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
 
Sgmlaw

There are many questions I would like to ask you as I do agree with much of what you said.

I can't say for the Fishers as mine are all unrestored.
I can say that I have owned the Klispch for 28 years and they had the original foil in oil caps and NEVER sounded like they do now. The Duelund in the tweeter caps is so massively better it is not even funny. I have never heard Duelund in electronics but do find it hard to imagine they do not still sound super natural there to.

I have no problem saying that sometimes a cheap part is the best one but (in Duelund's case) their expensive part was worth every cent to me.

I am confused about the tube comment. My Fisher x101d is my favourite (the one that blew up) and it had Russian EH 7591's output tubes in it. Stereophile really like the Russian tubes? (saying in that case)

I have and am running right now a 6BQ5 x101st and it does do some things better than the 500c and x101d but prefer then 7591's. I do admit many do feel the way you do about the 6BQ5 amps. It might be mine? I also have a x202 that I am going to get checked out.

The x101st is running Telefunken tubes and Mullard rectifier and 3 of the 4 outputs are Raytheon's.

Any recommendations for the amp? I find it good but not near as good as the x101d and am looking for a output transformer for the x101d I found the x101d the best most natural sounding amp I have heard. There is not the dead silence between voices and instruments that the x101d has. Any idea what could be done to the x101st? The x101st is more aggressive and doesn't not have the interplay between musicians. More of a wall of sound.

All this being said I can see your love for the old Fishers. The x101d said Professional Series but that is just a name that Fisher was using at the time correct?
dgarretson
2,600 posts
 
Volleyguy, Tony Gee has a better handle than Tempo on how to rate caps. With Tony's method there is modest bracket creep. Caps that once led the pack at a 10 rating have been gradually surpassed by 10-20% improvements, raising the benchmark for SOTA to around a 12-13 point rating. The incremental progress one hears with equipment at the top of the high end occurs within a class of products that is trying to close a narrow gap between 9/10s and 10/10s of what's possible in audio. To talk about 3x improvements at this level is rediculous and pretty much discounts one's credibility as a reviewer.

Rationalizing value is a different issue. If trying for that, I would be tempted to opine that a handful of $11 Texas Components TX2575 resistors in preamp is better value than a $2000 in xover capacitors.
sgmlaw
76 posts
 
Volleyguy,

Stereophile tends to like items that you can buy new in a salon. They are not going to recommend a harder to find, vintage production tube that is generally only available used. The EH 7591A is a "nice" output, better than the JJ in my opinion, the latter being a little tizzy on top at times. But its fat size aside, the EH simply does not present the midrange presence of a Westinghouse, or a coin base Sylvania for that matter. Also, none of the current production 7591As have the grid leakage tolerance of the older production. While potentially pricey, I would try to hunt down a good quad of old Westinghouses (old as in used/test strong, as brand new quads are quite rare). They will be a significant step up from an EH. They are also less likely to break down than an EH can in the wrong circuit.

The 7591A is an interesting tube. Some would say it is the least tube-like sounding output tube, and it was quite a marvel of engineering at the time, being one of the last major output designs. It will be punchier and go deeper than a 6BQ5, especially in a SS rectified Fisher. Because only two manufacturers produced it during the vintage era, whatever brand you locate will be a Sylvania if a coin-base, or a Westinghouse if not.

The beauty of a good 6BQ5 is its middle, which is unmatched in my opinion. It is not powerful, but you don't need great power with horns.

Just as with passives, it is sometimes good to mix small signal tubing across stages to a desired result. Using all of one manufacture can sometimes be counterproductive. One sage piece of advise if you intend to start rolling: buy used/test strong stock. It is MUCH cheaper and you will have much more variety to choose from than with NOS. And most used/strong tubes will last just as long as an NOS. It is also a lot more fun.

At this point, I do NOT recommend running any Fisher tube instrument bone stock. Repairing individual items as they fail is not a good course at this point. Again, go check the vintage forum archives at AA for particulars on what should be done. I know I've written a lot there over the years. In particular, once the bias supply is updated, any 7591A will lead a longer and much cooler life.

It really is not fair to compare the original X-101 with the later X-101-D until both have been properly reconditioned. The former is now 50 years old, and is in dire need of reconditioning. It is no wonder it may not sound competitive. But of that family, I prefer the X-101-B the best.

If you really want to enjoy the Fisher tube sound, the pinnacle is the 400CX2 preamp. In my main system, a fully restored example feeds a larger Classe/Thiel pairing to delightful effect.
volleyguy OP
789 posts
 
Sgmlaw

Is not the x202 the same pre-amp section as the famous 400CX2? It is interesting you say the 7591s are beefier it is exactly that I think is why I like them better. Tight defined bottom end. Interesting you say that about the tubes as well as I have told the tech guy who has the x101d not to move any of the miss mash of tubes from where they are as I think it sounds fantastic!
volleyguy OP
789 posts
 
Dave I really liked Tempo's reviews more than Tony's as I found his confusing. When reading Tony's he gets the Duelund right, but not the magnitude. I do think the difference from Mundorf Supreme and Duelund VSF is huge! I think that is what Tempo is saying is the difference is HUGE but 3x may be strange wording. I also agree with Tempo as I found the Silver in Oil tilted the sound upwarded and (for me) I agree with Tempo and see no value in the Silver in Oil. Tony rates every more expensive Mundorf higher and many people I have heard do not like the Silver/Gold?

I wish Tony would come out with some adjusted numbers. I think only the best can be 10/10 and if he rates CAST the best (and I sure can not argue with that) than everything else should be less. I remember thinking a Sonicap would be good from Tony's rating of 8.5 and I think their crap! Tony rates nothing less than a 6 which is like all caps pass. Tempo at least says some are Tier F or whatever and that puts it into perspective. Tony's rating's give one a false sense of what they have.
Just more realistic numbers from Tony would be nice like a CAST at 10 VSF at 9, Supreme 6.5 and Sonicap at 5 and a Solen at 2 then if I read that I would know there was a difference in caps which there is.
More to discover