New caps?

Neskahi

Is there a indicator or tell tale sign that xovers should be rebuilt with new caps and resistors. I know from what I've read here that age is used as a general rule
but wondered if a before and after sound comparison was the final test. Thanks.



2.3's with RDO's [vast improvement]

SDA SRS's [RDO's planned]

ka7niq

Neskahi wrote: »

Is there a indicator or tell tale sign that xovers should be rebuilt with new caps and resistors. I know from what I've read here that age is used as a general rule
but wondered if a before and after sound comparison was the final test. Thanks.



2.3's with RDO's [vast improvement]

SDA SRS's [RDO's planned]

Here is my experience with aging caps.
It gives a dull, laid back, rolled off sound.
IMHO, any electrolytic cap over 20 years old should be replaced.
Maybe even sooner, but at 20 years you can be pretty shure they have changed a lot.

Mylar caps have longer life, and MAY still be good, even at 20 plus years.
We replace em anyway because we feel that there are better cap choices like Poly.
It MAY be psychological, but there is "something about" listening to, and living with a speaker you have re capped.
I THINK it should sound better, therefore it DOES.
Get it ?

Systems

Lasareath wrote: »

Mine were 18 years old in my 1.2TL's,...
I almost want to buy another pair of polks just to redo another pair of crossovers, hehe, lol

Sal

Wow I just looked at your gallery,you did a beauty job of refinishing those speakers.

F1nut

Is there a indicator or tell tale sign that xovers should be rebuilt with new caps and resistors.

Yep, even if the speakers are new and came with electrolytic caps and ceramic resistors upgrade them asap.

F1nut

No one knows for sure....LOL

Probably a custom poly type though.

ka7niq

F1nut wrote: »

Yep, even if the speakers are new and came with electrolytic caps and ceramic resistors upgrade them asap.

I agree with that.
But many times changing out all the new electrolytic caps may not be necessary ?
I find it is the tweeter caps that make the most difference.
If you look at what Polk and many other manufactures do, you will often find Electrolytic with Mylars in the tweeter circuit.
They spend the money where it matters most, on the tweeters.
Now, in a OLD speaker, where caps are bad, by all means replace em all, and might as well use all low cost Poly or Mylar caps, except in the tweeter circuit.
Cast resistors sound bad, and should be replaced.
But bear in mind resistors can vary wildly.
I have actually measured Polk resistors as being much less then their rated value.
For instance, in my Polk RT 2000P's, a "5 ohms" resistor is actually 3.5 ohms.
Perhaps the designers took that into account ?
So, when you come along with a precision 5 ohm resistor, you screw up the intent of the design ?

OR, you make it right ?

It is a crap shoot, it really is.
I have greatly improved speakers swapping parts, and I have screwed em up too.

Let YOUR ears be the judge, and TRY not to ruin parts.
Be man enough to admit you made a mistake, and put the old parts BACK IN, if you need to.

Once, on a British Audiophile BBS, I was playing with some Celestion SL 600's,. a highly regarded British speaker from some time ago,'

I COMPLETELY replaced every cap/resistor with super expensive German Sidereal caps and Vishay/Wima resistors.

They sounded HORRIBLY.

I let em "break in" and still they sounded bad,
Others on the BBS had the same experiences.

Finally, the engineer from Celestion got on the BBS, and told us the caps used accomplished the exact filter function they wanted.
They told us of how they selected 8 different brands of Caps UNTIL they got what they wanted.

B&W also cautions against changing caps with different brands/types.

There is MORE to a cap then just capacitance evidently ?

I like to experiment too, but experience has taught me NOT to destroy the old components, in case the experiments do not prove successful.
And, for those interested on what Lynn Olson has tosay about the role of the tweeter capacitors, here is some reading,

Whatever you do, please don't use generic metallized-film polypropylenes like Solen for the C1 tweeter cap.

I strongly recommend Auricap, Hovland Musicap, or North Creek film-and-foil capacitors, with an additional 0.1 or 0.22uF Teflon bypass for the last measure of transparency. Yes, these parts are expensive, but the tweeter cap is the single most important component in your high-fidelity system - more important than interconnects or speaker wires. Keep your priorities straight!


