Don't shoot the messenger,
And yes some of the posts cover audible noise outside the caps
A few red herrings..Please ignore..Its just for fun.
Picking Capacitors - Walter G. Jung and Richard Marsh
Johnson?Nyquist noise - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Everybody knows about Capacitor Noise
http://www.senseir.com/uploads/Noise_on_Capacitor_Combinations.pdf
IEEE Xplore - Vibration and audible noise of capacitors subjected to nonsinusoidal waveforms
Regards
M. Gregg
And yes some of the posts cover audible noise outside the caps
A few red herrings..Please ignore..Its just for fun.
Picking Capacitors - Walter G. Jung and Richard Marsh
Johnson?Nyquist noise - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Everybody knows about Capacitor Noise
http://www.senseir.com/uploads/Noise_on_Capacitor_Combinations.pdf
IEEE Xplore - Vibration and audible noise of capacitors subjected to nonsinusoidal waveforms
Regards
M. Gregg
This question has been answered many decades, maybe a century ago.
The first question in my mind should be: "do people reliably identify changes in capacitor treatment?"
If this is answered affirmatively, then it would make sense to devote time, effort and money to find out why this is so.
So far, all we have is anecdotes and "it is so, because I say so".
jan
Don't think I've ever seen this capacitor site before. It looks to be interesting for beginners or experts, and "my main interest is in analog electronic applications so that is how this FAQ is oriented" is a big bonus for audio folks.
Just another red herring,
Again ignore its just for fun.
Clarity cap white paper..(Yes they are going to promote their caps its still interesting)
http://www.hificollective.co.uk/pdf/claritycapmr.pdf
I guess if the caps were covered with a coating that did not give with movement like heat shrink (that would change with time and heating)..or a piece of copper pipe filled with resin oups thats Obbligato..
Regards
M. Gregg
Again ignore its just for fun.
Clarity cap white paper..(Yes they are going to promote their caps its still interesting)
http://www.hificollective.co.uk/pdf/claritycapmr.pdf
I guess if the caps were covered with a coating that did not give with movement like heat shrink (that would change with time and heating)..or a piece of copper pipe filled with resin oups thats Obbligato..
Regards
M. Gregg
Last edited:
Nothing there in Clarity's paper about break-in, despite their dedicated research on cap sound quality. Much of the same info is found in Cyril Bateman's "cap_fallacies" pdf someone linked earlier.
From the link I provided above, there is this on capacitor "Aging":
"Class 2 ceramic capacitors go through a logarithmic loss of capacitance (ageing) [sic] after manufacture because of the slow realignment of the crystals of barium titanate after baking. In general, the higher the K, the faster the ageing. Because of this, electrical measurements are typically taken no less than 24 hours later (some people recommend 1000 hours). Baking the capacitors for several hours at 130-150C restores the capacitance to it´s original value (should you want to), and the ageing starts all over again. High voltage also tends to turn back the clock somewhat, and some test procedures take this into account."
I hope we agree it's a bit of a stretch to call this the "break-in" of this thread's topic.
From the link I provided above, there is this on capacitor "Aging":
"Class 2 ceramic capacitors go through a logarithmic loss of capacitance (ageing) [sic] after manufacture because of the slow realignment of the crystals of barium titanate after baking. In general, the higher the K, the faster the ageing. Because of this, electrical measurements are typically taken no less than 24 hours later (some people recommend 1000 hours). Baking the capacitors for several hours at 130-150C restores the capacitance to it´s original value (should you want to), and the ageing starts all over again. High voltage also tends to turn back the clock somewhat, and some test procedures take this into account."
I hope we agree it's a bit of a stretch to call this the "break-in" of this thread's topic.
Last edited:
Well its just a thought,<<NB
If the winding were to get looser ie worse then this would allow movement in the capacitor. OK yes its irrelevant..however if the cap got worse could it create a sound people prefered..heating and cooling will effect a cap. How tight is it wound and how long does this tightness last? Ok your going to say the dielectric can't stretch..the cap won't expand or contract in its use.
Regards
M. Gregg
This just reminds us of the message: that science can explain some changes.
If we can explain it scientifically then we are likely to have understood the mechanism of change.
Once we understand then we can llok for a way to scientifically measure the change.
Burn in has not been scientifically explained.
I would allege that the two conditions follow: We don't understand and we don't know how to measure.
There being no existing scientific explanation does not preclude that eventually our understanding could change and an explanation does come about.
It's the usual, absence of a negative does not prove a positive (have I got that the right way around?).
BTW,
epcos say in their spec that the electrolytic leakage is down to specified value within 5mins. That is not the same as saying leakage does not change after 5mins.
