Thread Hi-Jacking
Bob,
Please, hi-jack on!
I didn't follow up on some of my testing due to an unseasonably warm 72° F (22° C) in the Washington D.C. area. Temperatures such as this in January in this area could be the signal for the prophecized last days. So, I did some things outside, yesterday.
I awakened to find the world was still here and the temperatures pretty much back to normal. The great joy was to find that there had been a number of posts regarding what Bob had shared with us.
Again, more things to ponder have been posted, but to me this is the joy of DIY.
Bob,
Please, hi-jack on!
I didn't follow up on some of my testing due to an unseasonably warm 72° F (22° C) in the Washington D.C. area. Temperatures such as this in January in this area could be the signal for the prophecized last days. So, I did some things outside, yesterday.
I awakened to find the world was still here and the temperatures pretty much back to normal. The great joy was to find that there had been a number of posts regarding what Bob had shared with us.
Again, more things to ponder have been posted, but to me this is the joy of DIY.
Cap Rankings (Not Mine)
For those that have been waiting for another series of test, I must apologize for the delay. I have been rethinking my test bed and doing some research on the best way to implement the new test bed.
I have received caps from one reader, I have some generic caps I purchased, and I am awaiting caps from another reader. I will get back to testing in short order.
Most importantly I purchased six new CDs and I have been listening, listening, listening! As previously posted, currently, I have the Blackgates bypassed by 0.1 μf Flourinerts, 0.01 μf WIMA films and 30 pf silver mica caps. The reproduction is just startling. Performances sound as if they are right in the room.
I have not tried any other combination for some time now. I am just enjoying the music. I don't want to burst my own bubble. For the moment I am just happy with what I am hearing. I will get back into analysis mode in short order.
In my research I came across the following two links that some of you may find of interest.
Cap Rankings article with a broad array of caps.
Boutique Cap Ranking thread with worthwhile background info
of some caps in various configurations.
For those that have been waiting for another series of test, I must apologize for the delay. I have been rethinking my test bed and doing some research on the best way to implement the new test bed.
I have received caps from one reader, I have some generic caps I purchased, and I am awaiting caps from another reader. I will get back to testing in short order.
Most importantly I purchased six new CDs and I have been listening, listening, listening! As previously posted, currently, I have the Blackgates bypassed by 0.1 μf Flourinerts, 0.01 μf WIMA films and 30 pf silver mica caps. The reproduction is just startling. Performances sound as if they are right in the room.
I have not tried any other combination for some time now. I am just enjoying the music. I don't want to burst my own bubble. For the moment I am just happy with what I am hearing. I will get back into analysis mode in short order.
In my research I came across the following two links that some of you may find of interest.
Cap Rankings article with a broad array of caps.
Boutique Cap Ranking thread with worthwhile background info
of some caps in various configurations.
But Dave,
What about the new CDs? What did you buy and I hope are enjoying right now? I hope your wife likes them too, it's nice when you can get them involved with this hobby too! (you get away with spending more time on this)
Who knows, she may solder better than you or me too for that matter! From what I have read, they supposedly have better hearing than men too. She might be the perfect validator.
Regards//Keith
What about the new CDs? What did you buy and I hope are enjoying right now? I hope your wife likes them too, it's nice when you can get them involved with this hobby too! (you get away with spending more time on this)
Who knows, she may solder better than you or me too for that matter! From what I have read, they supposedly have better hearing than men too. She might be the perfect validator.
Regards//Keith
KP11520 said:
Hi,
This made me smile as the first person to show me how to solder was a great Aunt of mine, when I was around 5 yrs old. She was bereaved during WWII, and could turn her hand to (almost) anything, although this soldering lesson was not electronics-related of course.
It was also interesting reading through these other cap trials 'references', and the overall similarities in choices of caps are quite apparent, even though we have reached these 'preferences' entirely independently.
The comments on the Head-Fi thread about not being able to *improve* anything with choosing certain caps is very important to keep in mind, and this is easily overlooked. As I earlier suggested when mentioning the V-Caps, these are about as innocuous or benign as anything I have so far come across, and it is hard to distinguish these caps from a straight wire in direct comparisons.
However, in my experience every component has some sonic 'character' albeit very small in many (most?) cases, but when using several similar components in one circuit (or complete system) these characteristics are cumulative. In the past I have often used a 'string' of the same type of components in series to deliberately exaggerate any sonic effects, as sometimes using one part alone is not sufficient to reach a positive and consistent conclusion.
Incidentally, and I believe someone else has touched on this, an excellent way of ensuring that there is no unwitting self-deceit, is to try removing the latest 'substitution', and going back a step to how it was previously. If this is not then a noticeable retrospective move sonically, then maybe there was some other factor influencing the perceived results and the previously-judged 'improvement'. This gives one the chance to become accustomed to the sound for a while which helps, and largely overcomes the frequently-heard changes over the passage of time, due to any burning-in.
Part of the skill here when using other than *perfect-sounding* components is more about getting the best mix overall when choosing caps etc., and this is helped a lot by experience, although in certain locations the noticed effects can still sometimes be rather unexpected.
One thing I found a long while ago (when talking about analogue systems) is that once some wanted 'information' which is in the original recording is lost anywhere along the signal path, this is lost forever, and it cannot be recovered by any other means. This means that if there is a lousy coupling cap (almost anywhere) which 'veils' sounds to any extent, there is no point in trying to offset this loss anywhere else in the circuits, by using many other top-quality parts.
Imagine caps, or whatever, as overlaid pieces of glass through which you are trying to see clearly, and if any one of these is dirty, some information (fine-details) will be obscured no matter how clean all the other bits of glass may be.
Consistency throughout a system is what matters most here, so unless one is interested in continually seeking perfection and making component changes on a regular basis, it is better to assess a budget for improvements, and 'spread' this evenly throughout a system. For example, there is little point in using an expensive and excellent cap like a V-Cap to couple the output of say a DAC, if maybe later on in the chain (possibly the input of a power amp), a poor sounding and cheaper polyester is used there.
In such a case, the benefits of the V-cap will be partially (or mostly?) lost due to the subsequent 'veiling' later on, and the 'order' of these caps in any system doesn't affect this issue much either. Taking another example, if a poor-sounding cap is used in the output of the same DAC, using a V-Cap in the power amp will not provide much benefit (if at all) as all it achieves is allowing you to hear better the degredation already caused further 'upstream'.
Better overall results will always be achieved in my opinion if the caps used everywhere are of a similar quality/sonic performance, than when using top-quality caps in one area, and poorer-quality elsewhere. Also, as the really HQ parts are often maybe 10x the cost of some quite respectable-sounding alternatives (but with maybe merely a very small % sonic improvement!) saving that excessive financial outlay in one isolated area will probably allow one to upgrade all other caps in the system to quite a high level.
