I have a pair of celestion ditton 55's and a pair of 66 bass units as well as a pair of bass reflex units. So naturally I am wanting to build a pair of 66's. My question is -
Are the crossovers from the 55's and 66's the same? And could I re-cap the crossovers from the 55's and use them to re-create the 66's. I believe the both operate at the same crossover frequencies.
Any advice would be most welcome.
Are the crossovers from the 55's and 66's the same? And could I re-cap the crossovers from the 55's and use them to re-create the 66's. I believe the both operate at the same crossover frequencies.
Any advice would be most welcome.
Hi,post a photo crossover 55 ( ditton 55 never see this model make photo of this and photo midrange and tweeter )face component and face printed circuit board for make schematic diagram and comparate with crossover 66 regards Osvaldo sorry for my little english osvaldo.figini@alice.it
Attachments
Celestion Ditton 55 ?
Hello Lorien,
are you sure you have Celestion Ditton 55 ?
I have never seen a 55, nor can I find any information about one ever existing.
Look carefully at what you have - is it a Celestion {Ditton} 551 ?
That model had a 10" woofer, and a ported -{bass reflex}- enclosure.
There was also 442 and 662.
Both had 12" woofers, BUT they are a higher Impedance 12" woofer than the woofer used in 44 and 66.
What is the T**** number printed on the back of the 2 woofers you have ?
{there will be a T followed by four digits.}
Am I misunderstanding what you mean by:- "bass units" and "bass reflex units" ?
Are these Woofers or Cabinets ?
442, 551, 662 crossovers are not the same as the crossover used in 44 and 66.
Hello Lorien,
are you sure you have Celestion Ditton 55 ?
I have never seen a 55, nor can I find any information about one ever existing.
Look carefully at what you have - is it a Celestion {Ditton} 551 ?
That model had a 10" woofer, and a ported -{bass reflex}- enclosure.
There was also 442 and 662.
Both had 12" woofers, BUT they are a higher Impedance 12" woofer than the woofer used in 44 and 66.
What is the T**** number printed on the back of the 2 woofers you have ?
{there will be a T followed by four digits.}
Am I misunderstanding what you mean by:- "bass units" and "bass reflex units" ?
Are these Woofers or Cabinets ?
442, 551, 662 crossovers are not the same as the crossover used in 44 and 66.
some more info
Hi Alan, here (I hope) is a pdf of the 662 schematic and below a link to some photographs. The caps with the asterixs are the green ones, the 2.5 being two in parallel. The 40uf is three in parallel the 102uf is two in parallel and the 28.7 is two in parallel, this may be of little importance?
2 X Celestion Ditton 662 3-Way Crossovers on eBay (end time 28-Jan-10 17:06:51 GMT)
I have opted to remake the crossovers point to point because I think I would need watchmakers hands to compose it all on the existing board, plus experiment with resistors.
Thank you again - LB/Hamilton
Hi Alan, here (I hope) is a pdf of the 662 schematic and below a link to some photographs. The caps with the asterixs are the green ones, the 2.5 being two in parallel. The 40uf is three in parallel the 102uf is two in parallel and the 28.7 is two in parallel, this may be of little importance?
2 X Celestion Ditton 662 3-Way Crossovers on eBay (end time 28-Jan-10 17:06:51 GMT)
I have opted to remake the crossovers point to point because I think I would need watchmakers hands to compose it all on the existing board, plus experiment with resistors.
Thank you again - LB/Hamilton
You might have been thinking of the Ditton 25 which is similar to the 66 in that it uses a 12" bass unit & a 12" ABR. They might be the same drivers & ABR, i don't know.
I have a pair of 66s in another room, unfortunately the original HF2000 tweeters were toast when i bought them (dead cheap) so i replaced them with some Goodmans 1" domes from the Magnum
They sound really good, which is surprising considering how cr*ppy the cabinet build is compared to more modern speakers
I have a pair of 66s in another room, unfortunately the original HF2000 tweeters were toast when i bought them (dead cheap) so i replaced them with some Goodmans 1" domes from the Magnum
They sound really good, which is surprising considering how cr*ppy the cabinet build is compared to more modern speakers
No - the cabinets are the 551's the bass drivers are chopped in from 44's, the crossovers have been pinched from a pair of 662's.
