They do, very much so. Each component is generally tested half to death before installation as you don't want a bathtub failure half way across the solar system. The assembled board is then tested half to death and the complete rover like wise. Between soldering iron being first warmed up and rover being put into the nose cone for launch could be anything from 4-10 years.
Look at hubble. work started in late 60s, things got serious about 1975. It was ready for launch in 1983 but then delayed until 1986.
Much thanks for the great links! I'll give them a thorough reading later.
I don't design bridges, so you won't have to worry about this. However, I'd be skeptical buying an audio device from you if you were a manufacturer.
I hope you forgive me too, because I share pretty much the same opinion towards your attitude and the most of your comments. But it doesn't really matter. I try being respectful to everyone's posts no matter the differences in ideas.
Could it be possible that school itself has done more harm than good on you? What do you think? I'm just wondering.
I'm curious: how does an individual arrive at his own version of physics (or maths)? Does he have to repeat all the experiments ever done in the history of science but reach different conclusions, or just assert his own view (loosely based on science he has heard of, but not necessarily accepted) and not worry about evidence? Does it require more thought than learning, understanding and accepting the majority view, or less thought?
If a gypsy woman comes up to you in the street and offers you some heather, which if you buy will bring good luck do you buy it and then rush off to get a lottery ticket as your luck is in?
How is believing absolutely in magic audio components any different? Testing them to find the differences and understanding how complex interactions occur is a worthwhile goal, but glomming things in may end up being totally futile.
I don't trust fortune tellers or lotteries. Does that comfort you?
Let me correct your assumptions. I don't believe in magic audio components. I believe in the possibly existing characteristics of audio components that have to be further investigated. And I see nothing wrong believing there should be more science and research invested into the audio domain.
What does this have to do about school? You are making the difference between school and education, do you?
Yes, this one should do it for me. I see nothing wrong in tearing a building to the beams and then starting a fresh one from scratch. In the end, I'll have the chance of constructing a different substructure - something I can't change on an existing project.
Do these discussions always have to degenerate into an "us vs. them" situation?
I posted some manufacturer-generated documentation and graphs in post #20 that very clearly show that not just LC, but also ESR (and therefore one would assume ripple, correct me if I'm wrong) change as a function of soldering heat - and have very different recovery time profiles depending on the type of capacitor (eg. solid polymer or liquid electrolytic), physical size, and the usage conditions (temperature and applied voltage). The graphs indicate changes occuring from anywhere between 1 and 1000 hours depending on those conditions.
It seems some long-standing members would rather bully "audiophools" than actually contribute anything. It results in useful data being buried under the same degenerative argument.
I posted some manufacturer-generated documentation and graphs in post #20 that very clearly show that not just LC, but also ESR (and therefore one would assume ripple, correct me if I'm wrong) change as a function of soldering heat - and have very different recovery time profiles depending on the type of capacitor (eg. solid polymer or liquid electrolytic), physical size, and the usage conditions (temperature and applied voltage). The graphs indicate changes occuring from anywhere between 1 and 1000 hours depending on those conditions.
It seems some long-standing members would rather bully "audiophools" than actually contribute anything. It results in useful data being buried under the same degenerative argument.
Don't underestimate the ravaging effects of boredom and social rejection. Best to ignore them.
Electrolytics leak. Unlikely for leakage within the manufacturer's spec to significantly affect a well-designed circuit. The TV maker anecdote in the pdf was usage outside the spec (adjustment too soon after manufacture). The long term recovery issue was for SMD caps which had got too hot during soldering; less of an issue for leaded components. Film caps don't leak - unless they are faulty.zaib4tsu said:
To be fair you would be bored too if, a few impedance edge cases aside, CD > 5532 > LM3886 had no room for audible improvement.
- "Doesn't significantly affect" /= "no effect".
- "Less of an issue" /= "no issue".
- "Too hot" is not quantifiable in this case because the effects (and recovery) are non-linear, and vary according to component size - not just soldering method and time. It's not a yes/no equation, any amount of soldering heat causes change and a proportional recovery time.
- "Well-designed" is again not quantifiable, and many circuits are not optimally designed - so this should be considered on a case-by-case basis, not by blanket rejections that may not apply in all cases.