Developing a solitary electronic circuit like a preamp, or whatever, and entire audio systems, have always been an iterative process for me, and I constantly re-visit other circuit areas following certain changes being made somewhere else in the system. Sometimes deciding if a current mirror is sonically preferable to another constant-current source in the input of a power amp is not straightforward, for example, but often after improvements to overall system-transparency have been made elsewhere (possibly in speakers), it then becomes an easy choice and perhaps the current mirror is then heard to be noticeably superior, at least in that particular location.
Then when the power amp is optimised (as much as possible at that stage), it is usually worthwhile looking at the DAC's performance again, or perhaps the speakers once more, and so on ad infinitum. Gradually, as the entire system improves in overall transparency, later component listening-trials like these become much more easy as these tiny (and often previously-masked) details become more apparent.
Unfortunately, the weakest link in the entire system will be the overall 'limiting factor' sonically, and as the weaker links are improved gradually, the overall improvement achieved will help with subsequent trials.
When I first started with these listening trials in earnest, maybe around 35 yrs ago, my inherent skills were less good due to a lack of experience, but the greatest difficulty was that the majority of my reference system simply was not adequate to permit me to hear a lot of the changes which later-on became so apparent to me.
Regards,
Bob,
-
Again an outstanding posting. As to my test system all of the caps in the speaker crossover are Auricaps. After working over my Tripath amplifier I may go back and look at the caps in my CD/DVD player. Your analogy to glass really hit a nerve with me. I fear I may have to get a second trust on my house to finance purchasing V-Caps to replace caps in my system.
Following through on your glass analolgy:
When bypassing is this like clearing a piece of the glass or replacing a cloudy piece with a clear piece? A mosaic of glass (capacitors) that covers the frequency range.
You made mention of paralleling a number of caps of the same value. Is it possible by pursuing this bypass methodology that we may approach a straight wire?
-
Again an outstanding posting. As to my test system all of the caps in the speaker crossover are Auricaps. After working over my Tripath amplifier I may go back and look at the caps in my CD/DVD player. Your analogy to glass really hit a nerve with me. I fear I may have to get a second trust on my house to finance purchasing V-Caps to replace caps in my system.
Following through on your glass analolgy:
When bypassing is this like clearing a piece of the glass or replacing a cloudy piece with a clear piece? A mosaic of glass (capacitors) that covers the frequency range.
You made mention of paralleling a number of caps of the same value. Is it possible by pursuing this bypass methodology that we may approach a straight wire?
CDs
I purchased the following CDs:
The Brubeck Brothers Intuition
Impulse The House that Trane Built
Andy Bey American Song
Gillespie-Rollins Sonny Side Up
Clifford Brown & Max Roach at Basin Street
Chick Corea The Best of Chick Corea]
Jazz Number Ones
I have yet to listen to the last three CDs. Of the four that I have listened to The House that Trane Built is the most impressive to me. This album has selections from the Impulse catalog. IMO, the recordings are masterfully done. There are a number of selections I had never heard and others that I had heard in years gone by, but I did not have copies of in my collection. I have listened to selections off this 4 CD set repeatedly.
The Andy Bey CD is one I will go back and hear again. I have long been an admirer of his, but this is the first album I have owned by him. I do have a cassette of his music that was prepared for me by the person that introduced me to him. Andy Bey has taken these American standards and really arranged/re-worked them. Quite often I did not recognize the tune until he got to the 'head'.
The other two CDs didn't really move me. It may well have been my mood at the time.
I purchased the following CDs:
The Brubeck Brothers Intuition
Impulse The House that Trane Built
Andy Bey American Song
Gillespie-Rollins Sonny Side Up
Clifford Brown & Max Roach at Basin Street
Chick Corea The Best of Chick Corea]
Jazz Number Ones
I have yet to listen to the last three CDs. Of the four that I have listened to The House that Trane Built is the most impressive to me. This album has selections from the Impulse catalog. IMO, the recordings are masterfully done. There are a number of selections I had never heard and others that I had heard in years gone by, but I did not have copies of in my collection. I have listened to selections off this 4 CD set repeatedly.
The Andy Bey CD is one I will go back and hear again. I have long been an admirer of his, but this is the first album I have owned by him. I do have a cassette of his music that was prepared for me by the person that introduced me to him. Andy Bey has taken these American standards and really arranged/re-worked them. Quite often I did not recognize the tune until he got to the 'head'.
The other two CDs didn't really move me. It may well have been my mood at the time.
Hi Dave,
Firstly, don't get me wrong about Auricaps as these are relatively good-sounding 'universal' film caps, used by a lot of DIYers and manufacturers, as I know. However, what I said was that I was less-enchanted with them than some other people who rave about them seem to be, simply because I have found somewhat better-sounding caps, albeit at a colossally higher cost.
In fact, my belief is that these Auricaps are basically the same as (possibly with some very minor more-recent refinements) Sidereal Caps from well over 20 yrs ago, and which I preferred to their counterpart 'TRT Wondercaps' of that time, in many locations. Subsequently they were taken over and sold under the Kimber banner, and more recently-still by Audience, who have hiked their prices up quite a lot in view of their popularity, which I also consider to be something of a deterrent.
Actually, for some trials in a commercial project recently, I purchased a few Auricaps, and my feelings over their sonic performance were much the same as before, and their construction is identical to the Sidereal/Kimbers, so what I heard about these caps from within the industry, is probably correct, for what that is worth.
To be fair to Auricaps, they are quite good even allowing for their increased costs, but there are several better-sounding alternatives for a greater outlay, as I have previously detailed.
On the glass analogy, I knew that there are always dangers in using any analogy, as the situation is not exactly the same, of course, but I tried to indicate 'generally' what happens here, and the overall significance of ending up with a balanced result.
Considering the signal path from cartridge (or maybe CD laser) right through to the speaker voice-coils, this entire path is vital to keep in balance for the best cost-effective results, in my experience. Each area is just as important as the other, simply because (as I mentioned) anything 'lost' along the way, is lost for ever and cannot be recreated by any possible means.
Using a fluid analogy is not perfect here either, as speed of flow is not what matters as much as the quality of the water which passes through a plumbing system, and you don't want this to be polluted by addition, or have any part of it removed, during its passage along the way. But maybe considering the restriction of passage of water in such a system might help to explain what I am getting at here, although it is not simply quantity in audio matters, as the quality is more important.
Imagine having a series of taps (faucets, I think for you) along a water system and at least in the UK we have a 'stop-****' outside our premises to shut off all incoming water, should we have a leak anywhere underground which needs isolating for repairs. Also, normally we have our own domestic stop-**** somewhere inside and close to where the piping enters the property, for easy 'shut-downs' for replacing leaking tap washers, or whatever, and avoiding the need to go into the road during bad weather etc. to access the main Water-Suppliers tap.
