While I agree there is no money in the test that leaves it to the hobby with people who do this not for money. Maybe some thing along the line of intermodular distortion . John C remember the bumblebee work the phd where fired for saying it impossible ! I not asking you to devote large resources to this but no one is coming forth with any type of trials or methodology to prove or disprove break-in effects the passive. One last point every piece of machinery I have ever used electronic, car, truck, etc has changed after a break-in period . Given that how is it possible that singularly in the universe as we know it that capacitors do not change after a break-in period ?
Machinery and passive electronic components are two different things. Not a good analogy. There's nothing to "wear" or change dimension/flexibility in plastic film capacitors (except possibly Mylar as I noted above).
The money quote is John Curl admitting that there's nothing there capable of measurement. Combine it with the total lack of evidence of audibility and you can provisionally assume that it's all audiophile legend.
Don't let the fact that your bumblebee story is untrue stop you from believing it, though.
The money quote is John Curl admitting that there's nothing there capable of measurement. Combine it with the total lack of evidence of audibility and you can provisionally assume that it's all audiophile legend.
Don't let the fact that your bumblebee story is untrue stop you from believing it, though.
I wasn't going to comment however
Post 13 in polk audio,
PDF...
Capacitor break-in
SD ansar information..ref voltage proofing
Ansar Capacitors Technical Information from suppression-devices.com
Regards
M. Gregg
Post 13 in polk audio,
PDF...
Capacitor break-in
SD ansar information..ref voltage proofing
Ansar Capacitors Technical Information from suppression-devices.com
Regards
M. Gregg
Can be done in couple ways.
1. Listening test, new vs. broken-in caps.
2. Measure the sound, before & after.
We are not saying that there is sound we can hear but not measurable with modern device, are we?
Of course we are. Test equipment has a limited range and function, at least for analyzers that cost up to $30,000. Perhaps there is a $100,000 or million dollar piece of equipment in some lab somewhere that could measure something interesting, even about cap 'break-in' but we lowly audio people don't have easy access to it.
I once referenced some electron microscope studies that showed what happens to a metal when just sitting around, and on a micro scale, it was profound. However, the same critics dismissed the research entirely, at the time.
I once referenced some electron microscope studies that showed what happens to a metal when just sitting around, and on a micro scale, it was profound. However, the same critics dismissed the research entirely, at the time.
Sy,
As you are aware I'm firmly in the "if I hear it I believe I hear it" camp
. But the possibility of some sort of scientific testing and proofing is intriguing - whether the results confirm or disprove claims of audible differences as the result of "break-in". I've sent out several emails to some significant companies requesting information on methods, equipment and practicality of such a quest. I'll report if and/or when I get replies.
I do however, want to ask you a very simple straight forward question. Have you never experienced a change/improvement/difference in the output of a piece of audio equipment from first power-up - and performance over time? It appears that is what you are stating - but I well might be misinterpreting your comments.
Again, this is not intended to be a gottcha or a desire to be petty - just an honest question.
As you are aware I'm firmly in the "if I hear it I believe I hear it" camp
. But the possibility of some sort of scientific testing and proofing is intriguing - whether the results confirm or disprove claims of audible differences as the result of "break-in". I've sent out several emails to some significant companies requesting information on methods, equipment and practicality of such a quest. I'll report if and/or when I get replies.I do however, want to ask you a very simple straight forward question. Have you never experienced a change/improvement/difference in the output of a piece of audio equipment from first power-up - and performance over time? It appears that is what you are stating - but I well might be misinterpreting your comments.
Again, this is not intended to be a gottcha or a desire to be petty - just an honest question.
Sure I have- but for completely rational reasons (like hitting operating points, driving out moisture, mechanical break-in in transducers). In all cases, the phenomena are easy to measure, as is the case for ANYTHING that's been demonstrated to be audible.
If someone does a controlled listening test between "new" and "broken in" capacitors and can find a difference, that's evidence, and then worth spending technical effort. To date, only hand-waving and anecdote.
If someone does a controlled listening test between "new" and "broken in" capacitors and can find a difference, that's evidence, and then worth spending technical effort. To date, only hand-waving and anecdote.
You can build a switch-box with parts on hand and do an ears-only test. There. I saved you a million bucks.
Good question Bob. What appears to be happening in 'break-in' is that highly worked materials have a chance to 'relax' to their lowest energy state. Why this should be audible I do not exactly know, but that seems to be what is happening at the 'nano' level, somewhere above just atoms, but below what most measuring equipment can detect anything. After all, most of our measuring equipment is made from caps, IC's, etc that we would not put into a hi end audio product, so it should be obvious that whatever the test equipment measures, it is NOT the 'quality' of the caps or IC's to any great extent.
