Why is everyone so against electrolytic caps in crossovers?

[Zonker92]

Just to play the devil's advocate, too, I would refer to the B&W advisory I posted up above, with regard to people who claim big improvements when switching from NPEs to film caps, or from iron-core inductors to air-cores with lower DCR:

You may suddenly hear "improved" sound but in actuality, the frequency response simply may have gone from being relatively flat to one that has some peaks, which can sound "better," at least at first.

 

[Wigwam Jones]

Valid points but how would one know that existing speakers could be upgraded to next level by upgrading crossovers without doing it or hearing upgraded pair?

You wouldn't. It's definitely suck it and see.

I would not assume that there *is* a 'next level' for any given set of speakers.

I mean I have read many threads where they liked stock sound and only upgraded after long time due to peer pressure. And when they did it, they said, "Man I should have done it years ago".

People say a lot of things. I often find favorably for things I just dropped a bunch of cash on.

I'm afraid to work on many pairs that I like the sound as it is but wonder if they actually be much better. :scratch2:

I don't think anyone is arguing that higher-end caps won't make a given set of speakers sound better; they might. And if others have done the same speakers with a given type of upgrade and you trust them, that's a good way to experiment, I'd say. The whole "Bob Crites" thing comes to mind; a person who is well-respected in the industry and who has a ton of experience and has some very specific recommendations. Sounds like a good way to go. I just would not assume that because Bob likes XYZ brand caps for ABC brand speakers, that means they make everything sound like an angel just crafted it from cake for you.

 

[datafone]

Your right, just because one uses more expensive parts is no guarantee that one gets a real improvement. Significant improvement comes when people go far enough. IMO most people don't go far enough.


Simple cap replacements can bring an aged speaker back to life but its often not enough to change cap flavors and get something truly significant.

I'd like to recommend a site for caps where there has been some hard work in categorizing their sound.

http://www.humblehomemadehifi.com/Cap.htmlI like your thinking

Inductors, cap and resistors upgrades can do wonders, as long as the rest of the speaker is reasonable, low-ish resonance cab, and good drivers.

I upgraded a few pairs of Aussie made Richter Harlequin MkII speakers that were produced mid 90's, at the time they won awards, after upgrading the tweeter side caps and the inductors on the mid-woffers they were in another league again!
These were my crossovers with the stock poly caps replaced with Auricaps (used Obbligato Gold in my friends pair - even better) and resistor changed to MOX and as you see in the pic the inductor is a little more substantial than those removed

There's a lot more to a speaker then just caps, like inductors and of course resistors. But inductors are very serious. I have found their influence to be much more than caps IMO. But don't get me wrong I think everything matters.

Here is a site that has some excellent FAQ's on inductors at the bottom of the page but the whole page is enlightening.

http://www.northcreekmusic.com/COILS.html



In my case doing what I did was a serious improvement. Far more than then I ever expected and enough to drop peoples jaws when contrasted to a pair of the same factory stock speakers. I invite anyone in the midwest to hear them for themselves if they wish.

My speaker was relatively inexpensive a Klipsch Forte with some of the usual tricks like Crites Titanium Tweeters and the Klipsch Titanium Mids added.

My networks are outboard. I stuck about $2000 into the networks. Not that one has spend this much to get startling results. I have seen people spend as little as $600 on a $600 speaker and I have seen one person spend about a $1000 on parts with the same speaker I have but with some compromise. He was thrilled! I think the thread title says it all.

http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=516254

The nice thing about these speakers is that the parts values are relatively low and that allows one to use some of the best high subjective quality parts.

Here's my project contrasting the stock networks

Here is another Klipsch product, Rf25's that my friend DaveC put $600 into. In his words the speakers are just explosive!

In essence its possible if you go far enough to make even relatively inexpensive speakers like these sound as though they cost many times their original value. The contrast in size alone is just as well represented in the musics increase in foundation and size.

SET12

I like your thinking

Inductors, cap and resistors upgrades can do wonders, as long as the rest of the speaker is reasonable, low-ish resonance cab, and good drivers and design.