If you're going to plaster about claims of "science" in every single thread about components, you should at least be accurate about it. I'm certainly no expert but I've seen you single-handedly destroy at least 20 threads I opened in the hopes of learning something (again, not this particular one).
Hint: most relatively intelligent readers can separate fact from fiction themselves, the only thing your pollution achieves is making that task more difficult.
I already posted some data but it was ignored in favour of the usual phool-bashing. Nothing to do with the thread topic, just the claim that parts don't change.How does asking that question contribute anything?...........Just a thought
Point taken.
Last edited:
Stick a DSP in there for crossover duties and you are probably right. And that is pretty much the direction I am going in.
The curious part is, when it comes to audio a lot of intelligent people lose that ability. You can't blame all of this on the gushy magazine reviewers. From the outside (I was on the inside in my teens) it is very strange to watch the angst in action. It doesn't take much to work out what is required to create the sort of changes people are talking about and investigate. The fact that Audacity is free and you can actually mess around with files to hear how much a db here and there actually changes things means people can actually explore, understand, think and learn. But seems many don't want to. Which is a shame, but DF96 will keep trying and you can't knock him for that.
Pop Quiz: I've just put new shelving up for the stereo, Serviced the turntable as the motor wasn't rotating in its support and put a new and much bigger and thicker rug down. System fired up tonight finally and sounds better than it ever has done in this particular room. Which made the most difference
1. the shelf
2. the service
3. the rug
4. I was so happy to get it working again.
(answer is no one knows, but a rug is more significant and measurable than a fancy capacitor).
Keep trying what?
Trying to extend 2 pages of easily identifiable fact/fiction posts into 20 pages of him belittling somewhat-delusional (but generally well-meaning) posters?
I'm not standing with the posts of people he belittles (I just scroll past them, often harmless), I'm just saying that it contributes nothing to the thread and actually makes it much harder to obtain useful data from discussions.
I've found a general trend where a 10 page thread could have been 3 pages if some people didn't feel the need to prove themselves. Again this thread is a bad example but I've seen a lot of good ones ruined in this fashion.
I'll vote for 1. the shelf, doubles as a good place for people to put their fighting gloves back up on.
You've clearly not been here long! There are some professional wibblers on here that will destroy the most on topic threads dragging them into the weeds, often quite innocently. It's part of the 'care in the community' part of this.
I just looked up the prices of stealthcaps. a 1uF/310v is $120. For that I would expect some pretty thorough data sheets and performance guarantees backed up with some real world measurements to show how they improve something. Nope, just flowery words and celeb endorsement. My conscience wouldn't let me not comment that this appears to be a way to part someone with lots of money for no good reason. But at the end of the day it's a free world.
I just looked up the prices of stealthcaps. a 1uF/310v is $120. For that I would expect some pretty thorough data sheets and performance guarantees backed up with some real world measurements to show how they improve something. Nope, just flowery words and celeb endorsement. My conscience wouldn't let me not comment that this appears to be a way to part someone with lots of money for no good reason. But at the end of the day it's a free world.
Yep I'm new, just what I've noticed while searching past topics (lurked for a while before sign up).
I have no interest in stealth caps (etc), but most people that would purchase those things will do so anyway, I think posts like his have more to do with ego-stroking than "saving the world". I just wanted to point out that it has also served the purpose of making old discussions much harder to get useful information out of - much moreso than the flowery posts themselves.
I have no interest in stealth caps (etc), but most people that would purchase those things will do so anyway, I think posts like his have more to do with ego-stroking than "saving the world". I just wanted to point out that it has also served the purpose of making old discussions much harder to get useful information out of - much moreso than the flowery posts themselves.
Reliable Capacitor Company makes them and Peter Moncrieff of TRT originally made " wonder caps " famous by publishing their effects in his magazine (IAR) on the sonic qualities back in the early 80's - used in many excellent products of today.
Anything from them has been consistant and a great solution in the capacitor domain for a long time.
NOT made in the Cheesy China Syndrome
Regards
David
Anything from them has been consistant and a great solution in the capacitor domain for a long time.
NOT made in the Cheesy China Syndrome
Regards
David
- Status
- Not open for further replies.