If any of these taps are not fully opened at any time, however far open the final tap (say in the bathroom) may be, the flow of water coming out of this last tap appears to be reduced somewhat. Conversely, even though the upstream taps are (usually!) fully open, the flow can still be reduced down to nothing by the final tap in the chain.
Please don't agonise over this, though, as there are other factors with water-flow like if the outside tap is on a larger bore pipe anyway, and this will also enter the picture in this water analogy (and doubtless someone will hurriedly correct me, if I don't say this!) but I hope that together with the 'glass' example it will help you to understand the principles here.
Interestingly, when I first noticed the effects of using alternative caps in audio circuits, this was entirely accidental some 35 yrs ago, and it was in a moving coil head-amp. The late JLH (well known UK Guru in audio designs, and a long-term friend and mentor of mine) sometimes sent me prototype designs of his for a second opinion 'sonically' before finalising the design for publication, as he seemed to value my hearing 'attributes'.
Regrettably, this particular very sensitive head-amp which was used to amplify a few mV from a low-output MC cartridge, exhibited RF breakththrough in my location when on trials.
His advice to me was to increase a tiny (maybe 10 or 20pF) HF roll-off cap which was located at this head-amp's input, by a factor of double or so, in an attempt at curing this unwanted interference which was spoiling my listening-tests. I should mention here that in this design, this cap's effect was way outside of the normal hearing threshold, probably well over 50kHz.
The original cap was a ceramic (considered good at HF, of course, due to low ESR) but only having a polystyrene cap of a suitable value to hand, I used this instead. Well, I just couldn't believe the difference in overal sound as it was totally transformed just like a much uprated circuit altogether. I anticipated the HF to be a bit cleaner-sounding due to the removal of the HF hash, but this cap changed the entire musical results throughout the audio spectrum, to a quite extraordinary extent. Disbelievingly, I put the earlier caps (it was 2 actually, being stereo, of course) back again, and the sound went back to how it was before. To me at that time, this was quite extraordinary, as I simply believed that providing that the value was the same, all caps would have an identical effect on the sound.
I therefore tried some other caps which I had to hand, of varying but similar values, and different constructions, and soon realised that it was not the value of cap which dominated here, but the specific type of cap used. With hindsight, it is possible that these effects were more noticeable as this was a sensitive area where the signal was subsequently amplified up by a factor of several thousands before reaching the speaker's voice-coils, and that none of these changes affected the sonic balance of the results, being so far outside of the normal listening upper threshold limits.
When apprehensively confronting JLH, the designer, with these conclusions, he naturally told me I was out of my head, but after explaining the trouble I had gone to with these substitutions, he thought he had better try this out for himself. Of course, and much to his disquieting feelings, he had to admit that this was the case when he replicated my findings, which in those days was absolute heresy to any conventionally-trained engineer. Irrespective of their individual values which I varied quite a lot, I could always identify some similarities and/or a 'goodness factor', much the same as with any family likeness.
Anyway, I gave him the same 'ranking-order' which I posted here earlier, based on my sonic preferences then, and he carried out some tests on various parameters of the caps concerned. Fortunately, JLH was at that time head of the laboratories of British Cellophane, who manufactured virtually all of the plastic films used in caps in those days in the UK (and some in Europe), and their lab facilities were second to none. Although I had not previously even heard of the term as far as I can recall, it turned out that my 'order' corresponded precisely with the dielectric absorption factor (DA) of the various films used, so I felt somewhat vindicated and a little elated at my sonic discoveries.
I'll come back to the more-specific bypassing query etc., in a while with a new posting for this.
Regards,
Firstly, don't get me wrong about Auricaps as these are relatively good-sounding 'universal' film caps, used by a lot of DIYers and manufacturers, as I know. However, what I said was that I was less-enchanted with them than some other people who rave about them seem to be, simply because I have found somewhat better-sounding caps, albeit at a colossally higher cost.
In fact, my belief is that these Auricaps are basically the same as (possibly with some very minor more-recent refinements) Sidereal Caps from well over 20 yrs ago, and which I preferred to their counterpart 'TRT Wondercaps' of that time, in many locations. Subsequently they were taken over and sold under the Kimber banner, and more recently-still by Audience, who have hiked their prices up quite a lot in view of their popularity, which I also consider to be something of a deterrent.
Actually, for some trials in a commercial project recently, I purchased a few Auricaps, and my feelings over their sonic performance were much the same as before, and their construction is identical to the Sidereal/Kimbers, so what I heard about these caps from within the industry, is probably correct, for what that is worth.
To be fair to Auricaps, they are quite good even allowing for their increased costs, but there are several better-sounding alternatives for a greater outlay, as I have previously detailed.
On the glass analogy, I knew that there are always dangers in using any analogy, as the situation is not exactly the same, of course, but I tried to indicate 'generally' what happens here, and the overall significance of ending up with a balanced result.
Considering the signal path from cartridge (or maybe CD laser) right through to the speaker voice-coils, this entire path is vital to keep in balance for the best cost-effective results, in my experience. Each area is just as important as the other, simply because (as I mentioned) anything 'lost' along the way, is lost for ever and cannot be recreated by any possible means.
Using a fluid analogy is not perfect here either, as speed of flow is not what matters as much as the quality of the water which passes through a plumbing system, and you don't want this to be polluted by addition, or have any part of it removed, during its passage along the way. But maybe considering the restriction of passage of water in such a system might help to explain what I am getting at here, although it is not simply quantity in audio matters, as the quality is more important.
Imagine having a series of taps (faucets, I think for you) along a water system and at least in the UK we have a 'stop-****' outside our premises to shut off all incoming water, should we have a leak anywhere underground which needs isolating for repairs. Also, normally we have our own domestic stop-**** somewhere inside and close to where the piping enters the property, for easy 'shut-downs' for replacing leaking tap washers, or whatever, and avoiding the need to go into the road during bad weather etc. to access the main Water-Suppliers tap.
If any of these taps are not fully opened at any time, however far open the final tap (say in the bathroom) may be, the flow of water coming out of this last tap appears to be reduced somewhat. Conversely, even though the upstream taps are (usually!) fully open, the flow can still be reduced down to nothing by the final tap in the chain.
Please don't agonise over this, though, as there are other factors with water-flow like if the outside tap is on a larger bore pipe anyway, and this will also enter the picture in this water analogy (and doubtless someone will hurriedly correct me, if I don't say this!) but I hope that together with the 'glass' example it will help you to understand the principles here.
Interestingly, when I first noticed the effects of using alternative caps in audio circuits, this was entirely accidental some 35 yrs ago, and it was in a moving coil head-amp. The late JLH (well known UK Guru in audio designs, and a long-term friend and mentor of mine) sometimes sent me prototype designs of his for a second opinion 'sonically' before finalising the design for publication, as he seemed to value my hearing 'attributes'.
