I was disappointed. Yes, they do have great clarity and imaging, but they just sounded flat compared to my Polk Monitor 10As. I will take the Polk Monitor
10As over the DQ 10s any time! I listen to the DQ 10s now and then...they are great for light jazz and classical music. But I listen to my Polk Monitor 10As 90% more than to my DQ 10s. That is just my prefernce in sound, I guess. I like the overall sound of the Polk Monitor 10As better. And others may like the DQ 10s better. That is fine. What is good and better and best is merely what one prefers! That is all! Thanks.

cristo

Does recapping 20+ year old failing electrolytics with new electrolytics improve sound quality?
- undoubtably.
Does recapping new electrolytics with new film capacitors of any decent brand?
- yes, but probably less noticeably.
Does recapping Solens or Daytons with Sonicaps help?
- probably a small subtle difference.
Does recapping Sonicaps with a more expensive audiophile capacitor improve sound quality? -
??????

ravaneli

honesty gets nailed hard hard here. How much does a cap cost?

Think about this, HUGE improvement, cheap price. Users 'blown away' by the difference. It is really insulting to the audio engineers to suggest that Polk wouldn't put a better cap if it made a difference. For that difference in quality (if it were real) they could sell the speaker for much more.

All these testimonial would be humiliated in a blind test.

You've found an honest technician and I would not lose him!

Face

ravaneli wrote: »

honesty gets nailed hard hard here. How much does a cap cost?

Think about this, HUGE improvement, cheap price. Users 'blown away' by the difference. It is really insulting to the audio engineers to suggest that Polk wouldn't put a better cap if it made a difference. For that difference in quality (if it were real) they could sell the speaker for much more.

All these testimonial would be humiliated in a blind test.

You've found an honest technician and I would not lose him!

What blind testing have you done with capacitors, which caps were used, what was your conclusion?

tommyt21

Replaced with cheap caps? I can tell you i spent almost as much as the speaker cost and yes there was a big difference. Yet again ravioli you are ignorant on something you have no experience with.

nspindel

ravaneli wrote: »

honesty gets nailed hard hard here. How much does a cap cost?

Think about this, HUGE improvement, cheap price. Users 'blown away' by the difference. It is really insulting to the audio engineers to suggest that Polk wouldn't put a better cap if it made a difference. For that difference in quality (if it were real) they could sell the speaker for much more.

All these testimonial would be humiliated in a blind test.

You've found an honest technician and I would not lose him!

Oh no, ravioli is back.

You simply have no idea what you're talking about dude. Matthew Polk has personally given advice to the members on this forum, saying explicitly that he wishes he could have used caps of the quality we are using as replacements, but the stock parts were spec'ed to meet specific retail price points. So what are you doing here? Defending the faith of the Polk engineers by calling Matthew Polk a liar? And how on earth are you calling these caps cheap? The sonicaps used in my CRS+ rebuild cost over $260. The larger speakers use more caps and so would cost even more. You think Polk could just throw them in and bump up the price accordingly, and not affect sales? Really? In this day and age when 99% of the people think Apple earbuds are fine?

You are a fool and a troll. You have proved that over and over. You show up on threads just to stir up a fight. Go away, and take your useless drivel with you.

cstmar01

nspindel wrote: »

Oh no, ravioli is back.

You simply have no idea what you're talking about dude. Matthew Polk has personally given advice to the members on this forum, saying explicitly that he wishes he could have used caps of the quality we are using as replacements, but the stock parts were spec'ed to meet specific retail price points. So what are you doing here? Defending the faith of the Polk engineers by calling Matthew Polk a liar? And how on earth are you calling these caps cheap? The sonicaps used in my CRS+ rebuild cost over $260. The larger speakers use more caps and so would cost even more. You think Polk could just throw them in and bump up the price accordingly, and not affect sales? Really? In this day and age when 99% of the people think Apple earbuds are fine?

You are a fool and a troll. You have proved that over and over. You show up on threads just to stir up a fight. Go away, and take your useless drivel with you.

well said.

I would like reports also from him of all the blind testing he's done of all the gear and how much time etc. For someone that claims to know all, it doesn't seem like he posts a whole lot about his findings, even though he tells us we need to.

skrol

Why do most manufacturers use electrolytics vs metalized Polypropylene caps? The answer is economics. A 10uF electrolytic is well less than $1 (street price) vs even a low grade metalized Polypropylene which are about $4. You will find the better caps in top shelf speakers.

What do the LSiM speakers use?

Geoff4rfc

skrol wrote: »

I just stand at the edge of the rabbit hole, looking in, wondering what is down there, afraid to take that step. ... Ok, afraid of what my wife might do to me if I did :eek:.

Are you serious????? Have you looked at your sig line? My friend, you've been tumbling down the rabbit hole for quite some time

ravaneli

I believe in the magic hand of a free market and in the expertise of the Polk Audio engineers. There is a thing called marginal utility. If the incremental utility from extra $10 spent on cap is bigger than the $10 spent on the cap, Polk will go for it. You don't know how to run a business but they do. Tell me, ho much do you think Polk pays for the price of the caps in LSiM? Do you think the caps are the only difference with RTiA? Really.
Are you 'blown away' by the difference between RTiA and LSiM? Most people would concede LSiM is better though both are pretty good speakers. How do you compare RTiA with VR3 caps to LSiM then? No, LSiM will be the better speaker no matter what caps u put in RTiA.
Please, to keep this clean, refrain from insults. Believe me, i don't think any higher of you, but i don't insult you like this.
I have challenged people from Chicago many times to hook up and do a couple of blind tests. That's a better way to 'show me'. Or, instead of attacking my intelligence lets go take an IQ test together. But refrain from the cheap insults. We can just disagree in a civil way.

F1nut

You don't know how to run a business but they do.

I own a business, HELLO!

Tell me, ho much do you think Polk pays for the price of the caps in LSiM? Do you think the caps are the only difference with RTiA? Really.

Your reading compensation is as piss poor as your knowledge of audio, HELLO!

but i don't insult you like this.

You have insulted this entire community, HELLO!

We can just disagree in a civil way.

Must be why you made a threat, HELLO!

F1nut

My spelling is as bad as rav's reading comprehension...geesh, I should know better than to post while half asleep.

CoolJazz

I happened to have had a conversation last weekend with a friend about the Dahlquist speakers. He's been in the speaker and driver building business for decades and even has patents in speakers. He was commenting that the Dahlquiest crossover was in his opinion built more to protect the drivers than it was to implement a proper crossover. I think he said there was a very commonly done revision out that was often done to big benefit. You might look for that as part of your improvments on those DQ-10's.

In this thread I've seen comments that more reflects on aging electrolytic caps than on AC style crossover capacitors. Some difference there. But quality capacitors are a very good investment if you're after audio quality improvement greater than what the Ravioli guy is after. Some of us want better music...rather than a null test result! I'll bet Ravioli wants blue ribbons for all the kids in all the sports and no score kept either. Same thing.

CJ