Thiel Owners
Tom As always your knowledge continues to educate and guide us in our appreciation for the work that Jim and the Thiel staff created . As for the higher than 100uf capacitors used on the 2.7s crossovers , I have been able to fit 4 x 100uf caps replacing the 0ne 400uf on the mid positive side but there was no room to replace the 330 and 220uf caps on the negative side , although I did end up with a 300 and 220 cap to dial in the exact designed value within 1%. Thank You |
Two questions: 1 - Could you tell any difference between the single 400uF vs the 4 x 100uF midrange feed caps? 2 - Are you saying that you had to use a different cap value to attain the 550uF target? If so, that's odd because electrolytics generally decrease in value with time. Your thoughts, please. BTW, the parasitics of the large caps don't hurt much in the shunt resonance circuit. |
Yes the difference was definitely an improvement , the definition improved with the speed of the 100uf vs a 400uf which makes for a smoother sound . The original 220uf and 330uf caps and the two sets of replacement electrolytics that were supposed to be +/- 5% were all about 10% over so I replaced the 330 with a 300 to get closer to 550uf , I didn't hear any difference but I wanted as close to schematic values as possible .
|
vair68robert - Good for you.What you call 'smooth with the 400uF cap, some have also called 'refined'. My word is 'homogenized'. The smoothness is definitely a loss of information, notably in the time domain. You do want the 550uF value. That's a tuned circuit which is no longer properly tuned if the component values are wrong. The de-tuning would be more apparent with loud and/or complex music. |
