Do different vendor crossover caps really sound all that different?

[F1nut]

You've missed my point. I'll try again. By using one brand of cap in one speaker and another brand in the other you cannot accurately judge the overall presentation of either cap. A better way to judge is one brand in both speakers, listen with your ears (the best way) and maybe take some notes. Then swap in the other brand and repeat.

 

[Nat]

You clearly have very high faith in audio memory. I don't. I've been fooled/fooled myself too many times to trust my ability to remember sounds. Taking notes might help, but only slightly - language is too imprecise, and fitting sound to available words dresses the actual sensation in prexisting categories.

 

[toddalin]

You clearly have very high faith in audio memory. I don't. I've been fooled/fooled myself too many times to trust my ability to remember sounds. Taking notes might help, but only slightly - language is too imprecise, and fitting sound to available words dresses the actual sensation in prexisting categories.

Agreed. You could even change the value of a cap by 10% or more leaving all else the same and you really don't know which sounds "better" or even if they sound "different" by the time you implement the change.

 

[F1nut]

You clearly have very high faith in audio memory. I don't. I've been fooled/fooled myself too many times to trust my ability to remember sounds. Taking notes might help, but only slightly - language is too imprecise, and fitting sound to available words dresses the actual sensation in prexisting categories.

Might be time to turn in your audiophile card....lol

 

[Guido57]

Damn, they never gave me a card.

 

[Nat]

Actually I might not disagree with you - I love music and I love equipment, and I have decent ears, but I haven't found, and therefore don't believe, that enjoyment of recorded music has very much to do with how 'good' the equipment is or how it conforms to audiophile notions. And it has almost nothing to do with price. It does have alot to do with context and mood, and of course, the actual music and recording.
The vast majority of listeners used equipment most of us would be appalled by, and it appears they love it. While many of them may be aware that a carefully chosen system would sound way better than their bluetooth speaker, they have no interest in 'stepping up', since it would cost them effort and money, and they couldn't take their music wherever they want.
Some of the most unpleasant systems I have ever heard have been highly touted - a system with a pair of Wilson Pups I heard at a high end store in Northhampton MA lingers in my memory. And I have gotten a lot of pleasure out of junky systems and lash ups.

Even if you actually have the audio memory needed for that audiophile card, I suspect that, were you to take the line up of cap qualities you have estrablished, and use them in different speakers in a different system, you'd hear a completely different hierarchy. If you didn't, I would suspect that you actually aren't hearing caps, and instead, you are 'hearing' price or preconcieved notions. I don't mean to be insulting, and I could be wrong, but almost everything in audio is a matter of matching as much as it is inherent qualities, and it would be very surprising if this one area was the only one with clear bright lines.

 

[kevintomb]

You clearly have very high faith in audio memory. I don't. I've been fooled/fooled myself too many times to trust my ability to remember sounds. Taking notes might help, but only slightly - language is too imprecise, and fitting sound to available words dresses the actual sensation in prexisting categories.

Taking "notes" while being full aware of what cap one is using, is like doing the Pepsi challenge with the labels Coke and Pepsi in full view.

"This tastes like pepsi" but you are reading the label that says "Pepsi".....
Auditory memory is very fleeting as far as "Sound Quality" goes.

Some not well versed in audio confuse Auditory Memory with Voice or sound recognition.
Totally different things.
Of course we all recognize our kids voices or realize what a dog bark sounds like, but picking out small details in stereo reproduction is quite a different challenge, as it does not require us to identify if we are hearing a drum or a guitar, but small aspects of sound stage and details, things humans are not adept at.

 

[bimasta]

Also complicating matters, different cap values within the same brand can vary in quality. Take, say, TOTL Mundorfs — their µ5.6 cap might be great and worth the money, while their µ33 cap is might be no better than the cheapest brand.

I asked, a week ago, if anyone has experience replacing bad, old crossover electrolytics with new, better electrolytics — not using expensive metal film caps, but replacing old 'lytics with new and better 'lytics. The original m'fr used 'lytics, and they sounded great — till 40 years of use degraded them. That's the problem, not the quality of new, fresh electrolytics.

But no one answered my question. Has no one ever replaced old 'lytics with new 'lytics? I read that the new crop of modern 'lytics are much better than the old ones. Has no one tried them? Is it always necessary to use expensive metal film caps? And play the game of deciding which one is better — the $400 cap, or the $325 cap? When you could renew the whole crossover with new 'lytics for $30, and achieve the great sound you're seeking?

 

[bimasta]

Also complicating matters, different cap values within the same brand can vary in quality. Take, say, TOTL Mundorfs — their µ5.6 cap might be great and worth the money, while their µ33 cap is no better than the cheapest brand.

I asked, a week ago, if anyone has experience replacing bad, old crossover electrolytics with new, better electrolytics — not using expensive metal film caps, but replacing old 'lytics with new and better 'lytics. The original m'fr used 'lytics, and they sounded great — till 40 years of use degraded them. That's the problem, not the basic quality of electrolytics when new.

But no one answered my question. Has no one ever replaced old 'lytics with new 'lytics? I read that the new crop of modern 'lytics are much better than the old ones. Has no one tried them? Is it always necessary to go to expensive metal film caps? And play the game of deciding which one is better — the $400 cap, or the $325 cap? When you could renew the whole crossover with new 'lytics for $30?

 

[Guido57]

I replaced the original 13uF electroylytics in a pair of NLAs with paralleled 10 and 3.3uF electrolytics from Parts Express and there was a vast improvement. In another pair of NLAs I replaced the original electrolytic with inexpensive film caps from Parts Express, probably Dayton. Difference was slight but discernible. While I preferred the film caps my son preferred the electrolytics. You may read into it what you will, but I do admit I knew which caps were in each pair while my son was completely unaware of what the difference was. Note that I have not done caparisons between different film caps, but also note that not all metal film caps are horribly expensive.

