Using 18uF instead of 20uF for the crossover mod

hauxon

Simple question regarding SDA crossovers. I'm planning to use ClarityCap ESA caps for my xo recap. ClarityCap does not have a 20uF cap in it's ESA line but 18uF and 22uF. Can I use 18uF caps where the 20uF caps are supposed to be? Will it affect the sound and in what way? I could also use two 10uF caps (total of 12 for my SDA 2B) but that's ...cumbersome Those of you who chose to use ClarityCaps, how did you implement this?

Hrannnar

pitdogg2

You can use two 10uf boom done

hauxon

Ok two 10uF is probably the way to go. I should have enough space if I order the gimpod board.

pitdogg2

Yes use those boards

mhardy6647

Two 10s in parallel, or an 18 and a 2 in parallel -- anything that adds up to 20, in parallel, will get you the capacitance you want.

Some folks like to parallel ('bypass') large caps with two smaller value caps -- the notion is to have low ESR across a wide bandwidth. It's one of those things that shouldn't hurt -- and it certainly helps keep the capacitor companies profitable, which helps keep 'em in business, which is good for all of us!

pitdogg2

mhardy6647 wrote: »

Two 10s in parallel, or an 18 and a 2 in parallel -- anything that adds up to 20, in parallel, will get you the capacitance you want.

Some folks like to parallel ('bypass') large caps with two smaller value caps -- the notion is to have low ESR across a wide bandwidth. It's one of those things that shouldn't hurt -- and it certainly helps keep the capacitor companies profitable, which helps keep 'em in business, which is good for all of us!

Won't this act more like a bypass cap? I was always told to make sure they are as close to even as possible.

mhardy6647

Yes, it will -- but the net capacitance is 20 uF -- the difference would be (could be) the ESR as a function of frequency. Probably not a huge difference -- but a difference. Is it a good idea (i.e., a better idea)? Only one way to tell.

Note, I'm absolutely not contraindicating your advice -- just offering an alternative. Like alternative facts!

F1nut

Simple solution, use Sonicap. They sound better anyway

hauxon

I've always felt the SDA 2B sounds good in a non aggressive way, bit warm maybe. So my thinking with selecting ClarityCap was making them a little bit more forward. Am I correct? Sonicap are warmer, maybe closer to the original Polk sound and ClarityCap slightly more forward? Is there a huge differance? I've always thought it was subtle.

gimpod

hauxon wrote: »

I've always felt the SDA 2B sounds good in a non aggressive way, bit warm maybe. So my thinking with selecting ClarityCap was making them sound more Clinical/Sterile. Am I correct? Sonicap are warmer, maybe closer to the original Polk sound and ClarityCap slightly more Clinical/Sterile? Is there a huge difference? I've always thought it was subtle.

I fixed it for ya.

F1nut wrote: »

Simple solution, use Sonicap. They sound better anyway

I agree, IHMO SDA's are suppose to sound warm.

headrott

Having heard 3 different SDA's (2BTL's, 3.1TL's and 2.3TL's) using Sonicaps, and the 2.3TL's using both Clarity Cap ESA's and Sonicaps, I will say that the Clarity Caps are definitely more forward, clinical (I would not say sterile, IMO) than Sonicaps. I will also say definitely that the bass from the ESA's is much more solid (without being "robo-bass like). The Sonicaps sound muddy in comparison, IMO. The highs of Sonicaps are better (warmer) sounding than ESA's.

It's all about what sound you are looking for. If the rest of your equipment is warmer sounding, go for the ESA's. if your equipment is already forward/clinical sounding, go for Sonicaps.

Also, Mills (resistors) are warmer sounding and Duelund cast resistors are more clinical sounding.

pitdogg2

Could one use Clarity in low pass and sonicaps in the high pass and have the best of both worlds? Or would that just be a mess of sound?