My experience bears this out.
Get THE best tweeter cap or caps you can, and bypass with Teflon.
IMHO, THIS is where "the action is".

ka7niq

F1nut wrote: »

No one knows for sure....LOL

Probably a custom poly type though.

There are really FEW actual cap manufacturers.
It is quite easy to have a cap made to your specs, and make all kinds of claims for it.
Then, you send some to speaker manufacturers and give sweetheart deals on them, and they recommend your cap.
Here is an interesting thread http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4948

Follow all the sub threads, and judge for yourself ?

I THINK the Clarity Caps are the best caps I have used, and Electrolytic caps sound BAD.

Interestingly enough, many speakers I have owned, including B&W 801's and Celestion SL 600's are ALL Electrolytic caps.

I have always wanted to replace OLD Electrolytics with NEW Electrolytics, but the audiophile in me will not allow it.

Maybe the change in sound I hear is the difference in an old vs a new cap ?

OR the ESR and other differences, and NOT the cap itself ?

Nevertheless, Poly and teflon shall go in MY tweeters circuit, the rest I could care less about.

F1nut

We'll have to disagree on a few points. My experience with bypass (teflon and other) has been less than pleasing. That last measure of transparency, that you refer to, produces an un-natural sound or artifacts that one never hears in live music. Sure, at first it sounds kinda cool, but quickly becomes quite annoying.

From the highly regarded 10 Audio website:

Bypass capacitors. In addition to the Multicap RTX, I have tried either .1 µF or .01 µF bypasses from Sonicap (Gen I and the Teflon® Platinum cap), Hovland, AudioCap, and Wima. In every case the results were similar. Let me digress for a minute or so (depending on how fast you read) and talk about crossovers.

In the simple first order high-pass crossovers we are using for this capacitor comparison, the value of the single capacitor, together with the impedance of the loudspeaker driver, determines the crossover frequency. An 8 µF capacitor with the 4 ohm impedance of the Magnepan quasi-ribbon tweeter gives a crossover frequency of about 5000 Hz (1/2πRC). A smaller value capacitor (for example, 4 µF instead of 8 µF) will raise the crossover frequency. If we used only the very small value .1 µF capacitor without the 8 µF, we would hear nothing because the crossover frequency is now almost 400,000 Hz. Even a dog would not hear it!

So why use a bypass at all? There are actually components of very high frequencies in some audio waveforms. Some are high order harmonics. If you think of a square wave, the right angles at the top of the wave are extremely high in frequency. Sometimes there are high frequency components in very fast audio sounds, for example, the instantaneous tap of a drum stick on a cymbal. These are the sounds that should be "helped" by including a small-value bypass capacitor in a high pass crossover.

Well, I don't think so. If the 8 µF capacitor blocks frequencies below 5000 Hz and passes frequencies above 5000 Hz, why do we need what is actually another crossover for the same tweeter, but operating at frequencies already passed by the big cap? I am sure engineers have a very good reason, and a couple of them have tried to educate me on this subject. I respect the science and electrical theory on this subject, and my technical background helps me to understand it fairly well. But there is one small problem: the bypasses all sound bad! They add a quality that at first sounds like an increase in air and detail, but after a couple of hours becomes an intrusive harshness and discontinuity in the upper treble. Remove the bypass: all of the detail is present but without that grating and annoying sound. The high frequencies are cleaner, smoother, and much more enjoyable. It doesn't matter if the bypass cap is Teflon®, polystyrene, or common polypropylene, the results are very similar. And to be avoided.

I find it is the tweeter caps that make the most difference.

I'll also have to disagree that the tweeter circuit is more important than the rest. Balance is key to obtaining the best sound and better caps thru out will result in better mids and bass to balance with the better high end. It's been my experience that there is an marked improvement in those areas when using high grade caps vs electrolytic/mylar.

It is quite easy to have a cap made to your specs, and make all kinds of claims for it. Then, you send some to speaker manufacturers and give sweetheart deals on them, and they recommend your cap.