On the whole they sound great, the bass is awesome, the mids a little absent and the highs a wee bit harsh. Im attempting to resolve the last issues by re-vamping the crossover with poltprops and switching from a circuit board to point2point. I'm in deeper than I was expecting, nobody warned me that crossover design was dark arts with more variables than an octopus could juggle.
One thing for certain - if you own some 551's buy some bass units from the 44''s or 66's and swap them for the 10inch driver. You will not look back, you will bin the old ones. Oh and I have 2 spare sets of 44 bass drivers up for grabs
On the whole they sound great, the bass is awesome, the mids a little absent and the highs a wee bit harsh. Im attempting to resolve the last issues by re-vamping the crossover with poltprops and switching from a circuit board to point2point. I'm in deeper than I was expecting, nobody warned me that crossover design was dark arts with more variables than an octopus could juggle.
One thing for certain - if you own some 551's buy some bass units from the 44''s or 66's and swap them for the 10inch driver. You will not look back, you will bin the old ones. Oh and I have 2 spare sets of 44 bass drivers up for grabs
10'' woofer for Celestion 551
There are SEAS 10" drivers available which can be used in Celestion 551 if the original drivers have deteriorated, or if one wants to improve on the performance of the original woofer.
I will post about this if anyone is interested.
I think an old 12" Celestion driver is not necessarily the optimum choice,
nor good value if its price is high to buy, and depending on its condition it may not last as long as a new SEAS 10".
But of course if one likes the sound of the old 12" Celestion woofer in the 551 loudspeaker, then that is fine.
Lorien, is the internal volume of the 551 the same, or close to the same,
as the internal volume of your Celestion 44 ?
There are SEAS 10" drivers available which can be used in Celestion 551 if the original drivers have deteriorated, or if one wants to improve on the performance of the original woofer.
I will post about this if anyone is interested.
I think an old 12" Celestion driver is not necessarily the optimum choice,
nor good value if its price is high to buy, and depending on its condition it may not last as long as a new SEAS 10".
But of course if one likes the sound of the old 12" Celestion woofer in the 551 loudspeaker, then that is fine.
Lorien, is the internal volume of the 551 the same, or close to the same,
as the internal volume of your Celestion 44 ?
not correctly designated
Lorien, this circuit is not correct, at least not in part.
The components along the top line form a band-pass filter, thus will be for a mid-range driver and not for a tweeter.
The components along the middle line form a high-pass filter, thus will be for a tweeter and not for a mid-range driver.
The components along the bottom line form a low-pass filter, thus are for a woofer.
The + and - connections for the drivers are not labelled at the outputs.
I think at least one of the outputs will have its -ive connected to its components' line and its +ive connected to ground, and perhaps two of them will.
Looking at the photos on the ebay page I cannot read the values printed on some of the capacitors, though I can guess some of them, but not the black one labelled C11 under the 24MFD black capacitor on the Left-side - what is printed on it ?
Also, what is the value printed on the resistor ?
Look closely beside each inductor and you will see L numbers.
I can see only L3 in the photo.
What I need to know is:-
what is the L number for the other inductor which is the same size as L3 ?
what are the L numbers for the two smallest inductors ?
what is the L number for the largest inductor ?
Why I ask all this is that I am a bit surprised by this crossover.
Are you sure that you have followed all the circuit paths correctly ?
L3 with 4.7uF in complete local parallel with it is possible, but do check.
L1 and 28.7uF form a lower order filter than I would expect, but it is possible that works correctly for the later model Celestion woofers, though the crossover frequency will be much higher than I would have expected.
Are you sure that the combined capacitors there and L1 are the only components in that line ?
If the middle line of your drawing is correct for the tweeter, its crossover is higher in frequency than for the older 44 and 66 Celestions.
If the top line is correct for the mids' filter, its crossover from the bass is at a higher frequency than I would have expected.