We upgraded a few pairs of Aussie made Richter Harlequin MkII speakers that were produced mid 90's, at the time they won awards, after upgrading the tweeter side caps and the inductors on the mid-woffers they were in another league again!
These were my crossovers with the stock poly caps replaced with Auricaps (used Obbligato Gold in my friends pair - even better IMO) and resistor changed to MOX and as you see in the pic like yours the inductor is a little more substantial than those removed
Edit: When on the market the speakers RRP was $899 of course I have different speakers now, but had to take a decent leap up the food chain to justify the change.

Many manufacturers end up compromising due to the fact that for most It's mostly about the bottom line, and the components that nobody sees are the best option in the eyes of the bean counters. I think if it were all up to the designer these compromises would happen less often (depending of the mind set of that designer).

 

[Mystery]

You wouldn't. It's definitely suck it and see.

I would not assume that there *is* a 'next level' for any given set of speakers.



People say a lot of things. I often find favorably for things I just dropped a bunch of cash on.



I don't think anyone is arguing that higher-end caps won't make a given set of speakers sound better; they might. And if others have done the same speakers with a given type of upgrade and you trust them, that's a good way to experiment, I'd say. The whole "Bob Crites" thing comes to mind; a person who is well-respected in the industry and who has a ton of experience and has some very specific recommendations. Sounds like a good way to go. I just would not assume that because Bob likes XYZ brand caps for ABC brand speakers, that means they make everything sound like an angel just crafted it from cake for you.

I see.
On my being afraid to work on many pairs, it's also due to quite a few threads where they hated the upgraded capacitors and went back stock.
I'd hate to spend time and buckaroos and have to go back.

 

[tubed]

North Creek B&W Crossovers
These guys seemed to think they could improve upon(not redesigned) the original designs of the 801 and 802 and felt using the "best" quality parts quite important.
http://www.northcreekmusic.com/801web.html

 

[Zonker92]

North Creek B&W Crossovers
These guys seemed to think they could improve upon(not redesigned) the original designs of the 801 and 802 and felt using the "best" quality parts quite important.
http://www.northcreekmusic.com/801web.html

Which totally makes sense, but I'm assuming they validated their design and parts through instrumented testing. It just reminds me of Zilch's timeless saying....

 

[datafone]

If staying with the same values you are not changing the design, just improving part quality.
Are you not?

 

[Zonker92]

Not necessarily. Again, here's what B&W says about how using film caps in place of 'lytics, and air-core inductors in place of iron-core inductors, can change the frequency response curves of loudspeakers:

http://hifi.goneill.co.nz/bwfaqn.php

We usually find that customers who alter crossover components are not fully satisfied with the results. They find that some aspects are improved, but others made worse. A classic case of this is when a polypropylene or other very low-loss type substitutes an electrolytic capacitor. We all know that polypropylene capacitors can sound inherently better, but the change in internal losses changes the response of the filter, which is designed assuming the losses of the electrolytic component.

What usually happens when the low loss component is fitted is that the corners of the roll-off are sharpened, giving a peak in the combined response that can make the sound unpleasant in various ways depending on the crossover frequency. One way of getting round this is to wire a small resistor in series with the capacitor to approximate the original losses. I say approximate because the loss factor is a frequency dependent resistance. The actual value you need depends on the original capacitor loss factor and its capacitance value. The larger the value, the lower the resistance for a given loss factor.

The formula for the equivalent resistance is:
R = d / (2π fC)
where R = resistance in ohms, d = loss factor, f = frequency in Hz and C = capacitance in farads.

Loss factor is usually expressed as a percentage at 1kHz. For a "low-loss" electrolytic such as the values between 1μF and 20μF found in tweeter circuits, d is of the order of 0.025 (loss factor of 2.5%). For values in the hundreds of microfarads it may be of the order of 0.07 or 7%. Typically therefore a good electrolytic capacitor of 5μF would have an equivalent series resistance of 0.8Ω. If the capacitor has a much larger resistor in series with it anyway, it's probably not worth altering.

