2. speakers
  3. 1211428524

Capacitor log Mundorf Silver in Oil

I wished I could find a log with information on caps. I have found many saying tremendous improvement etc. but not a detailed account of what the changes have been. I have had the same speakers for many years so am very familiar with them. (25+ years) The speakers are a set of Klipsch Lascala's. They have Alnico magnets in the mids and ceramic woofers and tweeters. The front end is Linn LP12 and Linn pre amp and amp. The speaker wire is 12 gauge and new wire.

I LOVE these speakers around 1 year ago they started to sound like garbage. As many have said they are VERY sensitive to the components before them. They are also showing what I think is the effect of worn out caps.

There are many out here on these boards I know of that are using the Klipsch (heritage) with cheaper Japanese electronics because the speakers are cheap! (for what they can do) One thing I would recommend is give these speakers the best quality musical sources you can afford. There is a LOT to get out of these speakers. My other speakers are Linn speakers at around 4k new with Linn tri-wire (I think about 1k for that) and the Klipsch DESTROY them in my mind. If you like "live feel" there is nothing like them. In fact it shocks me how little speakers have improved in 30 years (or 60 years in the Khorns instance)

In fact I question Linn's theory (that they have proved many times) that the source is the most important in the Hi-Fi chain. Linn's theory is top notch source with lessor rest of gear including speakers trumps expensive speakers with lessor source. I think is right if all things are equal but Klipsch heritage are NOT equal! They make a sound and feel that most either LOVE or hate. (I am in the LOVE camp and other speakers are boring to me)

So here goes and I hope this helps guys looking at caps in the future. Keep in mind Klipsch (heritage Khorns Belle's and Lascala's especially) are likely to show the effects of crossover changes more then most.

1 The caps are 30 years old and
2 the speakers being horn driven make changes 10x times more apparent.

Someone once told me find speakers and components you like THEN start to tweak if needed. Don't tweak something you not in love with. Makes sense to me.

So sound
Record is Let it Be (Beatles)
The voices are hard almost sounds like a worn out stylus.
Treble is very hard. I Me Mine has hard sounding guitars. Symbals sound awful. Everything has a digital vs. analog comparison x50! Paul's voice not as bad as John's and George's. Voices will crack.

different lp
Trumpets sound awful. Tambourine terrible. Bass is not great seems shy (compared to normal) but the bad caps draw soooooo much attention to the broken up mid range and hard highs that are not bright if anything it seems the highs are not working up to snuff. I have went many times to speaker to make sure tweeters are even working.

All in all they sound like crap except these Klipsch have such fantastic dynamics that even when not right they are exciting!

Makes me wonder about the people who do not like them if they are hearing worn out caps and cheap electronics? Then I can see why they do not like them! If I did not know better from 25+ years of ownership that would make sense.

For the new crossover I have chosen Mundorf Silver in Oil from what I have read and can afford. I want a warm not overly detailed sound as Klipsch already has lots of detail and does not need to be "livened up" they need lush smooth sounding caps. Hope I have made the right choice?

When the crossover is in I will do a initial impression on same lp's. Right now it goes from really bad (on what may be worn vinyl) to not as bad but NOT great on great vinyl. (I know the quality of the vinyl because tested on other speakers Linn)

The new caps are Mundorf Silver in Oil and new copper foil inductors are coming. I will at the same time be rewiring the speakers to 12 guage from the lamp cord that PWK put in. PWK was a master at getting very good sound often with crap by today's standards components.

The choice of speakers would be a toss up now depending on what I am listening to. Klipsch vastly more dynamic but if the breaking up of the sound becomes to much to effect enjoyment the Linn would be a better choice on that Lp. If I could I would switch a button back and forth between speakers depending on song and how bad the break-up sound was bothering me.

volleyguy
volleyguy OP
789 posts
 
Thanks a lot Stormen I would love to hear that pre-amp!
volleyguy OP
789 posts
 
Stormen I guess partsconnexion says they lent Tony the caps if I read that right and are glad the CAST is the new king. I really think it should be more than 13.5 though as 1 point over the VSF does not really show the difference.

