AA networks...

[NOSValves]

Chief,

 

 You are one strange dude! 

[Chief bonehead]

10 hours ago, Deang said:

 

Yes, the voicing of the loudspeaker changes. That's the whole point. "I've heard 'Y' and it sounds good, but now I'd like to try 'X' and see if I like it better". 

 

Everyone understands that the AL-4 and AA sound different. A comparison through listening is not invalidated because the FR is different - we already know the FR is different (along with several other parameters). 

 

The real question is this: is the Type AA a valid network choice for these loudspeakers? Since the drivers and horns are the same as those used when the AA was used, I would say the obvious answer is"yes".

 

Why did you put "upgraded parts" in quotes - as if they're not upgraded parts. The Jupiter is a fully protected film capacitor with soldered leads. It won't fall victim to moisture creep and climbing ESR, and it'll probably last 50 years or more. A polyester metalized capacitor is wrapped in Teflon tape, and the leads are attached using a conductive paste. They're cheap for a reason. Someone once told me, "hey, take it easy, those Mylars aren't that bad". I'm not interested in "not that bad". Material and construction quality matter. Finally, there is more going on here than slight changes in the FR, as applying DC biasing to capacitors easily demonstrates (DA). 

 

With the early networks, we know that some of the bass is elevated in relationship to the midrange and high frequency sections. Because the networks are low order, they open up fast with very little power. People who have grown accustomed to these attributes do not like the newer networks. What they do like however, is a cleaner version of what they already like. This isn't the first Al-4 (or AK-4) I've replaced. The approach is not "haphazard", but calculated - my builds are a little expensive. 

 

At their best, these speakers are +/- 5dB across most of their range. In an average room, they can go +/- 10dB. Please explain to us why we should get stressed over a .25dB variance over the loudspeakers useable range.

 

A flattened out response doesn't sound very good, and of course, PWK had FR listed as fourth as those things that matter most in a loudspeaker's performance - did he change his mind about that too?

 

So PWK wanted to pursue some other solutions. That's cool. Did he ever get to hear any of them? This is a man that used a network with three parts - how do we know what he would have preferred given a young set of ears again.  

 

The alarmist attitudes are comical. For years, people have been modifying these loudspeakers, and Klipsch has never said a word. We even have a "mods" section of the forum, where we've seen all kinds of driver recommendations, and the development of several horns. If these modifications are so detrimental to the performance of these loudspeakers, then why do we have a "mods" section? Now, after 15 years, we get the "OMG, you people really need to stop doing these things to our speakers!" 

 

The AA is a perfectly acceptable network solution for these loudspeakers, and I'm sorry, but insulting me doesn't make me wrong. 

 

If you listen in a large room with a lot of power, and really enjoy loud music, the AL-4/AL-5 are the way to go. If your environment is more intimate, and you listen at low to moderate levels, you'll prefer the Type A or AA. That doesn't mean you can't reach live levels - you can - but distortion will be higher. 

 

I have no "agenda". My back is so busted up that that I can't spend more than an hour at a time at my work bench - so I shut my business down. Pictures are from some things I needed to finish up. After back surgery, I'll reaccess.

just out of curiousity,,,,what do you use to listen and evaluate these "upgrade parts"?  by the way i know dean but you obviously spent alot more time with him....it is amazing how many holes you have in your comical arguments.....things are fixing to change.....

[Chief bonehead]

3 minutes ago, NOSValves said:

Chief,

 

 You are one strange dude! 

and so are you....i see you at all the strange club meetings....

[Max2]

Hmm. The thread is sinking. It shouldn't, as all the products were are talking about are products of Klipsch, except some caps which Klipsch doesn't produce.  I don't think PWK would have a problem with a few honoring one of his longest running designs.

 

  Schu wasnt trying to re-invent the wheel here, certainly just the opposite.  A first order offers some of the most beautiful brass and vocals money can buy, and yes it does it along with all of its flaws. Overlap, spill, whatever you want to call it, adds a little "magic" for the levels that most Heritage owners listen at. This, its simplicity and the "glorious" midrange is why so many gravitate and/or come back to it.  

 

 

[Deang]

Hi Roy. I use Craig for all of my listening tests - I don't hear so good.

[muel]

So would Klipsch like to suggest replacement capacitors for stock AA networks that will maintain the voicing as PWK intended?

[mark1101]

So would Klipsch like to suggest replacement capacitors for stock AA networks that will maintain the voicing as PWK intended?

 

 

 

I think you can use whiskey bottles.

