View Single Post
  #4 (permalink)  
Old December 22nd 07, 04:23 AM posted to uk.rec.audio
Eeyore
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,415
Default Improving loudspeaker crossovers (SBL's)



Stevie Boy wrote:

The components in any decent crossover are probably perfectly up to the
requirements for the job. What kind of substitution did you have in mind
and what improvements were you anticipating ?



-----------

I had nothing in mind but I've heard people replacing the electrolytic
alcaps & iron core inductors for the likes of Wilmslow audio super caps or
mundorf silver/oil caps & air core inductors from the likes of Jenson for
example.


Firstly, the alleged defects of electrolytic caps are overstated. However they
do inherently tend to have a very broad tolerance which will mean that one
crossover will not match the next very accurately and so on. That alone might be
a good reason to replace them with 5% tolerance plastic film caps.

As for Mundorf and the like, these are no better than a snake-oil 'Monster'
version of 'ordinary' caps. There is no measurable difference between them and
any other competently manufactured cap using the same dielectric. And no,
esoteric dielectrics don't sound any better either. All of this stuff is
superficial snake oil. Any polyester film cap will be just fine but do get the
5% tolerance type, not 10% or 20%.

It is true that ferrite and iron cored inductors will cause some small
distortion at higher power levels but replacing them with air-cored types (which
are free of this effect) is very likely to increase the DC resistance of the
coil and this will potentially have an adverse effect on the crossover
oepration.


I don't know what to expect improvement wise as I've not
experienced how these components differ in sound & electrical
characteristics from the stock crossover items used. Claims are made for
better soundstaging, imaging, depth, neutrality, greater bass weight,
dynamics & so on. Basically quite a lot!


Please define the actual meaning of the words "soundstaging, imaging, depth,
neutrality, greater bass weight, dynamics & so on ". These are all made up
nonsense concepts invented by reviewers who would be out of a job if they had to
be honest. You could do worse than read my post in the thread "What a sad excuse
for a group this is..." about this matter along with the replies. I can assure
you that a change in component is not going to suddenly made the stereo image
suddenly leap out at you.


I would not say I am unhappy with my SBL's as they are but if I can get more
out of them for a nominal cost in comparison to thier price or using an
active set-up I would be more than willing to give it a try. After all no
loudspeaker comes near to perfection.


Bear in mind that component substitution in a filter network is likely to cause
at least some subtle change in frequency response because of tolerance issues
with the components unless you measure the original part and fit *exacrtly* the
same value. This subtle difference is typically erroneously interpreted as
'better' by the audiophool who has no understanding of the underlying science.
Simply a change in the sound will convince him he did the right thing. Any
change in the sound will assure him of that.

If you really want to listen to good speakers, you should be considering
bi-amplification with accurate electronic filters. This is the ONLY way to deal
intelligently with 'crossover issue' imperfections..

Graham