Sonicap's were designed by Jeff Glowacki and not many folks know caps better than he does. He also sells many other brands and has no problem recommending something other than his own if he thinks the application calls for them. Hard to find honest people like that.

For instance, in my Polk RT 2000P's, a "5 ohms" resistor is actually 3.5 ohms. Perhaps the designers took that into account ? So, when you come along with a precision 5 ohm resistor, you screw up the intent of the design ?

Seeing as most sand resistors are +/- 20% the resistors in question could have easily measured 6 ohms or more. Serious design intent would spec a much tighter tolerance, which some companies do.

the tweeter cap is the single most important component in your high-fidelity system - more important than interconnects or speaker wires.

I strongly disagree with that statement. Again, balance or synergy is key and cables are a part of that.

DarqueKnight

ka7niq wrote: »

Once, on a British Audiophile BBS, I was playing with some Celestion SL 600's,. a highly regarded British speaker from some time ago,'

I COMPLETELY replaced every cap/resistor with super expensive German Sidereal caps and Vishay/Wima resistors.

They sounded HORRIBLY.

Finally, the engineer from Celestion got on the BBS, and told us the caps used accomplished the exact filter function they wanted.
They told us of how they selected 8 different brands of Caps UNTIL they got what they wanted.

B&W also cautions against changing caps with different brands/types.

This is why I consulted with Polk's engineering department prior to doing my first modification.

ka7niq wrote: »

There is MORE to a cap then just capacitance evidently ?

Of course. All caps just store and release energy; some do it better or worse depending on the dielectric material and construction method.

ka7niq wrote: »

Get THE best tweeter cap or caps you can, and bypass with Teflon.

As I understand it, the purpose of bypass caps in tweeter circuits is to improve the speed (transient response) of a larger, often average quality, capacitor. Electrolytic and mylar film capacitors generally benefit from some "help" in this area. Good to high quality polypropylene film caps generally do not need such help.

I was specifically advised by Polk not to use film type caps with "faster" dielectrics (e.g. polystyrene, teflon, etc) than polypropylene because it would harden the sound. I tried them anyway because more is better and a little more should be bliss, right? Immediately after yanking my hand out of the fire, I removed the polystyrene bypass caps and never looked back. However, if someone finds a tweak that they find sonically pleasing that does no harm, by all means go for it.

ka7niq

It is good we can all disagree on things.
This way, each of us can explore our own path to sonic nirvana, and share different ways to get there.
Some British companies and many others do not share our "audiophile beliefs" in the value of "better caps".
The Matrix 801's use all Electrolytics.
Many recording and mixing engineers used these speakers to make a living on.
While I THINK they sound better with Clarity Caps on the tweeters, I can't really PROVE it.
So, the Clarity Caps will stay.

It is important to add they sounded great even with Electrolytics, and easily beat many speakers with much "better caps" throughout their crossovers.

Same with my old Celestion SL 600's if you remember them ?
ALL Electrolytic.

My old Rogers LS 3/5 A's and my Kef 107's and 102's were all Electrolytics too.

The Polk SRS 2's are ALL Electrolytic except bypassed Mylars on the tweeters.

So, Electrolytic couldn't be "that bad".

THINK about it, the excellent Polk SDA type speakers, and all others are ALL Electrolytic, except a Mylar on the tweeters.

Don't you THINK Matt Polk, John Bowers of B&W, Jim Rogers, Laurie Fincham of KEF and other designers would not use Electrolytic if they were as bad as we think they are ?

Actually, if you look at linear capacitance curves for various caps, it is not until really high frequencies that Electrolytic become really non linear.

As you know, I am a Ham, and RF frequencies are way higher then audio frequencies.
Still Electrolytic are used except in some UHF applications.

A radio circuit operating at RF Frequencies is way more critical on a caps performance then at audio frequencies.

Still, my right brain conflicts with my left.
So, to "have peace" with myself, I buy and install the best caps I can.
But, I don't BS myself.
I DOUBT I could hear the difference in a double blind test.

Read the Madisound Test, no one could reliably identify the better caps.