The same argument applies if you substitute a cored inductor with an air core type. Always try to duplicate the DC resistance as well as the inductance. Sometimes inductors are deliberately wound with relatively fine wire to give a certain resistance to add damping to the circuit. Iron dust cores (sometimes called P-cores) have higher losses at higher frequencies than at lower, due to eddy current effects. Substitution of an air core, even of the same DC resistance, may give a steeper ultimate slope in the stop band that can alter the phase relationship between the two drivers. That can also mess up the overall response and skew the optimum listening angle a little.

...

As you can see, it's a potential minefield and difficult to get the optimum result without proper measuring facilities. Adjustment just by ear tends to give good results on limited programme material and you can usually come across some other piece that sounds less than acceptable.

 

[datafone]

Oh well, the first pair was done with the assistance of a very good speaker designer that I will not name, so I'll keep working with what he taught me.

No measurements were required while using same values, we just grinned at each other after firing them up after the changes

 

[Zonker92]

Yeah, and I'm not crapping on anyone's work; I've done plenty of mods myself and enjoyed almost all of them. I'm just throwing ideas out there ... Again, I will probably be putting MPP caps in place of the Mylars in my 4430s, but I'm planning to keep the stock XOs for ease of swappage.

 

[datafone]

Oh, I'm with you, not every speaker will respond well, it is very dependent of the the rest of the speaker and what decisions where made during the design process.

Not every mod (part swap) I have done has been great either, some have been "OK, need to try something else"

 

[tubed]

Which totally makes sense, but I'm assuming they validated their design and parts through instrumented testing. It just reminds me of Zilch's timeless saying....

I believe they(North Creek) were saying it was not a change in design, values etc but a change in what they believe to be "quality" parts that make the perceived and measured improvement.
I wonder if B&Ws statement had anything to do with NC upgrade?

 

[Zonker92]

I dunno. But I do see some "risk" in putting extremely low DCR coils in place of high DCR stock iron-cores, all else being equal: I just don't see how doing so could NOT change the original response curves. I think it's the equivalent of removing a resistor from the circuit. Yet North Creek seems to urge doing so anyway. Makes me go hmmmm. I guess maybe they assume that their customers are sophisticated enough to re-tune the crossovers appropriately? Not sure.

 

[UH1DG337]

The people that believe they can design a product better than the designers, price point or not, should tear apart everything they own and improve it. No reason to stop just at speakers.

Why not replace the power cord on your microwave with 0 gauge wire, or change all the electrical components in your TV, or yank the wiring out of your brand new car and re-wire it with a heavier gauge? Why is it only audio equipment that needs the consumer to improve it? It should be everything built to a price point, which would be everything made.

If the power cord burnt up in my microwave I would upgrade it. my microwave has been repaired many times. it now operates on a toggle switch the hell with those damn digital boards, no more plastic on the door either.

I believe companys use cheaper parts to control costs and the crossover is where they start. Everybody likes nice looking cabinets but the crossover is out of view.

Reciently I changed out the caps mylar and lytics with some solen fast caps in some fortes. The amount of added detail was amazing. tweeters midrange and woofer all had much improvement. imo those old stock caps simply suck. I further changed the 3 mh iron core inductor with a 10 ga aircore. again then improvement was incredible. the bass was better in every way. much more defined, tight, sharp, clear, extended, feel it in your ass ect. the stock inductors were very compressed the air-cores really open the speaker up.


Ford has made many14 second Mustangs but if you want a 10 sec. car you will have to do some "up-grades".

 

[SoundOfSound]

800V?

I thought one should stay within x2 of the specified voltage when recapping?

You may be thinking of polarized electrolytic capacitors where having a little bit of headroom, say about 20-30%, above the working voltage is good for the longevity of the capacitor.

In this case these are MKP film caps where the voltage rating indicates the strength of the polypropylene film being used. These Audyn Plus caps are double wound caps so they have two layers of polypropylene film in them. I think the 800V rating is the result of using two layers of a similar thickness 400V rated film that you would find in some Solen or Jantzen type capacitors.

 

[Pete B]

I dunno. But I do see some "risk" in putting extremely low DCR coils in place of high DCR stock iron-cores, all else being equal: I just don't see how doing so could NOT change the original response curves. I think it's the equivalent of removing a resistor from the circuit. Yet North Creek seems to urge doing so anyway. Makes me go hmmmm. I guess maybe they assume that their customers are sophisticated enough to re-tune the crossovers appropriately? Not sure.

