![]() |
Tweakers' Asylum Tweaks for systems, rooms and Do It Yourself (DIY) help. FAQ. |
|
While in search of a 5.3 uF metallized polypropylene capacitor for use in a loudspeaker crossover, I've only found a Kimber Kap available at that exact value.Since the capacitor is intended for a B&W product, I'm interested in the ClarityCap SA Series capacitor which is said to have been developed in consultation with B&W’s engineers for use in their Nautilus Series of speaker crossovers. A 5.3 uF value is not available, though.
What would the best choice be in terms of paralleling two ClarityCap SA caps to equal 5.3 uF?
Would two caps of close value (2.7 uF + 2.6 uF = 5.3 uF) or a larger and a smaller value (such as a 5 uF + .33 uF = 5.33 uF) be a better choice?
I'm also considering a film/foil bypass cap for the .33 uF cap, if a larger/smaller cap configuration is decided upon.
Or, should I simply go with the exact value single 5.3 uF Kimber Kap?
TIA
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Topic - Two paralleled cap's values for passive crossover? - Duster 12:33:51 11/17/05 (8)
- Re: Two paralleled cap's values for passive crossover? - Sam Anderson 02:07:09 11/29/05 (0)
- values for passive crossover? - Bare 19:05:05 11/17/05 (3)
- A "prolly" in this matter... - Duster 16:14:50 11/19/05 (0)
- Re: values for passive crossover? - Response34 14:00:18 11/18/05 (1)
- thanks... - Duster 14:17:45 11/22/05 (0)
- IMO you should first choose Kimber v. Clarity on sonic characteristics. - jeffreybehr 13:39:39 11/17/05 (2)
- Familiar sonic characteristics vs. experimentation... - Duster 14:29:58 11/17/05 (1)
- addendum: on the other hand... - Duster 17:40:29 11/17/05 (0)