Let me edit that for you
How about actually looking at what function the cap performs, what characteristics are relevant in that function, and what possible effect those characteristics have on the sound before using the word "always"?
It is like saying "better mains plug = better sound". Yes, sometimes, in some special cases, but mostly not.
look or hear, whatever suits you best
mains plug???.... have you actually ABX tested that statement? I never heard a better sounding Mains plug myself, I better try ABX to verify my listening skills
I allow you to have your own categorization of mods and tweaks and non-tweaks
.http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/class-d/190434-hypex-ncore-27.html#post2658382
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/class-d/190434-hypex-ncore-28.html#post2659516
http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/acousticimagery/open.png
Last edited:
Unfortunately proper electronic design requires understanding and analyzing the circuit and the role and function of each component. It is not (despite what many audiophiles seem to think) done by connecting a pile of components in different random permutations, and selecting the one that sounds best.
You might scoff at ABX testing, but do you have a better method for verifying which perceived differences are due to real differences (differences in the actual sound waves) and which ones are due to "perceptual" factors (such as expectation bias)?
We seem to once again be veering off subject here. How about telling us which specific parameters of the capacitors affect the sound quality of the ncore modules, and in which way?
Better caps= better sound, as always, no cap is perfect
thats of course not true if you are among those who don't believe ( can't hear, or did not ABX test) that caps do sound different
Well, where is the discussion of better caps for nc400 modules? You know any? Maybe i have just missed that.
Last edited:
By all means, "lets take whatever measures best, and not believe our ears"
Thats the difference between good electronic engineering and great audio engineering
To remind you: question was mods for nc400 = capacitors is one, and discussed here before, and in another tread, another forum:
Hypex NC400 mods and assembly
Are you implying that Bruno is only a good engineer? And that the splat-a-cap brigade are better?
I don't think Julf and Bruno are related in any way, or that Julf even thinks he speaks for Bruno
What i read in that thread is some guy selling people mods that their business can implement in nc400. But no evidence, no subjective and no measurements, that they will make nc400 any better. Not very inspiring content.
There must be someone tho who has tried combinations of caps on nc400 and lived to to tell about the results. Maybe even have measurements.
But, i have faint memory of talking about "wima" cap mods in this thread. I could be wrong, but i also have faint memory of length of cap legs being matter of millimeters (to ruin or not ruin the measured performance), which limits the cap rolling.
Last edited:
I allow you to have your own categorization of mods and tweaks and non-tweaks
Thanks
Words are of course just words.
I assume you agree with my categorization of the modifications/adjustments?
Thanks, I had forgotten about that discussion!
Actually not sure I would do it the way it is done in that picture - I would make sure the + and - leads are twisted as tightly together as possible, and not worry about twisting the two pairs with each other. The important thing is a twist that is tight and symmetric with regards to the + and - leads.
Listening is the final verification once you have done all the engineering. Listening is not a design method, it is a testing method.
Still a problem to "measure sound quality" ain't it
Yes, you remembered right, Julf pointed out that the slightly longer legs could work as a antenna
Not related in any way (as far as I know), and most definitely don't speak fro Bruno, but he has discussed his design methodologies and philosophy in a number of interviews and presentations. As far as I have gathered, the ncore technology was designed by understanding the technology and doing the maths, and both listening and measurements were used to verify the design.
All comes down to how you define "sound quality". Measuring exactly what you or I find most pleasing is tricky (but not impossible), and varies not only from person to person, but day to day (fortunately consumption of wine *can* be measured
). Engineers prefer to talk about transparency (lack of distortion and coloration), as it takes the person out of the picture.
No, always the very final goal has to be the sound, for some of us at least
when all engineering, and testing are ok, selecting the parts that interact optimal sound wise is done
If that is how you design, and it works for you, then great. But I don't know very many real, professional engineers who do it that way. I do know a lot of amateurs who think that is the way to do it. It is of course possible that the former are only good, and the latter great...
All comes down to how you define "sound quality". Measuring exactly what you or I find most pleasing is tricky (but not impossible), and varies not only from person to person, but day to day (fortunately consumption of wine *can* be measured
Engineers prefer to talk about transparency (lack of distortion and coloration), as it takes the person out of the picture.
Engineers talk about transparency!
Audio engineers listen after musicality
Engineers scream: coloration!
Audio engineers scream: cold!, Artificial!
There will never be a perfect amp
remember what High Fidelity means?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.