It depends. If the inductor in question is in series with a woofer, with a
DCR of 6 ohms, and you reduce the inductor's R by .5 ohms the percentage
change is very small.
On the other hand, if a tweeter circuit has a cap, then L to ground as a second
or higher order network and that first stage has high Q say a Q of 1 with slight
peaking controlled mainly by the DCR of the inductor - then if you reduce it from
say .9 ohms to .4 ohms the Q would go up significantly. Such a design would be
sensitive to cable resistance also. While you might say there's no good design
type that uses a high Q XO filter, I've seen it done more than a few times in
commercial speaker designs.

 

[SET12]

If staying with the same values you are not changing the design, just improving part quality.
Are you not?

That's my point of view.

Not necessarily. Again, here's what B&W says about how using film caps in place of 'lytics, and air-core inductors in place of iron-core inductors, can change the frequency response curves of loudspeakers:

http://hifi.goneill.co.nz/bwfaqn.php

I wouldn't doubt there are electrical changes. But I think George at Creek has been in the business a long time.

Looking at his back ground I think he has more than enough qualification.

http://www.northcreekmusic.com/AboutNorthCreek.htm#NCMSDesignersBackground

I would suggest reading some of the customers comments at the bottom that have purchased his 801 networks. I can only say that my experience is similar.

http://www.northcreekmusic.com/801web.html

Oh well, the first pair was done with the assistance of a very good speaker designer that I will not name, so I'll keep working with what he taught me.

No measurements were required while using same values, we just grinned at each other after firing them up after the changes

I bet you did!

Yeah, and I'm not crapping on anyone's work; I've done plenty of mods myself and enjoyed almost all of them. I'm just throwing ideas out there ... Again, I will probably be putting MPP caps in place of the Mylars in my 4430s, but I'm planning to keep the stock XOs for ease of swappage.

I don't believe you are.

Oh, I'm with you, not every speaker will respond well, it is very dependent of the the rest of the speaker and what decisions where made during the design process.

Not every mod (part swap) I have done has been great either, some have been "OK, need to try something else"

Same here, its the reason I went outboard so I could easily substitute or voice for what I wanted.

But I surely wouldn't bother with expensive caps using the stock inductors. I highly doubt that caps would be as significant as the inductors IMO. As I pointed out before there are people using North Creek Inductors with not so expensive caps and interestingly I was real surprised at how nice they sounded.

I dunno. But I do see some "risk" in putting extremely low DCR coils in place of high DCR stock iron-cores, all else being equal: I just don't see how doing so could NOT change the original response curves. I think it's the equivalent of removing a resistor from the circuit. Yet North Creek seems to urge doing so anyway. Makes me go hmmmm. I guess maybe they assume that their customers are sophisticated enough to re-tune the crossovers appropriately? Not sure.

Iron Cores are just awful to my ears.

My stock speakers were so compressed. Maybe some people could live with its stock sound. But I couldn't. I wasn't kidding when I said my sound stage width increased by a factor of 3 times not to mention the solidity and coherence from top to bottom. The speaker became a whole different animal. Like I said I had a stock pair to compare. Many friends heard the comparison for themselves. It wasn't even close, most people could only stand about 20 seconds of the stock pair.

With such simple networks that I have and considering the results that I have I don't see the need to worry.

After all room response is typically all over the place.

Replacing these with different values or "improved" parts can only degrade performance, referenced to the design intent. (Yeah, yeah, everyone, myself included, always prefers the sound of their own mods, at first.)

-k

I have had my networks use various parts for evaluation but its inductors have been used for over 10yrs now and I feel exactly the same way I did about when first hearing them. And some parts I have been using a few yrs but my opinion of them is unchanged.

