[Trevor Wilson[_2_]]

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...

My repairman used mil-spec replacements for about the same price
Linn
would have charged to renew the original parts.

He was probably marking those mil-spec parts up fantastically. In
small
volumes, the actual additional cost of a more competent part
obtained
competently is usually only marginal.

For the crossover, he installed 150 caps for $250 and was finished
the
next day.

Very unlikely. There aren't 150 capactors in 10 speakers, let alone
1.

It's a three-way active crossover on a circuit board. I got a plastic
bag full of dead parts in exchange. There were also repairs to the
power
supply, so it's possible the total was of assorted parts.

Maybe 15 parts.

No, even an electronics novice such as myself can tell the difference
between a bag of fifteen parts and a bag of one hundred fifty.

An online forum post describes a similar Linn crossover: "Linn
definitely claim some correction for phase in the Isobarik Aktiv box,
it
has a lot of electronics in it. Including two rows of 8 stages of
something with a capactitor and two transistors" which were said "The
two neat rows of trannies are basically cascaded all pass phase shift
networks to give you time alignment between the hf & mf sections at
crossover point." The Kabers are three-way, so include more parts than
that.

There's only one way to describe a circuit board that small with 15 bad
parts on it: junk as built.

The number fifteen is your guess based on passive crossovers, so we can
move past this claim.

Well Stephen, you usual delusions of mind reading are in evidence as is
usual.

As for 'bad parts,' you must have missed Trevor's posts about the finite
life of electronic components. These may have been as much as twenty
years old, and because of damage to the power switch, run 24/7 for the
last few years.

I don't need Trevor to educate me about the reliability of electronic
parts.

**Actually, I suspect you do. Electrlytic capacitors begin wearing out, as
soon as the equipment is turned on. Many caps destined for domestic products
have a very short (published) life span. Certainly less than 5,000 hours. If
I was presented with a 20 year old piece of equipment, with a large number
of caps, some of which had failed, I would advise replacement of most/all
electros as a matter of course.The reason for this is that I do not like to
see my clients return with the same equipment, for similar faults, within a
year or two of service. I'd much prefer that my repair last AT LEAST as long
as the equipment had lasted to date. Preferably longer. As a rule, I always
use superior quality replacement caps, where possible.


The still-excessive failure rate may help explain Linn's continual
redesign of its active crossovers from discrete components to circuit
boards with plug-in modules to plug-in modules placed directly in the
power amp.

Failure of 150 parts in an electronic crossover, even after 20 years of
24/7 use is characteristic of junk-as-built.

**Nope. It is quite common. Ten years is about what we expect from a
permanent power supply in an old VCR. Cap failure is a normal event.
Particularly for products which operate at elevated temperatures. Even
quality brands like Sony and Panasonic are so afflicted. Quite a large
number of engineers appear to treat caps as if they are 'blcak box' passive
components, which are impervious to heat. They're wrong, of course.


Interesting that 'same price for better specs' translates to
'fantastic
markup' for you.

Stephen, can't read can you? Or is it that context means nothing to
you?
The above is irrelevant to what I said, and more strikingly, it is
irrelevant to what you said.

It's a paraphrase of what you said in reply to what I said. I agree
that
it didn't make sense in context.

You can buy motor oil cheaper in the store than at the mechanic's,
too.

Of course, but irrelevant.

Exactly relevant to the cost of replacement parts "obtained
competently"
by the tech vs the cost to the consumer installed as a repair.

That wasn't what I was talking about. I was talking about the
incremental
cost of a higher-spec part which is what you started out talking about.

Yes, I said I was able to get the higher-spec'd parts installed for the
supposed cost of a Linn renewal to original specs. Then you said the
repairman got a 'fantastic markup' which doesn't make sense,

It makes as much sense as you care to understand.

As things stand, the whole story is strange.

The number of parts (150 capacitors!) that were replaced was way out of
proportion to reality for either a passive or active crossover.

**Not necessarily. I've not sighted the crossover in question, but it is
entirely possible that Linn have used a large number of decoupling caps in
their design. I've worked on a few crossovers and some use rather prodigious
numbers of eletros in their design (usually as decoupling caps).

Form
example, there might be 35 capacitors per channel in an active crossover.
If even 25 percent failed after 20 years, it would be a disaster of
biblical proportions!

**Except that neither of us know what Linn have done and their reasons for
doing so.

Trevor Wilson