If all the components are connected in the way you have shown in the diagram, then I fully expect "the mids a little absent" - as you wrote - when this network is used with the older Celestion 12" woofer in comparison to "bass is awesome" - as you wrote.
To get the mids to balance better with the bass when using the 44 woofer you will likely have to increase the capacitance to more than 28.7uF.
Are you sure there is only one inductor in this section of the filter ?
I would have expected there to be two.
Ideally, we need to know the mH value of each inductor to adapt this crossover to the 44 woofers.
"the highs a wee bit harsh" - this can be reduced with suitable modern capacitors and a small value series connected resistor.
I hope you don't have 662 crossover connected in your 551 in the way you have shown the connections in the diagram.
If you do then harsh highs and absent mids is exactly what you will be hearing ! ... and the tweeter will be damaged if you play the speakers loudly.
Compare the 662 crossover with your 551 crossover.
Is the number of components exactly the same ?
Are the capacitors all the same values ?
Are the combinations and connections all exactly the same ?
Smaller size, metal cored inductors in 551 crossover does not mean different inductances, but I would expect a different inductance value for the bass filter of 662 to the one for 551, and a different combined capacitance there, both because of the different size woofers used.
Check everything in both 551 and 662 crossovers, and Post new diagrams for any differences.
Mark the +ive and -ive connections from the drivers on the outputs of the crossover diagram - this is relevant to the sound.
Lorien, this circuit is not correct, at least not in part.
The components along the top line form a band-pass filter, thus will be for a mid-range driver and not for a tweeter.
The components along the middle line form a high-pass filter, thus will be for a tweeter and not for a mid-range driver.
The components along the bottom line form a low-pass filter, thus are for a woofer.
The + and - connections for the drivers are not labelled at the outputs.
I think at least one of the outputs will have its -ive connected to its components' line and its +ive connected to ground, and perhaps two of them will.
Looking at the photos on the ebay page I cannot read the values printed on some of the capacitors, though I can guess some of them, but not the black one labelled C11 under the 24MFD black capacitor on the Left-side - what is printed on it ?
Also, what is the value printed on the resistor ?
Look closely beside each inductor and you will see L numbers.
I can see only L3 in the photo.
What I need to know is:-
what is the L number for the other inductor which is the same size as L3 ?
what are the L numbers for the two smallest inductors ?
what is the L number for the largest inductor ?
Why I ask all this is that I am a bit surprised by this crossover.
Are you sure that you have followed all the circuit paths correctly ?
L3 with 4.7uF in complete local parallel with it is possible, but do check.
L1 and 28.7uF form a lower order filter than I would expect, but it is possible that works correctly for the later model Celestion woofers, though the crossover frequency will be much higher than I would have expected.
Are you sure that the combined capacitors there and L1 are the only components in that line ?
If the middle line of your drawing is correct for the tweeter, its crossover is higher in frequency than for the older 44 and 66 Celestions.
If the top line is correct for the mids' filter, its crossover from the bass is at a higher frequency than I would have expected.
If all the components are connected in the way you have shown in the diagram, then I fully expect "the mids a little absent" - as you wrote - when this network is used with the older Celestion 12" woofer in comparison to "bass is awesome" - as you wrote.
To get the mids to balance better with the bass when using the 44 woofer you will likely have to increase the capacitance to more than 28.7uF.
Are you sure there is only one inductor in this section of the filter ?
I would have expected there to be two.
Ideally, we need to know the mH value of each inductor to adapt this crossover to the 44 woofers.
"the highs a wee bit harsh" - this can be reduced with suitable modern capacitors and a small value series connected resistor.
I hope you don't have 662 crossover connected in your 551 in the way you have shown the connections in the diagram.
If you do then harsh highs and absent mids is exactly what you will be hearing ! ... and the tweeter will be damaged if you play the speakers loudly.
Compare the 662 crossover with your 551 crossover.
Is the number of components exactly the same ?
Are the capacitors all the same values ?
Are the combinations and connections all exactly the same ?