Still, I will lose sleep w/o the very best caps.
It's called audio addiction.
Know any good 12 step programs ?

avguytx

The electrolytics were (are) primarily used by a lot of manufacturers because they were more readily available for mass quantity ordering versus the higher cost poly caps, etc. Plus, most mainstream customers would not notice the benefits in sound and the price increase by going to the higher end caps, etc. It's still that way today. There's more to speaker manufacturing than what they would "like" to use versus what's better economically.

F1nut

avguytx wrote: »

The electrolytics were (are) primarily used by a lot of manufacturers because they were more readily available for mass quantity ordering versus the higher cost poly caps, etc. Plus, most mainstream customers would not notice the benefits in sound and the price increase by going to the higher end caps, etc. It's still that way today. There's more to speaker manufacturing than what they would "like" to use versus what's better economically.

Bingo!

It is good we can all disagree on things.
This way, each of us can explore our own path to sonic nirvana, and share different ways to get there.

Agreed

Systems

ka7niq wrote: »

Same with my old Celestion SL 600's if you remember them ?

Yes I do they where a development of the tiny SL6 and used some sort of hi tech honeycomb material for the enclosures.They where very expensive and the darlings of the British Audio press in the 80's.

Still, I will lose sleep w/o the very best caps.
It's called audio addiction.
Know any good 12 step programs ?

Sorry your in too deep there no hope for you now.:eek:

ka7niq

GV#27 wrote: »

Yes I do they where a development of the tiny SL6 and used some sort of hi tech honeycomb material for the enclosures.They where very expensive and the darlings of the British Audio press in the 80's.

Sorry your in too deep there no hope for you now.:eek:

I KNEW of course that YOU and most others here know what Celestion SL 600's were, LOL
Yes, I AM in too deep now, and though my Ham Radio "mind" knows there is no difference in Caps, MY speakers, the SRS 2's will have the best caps I can afford in them!
Call it "male bonding", yeah that's it ?
So now, instead of **** Envy, we have Capacitor Envy :eek:
Maybe that is why people like Solens ?
Like they say "once you go black, you never go back" ?
This guy in picture below is smiling because he used Solens ?

Systems

ka7niq wrote: »

Maybe that is why people like Solens ?

This guy in picture below is smiling because he used Solens ?

I assure you I don't look like the brotha in the pic ,but I have been using the Solen's in my speaker projects for many moon's.I know many at CP are not fond of them, but I have found them to be completely satisfactory although I have never compared them with the ultra expensive alternatives.

ka7niq

avguytx wrote: »

The electrolytics were (are) primarily used by a lot of manufacturers because they were more readily available for mass quantity ordering versus the higher cost poly caps, etc. Plus, most mainstream customers would not notice the benefits in sound and the price increase by going to the higher end caps, etc. It's still that way today. There's more to speaker manufacturing than what they would "like" to use versus what's better economically.

Got to respectfully disagree here, w/o being disagreeable either.
There are NO more fanatical people then recording and mastering engineers.
This is not a hobby to them, their livelyhood depends on haveing the BEST monitor.
B&W uses Electrolytic caps in the 801's, at least they did in the Matrix series.
Vandersteens use em, Theils use em, and KEF used em.

These speakers are ALL aimed at audiophiles, and must compete in sound quality for market share.
What you are saying is like Ford making a 450 hp street engine, then crippling it with a small induction system.

That sadi, MY speakers shall have "good caps" simply because I will LOSE SLEEP if they do not.

However, this is not my first rodeo.

I USED to think I could hear differences in interconnects, until I listened blindly w/o knowing which Interconnect was in there.

They "switched" in three "different" Interconnects on Acoustat Model 8 Electrostats.
I "heard" BIG differences in all "Three",, as did the rest of the Seattle Audio Society!

It was SOBERING to lean NO Interconnect had been switched at all, LOL

We were all shown the 3 different interconnects, and TOLD "this is the Audioquest, this is the stock one, and this is the Mogami" :eek:

We ALL "picked" the Mogami.
What a bunch of dumb fuks we were.

The MIND is a powerful thing ....