Real rating 15 or 16 would be more like it!
stormen
30 posts
 
Volleyguy,

I would definitely rate them a lot higher also. In general I don’t understand either why the Mundorfs are anywhere near the Duelund VSF let alone the CAST. To my ears, the Duelund are head and shoulders above the others.
volleyguy OP
789 posts
 
Stormen glad to hear I am not alone. I think does hit on the differences of Duelund making things sound natural compared to the plastic caps but Tony does not go far enough (at least for me) on what it means to have instruments sound real. For me it was huge! I could believe what the VSF did. Other caps just sounded fake in comparison and I (for one) enjoyed the "real" sound.

Tony also on the CAST rates them 13.5 compared to 12.5 and I for one still have a problem with anything being better than 10?? I think CAST are 10 and VSF are around 9 (maybe 8.5) and Supreme's or Silver in Oil are 5 to 6 at best and the cheap caps like what was in my (Linn) speakers are around 2! (Bennic)

Rating a Mundorf Supreme at 10 is just not right. 10 sounds like perfect and a Supreme is HUGELY lacking from even the VSF. If I had not done this myself I would have thought a 10 (Supreme) was good enough for me as I "thought" it would be small improvement after that. It shocked me (in fact I was confused by the CAST at first) on how big the difference as even from the VSF to CAST level. I do not think someone reading Tony's review would think the difference is a big as it really is.

I think a better review would be to say the only the Duelund's (that I have heard) and have good reason to believe one would need similiar construction meaning all natural to make music sound natural.

Duelund VSF (wayyyyyyy more natural sounding than the competition)

Duelund CAST takes the super natural sound of the VSF and makes what is a hard to believe MASSIVE reduction in noise level.

Is this more like what you would say Stormen?
sgmlaw
76 posts
 
I will chime in here very late to the OP.

While I have enjoyed the interesting discourse about the high end capacitors, I think you would be very surprised to find out what is typically in the Fisher tube instrument that is feeding the whole thing.

I've restored more Fisher tube instruments over the years than I can remember at this point. These instruments are full of inexpensive, dried out electrolytics. And the coupling caps are not hand-rolled fancies or anything other than very inexpensive General Instrument polyester films. The few imported ero-fol coupling caps sometimes found in the output stage are silimarly polyesters, and prone to leakage, creating a bias collapse and serious output damage.

I've used plenty of capacitors in Fisher rebuilds over the years (including some very expensive ones), and the one that sounds the best in the post '62s is the CDE DME, a 50 cent metallized polyester from Mouser, and Sprague Atoms for electrolytics. A far cry from the mega-buck Duelunds. But much more in line with the original design. More importantly, they sound RIGHT. And when a Fisher sounds right, it sounds as good as anything ever made.

That is because Fisher voiced its designs to the parts and technology of the day. If you do this long enough, you will find that tonal voicing is the touchstone. The best designers voiced around the limitations of the available components and technologies. Sometimes, a cheap part is the best part.

People playing Dr. Stereo with their Fishers, and loading it up with designer passives often sterilize the timbre and tone out of them, and it is like staring at a glacier. The hunt for more detail and resolution can be the devil's lure.

Nevertheless, the FAR far bigger determinant to the Fisher's sound is not the passives, but the tubing. People throwing hundreds of dollars in passives at a vintage Fisher (or elsewhere) and then tubing it with JJs or Russians or other new production completely miss the point.

I do not know what you are doing to your Fishers. But it would be shortsighted to dump many hundreds into these speaker capacitors and not invest in a quad of Westinghouse 7591As in a B or C series amp section, and make the effort to roll either Amperexes or TFKs in the pre stages to fine-tine the timbre. The difference between a Valvo, Holland Amperex, Sylvania black plate, and an EH can make a hugh difference. That difference, you may find, will be far more profound than the x-over capacitor changes, and at a fraction of the cost. And you will notice that is where Avery did freely spend his OEM money. TFKs weren't cheap in 1963 either.

I recommend a recap of the Fisher, but with modest passives consistent with the original design theme. And there are things that must be done with the power supply at this point, if only from a safety perspective.

For more details, check over at AA in the vintage asylum archives, where you will find a wealth of information on the older Fishers and how to recondition them right.

One last tip. If you're a midrange fan like me, then you will prefer the B series topology over that in C. The C amp topology can be a little over extended at times. The B series and pre '63 amps and integrateds do the middle a little better. Of course, running horns, you are probably best off with a 6BQ6 model, which were the best sounding Fishers of all.
More to discover