Smaller size, metal cored inductors in 551 crossover does not mean different inductances, but I would expect a different inductance value for the bass filter of 662 to the one for 551, and a different combined capacitance there, both because of the different size woofers used.
Check everything in both 551 and 662 crossovers, and Post new diagrams for any differences.
Mark the +ive and -ive connections from the drivers on the outputs of the crossover diagram - this is relevant to the sound.
the front panel controls
Lorien,
this crossover is further complicated by those two variable controls -{on the baffle panel}.
Draw in the next circuit exactly where those are connected.
Measure the resistances of each section of each with them disconnected from the circuit, and write those resistances on the diagram.
I am presuming there are 3 terminal potentiometers behind each one - yes or no ?
Depending on where they are in the circuit, other changes may have to be made.
Do you use them ?
Post some comments about how they change the sound.
Lorien,
this crossover is further complicated by those two variable controls -{on the baffle panel}.
Draw in the next circuit exactly where those are connected.
Measure the resistances of each section of each with them disconnected from the circuit, and write those resistances on the diagram.
I am presuming there are 3 terminal potentiometers behind each one - yes or no ?
Depending on where they are in the circuit, other changes may have to be made.
Do you use them ?
Post some comments about how they change the sound.
Hi Alan - yes there was a boob made, late nights. The mid and treble lines were incorectly labled, sorry. And a cap value was wrong also. I find following the direction of flow baffling but here is my best attempt to let you see the true picture, and answer your questions. I was under the impression that the top and mid drivers for the 551's were the same as the 66's - Just throw a bass driver in from some 66's or 44's, add a 662 crossover, and there you have a 551 cabinet pretending to be it's bigger brother. Hmmm?
Here are some answers to yor questions
The inductor the same size as L3 is L2
C11 is 8uf
The small inductors are L4 in the corner, and L5 below it.
The largest inductor is L1
R1 reads ERG, 16 ER, BR2 5%, 7903
The 551 crossover bears NO resemblance to the 662 - I wanted shot of the 551 c/o because of the mib/treble pots in the cab. They seem to play an integral part of the crossover design.
Volume of cabinets? very close by eye but I have yet to bring out the tape.
I have attached the schematic without the pen to fill in the blanks. All the drivers return straight to earth - There are numerals on the inductors, but I think they may be product numbers? L1 = unmarked, L2 873, L3 5881, L45885, L5 1949.
Many thanks once more for your generosity.
Hamilton.
Here are some answers to yor questions
The inductor the same size as L3 is L2
C11 is 8uf
The small inductors are L4 in the corner, and L5 below it.
The largest inductor is L1
R1 reads ERG, 16 ER, BR2 5%, 7903
The 551 crossover bears NO resemblance to the 662 - I wanted shot of the 551 c/o because of the mib/treble pots in the cab. They seem to play an integral part of the crossover design.
Volume of cabinets? very close by eye but I have yet to bring out the tape.
I have attached the schematic without the pen to fill in the blanks. All the drivers return straight to earth - There are numerals on the inductors, but I think they may be product numbers? L1 = unmarked, L2 873, L3 5881, L45885, L5 1949.
Many thanks once more for your generosity.
Hamilton.
Hi Alan - Just to make sure that I have been as clear as possible and have understood. The c/o in question is from a 662 and has nothing in it's wiring to utilise the variable pot controls from the 551 cabinets. These pots on the 551's use a radialy arranged, heating element/bar fire arrangement to alter the resistance of the circuit. They are past it, corroded, which is the main reason I want to change over to a c/o that is independant of them.
Slightly longer term I will build some 66/662 cabinets and put in bass reflex speakers. But thats a project for the summer holidays
Kind regards - Hamilton
Slightly longer term I will build some 66/662 cabinets and put in bass reflex speakers. But thats a project for the summer holidays
Kind regards - Hamilton
Measure the DC resistance of both pots
Hi Hamilton,
those pots for the L-pads:-
the DC resistance of each causes additional electrical damping of the tweeter and mid-driver.
