Just recapped my first pair of speakers(Wharfedale W60's)

The LS50's are not especially efficient, something like 85dB, but they respond well to less power if it's quality power, which the Fisher's beefy transformer can provide. In my 8" x 12" listening room, I have to turn the 28wpc Fisher's volume nearly 1/2 way up (if not more), so this pairing won't work so well in a living room, but it sounds lovely in this environment. If/when I move into a house with a larger room for the hifi, I'll probably have to think about getting some more efficient speakers (or a more powerful amp!).

My 400 was worked on by AK's audiodon, including a mod to make the power section run cooler, but I haven't experienced unusual amounts of heat from the Fisher even after several hours of use.

Incidentally, some suggest that the LS50's might respond better to a 4-ohm load. I have the taps set to 8 ohms on the Fisher because I need ever drop of power, but now I'm thinking I should try the 4-ohm tap again!

 

I've heard from at least two people about the old VOM amps maybe not being the best thing in the world for Wharfedale W*0 models. I didn't know if it was a voicing issue or merely a design/build-quality mismatch, as the Wharfies are really in a different class. One thing about Wharfedales, they don't get outclassed by the gear that's driving them. You get a top-quality tube rig of the warmer type (kinda' like the smaller-sized Goodmans Maxims, and you will get top-quality vintage sound. Sure, they aren't extension champs, but they have a rich, smooth, lush, three-dimensional sound that can really fill up a room when you're playing some psychedelic-rock or '60's jazz. Real "breath of life" stuff. Vintage Wharfedales really take advantage of what you feed them. Supposed to be wonderful with Marantz tubers, plus they love Fisher, Dynaco, Scott, Pilot, etc... Any of the warmer brands with engaging mids and highs... That's what wakes them right up.

 

How do those 8ohm/4ohm/6ohm taps work anyway? I never quite understood what went on there. What is it doing to make itself friendlier to an 8ohm/6ohm/4ohm load? I never understood how that worked. If putting my W90's on the 4ohm taps is going to give me less power but better sound, I would welcome that, but I always figured those taps were just kind of a useful guide or somethings.

 

Darned if I know...

 

OK, I switched over to using the 4 ohm taps on the 400 with the LS50s. It definitely sounds different - crisper perhaps - but give me some time to evaluate further.

From the Stereophile review:
"Somewhat optimistically specified at 8 ohms, the LS50's impedance (fig.1, solid trace) drops to 4 ohms at 200Hz and to 5.4 ohms at the top of the audioband. The electrical phase angle is generally mild, but the combination of 5.3 ohms and –41° at 135Hz, a frequency where music often has high energy, will make the speaker work at its best with a good, 4 ohm–rated amplifier."

 

Actually no, that's not the case. Electrolytic capacitors are often used where a relatively high capacitance value in a small space is required, and there is a cost savings to using them, but the size difference is considerable.

It's definitely going to perk up a vintage crossover section regardless, because the originals (electrolytic) will have likely dried out or failed by now. They are not an especially long lived component. If they will fit, and cost is not a concern any capacitor can be used to replace an electrolytic.

 

Another thing I've noticed is that the dynamics have gotten much better when listening at lower levels, making them an excellent late night speaker. My wife is very pleased with that aspect.

 

If you will indulge my going off topic again, regarding my previous comments about 8 ohms vs. 4 ohms on the Fisher with the KEFs, it sounds quite a bit more dynamic and quick @ 4 ohms, whereas before it had a much softer, pillow-y presentation. Output power seems to be about the same either way.

 

I put in some Russian PIOs in my Altec Lansing Santana IIs......it could not hurt lol. They sound ok....the original capacitors were certainly not helping things....
I have them hooked to a Jolida and the speakers sound better when I play cds now. I would most def trade the Santanas for a mint set of Wharfdales. I would feel guilty though...

 

Before I put the Jantzen's in I was concerned that I wouldn't like the resulting sound, but ultimately figured I could always put the originals back in, plus I have the PIO's coming. Now that the Jantzen's have been such a success, I'm afraid about putting the PIO's in.

 

I used Solen caps for the most part.The Dayton is decent enough, You can of course get even more expensive caps and resistors but I wouldn't go overboard on the Model Six as I doubt that those drivers could benefit from the subtle changes of caps once they are in the "above average". Certainly from worn-out 'lytics to a metalized poly, but beyond that and I expect it to be lost on them.
-Bill

 

Interesting on both counts. Low-level dynamics is a good thing.