Thanks,
It will be interesting to see if the DIY members can or will take on the challenge. The resources and interest appear to be present.
Exposing my lack of lab experience, I have seen some super sophisticated scope readouts on complicated multiplexed video signals. It's hard to believe/understand audio being that much more difficult to measure.
It will be interesting to see if the DIY members can or will take on the challenge. The resources and interest appear to be present.
Exposing my lack of lab experience, I have seen some super sophisticated scope readouts on complicated multiplexed video signals. It's hard to believe/understand audio being that much more difficult to measure.
Apparently not, since you've limited yourself to $30k analyzers.
The important thing is not how much the equipment costs (and I've got a few million dollars worth at my disposal) but the knowledge of how to use it and interpret it correctly. Hand-waving about "lower energy states" doesn't cut it except for trying to fool the rubes.I had a look at that 'study' a few days ago - it emerged from a Google search for any evidence of cap break-in. It appears that the author had access to a tool (meant for an analysing birdsong) so he used it. It also appears that the author had not a clue how to interpret the results, which were mainly null anyway. The most that can be said is that the study provides no evidence for break-in, and may provide weak evidence against break-in.M Gregg said:
The stuff on 'voltage-proofing' would be relevant to manufacturers using capacitor technologies which require it but don't do it in the factory. If so, two things would follow:
1. they would quickly acquire a reputation for lousy caps among ordinary electronics users,
2. to fix the problem would require applying high voltage DC, not the low voltage AC of a typical 'break-in' machine.
Therefore, irrelevant to the current discussion.
2.
I wonder the same thing. I shouldn't be, I suppose, but I am always amazed that you feel a need to do that.
If there is a phenomenon there, that may work just fine. Perhaps not just a scope, a spectrum analyzer (e.g., FT) could be more suitable. See Doug Self's paper on "breaking in" of Mylar caps in Linear Audio.
Talk about 'lowest energy states' (code for cryogenics?) is just creating a quantum smoke screen for the uninitiated. I have a simple question which has not been addressed:
what changes to a coupling capacitor would be audible?
My answers are:
1. huge increase in series resistance of the metal and/or significant increase in the audio loss tangent of the dielectric - in either case a small increase would not be noticeable.
2. huge change in capacitor value - if a small change is noticeable then the value was already too small anyway.
3. significant non-linearity, presumably in the dielectric - small non-linearity would not matter except in the LF rolloff setting capacitor.
4. high-Q mechanical resonance - a low-Q resonance would be easily spotted in a frequency-impedance curve - which somehow goes away after 'break-in'.
Would anyone like to suggest more possibilities? An explanation as to how these phenomena do not crop up in other applications of electronics would be useful too. Merely asserting without proof that audio is the most exacting application will not do.
what changes to a coupling capacitor would be audible?
My answers are:
1. huge increase in series resistance of the metal and/or significant increase in the audio loss tangent of the dielectric - in either case a small increase would not be noticeable.
2. huge change in capacitor value - if a small change is noticeable then the value was already too small anyway.
3. significant non-linearity, presumably in the dielectric - small non-linearity would not matter except in the LF rolloff setting capacitor.
4. high-Q mechanical resonance - a low-Q resonance would be easily spotted in a frequency-impedance curve - which somehow goes away after 'break-in'.
Would anyone like to suggest more possibilities? An explanation as to how these phenomena do not crop up in other applications of electronics would be useful too. Merely asserting without proof that audio is the most exacting application will not do.
I have just downloaded but not read that comprehensive capacitor test paper by C.Bateman.
There are numerous conclusions in there that DC bias changes the distortion resulting from passing an AC signal across a capacitor.
Could there be a change in distortion from equipment where the DC bias across one or more capacitors changes with use. This could be an increase in DC bias or an increase in DC bias.
If either of these changes (increase or decrease) in bias condition exists then it should be measurable.
Bateman has detailed the equipment and the methods allowing comparison/repetition.
There are numerous conclusions in there that DC bias changes the distortion resulting from passing an AC signal across a capacitor.
Could there be a change in distortion from equipment where the DC bias across one or more capacitors changes with use. This could be an increase in DC bias or an increase in DC bias.
If either of these changes (increase or decrease) in bias condition exists then it should be measurable.
Bateman has detailed the equipment and the methods allowing comparison/repetition.
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.