I had some trouble figuring out what he was saying (it would be nice to have an actual table of results), but if I read it right, despite the total lack of controls and the enormous resistance to designing the test to be valid, the results weren't really different than chance. Not surprising in one of these ad hoc group demos. Fun, but ultimately useless.
You know what- I wasn't doing this to suit *you*. I was doing it to suit me initially. A lot of participants heard differences, whether identifying was possible or not, or whether they were trained in the task or not. That was the main point.
Lack of controls meaning 'constants' in the test? How could there be more uncontrolled positions than the caps under switch? It's as valid as it was to the people taking it, one way or the other, so I don't care if it was valid to you or not. Just because I did not do it your way, does not mean it was wrong, or uneventful.
As to the statistics- the first test was more than chance statistically, but was more wrong. You can read the thread going further on the PETT forum.
Useless to you, not to me.
Like I said before- the whole ESR bit is inherent to cap models, and I am not going to go and change it to prove your point. I used them as they came off the line, with the same low tolerance (measured) capacitance bracket, and the output-level you speak of is not what I am hearing as a difference. I can guarantee that.
I know I can hear it between some caps, but maybe not all, and it was valuable to *me* in the end. I may not have proved that you can hear differences scientifically, but I don't care. I do plan on doing this again in a smaller setting/group, so we'll see what happens....
Later,
Wolf
Lack of controls meaning 'constants' in the test? How could there be more uncontrolled positions than the caps under switch? It's as valid as it was to the people taking it, one way or the other, so I don't care if it was valid to you or not. Just because I did not do it your way, does not mean it was wrong, or uneventful.
As to the statistics- the first test was more than chance statistically, but was more wrong. You can read the thread going further on the PETT forum.
Useless to you, not to me.
Like I said before- the whole ESR bit is inherent to cap models, and I am not going to go and change it to prove your point. I used them as they came off the line, with the same low tolerance (measured) capacitance bracket, and the output-level you speak of is not what I am hearing as a difference. I can guarantee that.
I know I can hear it between some caps, but maybe not all, and it was valuable to *me* in the end. I may not have proved that you can hear differences scientifically, but I don't care. I do plan on doing this again in a smaller setting/group, so we'll see what happens....
Later,
Wolf
That's your claim, but your data (and "methods," using the term very loosely) do not back that up. I'm glad you had fun, because that's what hobbies are all about.
This is true to some extent. I did some measurements a while back. However, recently I have discover things are really complicated. How the cap interacts with other components play an important role.
Suggest you don't write that over at PETT. There's a 'guardian of technological truth' over there that will probably challenge you to a Randi-type controlled experiment 'cus you made an unsupported 'claim'.
All I wrote was I believed something was the case and got taken to task....
Impedance tests done back in 2006
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Note that two caps seem to have the almost the same shape?
One was a Duelund Silver Gold. Call caps were same value. The goal was to find a cap that sounded like the Duelund Silver Gold, but of a smaller form factor. I used this to prove a supplier was not giving me the right stuff, and they finally admitted after seeing this data I showed them.
The difference IS audible.
Last edited:
It looks like the top and bottom traces are of the same cap. Whereas the middle two are quite different.
What was the uF value of the caps tested?
I'm puzzled as to the low frequency at which the imp. peaked. That's what I usually have when doing a WT3 test on a woofer.
How, exactly, was your test set up? Did you use a WT?
What was the uF value of the caps tested?
I'm puzzled as to the low frequency at which the imp. peaked. That's what I usually have when doing a WT3 test on a woofer.
How, exactly, was your test set up? Did you use a WT?
Last edited:
speakerdoctor & all,
I am as much interested in what I can hear as the next guy.
I may be wrong about this. I don't think so. That "guardian" spoken of was not in attendance at the event. I believe they have little basis for objection to what was or wasn't heard that day. I believe also that their postings are as much an exercise of rhetoric for its own sake rather than a pursuit of truth.
Thank you - well put.
It just erks me because I wasn't there either and never made any claims there about my ability to hear cap differences and yet he picked on me to bust.
The two that look alike are different caps, but sound very similar, as it was the goal as explained. Other than that, I can't reveal any more. By now, I though the whole forum would know what I use for testing.
The story is we found a cap that was sonically very close to the Duelund silver gold, found the supplier, asked for samples and found they did not sound right. So we had to prove they were not the same.
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.