Been thinking a lot about this. I've read quite a few threads about capacitors, some about regular caps and some about oil types in particular, and whenever a question was raised about choosing the right voltage, and specifically, questions about the pros/cons of choosing higher voltage vs lower voltage in audio circuits, I mainly got one of two answers.

1. "It needs to meet or exceed the voltage rating on the original cap for that particular circuit design, though the general rule of thumb is to use a cap of double the original stated voltage."

And...

2. "No, a higher voltage cap won't hurt anything and won't draw more voltage into the circuit than it's supposed to, and it also won't change the sound."

But as I've mentioned in the past regarding oil capacitors, you can't help but notice how higher-voltage caps of a particular brand/type/model seem to be more-robust than the lower-voltage caps (If you took two oil caps, same brand/series/type/tolerance, one being like 100vdc and the other being 1000vdc, all things being equal, the higher-voltage cap tends to be the more-robustly-manufactured of the two. And I've read a few (A few... Not a lot) mentions about certain modern capacitors where they said the higher-voltage ones had more depth and refinement, but I've heard other people say that's BS, although most of them sounded as if they were simply viewing it from a general standpoint of physics/math (Some engineers seem that way... There's no in-betweens or maybe's with them, you know? Oh jeez, I'm gonna' get it for that one... Probably should have left it at "I'm no expert." and kept my mouth shut ). And the audio/hi-fi business is chock full of seemingly-unexplainable occurrences where there were positive/negatives effects, ESPECIALLY in the VINTAGE hi-fi/audio world.

Whatever the case, Wharfedale drivers from the tube-era are very-sensitive to so many things like amp/preamp-design, tube-choice, etc. and are also very-sensitive from a power standpoint and are very-efficient, so if any drivers are gonna' be sensitive to cap-choice, Wharfedale would be among them. Anyway, I wanted to bring that up again because I've been thinking about it all day (Took me a while to get back to this... Left my Kindle on all afternoon, probably on this page, but there was nobody at the wheel).

 

It's the sound signature of poly cap used, not that it is a poly cap.

That's not it. Cheap electrolytic caps sound cheap, which I suppose could be mistaken for sounding faster, but it's actually the glare you're hearing.

I would never use Dayton or Solen caps in the high pass. They have an edgy, harsh sound signature. Sonicap, Clarity, Obbligato and Mundorf are much better choices. I would suggest changing the cheap ceramic block resistors as well. Mills are a good choice.

Completely false. Most speakers are made to a price point and using electrolytic caps is one way to get there. Size is another issue as poly caps are much larger than electrolytic. There's also the issue of supply. It would be difficult to purchase the quantity of good poly caps needed for a large production run, where as electrolytic caps are produced in very large quantities. In addition, caps in crossovers are non-polar.

 

Thanks, Bill! So if I'm reading you correctly, it wouldn't be worth the effort to replace the Daytons with Solens, correct?

 

I imagine you would get pretty much the same sound. And I would bet that F1nut is right about those points. I really haven't tried the higher-quality poly caps like the expensive Mundorf ones. I HAD considered going with some modern OIL-based caps, and I was close to pulling the trigger on some Rike ones (Maybe #2 to Duelund in price/quality terms), but it would have cost a fortune, and luckily, someone messaged me at just the right time with some help shopping for some good n.o.s. oil caps that saved me a bundle, so I never got to try out the Rikes.

What F1nut said has me a lot more-optimistic about the possibility of using modern caps again, maybe even the modern oil types, but thankfully, I'm already very-happy with the sound of my WO90's at this point. I would probably get buried in those things when I die. I love the classic Wharfedale sound of the early '60's. It reminds me of the classic British-made Vox AC30 guitar amps, which have the same kind of lushness (In fact, the original W60's have even more of that AC30/EL84-type bloom... They are Briggs-era Wharfedale through and through).

By the way, sberger's W60's look great. I always thought they looked nice on stands, and when placed properly like that, the W60's have a 3D depth to the mids and highs that rivals high-quality modern efficient types. Hard to explain, but it's that "breath of life" sound, which I adore. The W90's have the same thing, albeit with a much deeper bass response, but you pay for that bass depth with the incredibly-large cabs. But W60's are not like the smaller standmount speakers where you're saying to yourself, "They'd be great if I only had a sub". They don't have crazy extension, but what's there is still full-sized, thanks to the 12" woofer, which actually supplies some lower mids without clouding/muddying things up. Gilbert Briggs was proud of that model, which was specifically-designed for US customers that he felt might find the bass of the W3 a bit too lean for their tastes (And he didn't compromise on the QUALITY of the bass for the sake of better low-end extension... He appreciated the amazing low-bass of the original AR3, but he did feel it traded off on accuracy).