It depends. If the inductor in question is in series with a woofer, with a
DCR of 6 ohms, and you reduce the inductor's R by .5 ohms the percentage
change is very small.
On the other hand, if a tweeter circuit has a cap, then L to ground as a second
or higher order network and that first stage has high Q say a Q of 1 with slight
peaking controlled mainly by the DCR of the inductor - then if you reduce it from
say .9 ohms to .4 ohms the Q would go up significantly. Such a design would be
sensitive to cable resistance also. While you might say there's no good design
type that uses a high Q XO filter, I've seen it done more than a few times in
commercial speaker designs.

Thank You! Interestingly I replaced my stock .16mH Inductor maybe a 22AWG with an 8AWG .16mH. I tried a 14 AWG Litz Inductor Technically it has it is a superior design. But subjectively it was just awful. When I went back to my 8AWG NC's I was in heaven. I don't doubt that the Litz would do wonders in some speakers but surely it didn't in mine. My network uses a 39 ohm resistor in parallel with its tweeter to quail peakiness. But it certainly wasn't any help with the litz. People have told me its the one of the best horn high end they have heard.

Valid points but how would one know that existing speakers could be upgraded to next level by upgrading crossovers without doing it or hearing upgraded pair?

Your right! One wouldn't know unless the effort is put forth. I only worked with mine after hearing a not so listenable Klipch LaScala which became listenable after a friend DIY'd a ALK Universal network. his experience was miraculous for me.

I mean I have read many threads where they liked stock sound and only upgraded after long time due to peer pressure. And when they did it, they said, "Man I should have done it years ago".
I'm afraid to work on many pairs that I like the sound as it is but wonder if they actually be much better. :scratch2:

Yes one such thread http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=516254

As for the sound being much better, its only if you go far enough. If the networks are relatively simple then the expense can be kept down.

Listening to music is an event for me. I would rather have a truly single great pair of speakers then to own several stock classics. Which aren't likely to surpass what I have. For me I'd have to likely spend $10,000 to beat what I have from the $2000 in mods. I think a $1000 spent right can achieve most of what I have even in my own speakers.


SET12

 

[MikeCh]

Just an FYI:

There is a 20-page thread in the Speaker Reference section on this topic if you want to read more.

http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=78978

 

[Wigwam Jones]

If staying with the same values you are not changing the design, just improving part quality.
Are you not?

No, here is why.

"Improve" is a subjective term.

If I 'improve' a tire design, in what way is it improved? Is it longer-wearing? That's an improvement. Perhaps it has less rolling resistance, so the driver might get better gas mileage. Maybe it has better grip for higher performance driving. Or it might be quieter, or ride better. All of these are 'improvements', but what does 'improved' mean if you do not qualify the term by describing WHAT the improvement is? Nothing.

So you have two capacitors. Brand A and Brand B. Both are the same value, and rating. One is very expensive, the other is very inexpensive. One is commonly accepted as being an improved part.

Improved, HOW? Does it last longer? Does it have a lower ESR? Does it look better? Is it constructed so that it can withstand more extreme temperatures or installation in otherwise damaging environments? Is it constructed with 'green' processes, to avoid polluting the earth? All of those are improvements; but in what way do they 'improve' the sound when installed a speaker crossover?

I'm not saying that an 'improved' capacitor will not make the sound better; it very well might. I am saying it's a valueless word when used without context.

If you contend that a higher-end or boutique capacitor improves the sound, that's specific. But if you are going to make that claim, you have to prove it. Simply pointing out that something is improved doesn't mean it is going to be more fit for any particular purpose.

In summary, we don't want to confuse 'improvement' with 'and therefore sounds better'. There are many ways Brand A may be improved over Brand B that have no affect on sound at all, or alternatively, they may change the sound; that doesn't necessarily mean 'better' either.

 

[SET12]

Just an FYI:

There is a 20-page thread in the Speaker Reference section on this topic if you want to read more.

http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=78978

Thanks, I'll try and get to it. I see Bob Crites makes a few posts. Should be interesting.

No, here is why.

"Improve" is a subjective term.

I think that's what he meant! subjective. Of course improvement means different things to different people and that's good enough for me! Subjective values is really all I care about. For me, somethings are just not measurable yet.

My network mods have subjectively made monsters out of my simple Klipsch Forte's in contrast to the stock Forte sound. And its nothing subtle.

SET12