Of course, levels were matched, and all that, and we all listened to 1/2 hour on each one.

This TAUGHT me something, it really did.

heiney9

ka7niq wrote: »

There are NO more fanatical people then recording and mastering engineers.
This is not a hobby to them, their livelyhood depends on haveing the BEST monitor.

So where they hell are they? . Today's music sucks a** as far as recording technique, mastering, mixing and engineering. Of course there are exceptions but theya re few and far between.

H9

heiney9

ka7niq wrote: »

What you are saying is like Ford making a 450 hp street engine, then crippling it with a small induction system.

Happens all the time.

It's a matter of cost vs. profit and making a more well rounded product to appeal to a larger audience.

Example: My car has a performance chip, cold air intake, larger exhaust, larger throttle body tighter suspension, etc. With your thinking I should say they should have made it that way to begin with. The reality is not everyone wants all the performance stuff I added. It appeals to a broader market segment.

It's faster, better throttle response, cooler sound and in some cases better mpg (slightly).

For all except completely uncompromising products which are typically lower volume much higher dollar products there is "middle road" so to speak that is taken to hit a price point or market share, etc. It's not always about an audio product being so neutral or transparent or truthfull sometimes it's about musicallity and profit margin.

I don't completely disagree with you but it's all about being profitable and hitting a certain market niche.

H9

F1nut

The electrolytics were (are) primarily used by a lot of manufacturers because they were more readily available for mass quantity ordering versus the higher cost poly caps, etc.

That is an indisputable fact. The boutique cap makers can not supply the quantities needed for mass production.




Looks like John K. has a new friend.

ka7niq

heiney9 wrote: »

Happens all the time.

It's a matter of cost vs. profit and making a more well rounded product to appeal to a larger audience.

Example: My car has a performance chip, cold air intake, larger exhaust, larger throttle body tighter suspension, etc. With your thinking I should say they should have made it that way to begin with. The reality is not everyone wants all the performance stuff I added. It appeals to a broader market segment.

It's faster, better throttle response, cooler sound and in some cases better mpg (slightly).

For all except completely uncompromising products which are typically lower volume much higher dollar products there is "middle road" so to speak that is taken to hit a price point or market share, etc. It's not always about an audio product being so neutral or transparent or truthfull sometimes it's about musicallity and profit margin.

I don't completely disagree with you but it's all about being profitable and hitting a certain market niche.

H9

I would not exactly call a B&W Matrix 801 a "compromise product".
Noe would I call a Celestion SL 600 that either.
Both of these are balls to the walls designs, the Flagships of their creators.

John Bowers of B&W actually had musicians help pick out the caps in the crossovers.

I THINK my Matrix 801's sound better with the Clarity Caps in there, but my MIND can be fooling me.

Nevertheless, it will stay in there, JUST so i do not loose sleep, bite my nails, etc, etc, etc.

You know, the Madisound board can be a hard core place, and a blind listening test was done showing NO preference for any one kind of cap.

And, it wasn't like the guys in the test couild not hear either.

BTW, Panasonic makes some really good Electrolytics and other caps.
This may not be widely known, but Panasonic has been "into" caps for a long time.

Their high end stuff used Bamboo power supply caps.

MY SRS 2's will be re capped with Electrolytics, probably Elna's or preferrably Panasonics EXCEPT on the tweeters circuit.
I might go paper/oil, maybe motor run ?
OR I may just stick a RED Clarity Cap in there ?

I will use really good resistors.

Panasonic makes a good polyester to replace the ceramic cap.

If you look at capacitor measurements, the measured differences, IF any, are all at higher frequencies.

This is why Polk uses electrolytics in all BUT the tweeter.'
They go to Mylar.

heiney9

ka7niq wrote: »

I would not exactly call a B&W Matrix 801 a "compromise product".
Noe would I call a Celestion SL 600 that either.
Both of these are balls to the walls designs, the Flagships of their creators.

John Bowers of B&W actually had musicians help pick out the caps

Again not to be disagreeable or arguementative but there are more exotic, expensive and cutting edge designs out there.