Regrettably, this particular very sensitive head-amp which was used to amplify a few mV from a low-output MC cartridge, exhibited RF breakththrough in my location when on trials.
His advice to me was to increase a tiny (maybe 10 or 20pF) HF roll-off cap which was located at this head-amp's input, by a factor of double or so, in an attempt at curing this unwanted interference which was spoiling my listening-tests. I should mention here that in this design, this cap's effect was way outside of the normal hearing threshold, probably well over 50kHz.
The original cap was a ceramic (considered good at HF, of course, due to low ESR) but only having a polystyrene cap of a suitable value to hand, I used this instead. Well, I just couldn't believe the difference in overal sound as it was totally transformed just like a much uprated circuit altogether. I anticipated the HF to be a bit cleaner-sounding due to the removal of the HF hash, but this cap changed the entire musical results throughout the audio spectrum, to a quite extraordinary extent. Disbelievingly, I put the earlier caps (it was 2 actually, being stereo, of course) back again, and the sound went back to how it was before. To me at that time, this was quite extraordinary, as I simply believed that providing that the value was the same, all caps would have an identical effect on the sound.
I therefore tried some other caps which I had to hand, of varying but similar values, and different constructions, and soon realised that it was not the value of cap which dominated here, but the specific type of cap used. With hindsight, it is possible that these effects were more noticeable as this was a sensitive area where the signal was subsequently amplified up by a factor of several thousands before reaching the speaker's voice-coils, and that none of these changes affected the sonic balance of the results, being so far outside of the normal listening upper threshold limits.
When apprehensively confronting JLH, the designer, with these conclusions, he naturally told me I was out of my head, but after explaining the trouble I had gone to with these substitutions, he thought he had better try this out for himself. Of course, and much to his disquieting feelings, he had to admit that this was the case when he replicated my findings, which in those days was absolute heresy to any conventionally-trained engineer. Irrespective of their individual values which I varied quite a lot, I could always identify some similarities and/or a 'goodness factor', much the same as with any family likeness.
Anyway, I gave him the same 'ranking-order' which I posted here earlier, based on my sonic preferences then, and he carried out some tests on various parameters of the caps concerned. Fortunately, JLH was at that time head of the laboratories of British Cellophane, who manufactured virtually all of the plastic films used in caps in those days in the UK (and some in Europe), and their lab facilities were second to none. Although I had not previously even heard of the term as far as I can recall, it turned out that my 'order' corresponded precisely with the dielectric absorption factor (DA) of the various films used, so I felt somewhat vindicated and a little elated at my sonic discoveries.
I'll come back to the more-specific bypassing query etc., in a while with a new posting for this.
Regards,
Where have you been hiding?
Experience is exceptional and your logic as a result of your vast experience is impeccable. All this and modest too!
Can we invite you to all our threads? I personally, would truly value your opinions!
My Stepfather wasn't a great guy. However, he liked hanging out with the old retired guys. He said, they were much more interesting because of their experience. The problem was that he was in the Bar with them when he was "learning" from them. Alcohol did a nasty thing to his personality. All that knowledge died with his pickled brain cells and a hangover!
None the less, pick out the good part of that message and apply it to life!
Thanks for stopping by, I expect to see you here often! Look up AndrewT in this forum. I think you two would get along famously and he is a great guy too!
Regards//Keith
Experience is exceptional and your logic as a result of your vast experience is impeccable. All this and modest too!
Can we invite you to all our threads? I personally, would truly value your opinions!
My Stepfather wasn't a great guy. However, he liked hanging out with the old retired guys. He said, they were much more interesting because of their experience. The problem was that he was in the Bar with them when he was "learning" from them. Alcohol did a nasty thing to his personality. All that knowledge died with his pickled brain cells and a hangover!
None the less, pick out the good part of that message and apply it to life!
Thanks for stopping by, I expect to see you here often! Look up AndrewT in this forum. I think you two would get along famously and he is a great guy too!
Regards//Keith
Hi Keith,
Thank you for those kind comments, and I have always been happy to share my experienes in audio (and a few other areas) for what they are worth to others. However, no matter what I have to say, it is important for everyone to understand that it is up to them to find out for themselves and either verify, or maybe disagree with, what I have found during my own careful trials over the years. My intentions in posting are simply by way of encouragement for others to do (some of?) what I have done, as I am very confident that they will be rewarded with better sonic results. Even if certain matters are not always intuitive, nor fit in with conventional wisdom, it does not automatically follow that it is all just bunkum, as some people would have you believe.
So far, I don't recall anyone disagreeing with anything I have said or even discovering for themselves that their results are in stark contrast with my own, *when they have carried out similar trials for themselves*. However, in the past there has been a lot of unpleasantness from 'know-alls' who simply refuse to do any similar testing of components, and who base their offensive comments upon theories or whatever, and end up attempting to ridicule what people like I have to say on these matters. I just don't wish to waste the time I have left in life arguing the toss with these bigoted folk, who are quite entitled to their thoughts, so long as they are not deliberately destructive when I try to help in this manner, and when I truthfully share some of my experiences.
Luckily, no such comments have appeared in this thread, and from time-to-time I will keep an eye on things posted here in case I might be able to add something which I hope will be worthwhile and of some interest. During so many years of experimentation, I have been down more blind alleys than most people will ever know exist, and if some of my suggestions help to avoid others from wasting their time similarly, then it will have been worthwhile. This area of audio 'development' is not the exact science which I wish it would have been, and rarely can these effects be properly quantified, although I do still spend very many of my days in measuring devices, components, and completed circuits. There are still few days when I don't learn something new for myself, even after all these years, but some worthwhile and new discoveries make this effort rewarding for me.
I do know of AndrewT, and although we might not always see eye-to-eye on some matters, I admire his efforts as he appears to be sincere in his posting on the Forum, and I am sure that his words and frequent advice are of considerable value to those whom he addresses. He also treats other Members with consideration and respect, which is sadly often not the case with some vociferous Members, and that is all that anyone can ask for.
I will post some more over the weekend on bypassing matters which Dave queried, but as it is past an old chap's bedtime now (!) and I am a little tired, I will do a better job when I am feeling fresher.
Regards,
Thank you for those kind comments, and I have always been happy to share my experienes in audio (and a few other areas) for what they are worth to others. However, no matter what I have to say, it is important for everyone to understand that it is up to them to find out for themselves and either verify, or maybe disagree with, what I have found during my own careful trials over the years. My intentions in posting are simply by way of encouragement for others to do (some of?) what I have done, as I am very confident that they will be rewarded with better sonic results. Even if certain matters are not always intuitive, nor fit in with conventional wisdom, it does not automatically follow that it is all just bunkum, as some people would have you believe.