[wvu80]

6 minutes ago, mark1101 said:

I think you can use whiskey bottles.

 

Standard whiskey bottles, or premium upgraded?

 

It doesn't matter, the flavor of all whiskey tastes alike. 

[Chief bonehead]

On 8/15/2016 at 9:21 PM, Schu said:

About two weeks in... these networks have really begun to open up and improve greatly.

 

They were slightly "finicky" at first, but now... just what I was looking for when I made my choice.

 

---------

 

I can see some undue mis-understanding in the posts by the more technical oriented... this isnt and never was about trying to correct recordings, or an attempt find solutions to negative OEM pre existing conditions.

 

This is a very personal preference to modify a legendary speakers systems by employing a tried and true methodology by that same manufacturer... only using great upgraded components as a basis and great assembly technique in the making thereof.

 

I think this thread and the wonderful sound I am now experiencing in a great example and justification.

i am glad for you.  was just trying to impart some of the things i see when you change caps and other components on a network: the voltage transfer will change.  that should be checked and the values need to be adjusted IF you want the "tried and true methodology" to work as intended.  its like changing a driver to something other than the original; it going to be different. and i doubt anyone does a voltage transfer curve to see if the original, intended one was maintained.  take care.

[Chief bonehead]

1 hour ago, muel said:

So would Klipsch like to suggest replacement capacitors for stock AA networks that will maintain the voicing as PWK intended?

if you dont use the same type, run a voltage transfer curve.  if it is not the same as the intended curve then adjust the values.

[mark1101]

What reference should be used?  If the networks are from 1979 will the current FR be a reliable reference?  

 

I guess this has been the problem all along.  There are no recommended replacement parts for speakers that old (unless I don't know where to look).  Then everyone uses all these different capacitors.

 

I just recapped my friend's 1979 lascalas (AAs) with Dayton metalized polys (1%).  They were cheap and have a decent reputation.  Thought they came back to life based on what we heard as a sound improvement........but we will probably never really know how they compare to factory sound from 1979.

[Chief bonehead]

2 hours ago, Deang said:

Hi Roy. I use Craig for all of my listening tests - I don't hear so good.

craig....oh i see...strange.

[Max2]

13 minutes ago, mark1101 said:

What reference should be used?  If the networks are from 1979 will the current FR be a reliable reference?  

 

I guess this has been the problem all along.  There are no recommended replacement parts for speakers that old (unless I don't know where to look).  Then everyone uses all these different capacitors.

 

I just recapped my friend's 1979 lascalas (AAs) with Dayton metalized polys (1%).  They were cheap and have a decent reputation.  Thought they came back to life based on what we heard as a sound improvement........but we will probably never really know how they compare to factory sound from 1979.

 

I was wondering the same.  Does Klipsch really sample that many "affordable" caps with every new design?  And where is the cutoff on incremental changes from each and what is acceptable and not?   I wonder about the the 2 series XO where the mid was designed with such a big mid cut (2-4db I think) and that was eventually returned to "normal" for the most part in the 3 series. Was this chasing a flatter response in the 1980's or trying to satisfy the anti-horn crowd with a white paper measurement?  A lot of unanswered history out there, yet it feels like a child's toe has to be stepped on anytime someone would like a simple answer or direction of theory. 

 

[JJkizak]

On my 1965's all of the cap values were hand written with grease pencil on the caps. So if you bought 2 K-horns the crossovers were balanced which they stated in the invoice.

JJK

[BEC]

28 minutes ago, mark1101 said:

What reference should be used?  If the networks are from 1979 will the current FR be a reliable reference?  

 

I guess this has been the problem all along.  There are no recommended replacement parts for speakers that old (unless I don't know where to look).  Then everyone uses all these different capacitors.

 

I just recapped my friend's 1979 lascalas (AAs) with Dayton metalized polys (1%).  They were cheap and have a decent reputation.  Thought they came back to life based on what we heard as a sound improvement........but we will probably never really know how they compare to factory sound from 1979.

 

Let me tell you how I did this.  I was rebuilding lots of AA crossovers around 10 to 12 years ago.  I was also testing the old caps to see how they had changed.  Most of them had a pretty high ESR, but just occasionally, I would find one that read very good on ESR and capacitance.  I mean an ESR of less than 0.1 ohms.  Pretty soon I had enough of those old caps that read good to use them together in a new AA crossover.  I ran curves for that crossover on the spectrum analyzer.  Then compared that to curves I got with the new caps I was using.  Almost a perfect match.  Just to see the difference I did that comparison again with some old caps that all tested about 0.5 ohms ESR.  Could see some difference there.