If you remove the L-pads you will have to add resistors connected in Parallel with both tweeter and mid-driver in exactly the same electrical positions of the circuits for both so that the crossover will work correctly at the low frequency end of each drivers' bandwidth.
If this damping resistance is not used there will be audible distortion from both drivers when they are driven to high volume, or even with loud paeks in the music during moderate volume playing.
Look carefully at each L-pad.
What you need to measure is the largest resistance that can be set in Parallel with each driver.
There are 2 types of L-pads commonly used, and I do not know which type is in 551.
In both types one of the pot's end terminals is connected to ground -{the same as the driver}.
In both types the centre terminal {wiper} of the pot is connected to the input terminal of the driver.
In both types the input end terminal of the pot is connected to the output of the crossover filter for each driver.
For one of these types of L-pad the maximum parallel resistance is the resistance measured between the two end terminals, and that measurement remains the same regardless of where the wiper is set.
For the other type of L-pad the maximum parallel resistance is from the centre wiper terminal to the ground terminal when the centre wiper is set to maximum level - no attenuation.
If the centre wiper is set in other positions with this type of L-pad the resistance measured will not be the maximum.
If you cannot see which type of L-pad all yours are,
measure the resistance between the end terminals for settings of the centre wiper at both ends,
then measure the resistance from the centre wiper to the ground terminal for both end settings of the centre wiper.
Measure all 4 of your L-pads, because:-
the one for the tweeter may be different resistance to the one for the mids,
and because the pots are worn out in the way you described the resistances of some of them may no longer be correct, and if so we will need to look at measurements for all of them and estimate what the original resistance was.
Disconnect the input terminal and the centre wiper terminal of each pot from the circuit before you measure.
You can leave the earth terminal connected if you want to - with only one end terminal connected to the circuit the measurements will be correct.
If you do not own a multimeter, do not rush out and buy one,
but Post here and I will advise one that also has an Inductance measuring capability so that you can measure the mH of all your coils from both the 551 and 662 crossovers, so that we can adapt whatever is closest to what is required for the older woofers.
Post your maximum budget price if you want to buy a meter.
Hi Hamilton,
those pots for the L-pads:-
the DC resistance of each causes additional electrical damping of the tweeter and mid-driver.
If you remove the L-pads you will have to add resistors connected in Parallel with both tweeter and mid-driver in exactly the same electrical positions of the circuits for both so that the crossover will work correctly at the low frequency end of each drivers' bandwidth.
If this damping resistance is not used there will be audible distortion from both drivers when they are driven to high volume, or even with loud paeks in the music during moderate volume playing.
Look carefully at each L-pad.
What you need to measure is the largest resistance that can be set in Parallel with each driver.
There are 2 types of L-pads commonly used, and I do not know which type is in 551.
In both types one of the pot's end terminals is connected to ground -{the same as the driver}.
In both types the centre terminal {wiper} of the pot is connected to the input terminal of the driver.
In both types the input end terminal of the pot is connected to the output of the crossover filter for each driver.
For one of these types of L-pad the maximum parallel resistance is the resistance measured between the two end terminals, and that measurement remains the same regardless of where the wiper is set.
For the other type of L-pad the maximum parallel resistance is from the centre wiper terminal to the ground terminal when the centre wiper is set to maximum level - no attenuation.
If the centre wiper is set in other positions with this type of L-pad the resistance measured will not be the maximum.
If you cannot see which type of L-pad all yours are,
measure the resistance between the end terminals for settings of the centre wiper at both ends,
then measure the resistance from the centre wiper to the ground terminal for both end settings of the centre wiper.
Measure all 4 of your L-pads, because:-
the one for the tweeter may be different resistance to the one for the mids,
and because the pots are worn out in the way you described the resistances of some of them may no longer be correct, and if so we will need to look at measurements for all of them and estimate what the original resistance was.
Disconnect the input terminal and the centre wiper terminal of each pot from the circuit before you measure.
You can leave the earth terminal connected if you want to - with only one end terminal connected to the circuit the measurements will be correct.