Toolfan66

headrott wrote: »

Having heard 3 different SDA's (2BTL's, 3.1TL's and 2.3TL's) using Sonicaps, and the 2.3TL's using both Clarity Cap ESA's and Sonicaps, I will say that the Clarity Caps are definitely more forward, clinical (I would not say sterile, IMO) than Sonicaps. I will also say definitely that the bass from the ESA's is much more solid (without being "robo-bass like). The Sonicaps sound muddy in comparison, IMO. The highs of Sonicaps are better (warmer) sounding than ESA's.

It's all about what sound you are looking for. If the rest of your equipment is warmer sounding, go for the ESA's. if your equipment is already forward/clinical sounding, go for Sonicaps.

Also, Mills (resistors) are warmer sounding and Duelund cast resistors are more clinical sounding.

I couldn't agree more, I have two sets of crossovers for my 1.2tl's, one is with Sonicaps, and Duelund's the other is Clarity Cap MR's and Duelund's, I prefer the Clarity Cap's, but I honestly can say one can't go wrong with either one, they both sound better than the original ones..

Replacing the Inductors is a huge upgrade as well, especially the 16mh..

skrol

mhardy6647 wrote: »

Two 10s in parallel, or an 18 and a 2 in parallel -- anything that adds up to 20, in parallel, will get you the capacitance you want.

Some folks like to parallel ('bypass') large caps with two smaller value caps -- the notion is to have low ESR across a wide bandwidth. It's one of those things that shouldn't hurt -- and it certainly helps keep the capacitor companies profitable, which helps keep 'em in business, which is good for all of us!

Go 2 10s in parallel. The 18 and 2 will not sound right. Trust me, I've tried this.

headrott

pitdogg2 wrote: »

Could one use Clarity in low pass and sonicaps in the high pass and have the best of both worlds? Or would that just be a mess of sound?

I have not actually listened to a mix of capacitors like Clarity Cap ESA's for the low/mids and Sonicaps for the high end, but it doesn't seem like they would mesh well, IMO. As you said, it would be a "mess of sound".

I would do one or the other. I would also not mix resistors; either use Mills or Deulund.

pitdogg2

headrott wrote: »

pitdogg2 wrote: »

Could one use Clarity in low pass and sonicaps in the high pass and have the best of both worlds? Or would that just be a mess of sound?

I have not actually listened to a mix of capacitors like Clarity Cap ESA's for the low/mids and Sonicaps for the high end, but it doesn't seem like they would mesh well, IMO. As you said, it would be a "mess of sound".

I would do one or the other. I would also not mix resistors; either use Mills or Deulund.

My theory was i know some in the past used less expensive caps in the low pass to save money on their recap. So with your post it was almost like you may be able to get the best of both worlds. I know in talking to Trey he is in the mindset that Sonicaps are built to be bypassed with their upper lines to sound their best. Looking at Sonicaps upper two cap lines it is hard to argue that fact since all are small and tiny values.
Like Larry, Trey also stated that to get the best out of your rebuild inductors are a must.

westmassguy

pitdogg2 wrote: »

headrott wrote: »

pitdogg2 wrote: »

Could one use Clarity in low pass and sonicaps in the high pass and have the best of both worlds? Or would that just be a mess of sound?

I have not actually listened to a mix of capacitors like Clarity Cap ESA's for the low/mids and Sonicaps for the high end, but it doesn't seem like they would mesh well, IMO. As you said, it would be a "mess of sound".

I would do one or the other. I would also not mix resistors; either use Mills or Deulund.

My theory was i know some in the past used less expensive caps in the low pass to save money on their recap. So with your post it was almost like you may be able to get the best of both worlds. I know in talking to Trey he is in the mindset that Sonicaps are built to be bypassed with their upper lines to sound their best. Looking at Sonicaps upper two cap lines it is hard to argue that fact since all are small and tiny values.
Like Larry, Trey also stated that to get the best out of your rebuild inductors are a must.