 

[bimasta]

Thanks, Guido57. That's an instructive story. Though it's a small sample (only two of you) it seems new 'lytics are at least a plausible alternative. It's nice your son participates; so does mine, he grew up with me doing all my audio experiments and he has "educated" ears.

And BTW, I used high prices just to make a point — there's a correlation in many people's minds between cost and quality. Some people I communicated with say the Dayton film caps are "crap", and they only use the pricier brands... but when pushed they admit the difference is "slight"— which often means "I can't tell".

And your son prefers the electrolytics, so it's looking like a toss-up... based on a jury of two. I hope more people chime in.

 

[Nat]

Years ago I bought the Regnar recap kit for a pair of Dahlquist DQ 10s (the early ones that had electrolytics). It was a ridiculously expensive way to buy film caps, but back then I didn't know better and it was convenient. I was surprised to fine that one of the caps (I think it was the highest capacitance one) was an electrolytic. When I asked if there had been a mistake, the response was that film version was too expensive, or hard to find in that value, or something like that. It seemed to me at the time that this really didn't make much sense - if it is worth paying an arm and a leg to mostly recap with film caps, wouldn't it be worth some fingers and toes to do all of them? Or maybe it doesn't matter quite as much as it is claimed.
I seem to remember thinking the speakers sounded better, but not a night and day difference.

 

[kevintomb]

I replaced the original 13uF electroylytics in a pair of NLAs with paralleled 10 and 3.3uF electrolytics from Parts Express and there was a vast improvement. In another pair of NLAs I replaced the original electrolytic with inexpensive film caps from Parts Express, probably Dayton. Difference was slight but discernible. While I preferred the film caps my son preferred the electrolytics. You may read into it what you will, but I do admit I knew which caps were in each pair while my son was completely unaware of what the difference was. Note that I have not done caparisons between different film caps, but also note that not all metal film caps are horribly expensive.

Another thing to factor in.
The Engineers (and bean counters) designed and measured the original speaker to work with the original type of caps they used, including the ESR ratings.

By replacing with new Poly caps, often the sound will be different or sound more detailed, seeming "better", but often it is just reduced ESR, especially if the older caps have started to degrade.

Similar to just boosting the treble of the speaker a slight to a moderate amount.
So many times, one is not really hearing more detail and so on, but simply a slight boost of the treble in relation to how the speaker was originally designed,.

 

[Guido57]

Years ago I bought the Regnar recap kit for a pair of Dahlquist DQ 10s (the early ones that had electrolytics). It was a ridiculously expensive way to buy film caps, but back then I didn't know better and it was convenient. I was surprised to fine that one of the caps (I think it was the highest capacitance one) was an electrolytic. When I asked if there had been a mistake, the response was that film version was too expensive, or hard to find in that value, or something like that. It seemed to me at the time that this really didn't make much sense - if it is worth paying an arm and a leg to mostly recap with film caps, wouldn't it be worth some fingers and toes to do all of them? Or maybe it doesn't matter quite as much as it is claimed.
I seem to remember thinking the speakers sounded better, but not a night and day difference.

Depending on the capacitance required for the high value cap one might be talking head and neck rather than fingers and toes. One high value cap may cost more than all the other caps combined.

Another thing to factor in.
The Engineers (and bean counters) designed and measured the original speaker to work with the original type of caps they used, including the ESR ratings.

By replacing with new Poly caps, often the sound will be different or sound more detailed, seeming "better", but often it is just reduced ESR, especially if the older caps have started to degrade.

Similar to just boosting the treble of the speaker a slight to a moderate amount.
So many times, one is not really hearing more detail and so on, but simply a slight boost of the treble in relation to how the speaker was originally designed,.

That is why some of us use resistors to compensate for the ESR.

 

[GordonW]

A pure inductor doesn't dissipate any power. It's only the (unwanted) resistance of the wire that dissipates power, which is why inductors use thicker wire as they get more expensive. Inductors shouldn't really be dissipating much power at all.
Having said that, I have seen smoke coming out of a speaker because the crossover was so hot it set fire to the acoustic wadding in the cabinet!
It was a stage monitor being played at insane volume.

I will have to remember to take a picture of the next burned up poly cap I find, from a pro audio crossover- the caps sometimes burn so bad, that they look like smoked cigars...

I have also seen metal-core inductors, where the windings got so hot, that the plastic former melted, and the metal core fell out! And air-core inductors, that got so hot that the epoxy burned and they completely de-laminated (they became a scrambled donut of wire).

Regards,
Gordon.

 

[ic-racer]

Where is the check box for "The original ones."

 

[fredgarvin]

The only one of those I've used are the Daytons. They have been a nice improvement.

 

[crdm6]

Peter Walker challenge.

 

[bimasta]

What is the Peter Walker (Quad) challenge?

 

[crdm6]

What is the Peter Walker (Quad) challenge?

In short, when QUAD came out with the 405 amp it got a lot of bad reviews with the reviews mostly talking about how great the QUAD II valve amp was. Peter Walker said that in a blind test the QUAD II, 303 and 405 would be indistinguishable and offered to pay for the test. He was, of course, correct.
It was redone years later by Martin Colloms at Hi-Fi News because of some methodology quibbles with essentially the same result.
Peter Baxandall of tone control fame said the same thing.

There was also the Bob Carver challenge done by Stereophile magazine. A different sort of challenge but instructive none the less.