Just like the flagship model for Ford might be the GT500 which had input from Caroll Shelby. No slouch by any imagination but a compromise when you put it up to a Bugatti Vereyon.

All designers have their signature sound an their own very good reason why they choose the parts they did. It's great he used muscians to help with the parts, but what Pavoratti (RIP) liked compared to what Paul McCartney likes compared to what Andew Lloyd Weber likes can vary widely. Obviously people choose those based on what they heard. Doesn't mean they can't be changed or improved in another persons eye.

B&W are no slouch but I stiil feel it's hard to justify an electrolytic being better than a Poly or other. Same goes of sand resistors vs. wire wound.

H9

ka7niq

heiney9 wrote: »

Again not to be disagreeable or arguementative but there are more exotic, expensive and cutting edge designs out there.

Just like the flagship model for Ford might be the GT500 which had input from Caroll Shelby. No slouch by any imagination but a compromise when you put it up to a Bugatti Vereyon.

All designers have their signature sound an their own very good reason why they choose the parts they did. It's great he used muscians to help with the parts, but what Pavoratti (RIP) liked compared to what Paul McCartney likes compared to what Andew Lloyd Weber likes can vary widely. Obviously people choose those based on what they heard. Doesn't mean they can't be changed or improved in another persons eye.

B&W are no slouch but I stiil feel it's hard to justify an electrolytic being better than a Poly or other. Same goes of sand resistors vs. wire wound.

H9

A B&W engineer TOLD me NOT to mess with the caps UNLESS I used new versions of the same cap.
He told me there was more going on then met the eye.

He told me that even using the same value, but a different brand/type cap would change the sound.

Something about ESR, inductance, etc, etc, etc

He said the caps used were carefully selected to accomplish the exact filter function they wanted.

One will notice POLK in the srs 2's BYPASSES the Mylars, wonder what kind of cap that is ?

heiney9

ka7niq wrote: »

A B&W engineer TOLD me NOT to mess with the caps UNLESS I used new versions of the same cap.
He told me there was more going on then met the eye.

He told me that even using the same value, but a different brand/type cap would change the sound.

Something about ESR, inductance, etc, etc, etc

He said the caps used were carefully selected to accomplish the exact filter function they wanted.

One will notice POLK in the srs 2's BYPASSES the Mylars, wonder what kind of cap that is ?

Last comment on this because I'm not really vastly disagreeing. But I'm sure if 10 years ago you asked Matt Polk about changing/upgrading components in the SDA SRS's he'd probably give about the same response.

Changing components does change the sound, but im my experience it's always either restored pretty close to original or improved. I can't speak directly for B & W because I've never worked on those.

H9

heiney9

ka7niq wrote: »

One will notice POLK in the srs 2's BYPASSES the Mylars, wonder what kind of cap that is ?

I'm sure there was a good reason for it at the time, but if you talk to many on here that have refreshed parts they usually delete the bypass because if you use a nice enough replacement the bypass isn't needed or is less effective.

H9

Systems

ka7niq wrote: »

Vandersteens use em, Theils use em,

I believe both Theil and Vandersteen use film caps in series positions such in the tweeter circuit, but electrolytics in shunt positions and where large values are neccessary like in the low pass filter on a woofer.

DarqueKnight

ka7niq wrote: »

What you are saying is like Ford making a 450 hp street engine, then crippling it with a small induction system.

Your automotive analogy is interesting because the aftermarket performance enhancement industry for automobiles is HUGE.

heiney9 wrote: »

Last comment on this because I'm not really vastly disagreeing. But I'm sure if 10 years ago you asked Matt Polk about changing/upgrading components in the SDA SRS's he'd probably give about the same response.

I didn't talk to Matt Polk prior to doing my first SDA mod, but I did call up Polk's engineering department and spoke to one of their engineers. I was given a list of components to change and also given a list of components to leave alone. When I asked why they didn't use better parts to begin with, I was told that they couldn't get them in the quantities required.

ka7niq

heiney9 wrote: »

I'm sure there was a good reason for it at the time, but if you talk to many on here that have refreshed parts they usually delete the bypass because if you use a nice enough replacement the bypass isn't needed or is less effective.