I have proved, to myself, that leakage continues to change over days, not minutes.
No, I wouldn't. "Audiophile" caps are often the worst in this respect. A good mass-production machine made cap will show close to zero of this effect. But again, NOTHING to do with the topic. Can you please keep to the subject?
It is not enough to show that break-in changes a capacitor. You also have to show that break-in changes it enough to be audible. Small changes in capacitance value or loss tangent won't do it. Mechanical resonances could be an issue in 'capacitor sound', but difficult to see how break-in would improve that - just as likely to make it worse.
Please note that we are not asking for the answer before we begin the search, as has been suggested. We are asking for either:
1. some hard evidence that there is something to be sought, or
2. some idea of what it is we might be searching for.
If I asked you to search SY's garage for a dragon, you might ask me two questions:
1. what makes you think he has a dragon in his garage?
2. what (at least roughly) does a dragon look like e.g. how big might it be?
That is all we are asking. When people keep dragging out woodlice, wasps and bits of sawdust and asking "Is this a dragon?" they may find that we begin to lose patience. You see, we are not convinced that there is a dragon in SY's garage but we do know that a dragon is quite large and breathes fire (if it exists at all). So we could estimate what size of cupboard/corner the dragon might be hiding in. We might even conclude that his garage is not large enough to hold a dragon, as we know that people with even bigger garages don't seem to find dragons. We are then accused of being flat-earthers, or even being unscientific.
Show us the scorch-marks on the wall, then we may begin to believe in dragons.
Please note that we are not asking for the answer before we begin the search, as has been suggested. We are asking for either:
1. some hard evidence that there is something to be sought, or
2. some idea of what it is we might be searching for.
If I asked you to search SY's garage for a dragon, you might ask me two questions:
1. what makes you think he has a dragon in his garage?
2. what (at least roughly) does a dragon look like e.g. how big might it be?
That is all we are asking. When people keep dragging out woodlice, wasps and bits of sawdust and asking "Is this a dragon?" they may find that we begin to lose patience. You see, we are not convinced that there is a dragon in SY's garage but we do know that a dragon is quite large and breathes fire (if it exists at all). So we could estimate what size of cupboard/corner the dragon might be hiding in. We might even conclude that his garage is not large enough to hold a dragon, as we know that people with even bigger garages don't seem to find dragons. We are then accused of being flat-earthers, or even being unscientific.
Show us the scorch-marks on the wall, then we may begin to believe in dragons.
Insearch of the Dragon
2. How many degrees of freedom .
3. How is it repeatable .
4. Are the scorch marks from a dragon or is it some other source.
1. What is audible in this context.
2. How many degrees of freedom .
3. How is it repeatable .
4. Are the scorch marks from a dragon or is it some other source.
So I will ask you the same simple question I presented to SY. If you have heard a difference in the quality of the output from a piece of audio equipment - over time - what do you suspect causes that change. It is starting to look like attaching the phrase "burn-in" is at the heart of the disagreements. Possibly it's a semantic error that needs re-definition. My interest here is in the phenomenon more than the label.
Another question that could be added to the list is: "Why do you even want to know the answer you are seeking?" In this case I would hope an element of predictability related to component choices might be established. I have done a lot of "plug it in and listen", but would appreciate a better (read narrower) definition/explanation of what's happening - no matter the label.
I have made the mistake of installing more than one item in an upgrade, which eliminates the ability to understand the effect of each piece. When done correctly, having prior knowledge of what to expect might indeed still fall into the "the mind hears what it expects" approach. If though, a large number of users report the same result (be it positive or negative as stated earlier) IMO, that information could prove to be useful.
To be clear, I would welcome both subjective impressions and science based proofs that could take some of the guesswork out of the amp tuning process. If that is too trivial or the collected data too unreliable, so be it. It still appears to be an area well worth the effort of those who choose to investigate further and share what is learned.
I really like the idea of defining the dragon before we look for it.
Dave, just to save you some typing:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/tubes-valves/225000-breaking-audio-capacitors-6.html#post3278719
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/tubes-valves/225000-breaking-audio-capacitors-6.html#post3278719
OK. There is a theorem in computer science which says that every algorithm either halts or goes into an infinite loop. I think we have entered the loop when post 338 asks the same question as 208.
All I will say is that medium-term settling or long-term ageing of components are not the same thing as break-in. Applying a DC bias is not the same thing as applying random noise.
Why do people think there is a dragon in SY's garage?
All I will say is that medium-term settling or long-term ageing of components are not the same thing as break-in. Applying a DC bias is not the same thing as applying random noise.
Why do people think there is a dragon in SY's garage?
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.