So far, I don't recall anyone disagreeing with anything I have said or even discovering for themselves that their results are in stark contrast with my own, *when they have carried out similar trials for themselves*. However, in the past there has been a lot of unpleasantness from 'know-alls' who simply refuse to do any similar testing of components, and who base their offensive comments upon theories or whatever, and end up attempting to ridicule what people like I have to say on these matters. I just don't wish to waste the time I have left in life arguing the toss with these bigoted folk, who are quite entitled to their thoughts, so long as they are not deliberately destructive when I try to help in this manner, and when I truthfully share some of my experiences.
Luckily, no such comments have appeared in this thread, and from time-to-time I will keep an eye on things posted here in case I might be able to add something which I hope will be worthwhile and of some interest. During so many years of experimentation, I have been down more blind alleys than most people will ever know exist, and if some of my suggestions help to avoid others from wasting their time similarly, then it will have been worthwhile. This area of audio 'development' is not the exact science which I wish it would have been, and rarely can these effects be properly quantified, although I do still spend very many of my days in measuring devices, components, and completed circuits. There are still few days when I don't learn something new for myself, even after all these years, but some worthwhile and new discoveries make this effort rewarding for me.
I do know of AndrewT, and although we might not always see eye-to-eye on some matters, I admire his efforts as he appears to be sincere in his posting on the Forum, and I am sure that his words and frequent advice are of considerable value to those whom he addresses. He also treats other Members with consideration and respect, which is sadly often not the case with some vociferous Members, and that is all that anyone can ask for.
I will post some more over the weekend on bypassing matters which Dave queried, but as it is past an old chap's bedtime now (!) and I am a little tired, I will do a better job when I am feeling fresher.
Regards,
No dreams about capacitors..... Give yourself a treat and dream about ..... let's say Runway models. But then you will not wake up so fresh.... Actually more tired (but happy)! LOL
Properly delivered challenges are always healthy but that is not always the case here or anywhere in life.
Regards//Keith
Properly delivered challenges are always healthy but that is not always the case here or anywhere in life.
Regards//Keith
Bob,
Thank you, so much for sharing your experiences with us. I have enough years under my belt that I no longer feel the need to or have the energy to learn everything on my own. I would just as soon have those with experience tell me and save me the time and energy. Thus, allowing me to pursue others unknowns.
I have enjoyed decades in this hobby, and with the advent of the Internet I have found I can share my experiences with others. These others are far greater in number than those that I might hope to meet face-to-face.
Get that rest in and at your leisure allow us the benefit of your wisdom.
Thank you, so much for sharing your experiences with us. I have enough years under my belt that I no longer feel the need to or have the energy to learn everything on my own. I would just as soon have those with experience tell me and save me the time and energy. Thus, allowing me to pursue others unknowns.
I have enjoyed decades in this hobby, and with the advent of the Internet I have found I can share my experiences with others. These others are far greater in number than those that I might hope to meet face-to-face.
Get that rest in and at your leisure allow us the benefit of your wisdom.
KP11520 said:Give yourself a treat and dream about ..... let's say Runway models. But then you will not wake up so fresh.... Actually more tired (but happy)! LOL
Regards//Keith [/B]Hi Keith,
Unfortunately, I have reached the stage when virtually my entire body seems to be permanently stiff, except for the one small part which used to make life more fun, and that is rather reluctant nowadays!
However, I have had my moments, so I cannot rightfully grumble.
Hi Dave,
I agree that the Internet is a wondeful medium for sharing thoughts and experiences, and it is so different nowadays from when I first started out with these listening trials.
Knowledge was very scarce, and even if one heard about some new device or component, actually getting any data and samples to try out was a nightmare. Also, as far as I was then aware, I was mostly alone in my experiments and findings.
Whilst it wouldn't materially affect the majority of my views which are based on so many careful trials, it is always interesting to learn that others in different parts of the world have reached very similar conclusions, entirely independently.
I recall several times visiting our local Language School 'cap in hand' to ask them to translate a request of mine into Japanese, in the search for something I was interested in trying out. Often it would be up to 3 months before whatever I was interested in arrived, and, more often than not, it would end up being a real disappointment!
Certainly in those early days, my 'success-rate' would probably have been no more than 3 out of every 10 trials conducted, but I still learned a lot from the many disappointing failures.
I will give some more thought to the bypassing and caps effects issues, and come back later.
Regards,
Davet said:
Hi Dave,
Much of my response here is based on conjecture as I have not managed to measure many such effects, and I am wary of guessing a lot, peferring to recount real experiences.
However, whenever a signal is passed through any conductor (wire, cap, resistor, semi-conductor etc.) if it is modified in any way during this passage (except for simple amplitude increases or decreases) this must be by way of some addition to the signal, or possibly some subtraction, both of which I consider to be undesirable as this must be distortion. Distortion is something which I don't personally want, as my goal is to get as close to the original performance as possible, even if I didn't happen to be there when the recording was made, and cannot always be certain how close I am getting to this goal. Actually, even the proverbial straight wire can and does have some effect, although in most cases it will be unlikely to be very noticeable in the entire scheme of things.
With film caps, I hear several different effects and I believe that some of these are due to their poorer constructions giving rise to minor non-linear distortions which are added to the signal. Other caps can be more harmful from the opposite aspect, and they simply tend to restrict some of the wanted signal's content from passing through them, like a filter which is rarely 'even' across the audio spectrum.
In all of these instances, I am implying that the devices concerned are of a suitable value to cover the whole spectrum of sound, of course, but in addition to the above, it is possible to design circuits where the cap used will only pass certain frequencies readily and there is a determinable roll-off at their extremeties. Although there is (usually) no clearly-measurable difference across the wanted audio range, many caps don't seem to handle sounds at different frequencies *precisely* evenly across the board, and some can most certainly sonically accentuate maybe the bass regions, or mid, or HF, for examples.
In addition to these effects, some caps seem to handle some or all of the wanted frequencies at apparently different 'speeds', and this is an area where theoretical knowledge causes me some discomfort, as all of the likely 'speeds' involved should be of no practical concern as rise-times are so quick in real terms. However, some caps are definitely considerably more dynamic-sounding, and the leading edges of notes, like maybe drum strikes, are heard to be much 'faster' or more instantaneous, and more like the original live drumming, or whatever. I cannot see any of these differences even on a digital 'scope displaying these rise-times, but the subjective impression is that the rise-times are closer to a true square-wave.
Deliberately spoiling an amp's performance to slow it down at HF, for example, provides a very similar subjective effect here, and the results sound to be lazy with a slower increase in the sounds amplitude (or lesser acceleration) in the change from no sound at all, to the crescendo of these sounds. To make matters worse, quite a few poorer-sounding caps will also tend to 'overshoot' (but this can usually be measured) so they exaggerate changes from soft to loud which can be impressive initially, but are still not accurate due to this lack of control over the passing signal.
