I have tested quite a few caps myself and found that trend. I think only three were on Tony's list. Of the same brand and category's, the higher voltages and larger sizes always sounded better. Since I was looking for something to fit in limited space, I could not use the larger ones, but did find a solution that was good enough.
I take it that you have either not compared yourself, or do not trust what you hear? What is your own experience?
btw, such a site give a little idea, I surmise a 12 rated to be better most of the time than a 6 rated. It helps with the money you have to do a pre choice...
The final choice depends on the genral context of the speaker and the system behind; I do some experiments with my Phil Jone speaker which i found too brighty in the treble with Amphom alum in oil and a copper cap with good results in relation to the MIT RTX polystyren caps of the genuine crossover (cap which is not reviewed in this site and which is maybe discontinued this time)
But the better result was with a passive notch trap with the non interrested advice of Phil Jones himself by private mail and the advises of some experienced fellows of DIYA in a thread i opened!
So, such site are not a panacea but give some landmark and have the merit to centralise many items than some enthusiasts doesn't know themselves if they need to do themselves the work of sourcing.
The final choice depends on the genral context of the speaker and the system behind; I do some experiments with my Phil Jone speaker which i found too brighty in the treble with Amphom alum in oil and a copper cap with good results in relation to the MIT RTX polystyren caps of the genuine crossover (cap which is not reviewed in this site and which is maybe discontinued this time)
But the better result was with a passive notch trap with the non interrested advice of Phil Jones himself by private mail and the advises of some experienced fellows of DIYA in a thread i opened!
So, such site are not a panacea but give some landmark and have the merit to centralise many items than some enthusiasts doesn't know themselves if they need to do themselves the work of sourcing.
So the marketing BS of the maker and one set of ears is all you need to rate capacitors. What a load of crap. He shows the equivalent circuit of a cap and says we can measure so much more than we used to but just gives opinions. A lot of data sheets show the values of these components, so why didnt he show those and try to relate what he heard to actual cap characteristics?
Because he probably cant hear the difference.
And he dosnt know what microphony is either.
Because he probably cant hear the difference.
And he dosnt know what microphony is either.
Look on the bright side -at least Tony's bothered to wield a soldering iron (whether you / we agree or not with his views is another matter, and in fairness, he does state outright in the first sentence it's entirely subjective). I can name a few magazines for example where the reviews of the latest piece of wire take the form of repeating the advertising copy more or less verbatim, with a few sentences tacked onto the end.
Can't say I blindly believe, but I personally have tried a few caps on Tony's list, the general description is quit in line with my personal experience. If I experience anything on the contrary, i do specifically address it. Do I reference the rating? Well, I helps when one wants to select some different quality stuff to compare and fine out themselves whether the contents on the site is worth believing or not.
The scatterplot in the linked paper shows a rather linear relationship between Gee's ratings and VDC ratings. Would anyone like to go thru Gee's ratings today and plot selling price vs rating? I strongly suspect the relationship would be quite non-linear.
Thanks for that. Not the paper (I didn't read it) but this cogent analysis from Ken Kantor that bears repeating in any of these threads about the imagined "sound quality" of various commodity electrical parts:
"Carl, forgive my bluntness here: This effort was a waste of time in 1985. It most certainly is a waste of time 30+ years later. Bothering with these kinds of fringe issues does not further progress or understanding or fidelity in audio. Just the opposite. They divert attention and dollars away from meaningful improvements and potentially beneficial experiments. Thus, it's worse than a waste of time.... it's harmful. And, it is disrespectful to the people who devote their professional careers to investigating these matters in a careful, unbiased and systematic manner."
- Status
- Not open for further replies.