The Gen II and Platinum are being/have been phased out

pitdogg2

westmassguy wrote: »

pitdogg2 wrote: »

headrott wrote: »

pitdogg2 wrote: »

Could one use Clarity in low pass and sonicaps in the high pass and have the best of both worlds? Or would that just be a mess of sound?

I have not actually listened to a mix of capacitors like Clarity Cap ESA's for the low/mids and Sonicaps for the high end, but it doesn't seem like they would mesh well, IMO. As you said, it would be a "mess of sound".

I would do one or the other. I would also not mix resistors; either use Mills or Deulund.

My theory was i know some in the past used less expensive caps in the low pass to save money on their recap. So with your post it was almost like you may be able to get the best of both worlds. I know in talking to Trey he is in the mindset that Sonicaps are built to be bypassed with their upper lines to sound their best. Looking at Sonicaps upper two cap lines it is hard to argue that fact since all are small and tiny values.
Like Larry, Trey also stated that to get the best out of your rebuild inductors are a must.

The Gen II and Platinum are being/have been phased out

Interesting. I have been on the site and did see some in clearance but just thought low or very little sales.
Wonder if something is taking there place. I might reach out to Jeff or Elliot

cortico

Clarity and Sonicaps have great sound.

Although the high and mid-range tones from the Clarity ESA are clearer and more precise, the vocals/guitar have more fidelity to the original recording.

headrott

cortico wrote: »

Clarity and Sonicaps have great sound.

Although the high and mid-range tones from the Clarity ESA are clearer and more precise, the vocals/guitar have more fidelity to the original recording.

I would include the bass in that too. I do not remember the sound of the highs and mids (in the 2.3TL's) using Sonicaps, but I do remember the low end being more solid (less muddy) for certain (using Clarity Caps). Both are good caps and are system (and ear) dependent, IMO. Sonicaps/Mills for a more forward sounding amp/pre/source. Clarity Caps/Duelund for a more "laid back" sounding Amp/Pre/source.

hauxon

Toolfan66 wrote: »

headrott wrote: »

Replacing the Inductors is a huge upgrade as well, especially the 16mh..

Is there a 16mH inductor out there I can buy as a direct replacement? Does one need to buy a different spec inductor and modify it (unwind)? I cannot find anything reliable (like: buy this one and cut x centimeters off). I don't have the knowledge or experience to do the modding/calculations/measurements myself.

mhardy6647

Parts Express has a 16 mH air core inductor -- but the DCR is also important. Maybe not critical, but a change in DCR will change the crossover behavior at least a bit.

https://www.parts-express.com/jantzen-audio-16mh-18-awg-air-core-inductor--255-298

I reckon Madisound does, too -- I didn't look.

I have recently become enamored of copper foil inductors (FWIW).

hauxon

Ok thanks for the link. The Jantzen is air core and has a little bit lower DCR of 2.66 ohms (original is 2.8 ohms according to the table in the "inductor-dcr-insanity-for-sdas" thread) so it whould not lower the impedance value of the speakers that much, right?

What are the pros and cons of going with the Jantzen air core inductor in the link vs using a steel core type?

mhardy6647

Well, the big plus is there's no danger of core saturation with high signal levels -- the cored inductors are a way to make high power handling, high-ish inductance inductors at low cost. I don't think there's any good reason to use an iron, steel, etc. core inductor... but I wouldn't be at all surprised to

18 ga is kinda skinny -- a larger ga inductor would take more juice, but would also have lower DCR (I would think!).

I live in the fleapower world (my good amplifier is 3.5 watts per channel), so power handling's not something I much worry about -- but I reckon it's different for these rather less sensitive loudspeakers!

Schurkey

mhardy6647 wrote: »

Parts Express has a 16 mH air core inductor -- but the DCR is also important. Maybe not critical, but a change in DCR will change the crossover behavior at least a bit.

https://www.parts-express.com/jantzen-audio-16mh-18-awg-air-core-inductor--255-298

I reckon Madisound does, too -- I didn't look.