If you do not own a multimeter, do not rush out and buy one,
but Post here and I will advise one that also has an Inductance measuring capability so that you can measure the mH of all your coils from both the 551 and 662 crossovers, so that we can adapt whatever is closest to what is required for the older woofers.
Post your maximum budget price if you want to buy a meter.
More to think about ... and information required
Celestion's 551 and 662 both used the HF2001 tweeter, but I do not currently know if both used the same specification mid-dome, thus there may be different value components for the upper crossover point.
Regardless of mid-dome type, there will likely be different component values for the lower crossover point, because 10" and 12" woofers have different frequency and impedance characteristics in their mid range area.
Inspect your 551 crossovers and draw a circuit diagram with the components values, or Part Numbers, marked on it.
Also, the 44/66 woofer is a 4 ohm driver, but the 442/662 woofer is an 8 ohm driver, thus some crossover components will have to be changed.
I need to know that mH values of all the inductors you have so that I can advise which are best for you to use.
It would have been better to buy the 442/662 woofer.
There is a pair available from a Canadian ebay seller, though that will cost you Shipping.
Depending on your final plans, and the size of cabinets you want, you may be able to use the 44/66 woofers with the 662 mid-domes,
but there is a break-up resonance at about 750 Hz in the 44/66 woofer's cone, and the 662 mid-dome may not be able to be crossed over low enough in frequency for that woofer break-up to be filtered to low audibilty.
Decision will depend on how low in colouration in the lower midrange you want your final loudspeaker to be.
Celestion's 551 and 662 both used the HF2001 tweeter, but I do not currently know if both used the same specification mid-dome, thus there may be different value components for the upper crossover point.
Regardless of mid-dome type, there will likely be different component values for the lower crossover point, because 10" and 12" woofers have different frequency and impedance characteristics in their mid range area.
Inspect your 551 crossovers and draw a circuit diagram with the components values, or Part Numbers, marked on it.
Also, the 44/66 woofer is a 4 ohm driver, but the 442/662 woofer is an 8 ohm driver, thus some crossover components will have to be changed.
I need to know that mH values of all the inductors you have so that I can advise which are best for you to use.
It would have been better to buy the 442/662 woofer.
There is a pair available from a Canadian ebay seller, though that will cost you Shipping.
Depending on your final plans, and the size of cabinets you want, you may be able to use the 44/66 woofers with the 662 mid-domes,
but there is a break-up resonance at about 750 Hz in the 44/66 woofer's cone, and the 662 mid-dome may not be able to be crossed over low enough in frequency for that woofer break-up to be filtered to low audibilty.
Decision will depend on how low in colouration in the lower midrange you want your final loudspeaker to be.
Hi guys,
I have a pair of the Ditton 66 that sound fantastic except... the bottom is a bit quiet. The spec on these is a RIDICULOUS 18hz from the 12" woofer. I compare that to the 36Hz 10" woofer on my PSB, and yet the PSB have significantly stronger base.
I used the Wilson Speaker test CD and have determined that the 66's do indeed play much lower than the PSB, just without volume. In my profound ignorance I assume it has to do with the crossovers, and that the place to start with the crossovers is the now 35 year old caps.
So two questions: 1) is recapping a wise move? 2) Where would I get a list of the caps I need?
Caveat One: I am a software guy and have a permanent injuction that forbids me from being within 50 feet of a functioning soldering iron.
Caveat Two: I am dangerously willing to take apart things with no idea how to put them back together.
Caveat Three: I do have a guy who did a very nice job rewiring my Pioneer PL-400 turntable RCA outs and power cord for me. He runs a soldering iron very artistically.
(I agree about the awful cabinets; they look like thin MDF with vinyl cover. RE harsh highs, that is an amp issue not a speaker issue. Mine were harsh with my Carver, but not with my Adcom 5500 amp.)
Thanks a TON for any help guys!
Scott in Boise
I have a pair of the Ditton 66 that sound fantastic except... the bottom is a bit quiet. The spec on these is a RIDICULOUS 18hz from the 12" woofer. I compare that to the 36Hz 10" woofer on my PSB, and yet the PSB have significantly stronger base.