 

So, I think, as long as ESR is low enough, doesn't make any difference if the dielectric is paper, mica or whisky bottles.  That last sentence paraphrases a statement of PWK in a letter written in 1984.

 

Bob Crites

[mark1101]

26 minutes ago, BEC said:

 

Let me tell you how I did this.  I was rebuilding lots of AA crossovers around 10 to 12 years ago.  I was also testing the old caps to see how they had changed.  Most of them had a pretty high ESR, but just occasionally, I would find one that read very good on ESR and capacitance.  I mean an ESR of less than 0.1 ohms.  Pretty soon I had enough of those old caps that read good to use them together in a new AA crossover.  I ran curves for that crossover on the spectrum analyzer.  Then compared that to curves I got with the new caps I was using.  Almost a perfect match.  Just to see the difference I did that comparison again with some old caps that all tested about 0.5 ohms ESR.  Could see some difference there.

 

So, I think, as long as ESR is low enough, doesn't make any difference if the dielectric is paper, mica or whisky bottles.  That last sentence paraphrases a statement of PWK in a letter written in 1984.

 

Bob Crites

 

Bob, Thanks for the explanation.  You were doing great until the last sentence.  You have always done me a great service but I'll be honest as I can be, Sonicaps sound lousy to me.  They are dry and brittle sounding and don't seem to change after many hours of listening.  I have been patient with them and given them the chance they deserve.  I have tried several different caps in various networks and every single one sounded at least a little different to me.  Some more than others.  In total I have listened to very few compared to the very large number available.

 

That said...........in all your testing have you found any other brand that matches the Klipsch FR signature, or did you stop at Sonicaps.  I have to believe that in 2016 another review is in order because Sonicaps just don't cut it, and the choices are astounding.

 

What would be great is if you could identify some of these that would provide the correct signature and offer some choices, or provide a running list for the forum as you find these out.

 

I hope you don't believe every cap that has the same ESR sounds exactly the same.  If you do, never mind.  

 

Please don't take any of this the wrong way.  This is about a constructive discussion that could go a long way for many of us.

[BEC]

Mark,

I consider very low ESR and very consistently low ESR cap after cap as a mark of quality in caps.  With that as a standard, the only ones I have really liked were the GE motor run caps I started out with and the Sonicaps I used when the GEs were no longer produced.  Another reason is the to the best of my knowledge Sonicraft is the only company that produces capacitors in all the values we need for Klipsch crossovers. 

 

I could list many caps that would duplicate the original signature if you go through them and do a bunch of testing of the parallel combinations you have to use to get the values.  I personally just eliminate most of them because they are not produced in the right values or they specify a 10 percent tolerance.  I can't imagine how loose their manufacturing process must be if they can't specify a better than 10 percent tolerance.

[jwc]

4 hours ago, wvu80 said:

 

Standard whiskey bottles, or premium upgraded?

 

It doesn't matter, the flavor of all whiskey tastes alike. 

Bull$hit

[mark1101]

1 hour ago, BEC said:

Mark,

I consider very low ESR and very consistently low ESR cap after cap as a mark of quality in caps.  With that as a standard, the only ones I have really liked were the GE motor run caps I started out with and the Sonicaps I used when the GEs were no longer produced.  Another reason is the to the best of my knowledge Sonicraft is the only company that produces capacitors in all the values we need for Klipsch crossovers. 

 

I could list many caps that would duplicate the original signature if you go through them and do a bunch of testing of the parallel combinations you have to use to get the values.  I personally just eliminate most of them because they are not produced in the right values or they specify a 10 percent tolerance.  I can't imagine how loose their manufacturing process must be if they can't specify a better than 10 percent tolerance.

 

Bob

This is a very fair answer and I have run into the same issues before.  It is best not to parallel when you don't need to and with you building so many boards.......I get it.

 

Thanks

[Chief bonehead]

5 hours ago, Max2 said:

 

I was wondering the same.  Does Klipsch really sample that many "affordable" caps with every new design?  And where is the cutoff on incremental changes from each and what is acceptable and not?   I wonder about the the 2 series XO where the mid was designed with such a big mid cut (2-4db I think) and that was eventually returned to "normal" for the most part in the 3 series. Was this chasing a flatter response in the 1980's or trying to satisfy the anti-horn crowd with a white paper measurement?  A lot of unanswered history out there, yet it feels like a child's toe has to be stepped on anytime someone would like a simple answer or direction of theory. 

 

child?  that would be me....