I have recently become enamored of copper foil inductors (FWIW).

I thought the entire point of replacing the 16mH (SDA) inductor was to drop the DCR in order to improve bass response. The SDA inductor allows the SDA drivers to assist with bass in-phase with the stereo drivers.

When it was me, I bought the biggest-gauge, iron-core inductor that ERSE had in stock, and then unwound ~2 feet to get it "right" for my SDA 1B. 0.364 ohms before unwinding. The 1B uses a smaller inductor (9.6mH) than many of the other SDAs, which typically use a 16mH

Last I looked, ERSE would custom-unwind inductors for a nominal charge--$10 or $15 per inductor. It's been years, though--so contact them first.

www.erseaudio.com

http://www.erseaudio.com/Products/SuperQCoils16Gauge/ESQ55-16-18000

hauxon

After a little research it looks to me that a 16mH Jantzen C Coil inductor is the way to go for my SDA 2B. Am I correct?

https://www.hificollective.co.uk/catalog/000-6577-16mh-jantzen-c-coil.html

mhardy6647

I've gotta bow out of this discussion, since I seriously don't have insight into the 'stock' SDA XOs nor the goals of improving them I will do more harm than good!

PS Lots of folks do wind their own inductors -- but, having done some "google-research" on the topic, I got very confused very fast about the influence of the salient variables (coil geometry, length of wire, gauge of wire, and number of turns) as it influences inductance, so I gave up

DCR is simple: it depends on the length and diameter (gauge) of the wire -- and of course on the conductor used (copper, silver, aluminum, brass, whatever)!

westmassguy

hauxon wrote: »

After a little research it looks to me that a 16mH Jantzen C Coil inductor is the way to go for my SDA 2B. Am I correct?

https://www.hificollective.co.uk/catalog/000-6577-16mh-jantzen-c-coil.html

Yes, however they're expensive, and the overall impedance of the speaker will drop significantly. Erse SuperQs are what I normally use, but they must be unwound. Your 2Bs are 6 ohm nominal now, but will most likely end up 4 ohm, and will drop well below that at certain frequencies. Your Amplifier must be able to handle 4 ohms or less safely.

hauxon

I'm using a NAD C272 power amp with my speakers.

The manual says:
"More meaningful in the real world arethe C 272’s dynamic capabilities; up to 450 watts into 2 ohms and up to 70 amps current capability into 1 ohm!"

So my guess is that the amp would be able to handle the lowered impedance.

I'm planning to buy gimpod boards and switch the old ones out using none of the original components. I live in Iceland and am planning to buy the components from hificollective.co.uk and buying everything from a single place would be convenient and make savings for me on shipping. They don't carry Erse but have all Jantzen parts (and ClarityCap).

TNTsTunes

You could go with this Jantzen 16mH air core inductor too.

PN# 000-1721 16mH AWG17 DCR 2.22R

It would allow a slight increase in bass output to the dimensional driver without risking overdriving it or reducing the overall impedance of the speaker too dramatically.

https://hificollective.co.uk/catalog/000-1721-16mh-jantzen-air-core-wire-coil.html

F1nut

hauxon wrote: »

I'm using a NAD C272 power amp with my speakers.

The manual says:
"More meaningful in the real world arethe C 272’s dynamic capabilities; up to 450 watts into 2 ohms and up to 70 amps current capability into 1 ohm!"

So my guess is that the amp would be able to handle the lowered impedance.

I'm planning to buy gimpod boards and switch the old ones out using none of the original components. I live in Iceland and am planning to buy the components from hificollective.co.uk and buying everything from a single place would be convenient and make savings for me on shipping. They don't carry Erse but have all Jantzen parts (and ClarityCap).

Those dynamic (peak) ratings should not be used for determining if your amp can handle constant loads at or below the nominal 4 ohms your speakers would become.