Looking at the Wikipedia article on palladium, it is noted that extremely fine particles are pyrophoric in air. That suggests that special precautions must be taken when manufacturing the paper and/or electrolyte, rather than chemical toxicity. The actual dielectric in electrolytic capacitors is aluminum oxide; BG caps were noted for having both anodic and cathodic foils etched, though not equally. It's been suggested that the carbon particles are the actual conductor rather than the electrolyte, such that both foils need to be passivated; it's the etching of the foil that gives electrolytic capacitors the very high surface area to increase capacitance, and that the electrolyte is needed to 'wet' the foil surfaces to take advantage of that surface.
By the time I was involved enough to maybe consider buying some of this type, they were already hundreds of dollars for small sizes from some places I had noticed.
Might be cool parts, but I'll just have to suffer here without.
I was reading the patent for the pureism, and it sounded like maybe they were trying to do something like what audionote has done to transfer as much as was practical/legal and put it into a new product. So hard to tell when some of the verbiage starts to ring of marketing speak.
Might be cool parts, but I'll just have to suffer here without.
I was reading the patent for the pureism, and it sounded like maybe they were trying to do something like what audionote has done to transfer as much as was practical/legal and put it into a new product. So hard to tell when some of the verbiage starts to ring of marketing speak.
Caps are really not a bad thing. It's like seasoning in food,
use it in the right places can yield very good benefits but
in order to do this you must know the sound of each cap.
Only place that I always try to avoid if possible is at input
or output of the circuits. If I can't then its caps testing
time & tweaking time.
use it in the right places can yield very good benefits but
in order to do this you must know the sound of each cap.
Only place that I always try to avoid if possible is at input
or output of the circuits. If I can't then its caps testing
time & tweaking time.
Patno. US5057972
https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/pdfs/US5057972.pdf
p.s.: sounds expensive and could explain the quite high initial prices.
Last edited:
According to Graphite Particle Layers Ive found this Patent (1977) not Jelmax nor Rubycon but this is not important for Rubycon (after>20a). Describing a conductive graphite layer of fine particles. But it is used in early organic cap design however this might be the paper evry one is pointing on if they say patents since 1978....
Patno.: US4009424
https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/pdfs/US4009424.pdf
Patno.: US4009424
https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/pdfs/US4009424.pdf
Last edited:
you mean a patent related to conductive polymer, hybrids
Purism was no such thing and predates patent by many years
Good find ! Thank you. It seems the distributor pointed me in the right direction. I don't think there are many equivalents with the materials Jelmax used
Stick to discussing BG caps and leave the politics out of the discussion.On the Audio Note UK website there is a 2017 Visit to Tokyo with pictures of the carbon paper needed for manufacturing new Blackgates from.
The carbon paper was apparently the last item needed to build new Blackgates and so we should see new Blackgates later this year/ early next year.
http://www.audionote.co.uk/news/pdf/Tokyo trip 1 v2.pdf
The carbon paper was apparently the last item needed to build new Blackgates and so we should see new Blackgates later this year/ early next year.
http://www.audionote.co.uk/news/pdf/Tokyo trip 1 v2.pdf
Last edited:
Never said it was the same as the pureism, just that they had patents as well for some alleged improvements.
Looking forward, you'd think that some digital infusing/printing technology could lead to some improved paper, but probably not anything digital in the paper mfg processing, at that point in the process.
Looking forward, you'd think that some digital infusing/printing technology could lead to some improved paper, but probably not anything digital in the paper mfg processing, at that point in the process.
Black Gate capacitors were by Jelmax and production was outsourced to Rubycon. Any new product made by a different company is not a Black Gate capacitor. I see they carefully call them "Black Gate replacements".... Good techniques to draw customers. Audio Note has nothing to do with Black Gate except that they were customer of Jelmax and used them in their products. The fact that AN and Rubycon were trying to find the very fine graphite impregnated paper says that Jelmax provided the materials to Rubycon. This would only be logical as it seems awkward to hand over all "trade secrets" to an experienced company that already produces millions of various electrolytic capacitors.
It may be an attempt to come close to the original. Saying the new product is better is something any producer would say
It may be an attempt to come close to the original. Saying the new product is better is something any producer would say
Last edited:
Indeed, hot scent.It seems the distributor pointed me in the right direction. I don't think there are many equivalents with the materials Jelmax used
would be nice to find all of the seven patents mentioned by Audio Note.
Thx for the link. First time that they show some "proof" (at least as pic) that they are really on to something
As Jean-Paul said - it will not be the same but they try to make them as close as possible and maybe better (?) due to new production technologies.
For me the Kaisei's are quite good.
Thx for the tip. But have you seen the prices eg Rubycon BLACK GATE NX series electrolytic capacitor 2200uF 6.3V (2 pcs) | eBay no Certificate of Authenticity)
I'm wondering, as with other technologies, if there has been any efforts to achieve the same goals using different processes maybe. Sometimes the first way isn't always the best way, even if it produced some good results.
Who knows...
Wow, 100k uf of bg, that's pretty neat, those must be worth a $100,000 now right?
My Borbely/Hafler has to make do with 44,000, epcos.
Who knows...
Wow, 100k uf of bg, that's pretty neat, those must be worth a $100,000 now right?
My Borbely/Hafler has to make do with 44,000, epcos.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.