H9

NO telling WHAT Matt Polk was doing there ?
One can get all kkinds of strange effects bypassing caps.
What I am going to say now is almost humbling, but even a fully re capped SRS MAY not even be as good as the original was, when it's caps were new:eek:

Since many are recapping, they figure "why not" use the "best caps" ?
But how many have actually compared them in blind listening teast ?

A LOT of the suposed superiority of the poly caps MAY be due to replacing bad caps with GOOD ?

I do not always use expensive caps on ALL vintage speakers.
Panasonic and ELNA make excellent electrolytics, and I use them in non tweeter applications.

They too have made incredible differences.
This always happens when a good cap replaces a bad one;)

I still always try for at least Mylar in the tweeters, even "better" on keepers.

ka7niq

heiney9 wrote: »

Last comment on this because I'm not really vastly disagreeing. But I'm sure if 10 years ago you asked Matt Polk about changing/upgrading components in the SDA SRS's he'd probably give about the same response.

Changing components does change the sound, but im my experience it's always either restored pretty close to original or improved. I can't speak directly for B & W because I've never worked on those.

H9

AND H9, in suppport of your equally valid idea, it could be said that Poly was too expensive back then for Matt too ?

I WONDER what Matt would say, or maybe even Brad Starobin ?

Neskahi

Kinda getting back to basics here, but are the Solen PB Series Film
Capacitors that are described in Mr. Smith's SDA Compendium polarity sensitive like electrolytics? Thanks.

heiney9

ka7niq wrote: »

NO telling WHAT Matt Polk was doing there ?
One can get all kkinds of strange effects bypassing caps.
What I am going to say now is almost humbling, but even a fully re capped SRS MAY not even be as good as the original was, when it's caps were new:eek:

Since many are recapping, they figure "why not" use the "best caps" ?
But how many have actually compared them in blind listening teast ?

A LOT of the suposed superiority of the poly caps MAY be due to replacing bad caps with GOOD ?

I do not always use expensive caps on ALL vintage speakers.
Panasonic and ELNA make excellent electrolytics, and I use them in non tweeter applications.

They too have made incredible differences.
This always happens when a good cap replaces a bad one;)

I still always try for at least Mylar in the tweeters, even "better" on keepers.

Firstly, great exchange of thoughts going on here. Well for some very knowledgeable people on this list refreshing the caps, etc has resulted in fantastic results. It would be hard to do a comparo with a "new" set of SDA's with orignal parts (since the newest would be approx. 16 years old). But I think you will be surprised by your assumption. Did you get a compendium yet, that might (will) shed more light on this subject.

Of course we are looking for different things in our audio world, but I have yet to hear anyone dislike the results with recapping. So it's not a bad thing regardless if it slightly changes the original sound the designer was going for.

Some of my nicest sounding gear has stock ELNA caps in critical paths and I'd have to agree with you.

H9

P.s. With the kind of interest and experience you have getting a copy of the compendium is a must

ka7niq

Neskahi wrote: »

Kinda getting back to basics here, but are the Solen PB Series Film
Capacitors that are described in Mr. Smith's SDA Compendium polarity sensitive like electrolytics? Thanks.

ALL Film Caps are Bi Polar, and NEED Medication :rolleyes:
We are JUST "talking shop" here.
ACTUAL experience counts in doing crossover mods.
I have had CHEAP caps sound fanntastic in SOME circuits, even better then Auricaps, Sidereals, and Axons.

If someone says the Solens work great, and they have used them, then it will be a safe bet to install them.

Some of us "Like to go where no man has gone before"

It's ALL good, we are all friends, and fellow Polk owners, doing our thing.

I LIKE to play with speakers, and wil pull them apart, reassemble, and pull apart again until the screw holes strip.

Then, I will place wood toothpicks in the stripped holes, and do it again.

Maybe I will FINALLY wind up with Solens after all

And maybe not ?

If you just want to "be done with it", be safe, and use tthe suggested Solens.

Me ?

I am NEVER "done with it"