pcrosewood Posted July 27, 2012 Report Share Posted July 27, 2012 I'm new to AR speakers and have two pairs of 2ax's. One pair is the original edition and the other is the later model. I've been researching some of the upgrades these speakers need including re-caps. However, some of the original caps , I've read, are in a sealed box inside the speaker and last forever So now I'm having my doubts as to whether a re-cap is needed. What benefit would there be in re-capping ? And I'm thinking, these are 50 year old speakers, the caps must need to be changed by now. Should I or shouldn't I...that's the question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
genek Posted July 27, 2012 Report Share Posted July 27, 2012 The only vintage caps that never need to be replaced are the old oil-filled cans. The wax block and NPE type caps will eventually drift off spec.Whether a recap will significantly improve the sound of speakers whose sound you like now is another matter. But if you have to open them up anyway to refoam the woofers or clean out the level controls, changing the caps even if they don't actually need it will at least save you the trouble of having to go back in again to do it for a long time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rrcrain Posted July 27, 2012 Report Share Posted July 27, 2012 My understanding is the old oil filled caps are filled with PCB, Something I wouldn't want to leave in the home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoyC Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 Although it probaby can't hurt to replace the caps, the 2ax was manufactured long after the "oil filled" type were used.Attached are 2 photos of "oil filled" caps used in a very early pair of AR-3's (manufactured around 1960). These were heavy duty (probably military surplus), rated at 200V for the small parallel 3uf caps in the tweeter circuit and 600V for the 24uf combo cap in the mid circuit. These measured right on the money, with no signs of leakage. I would have no problem leaving them in the cabinet. Otoh, the caps used in later 3's, 2ax, etc, were not pcb/oil filled, or as durable. These were rated at 50V, and almost always require replacement.Roy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lakecat Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 I have a pair of ax's that were from 1977 and I purchased them mint from the original owner. Being new to AR, I rushed them right over to my speaker guy and had the pots cleaned and had it recapped with Solens. They sound pretty good.....until I stuck an original untouched 2a next to one......The 2a just sounds better. It is not as soft and plays louder. Go figure....I am still trying too. I would try one pair recapped...then test against the originals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcrosewood Posted July 29, 2012 Author Report Share Posted July 29, 2012 Thanks to all for the responses. This is a great site. Looks like I'll re-cap while I'm in there. I've chosen the Dayton 4UF and 6.2uF caps. I'm enjoying the sound of these original 2ax's despite tha fact the pots are corroded and the woofers need to be resealed. I'm hesitant to do anything that may change the fundamental sound. I re-capped a pair of Dynaco A25xl's recently with Solens caps. The Solens brightened up the Dynacos , which worked out well because they were bass heavy and muddy sounding. The re-cap was a very noticeable improvement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JKent Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 I have a pair of ax's that were from 1977 and I purchased them mint from the original owner. Being new to AR, I rushed them right over to my speaker guy and had the pots cleaned and had it recapped with Solens. They sound pretty good.....until I stuck an original untouched 2a next to one......The 2a just sounds better. It is not as soft and plays louder. Go figure....I am still trying too. I would try one pair recapped...then test against the originals.The 2a and 2ax are different animals. I have had two pair of 2ax's. One early pair with the cast aluminum frame woofers and one later pair. Both had the wax block caps and those really had to be replaced.I also have a pair of 2a's. Those happen to have the oil-filled can caps and I agree--the 2a's sound wonderful. Possibly better than the 2ax but I did not do a side-by-side comparison.Kent Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlspeak Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 Of all the vintage AR caps I've tested, only the Compulytics have withstood the test of time and remained reasonably close to target uF values and ESR had not increased significantly. Visit here for more details.http://www.classicspeakerpages.net/IP.Board/index.php?showtopic=6354My recommendation is to replace if it isn't a Compulytic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lakecat Posted