Using electrolytic caps in bass xover

andy2 · 14th September 2011, 04:47 AM

Has anyone able to detect any significant differences in using electrolytic caps in the bass xover in a 3way design? The xover will be a 10mh inductor then 68uf electrolytic to ground. I plan to bypass it with a good 1uf cap. The money saving will be significant. A 65uf electrolytic cap is less than $2 vs much more for a MKP cap with the same value.

picowallspeaker · 14th September 2011, 05:17 AM

When it exploded , I sniffed some significant evidence !!

But it was a tiny 6.8 µF/ 50 VL ...Bipolar of course !
You can try also regular non-bipolar Electrolytics put in anti-phase series ( +--+ ) ,but in this case you need to find 140 µF values ..
No need for any bypassing , in that position ( and task ) .

jerome69 · 14th September 2011, 06:00 AM

Yes there is a little difference when you use a big coil. The sound seems a little more clean. The film capacitor 68uF does a little better.
But high end electrolytic capacitor exists too

David Gatti · 14th September 2011, 11:33 AM

Distortion from a woofer is typically > 1%.
Combine that with room modes and the ear's relatively poor sensitivity/discrimination in that frequency range and I think it's the one area where I think a good bipolar electrolytic (and ferrite core inductor) are acceptable.

Moondog55 · 14th September 2011, 02:55 PM

Use electrolytic caps with the highest voltage rating you can find 100 V is probably OK; 35V probably isn't.
I no longer bother with the bypass caps as the reactance time of different types of cap is different may have an effect/affect on the sound.

Rather than use a single large cap of the correct or nearest standard value I try and use multiples of the same value in your case #3 * 22uF may work out cheaper and 66uF is probably close enough

andy2 · 14th September 2011, 04:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moondog55

Rather than use a single large cap of the correct or nearest standard value I try and use multiples of the same value in your case #3 * 22uF may work out cheaper and 66uF is probably close enough

Yeah, that seems like a good compromise -- use a few in parallel.
Thanks for the all the responses.

Loren42 · 14th September 2011, 04:39 PM

One issue is that the stated value on the capacitor's jacket and the actual value probably will not match very well. Some can be as much as 20% off.

The second issue is that electrolytic caps change value over time, which will screw up the crossover. So even measuring them now doesn't mean they will be anything like what you expect later on.

14th September 2011, 04:47 AM	#1
andy2 diyAudio Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Los Angeles	Using electrolytic caps in bass xover Has anyone able to detect any significant differences in using electrolytic caps in the bass xover in a 3way design? The xover will be a 10mh inductor then 68uf electrolytic to ground. I plan to bypass it with a good 1uf cap. The money saving will be significant. A 65uf electrolytic cap is less than $2 vs much more for a MKP cap with the same value.

14th September 2011, 02:55 PM	#5
Moondog55 diyAudio Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Norlane; Geelong: Victoria: Australia	Use electrolytic caps with the highest voltage rating you can find 100 V is probably OK; 35V probably isn't. I no longer bother with the bypass caps as the reactance time of different types of cap is different may have an effect/affect on the sound. Rather than use a single large cap of the correct or nearest standard value I try and use multiples of the same value in your case #3 * 22uF may work out cheaper and 66uF is probably close enough __________________ QUOTE" The more I know, the more I know, I know (insert maniacal laugh >here<) NOTHING"

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
paralleling film caps with electrolytic caps	jarthel	Power Supplies	381	10th March 2012 08:13 AM
Does someone know these electrolytic caps?	12 Cents	Parts	4	25th November 2005 09:26 AM
Electrolytic Caps	jhead	Parts	0	21st April 2004 10:11 PM
More Electrolytic Caps	MRehorst	Swap Meet	3	26th December 2002 10:56 PM
Electrolytic Caps	MRehorst	Swap Meet	5	12th December 2002 03:45 PM

New To Site?	Need Help?
Register to Participate Search Privacy Statement Contact Us	Frequently Asked Questions Did you forget your password? Mark Forums Read


	Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you. Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving

14th September 2011, 05:17 AM	#2
picowallspeaker diyAudio Member Join Date: Apr 2007	When it exploded , I sniffed some significant evidence !! But it was a tiny 6.8 µF/ 50 VL ...Bipolar of course ! You can try also regular non-bipolar Electrolytics put in anti-phase series ( +--+ ) ,but in this case you need to find 140 µF values .. No need for any bypassing , in that position ( and task ) .

14th September 2011, 06:00 AM	#3
jerome69 diyAudio Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Lyon	Yes there is a little difference when you use a big coil. The sound seems a little more clean. The film capacitor 68uF does a little better. But high end electrolytic capacitor exists too

14th September 2011, 11:33 AM	#4
David Gatti diyAudio Member Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Melbourne, Australia	Distortion from a woofer is typically > 1%. Combine that with room modes and the ear's relatively poor sensitivity/discrimination in that frequency range and I think it's the one area where I think a good bipolar electrolytic (and ferrite core inductor) are acceptable.

14th September 2011, 04:39 PM	#7
Loren42 diyAudio Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: "Space Coast" Florida, USA	One issue is that the stated value on the capacitor's jacket and the actual value probably will not match very well. Some can be as much as 20% off. The second issue is that electrolytic caps change value over time, which will screw up the crossover. So even measuring them now doesn't mean they will be anything like what you expect later on.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)