I used the Wilson Speaker test CD and have determined that the 66's do indeed play much lower than the PSB, just without volume. In my profound ignorance I assume it has to do with the crossovers, and that the place to start with the crossovers is the now 35 year old caps.
So two questions: 1) is recapping a wise move? 2) Where would I get a list of the caps I need?
Caveat One: I am a software guy and have a permanent injuction that forbids me from being within 50 feet of a functioning soldering iron.
Caveat Two: I am dangerously willing to take apart things with no idea how to put them back together.
Caveat Three: I do have a guy who did a very nice job rewiring my Pioneer PL-400 turntable RCA outs and power cord for me. He runs a soldering iron very artistically.
(I agree about the awful cabinets; they look like thin MDF with vinyl cover. RE harsh highs, that is an amp issue not a speaker issue. Mine were harsh with my Carver, but not with my Adcom 5500 amp.)
Thanks a TON for any help guys!
Scott in Boise
Look here:-
Hi Scott in Boise.
Search this forum and go to the Thread titled:- celestion 66 needs Mid-range
started by:- Mr_White
Several of us have discussed the bass response, and the capacitors there,
and there has been several re-cappings reported on, including the not-so-successful ones.
Some of these are on-going projects, and further results will be reported for those.
Brands and Sellers of capacitors are discussed.
Despite the Title of the thread, it now includes almost everything about Celestion 66s ... {and Mr_White has never returned}.
Ideally I'd change the Title of the thread to Reconditioning Celestion 66 if I could !
There is a LOT to read through, and not all of it may interest you, but do glance at each Post before you move to the next,
because some contain unexpected things.
Start on Page 3 at least, so that you know what the design compromises were.
Post in that thread, after you have read through it, if you think there is something we have not covered that you want to know.
Hi Scott in Boise.
Search this forum and go to the Thread titled:- celestion 66 needs Mid-range
started by:- Mr_White
Several of us have discussed the bass response, and the capacitors there,
and there has been several re-cappings reported on, including the not-so-successful ones.
Some of these are on-going projects, and further results will be reported for those.
Brands and Sellers of capacitors are discussed.
Despite the Title of the thread, it now includes almost everything about Celestion 66s ... {and Mr_White has never returned}.
Ideally I'd change the Title of the thread to Reconditioning Celestion 66 if I could !
There is a LOT to read through, and not all of it may interest you, but do glance at each Post before you move to the next,
because some contain unexpected things.
Start on Page 3 at least, so that you know what the design compromises were.
Post in that thread, after you have read through it, if you think there is something we have not covered that you want to know.
Last edited:
Celestion Ditton 442
Hours and Hours of searching and maybe Ive found some people that can help.....Please
I have some Celestion Ditton 442's In seemingly good condition - Thing is I'm pretty sure the sound just isn't performing as it should - Ive tried with a few different amps but problem seems to still be there. Basically the bass response doesn't seem to be there as it should. I was wondering whether the Caps could be tired and its causing the problem - Maybe they've been wired out of phase inside? Any help or info, wiring drawings so I can check the insides would be great.. I will put up some photos as well - Thanks for your time people ps if more photos are need just tell me and I can put them up Celestion Ditton 442 - a set on Flickr
Hours and Hours of searching and maybe Ive found some people that can help.....Please
I have some Celestion Ditton 442's In seemingly good condition - Thing is I'm pretty sure the sound just isn't performing as it should - Ive tried with a few different amps but problem seems to still be there. Basically the bass response doesn't seem to be there as it should. I was wondering whether the Caps could be tired and its causing the problem - Maybe they've been wired out of phase inside? Any help or info, wiring drawings so I can check the insides would be great.. I will put up some photos as well - Thanks for your time people
ps if more photos are need just tell me and I can put them up Celestion Ditton 442 - a set on FlickrHi, I'm attempting a 662 c/o recap, but the attachment in message 12 of this thread won't download - any chance of a re-post?
bdgdpc
bdgdpc
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.