There are several other unusual effects as well, but I cannot go on forever here, and the above should give you something to think about. These effects are rarely 'chalk & cheese' or very readily noticed immediately, and I accept that the average chap, with an average system, with an average interest in this topic etc., will probably never hear them for themselves, especially in isolation. Having said this, more often than not even relatively disinterested casual visitors will comment on various sonic attributes of my domestic system, and they all seem to home in on the same 'benefits' when compared with whatever they have listened to before. This, of course, is the result of the cumulative benefits stemming from optimising hundreds of idividual components throughout a system, and every little improvement or right choice made will help in this respect.
Returning (at last, you may say!) to bypassing, hopefully you can now see how difficult it is to generalise with this activity, and, as I have said before, each area ideally does need to be optimised individually. Using known good (or less-harmful) components is a great help here, but sometimes even the very best HQ caps etc., just don't seem to suit a particular application as well as another alternative, for some reason.
Again, to generalise, I prefer to avoid bypassing very much nowadays, and will use the best 'single' caps I can justify, as the results are more predictable, but I guess that this isn't of much help to you now.
When doing more bypassing some years ago and before better caps were available, I discovered some 'rules of thumb' which worked quite well for me:
Although similar caps of the same nominal value work very well in parallel (due to their almost identical characteristics), relatively small differences between the 2 caps (like maybe a ratio of 10:1) just don't work, and I have some ideas as to why this is. I have had much more consistent/predictable and sonically preferable results when the bypass is really quite small compared with the main cap.
Although less so with caps of identical construction/make, I found that there was often an 'overlap' effect where both caps were handling the same part of the audio spectrum, and their individual characteristics were rarely a complement to each other. The results of this being a mid-range clash or bad sonic area where the sound goes diffuse, almost like an out-of-focus effect.
Incidentally, some others I have consulted with recently agree with this unwanted effect, too.
Accordingly (again in general) I would recommend using much smaller bypasses, possibly 1000:1 or even less in some of your trials, to see what this does to the sound. I don't much like any electrolytic caps and would avoid them altogether if possible, but the excellent Black Gate (only) 'N' series are quite good sonically, although their burn-in over several months is a real pain in the ***. Sometimes I have achieved some sonic benefits bypassing these but with say a 1000uF BG 'N', I would not even try a bypass any larger than a fraction of a uF, normally with these. Only their extreme top end is a bit lazy-sounding, and can benefit from some 'speeding-up/cleaning-up', and anything approaching a uF or so is too much in my experience, and can have some modifying influence lower down in the frequency range, and back comes this unwanted 'overlap' effect. 'Local' circuit impedances will have some effect on this choice of values too, as these will affect the lowest levels which the bypass will have some influence upon.
Another aspect here is attempting to ascertain just what 'deficiencies' are being addressed with any bypassing exercise, and this is probably the hardest part of all, with only experience being your helper I am sorry to say.
The BG example is straightforward in that I know where I wish to make some small change, and I know how to accomplish this. With any 'new' cap to me, I will attempt to identify anything which appears to be a downside, and consider whether or not I might successfully overcome these apparent shortcomings, without ending up with a poor overal result. If the cap in question is simply lacking in transparency throughout most of its sonic range, then I wouldn't waste any time on this as I know from painful attempts that it will remain a 'dog', no matter what I try, and I don't tolerate any barking in my designs. By sheer luck, one might just couple two caps of different constructions together, and of similar values so that they both cover the entire frequency range, and end up with an acceptable result, but it is not something which I have ever achieved to my full satisfaction.
Unless one is dissatisfied with bass performance due to inadequately-sized caps giving a lower roll-off at too high a level (and don't forget this roll-off *commences* at a decade above the calculated -3dB point, and this will be audible), I haven't had much success with 'helping' any cap which shows a poor low frequency response. All too frequently one sees a recommended lower -3dB roll-off at say 10Hz (well below the normal 20Hz, anyway) but the actual reduction in amplitude commences in this case at around 100Hz, well within the normal wanted range. Worse than this, and with bass sounds I believe it is very important, the phase-change will start at ten times higher still, at around 1kHz! The answer here is to replace the entire cap with a greater and more suitable value, or use 2 (or more) identical caps in parallel.
So, I have had more success with 'main' caps which are consistent throughout their range and reasonably transparent, but which need attention just in the upper regions, as this is much easier to improve with little or no attendant downsides.
Dave, if you ever approach "a piece of straight wire" with any bypassing arrangement of caps, consider yourself to be an expert (or extremely fortunate!), but it is possible to come acceptably close.
Regrettably, in view of the above, and as I have shown some overall preferences, I cannot answer queries about specific circuits and/or recommend combinations of caps, but this is DIY anyway, so I must leave others with some challenges to overcome for themselves.
Regards,
Hi Bob,
Thank you for a better way to define and look at the challenge.
I wonder how many mods and mod decisions were made, based on an already adulterated signal. It seems like maybe many.
So in my mind, this presents several dilemmas (this is by no means any challenge but I hope a good dicusssion). How can we really make any evaluations when just about all of our components in our system are not optimized to have that "wire like" trueness in sound quality. Using my current system, what might improve the sound might be based on some earlier sin that needs to be re adjusted back to the middle ground. (I hope this is clear)
So which do we start with? The CD player? The Amp? The speakers? Or should I just take my entire setup and jump off a cliff and disassemble the entire thing and re-engineer the whole thing? (that is way over my head)
What would be nice is a simulator where every piece in a system is optimized to be pure except for gain and reproduces exactly the way it is read from the media. Then install your component and just mod the questionable areas in that device to get as close to pure as can be achieved with that device. I bet this would put a whole new light on the choices we have come to accept as the end all in our mods.
The other challenge is how to deal with the unmeasureable characteristics like ambiance and soundstage and depth. Now this is getting intimidating because to accurately reproduce exactly what the media presents (especially digital) and also nail the "air" that is and was part of the recording and sometimes overlooked by the digital recording (especially earlier stuff) seems like light years away.
I am not disagreeing with you at all, I am just taking "purism" probably way too far and that becomes overwhelming. The Halogram Deck from Star Trek is looking very appealing right now.
I do want to learn and maybe pioneer in this area to a better way. I am a beginner and I may complete my work in the next or perhaps the lifetime after that! LOL. Thank Heaven, I am in the forum. Maybe we can move this mountain faster together! But it is truly fascinating!
Regards//Keith
Thank you for a better way to define and look at the challenge.
I wonder how many mods and mod decisions were made, based on an already adulterated signal. It seems like maybe many.