 

Oh man, I know a guy with a real copper-panel JMI-era Vox AC30 (circa '63-'64), and lemme tell ya, that remains the most incredible-sounding amp I've yet had the pleasure to use. Lush, creamy, complex, nuanced, etc. etc. etc. No wonder they go for big bucks now.

At the time I had a 2002 UK-made AC30TBX, and the difference between the two amps was like comparing a Fisher tube amp and some BPC* receiver from Goodwill.

*Black Plastic Crap

 

Whoops... I meant to say Gilbert Briggs felt the AR3 traded off on bass-QUALITY, ... not accuracy.

I realized I goofed there, but the 30 minute editing time limit had expired.

 

I know precisely what you mean. Dick Jennings was the man (That was his name, right? The guy who designed the AC15 & AC30?). And like I said, Wharfedale in the '60's was like the hi-fi loudspeaker equivalent to Vox. They have the same lushness and bloom, to the point where vintage guitar lovers would easily hear the resemblance. I remember when Crestwood23 first mentioned it to me, and I thought, "OMG... He's right... They TOTALLY-have that Vox bloom.".

Vox also had, for a brief time, the Tonebender, which was a germanium-transistor-driven fuzz pedal. The Vox one was kind of the mid-era version of the Tonebender. I think it may have been assembled in Italy, but it was JMI-era as far as I know. There was an early version, then the Vox variation came next, followed by the classic Sola Sound Tonebender MKII Professional, which is probably the most-famous version. I have a modern, hand-built replica from the late Bob Sweet that has OC81 transistors (Mine is #23... I bought it when it first came out, and he passed away a short time after that, so it is a VERY-rare pedal... I also have an early Analog Man Sunface (Analog Man, i.e. Mike Pierra), which is the most-authentic boutique replica of the old Arbiter Fuzz Face that Hendrix used... I also have one of his early Dallas Rangemaster replicas... Billy Gibbons uses both pedals in his guitar rig... I love the old, transistor-driven, all-analog effects like that from the old British companies like Sola Sound, Arbiter/Dallas-Arbiter, and others... The Tonebender, the Fuzz Face, the Rangemaster, the Univibe, etc... Interestingly-enough, the old Wharfedales are especially-good at reproducing those old effects pedals as well as the analog and analog-tape-based studio effects/trickery, such as the panning and tape-manipulation stuff that Eddie Kramer did in the late '60's on "Axis: Bold As Love" and "Electric Ladyland"... To sberger, if you ever get an opportunity to hear the old, first-pressing stereo LP's of those albums through those W60's, I think you would like it very-much... I have the Reprise first pressings of Axis, Smash Hits, Electric Ladyland, etc. and the early Wharfedales really nail that stuff... The Super 3 and Super 5 cone-tweeters seem perfectly-designed for it).

 

,

Thanks GT for a great post. Extremely interesting and educational. I have all the early Hendrix on Reprise and Track. Always like having a reason to pull them out for a spin.

 

Yeah, I love that stuff. The Track "Electric Ladyland" is awesome. Also, if you don't have it, you should try the US Reprise "Smash Hits". Probably my favorite vintage LP in my collection. Bought it when I was 12, and it still plays dead-quiet. Very-deep grooves on that one. I have the Reprise LP's for everything up to "War Heroes", but "Smash Hits" is the one I play most. It has the best version of "Red House", which I worshipped when I was a kid, first learning how to play guitar.

Honestly, the old Wharfedales are very-vinyl-friendly in general. Wharfedale is definitely a brand born of the analog world, and their classic models are very-friendly to analog-based formats like vinyl, cassette (the analog ones), reel-to-reel, etc.

Incidentally, I learned most of what I know about record and CD pressings back during my first two years here on the Steve Hoffman forum, and that knowledge was incredibly-useful later on when I joined AK.

 

Since the original Six's were voiced with oil caps, I would bet that at the very least replacing the Daytons with caps that others have said to be less harsh/edgy might be worth the trouble. And if I was recapping mine, I'd definitely be on the lookout for PIO's to get as close to the original voicing as I could. I think they're worth it.

 

Got it, one of mine too. Will give it a spin today.

 

Oh nice... That "Smash Hits" rules.

 

You touched on something that I was considering. I was expecting the Sixes to be 'warmer,' but they are pretty crispy. Is that because of the caps I used or because I'm using them with a Yamaha CR-1020 receiver? Yamaha receivers from that era are known for their "cool" character. I dunno...

 

Dang, maybe I should go buy those local W60's after all...