August 3, 2012 Report Share Posted August 3, 2012 The 2a and 2ax are different animals. I have had two pair of 2ax's. One early pair with the cast aluminum frame woofers and one later pair. Both had the wax block caps and those really had to be replaced.I also have a pair of 2a's. Those happen to have the oil-filled can caps and I agree--the 2a's sound wonderful. Possibly better than the 2ax but I did not do a side-by-side comparison.KentHi Kent. Yes, they are different animals but close cousins... Being new to the AR lines, I am still in the learning curve. From the little reading I have done, I assumed the 2ax was an upgrade over the 2a. I have had the 2ax's for awhile and after having the recap and pots cleaned, really enjoyed them. I came across an original condition 2a locally here and purchased it from the gentleman as it was in mint condition and this seller had NO appreciation for the speaker...(long story)...but had to get it away from him...Got it home and removed the staples holding the grille cover, cleaned it, and did the woofer finger test. It failed so got the sealant from Roy and sealed the woofer. Then I took this speaker and replaced the one 2ax so I could compare the two while playing and see how the 2a sounded against the 2ax. I figured the 2ax would sound much better than the 2a...but was wrong. It is close but the 2a sounds better to me....and to five people I've had sit and listen to them also. And to top it off, the pots on the 2a have never been cleaned and aren't working well. Go figure.....but I am scratching my head as to what exactly did the recap do to the 2ax. You should do the test yourself to see if you come to the same conclusion. I do have to say I am looking for the match to the 2a now!...lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JKent Posted August 3, 2012 Report Share Posted August 3, 2012 I totally agree. I, too, thought the 2ax was an improvement over the 2a. In fact, AR used to sell a conversion kit for 2a owners to "upgrade" to the 2ax. The thing is, I really like the 2a and although I never did a side by side comparison, I think I like it better than the 2ax, as you do.I sold both pair of 2ax's when I got my 3s, but I'm holding on to the 2a's. I did a little damage to the back of the grille when I removed it--no big deal and easily repaired but I have to get around to it. I do think that when properly treated with Roy's goo the old cloth-surround woofers in the 2a and some early 2ax's are superior to the newer foam-surround ones. YMMV.Only drawback to the 2a design is that it is designed for horizontal (bookshelf) placement. The angled mid-tweets give their best dispersion in that position. The 2ax OTOH could be put on the floor, vertically (on stands).Your 2ax absolutely needed to be recapped, so you did not do anything "bad" to the 2ax. You just prefer the sound of the 2a (as do I).Kent Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryM Posted August 3, 2012 Report Share Posted August 3, 2012 To me,recapping tames the shrillness of the highs.Every pair of speakers I pick up get hooked up and listened to,then I recap one and hook it back up to see if there is an improvement and I have found on all,but my AR-8's,that the improvement is noticeable.Some more then others but always an improvement.Even my AR-91's that I thought sounded amazing improved after recapping.It's a cleaner more balanced sound to me.I highly recommend recapping. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lakecat Posted August 5, 2012 Report Share Posted August 5, 2012 I totally agree. I, too, thought the 2ax was an improvement over the 2a. In fact, AR used to sell a conversion kit for 2a owners to "upgrade" to the 2ax. The thing is, I really like the 2a and although I never did a side by side comparison, I think I like it better than the 2ax, as you do.I sold both pair of 2ax's when I got my 3s, but I'm holding on to the 2a's. I did a little damage to the back of the grille when I removed it--no big deal and easily repaired but I have to get around to it. I do think that when properly treated with Roy's goo the old cloth-surround woofers in the 2a and some early 2ax's are superior to the newer foam-surround ones. YMMV.Only drawback to the 2a design is that it is designed for horizontal (bookshelf) placement. The angled mid-tweets give their best dispersion in that position. The 2ax OTOH could be put on the floor, vertically (on stands).Your 2ax absolutely needed to be recapped, so you did not do anything "bad" to the 2ax. You just prefer the sound of the 2a (as do I).KentHi Kent and glad someone else thinks the same.. There was only two caps to replace in the ax and I agree that recapping made it smoother sounding. This person has an opportunity to compare before and after recaps to his speakers and would be curious as to what differences he could hear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.