So in my mind, this presents several dilemmas (this is by no means any challenge but I hope a good dicusssion). How can we really make any evaluations when just about all of our components in our system are not optimized to have that "wire like" trueness in sound quality. Using my current system, what might improve the sound might be based on some earlier sin that needs to be re adjusted back to the middle ground. (I hope this is clear)
So which do we start with? The CD player? The Amp? The speakers? Or should I just take my entire setup and jump off a cliff and disassemble the entire thing and re-engineer the whole thing? (that is way over my head)
What would be nice is a simulator where every piece in a system is optimized to be pure except for gain and reproduces exactly the way it is read from the media. Then install your component and just mod the questionable areas in that device to get as close to pure as can be achieved with that device. I bet this would put a whole new light on the choices we have come to accept as the end all in our mods.
The other challenge is how to deal with the unmeasureable characteristics like ambiance and soundstage and depth. Now this is getting intimidating because to accurately reproduce exactly what the media presents (especially digital) and also nail the "air" that is and was part of the recording and sometimes overlooked by the digital recording (especially earlier stuff) seems like light years away.
I am not disagreeing with you at all, I am just taking "purism" probably way too far and that becomes overwhelming. The Halogram Deck from Star Trek is looking very appealing right now.
I do want to learn and maybe pioneer in this area to a better way. I am a beginner and I may complete my work in the next or perhaps the lifetime after that! LOL. Thank Heaven, I am in the forum. Maybe we can move this mountain faster together! But it is truly fascinating!
Regards//Keith
Hi Keith,
I never said it was easy, did I?
Seriously, it has taken me very many years to get to where I am now, and as I told you, I am still learning.
In my own case, I have always tended to be an evolutionary kind of person, rather than revolutionary, and this has doubtless made it easier for me to make progress and learn a bit about this fascinating subject. I tend to stick to well-known (at least to me!) circuits and work on them until satisfied, rather than continually buying new and upgraded electronics which I understand a lot of folk do, but in doing this you are trying to hit a constantly-moving target.
Familiarity is important here, so getting used to sounds and listening for these small differences over a period of time, is essential to me. I try to decide which part of my set-up is the most likely to be the weakest link, and start with some trials on that particular circuit, and see what (if anything) transpires.
With even half-decent ancillary electronics in a system, one should be able to hear some differences with component-changes, even if these changes are not necessarily for the good. If at any stage one simply cannot identify anything with any certainty or repeatability, there is no point in pursuing that particular area.
Either one's other components are simply not good enough to reveal anything there (unlikely), possibly one's ears are not good enough or insufficiently practiced (which needs more practice), or most likely in my experience, you just picked the wrong area to begin with.
As I also mentioned, this will inevitably end up as an iterative process if one wishes to get the very best of the entire system, and re-visiting another area when earlier such trials were not very conclusive, is often productive at a later time when other areas have improved.
Everyone has to start somewhere, and the longest journey begins with a single step, and the best advice I know is just to go for it and see what happens. However, for any 'hopefuls' who read this, there are no really easy shortcuts that I am aware of, and many mistakes may (and probably will) be made along the way, which will counter some of the joys experienced when matters go well. I am sure that Dave will confirm this, and that a lot of patience and effort are needed to become adept at these procedures, and that there is no 'one size fits all' solution (except maybe if you can obtain and use perfect-sounding components), so do be prepared for a lot of time to be spent in achieving perfection.
However, surely part of the satisfaction with DIY audio tinkering is in spending the necessary time needed to do these extensive trials, in a slow and steady manner, and always recording what you have done, together with any perceived effects. This is the only real way to learn about this area of 'development' and then you will be able to look back at any successful techniques or certain components which have turned out well, which is is good start for the next job.
Another 'rule of thumb' which I overlooked before but which I unfailingly adopt is this:
When any substitution of parts doesn't provide a noticeable improvement over a fews days of listening, and it doesn't worsen when reverting back to the original parts, *always* go back to the originals. Even if there is no apparent sonic change either way, go back to where you were before.
I know that this will be frustrating, but it is the only safe way to proceed. Also, never make more than one significant change at any one time, as you will not then know which part was responsible for any changes perceived, nor if they were cumulatively beneficial, or even countering each other in their sonic effects.
Very occasionally I have been asked to 'put right' some modification efforts of others who have upset certain pieces of their equipment in overall sonic balance etc., and what has clearly happened is that due to some bad choices elsewhere in their systems, they have unwittingly 'compensated' for some other anomalies which when connected together initially sounded fine. However, when subsequently they replaced the offending piece of equipment with something with a more neutral balance, the modified equipment stood out like a sore thumb.
To help avoid this possibility it is always a good idea to try to use another piece of equipment (perhaps even borrowed from an interested friend for a few hours) as a 'yardstick' from time-to-time, to ensure that you are not unwittingly veering away from neutral too much, as this can go unnoticed if it is in small increments and over several separate stages of changes.
I sincerely hope that having willingly shared almost a lifetime's experiences in this area of work, some other enthusiasts can save themselves quite a lot of 'unprofitable' and time-consuming but frustrating abortive work, and maybe move matters on much further and more quickly that I have been able to do.
Only time will tell.
Regards,
I never said it was easy, did I?
Seriously, it has taken me very many years to get to where I am now, and as I told you, I am still learning.
In my own case, I have always tended to be an evolutionary kind of person, rather than revolutionary, and this has doubtless made it easier for me to make progress and learn a bit about this fascinating subject. I tend to stick to well-known (at least to me!) circuits and work on them until satisfied, rather than continually buying new and upgraded electronics which I understand a lot of folk do, but in doing this you are trying to hit a constantly-moving target.
Familiarity is important here, so getting used to sounds and listening for these small differences over a period of time, is essential to me. I try to decide which part of my set-up is the most likely to be the weakest link, and start with some trials on that particular circuit, and see what (if anything) transpires.
With even half-decent ancillary electronics in a system, one should be able to hear some differences with component-changes, even if these changes are not necessarily for the good. If at any stage one simply cannot identify anything with any certainty or repeatability, there is no point in pursuing that particular area.
Either one's other components are simply not good enough to reveal anything there (unlikely), possibly one's ears are not good enough or insufficiently practiced (which needs more practice), or most likely in my experience, you just picked the wrong area to begin with.
As I also mentioned, this will inevitably end up as an iterative process if one wishes to get the very best of the entire system, and re-visiting another area when earlier such trials were not very conclusive, is often productive at a later time when other areas have improved.
Everyone has to start somewhere, and the longest journey begins with a single step, and the best advice I know is just to go for it and see what happens. However, for any 'hopefuls' who read this, there are no really easy shortcuts that I am aware of, and many mistakes may (and probably will) be made along the way, which will counter some of the joys experienced when matters go well. I am sure that Dave will confirm this, and that a lot of patience and effort are needed to become adept at these procedures, and that there is no 'one size fits all' solution (except maybe if you can obtain and use perfect-sounding components), so do be prepared for a lot of time to be spent in achieving perfection.
