Sorry, I don't understand what you mean by the unfiltered part of the signal.ClaveFremen said:
And again here.
Any music signal which has gone through a high-pass filter (e.g. a coupling cap) will have no DC and very little long-term asymmetry. Short-term asymmetry will not touch DA, as it is a slow phenomenon.
I use the word problem to include things which need to be considered i.e. soluble problems. If burn-in exists, then it is solving the problem of poorer component performance and poorer sound which would result from burn-in not being done.
it was very finely explained in every single detailed aspect why it have been misunderstood, when 'adopted' by audiophile caps suppliers for marketing purposes
well, you know how it goes when that happens, and here we are ....again and again, over and over
it will probably never change
anyone want to buy Black Gate caps, I have a few NOS, and boy do I feel stupid every time Im reminded of them
Sorry, I thought it was a discussion..I'll keep quiet you must already have all the answers..Please disregard my comment..I'm done.
Regards
M. Gregg
Well if components are considered defective if they change during "burn in" why should a quality component change during normal extended use or break-in ?
Thanks
-Antonio
NOS
bought them long time ago from Audio Note
then thought I would save them for better project than what had in mind at the time
now, I don't even care to try them
I would rather buy brand new NIC's or Nichicons than waste my solder on them
probably even much better, and cost much less too...50 caps for a fraction of the Black Gates
hey, just 10 small black Gates could easily pay those other 50, or amybe even 100
good idea but the 'shelf life' specs ? I have no idea about them
dry lytics for sure
I suppose a big hammer would be the right 'break in' for them
Don't try that with electrolytic caps. I saw some at a junkyard that had been turned into "low profile" caps by that method. I didn't measure to make sure, but I'm pretty sure the electric properties of the cap were changed in the process.
~Tom
The buzz
Well John just because you make a living for a long time designing very very goods pre-amps and amps some pontiff on the internet will say they know better . It is easier to claim it is psychoacoustic or some how a placebo in nature rather than admit it is a problem that is real and must be addressed for success . Doubting is good denial of the true is not. This reminds me of the bumblebee for the longest time aerospace engineers claimed that the bumblebee could not fly yet it did . Only after much examination after years did they figure out how it did fly . Break-in period for passives are the bumblebees of the curcuit so to speak.
I understand what he's asking, stop breakin the guys balls people...
Traditionally you dont want to "break in" or run voltage/current through it when its not in the circuit... the circuit itself tends to do that as its working, and the longer it is being used the better it will sound...
for example if you cannibalize some parts from an old radio or Tv or somethin you found in the garbage, that circuit "broke-in" that capacitor... so it will work best for that, but if you put it in something else, it might be great... or it might have an a**load of noise or may be on its way out, and might not sound good for what you want.
Just put it right in and run your circuit... after a few hours of constant use ( I use 40 hours as rough estimate) the circuit is broken in.
hope this helps out.
Don't try that with electrolytic caps. I saw some at a junkyard that had been turned into "low profile" caps by that method. I didn't measure to make sure, but I'm pretty sure the electric properties of the cap were changed in the process.
~Tom
but of course.....
ecaps have juices and plenty of air spaces inside the can....i can not imagine how those juices will not squirt out....
"It is easier to claim it is psychoacoustic or some how a placebo in nature rather than admit it is a problem that is real and must be addressed for success."
The coronary being, its easy to claim (insert pseudo-scientific, audio-electrical effect here) is not able to be measured because (insert implausible reason for not having tested and verified the effect empirically, either directly or by dbt listening tests) and then rely on appeals to expertise/scarcity/vanity/(insert irrelevant appellant option here) to fend off having to answer valid questions.
The coronary being, its easy to claim (insert pseudo-scientific, audio-electrical effect here) is not able to be measured because (insert implausible reason for not having tested and verified the effect empirically, either directly or by dbt listening tests) and then rely on appeals to expertise/scarcity/vanity/(insert irrelevant appellant option here) to fend off having to answer valid questions.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.