However, surely part of the satisfaction with DIY audio tinkering is in spending the necessary time needed to do these extensive trials, in a slow and steady manner, and always recording what you have done, together with any perceived effects. This is the only real way to learn about this area of 'development' and then you will be able to look back at any successful techniques or certain components which have turned out well, which is is good start for the next job.
Another 'rule of thumb' which I overlooked before but which I unfailingly adopt is this:
When any substitution of parts doesn't provide a noticeable improvement over a fews days of listening, and it doesn't worsen when reverting back to the original parts, *always* go back to the originals. Even if there is no apparent sonic change either way, go back to where you were before.
I know that this will be frustrating, but it is the only safe way to proceed. Also, never make more than one significant change at any one time, as you will not then know which part was responsible for any changes perceived, nor if they were cumulatively beneficial, or even countering each other in their sonic effects.
Very occasionally I have been asked to 'put right' some modification efforts of others who have upset certain pieces of their equipment in overall sonic balance etc., and what has clearly happened is that due to some bad choices elsewhere in their systems, they have unwittingly 'compensated' for some other anomalies which when connected together initially sounded fine. However, when subsequently they replaced the offending piece of equipment with something with a more neutral balance, the modified equipment stood out like a sore thumb.
To help avoid this possibility it is always a good idea to try to use another piece of equipment (perhaps even borrowed from an interested friend for a few hours) as a 'yardstick' from time-to-time, to ensure that you are not unwittingly veering away from neutral too much, as this can go unnoticed if it is in small increments and over several separate stages of changes.
I sincerely hope that having willingly shared almost a lifetime's experiences in this area of work, some other enthusiasts can save themselves quite a lot of 'unprofitable' and time-consuming but frustrating abortive work, and maybe move matters on much further and more quickly that I have been able to do.
Only time will tell.
Regards,
Dangers of generalisations!
Hi Dave, Keith & others,
It has just been pointed out to me privately, that some of my earlier comments could be subject to a misunderstanding, and I wish to clear this up, as it might help.
When continually stating that ideally each area in electronics should be 'optimised' individually, and that the same combination of caps in one area might not be so good 'sonically' as in another, I omitted to make the following point:
In a thread like this which began as mods just to Tripath amps, in most if not all cases where a suitable combination has been achieved, it should be 'transportable' across any other similar circuits. The only likely differences which could then prove worthwhile would be if the ancillary items used in the entire system were substantially different, and one was attempting to redress any anomalies elsewhere, but as mentioned, this is not what I would normally recommend anyway. Other than this, costs of parts will affect the issue as maybe not everyone will be able to justify expenditure on certain expensive components, which others might find to be a sonic improvement.
In my own trials, I very rarely purchase or even work on other maker's equipment, as they are mostly my own electronic designs, or developments of others' designs, so to share what I use anywhere for myself would be of no value to anyone, except for the general preferences which I have mentioned.
Recently while working for another manufacturer, after an initial protoype was 'thrashed to death', a second and rather differently laid-out PCB was used, but eventually, and after going through a lot of similar 'voicing' trials, I still finished-up with almost exactly the same choice of parts everywhere in the end. I am now confident that if using this well-researched choice of parts everywhere, the sonic results will be as close as possible to the original, when this piece of equipment goes into production.
So, if one of you working on a Tripath amp comes up with a very good sonic result, then I am sure that (most?) others will be very happy with the results if these are copied, or if the result is hopelessly poor, there is probably little point in others going down the same path. However, with a different amp altogether, although experiences gained with various components will be a help in getting somewhere more quickly, do be prepared for more experimentation to get the best for this other circuit.
I hope that this helps.
Regards,
Hi Dave, Keith & others,
It has just been pointed out to me privately, that some of my earlier comments could be subject to a misunderstanding, and I wish to clear this up, as it might help.
When continually stating that ideally each area in electronics should be 'optimised' individually, and that the same combination of caps in one area might not be so good 'sonically' as in another, I omitted to make the following point:
In a thread like this which began as mods just to Tripath amps, in most if not all cases where a suitable combination has been achieved, it should be 'transportable' across any other similar circuits. The only likely differences which could then prove worthwhile would be if the ancillary items used in the entire system were substantially different, and one was attempting to redress any anomalies elsewhere, but as mentioned, this is not what I would normally recommend anyway. Other than this, costs of parts will affect the issue as maybe not everyone will be able to justify expenditure on certain expensive components, which others might find to be a sonic improvement.
In my own trials, I very rarely purchase or even work on other maker's equipment, as they are mostly my own electronic designs, or developments of others' designs, so to share what I use anywhere for myself would be of no value to anyone, except for the general preferences which I have mentioned.
Recently while working for another manufacturer, after an initial protoype was 'thrashed to death', a second and rather differently laid-out PCB was used, but eventually, and after going through a lot of similar 'voicing' trials, I still finished-up with almost exactly the same choice of parts everywhere in the end. I am now confident that if using this well-researched choice of parts everywhere, the sonic results will be as close as possible to the original, when this piece of equipment goes into production.
So, if one of you working on a Tripath amp comes up with a very good sonic result, then I am sure that (most?) others will be very happy with the results if these are copied, or if the result is hopelessly poor, there is probably little point in others going down the same path. However, with a different amp altogether, although experiences gained with various components will be a help in getting somewhere more quickly, do be prepared for more experimentation to get the best for this other circuit.
I hope that this helps.
Regards,
Hi Bob,
Of Course!
In fact, I do not have a Tripath amp. I have a Rotel RHB10.
Maybe I will mod that somewhere down the road but I feel it is the least of my problems or should I say least in need of optimizing with my equipment for now.
However, I do have an old Rotel CD player that I am in the middle of modding the Analog Output Stage and there are some similarities to the input stage when it comes to Coupling Caps (but that is about it). So this will help me frame out what I can do to give me an upgrade and not a step sideways. It also gives me some ideas for when I build my own amp down the road a bit!
So there is a decent amount of info, logic and methodology that is quite universal here and other places too and then there is some that requires us to do our own work. But threads like these help us with the methodology that would be required to really make a convincing improvement to ourselves and others too. So lessons and tutorials like these never go to waste because they are part of the foundation (although many of us learn these at different times in our journeys).
This comes from a beginner that started and also joined in April 2007. So I hope that most would already know this. But I and I am sure the others, appreciate your intentions to ensure clarity!
Keep that clarity coming! How's that Cap direction tester going? Are you working on your dreams? They need to be Modded too! LOL Anything is possible in your dreams!
Regards//Keith
Of Course!
In fact, I do not have a Tripath amp. I have a Rotel RHB10.
Maybe I will mod that somewhere down the road but I feel it is the least of my problems or should I say least in need of optimizing with my equipment for now.
However, I do have an old Rotel CD player that I am in the middle of modding the Analog Output Stage and there are some similarities to the input stage when it comes to Coupling Caps (but that is about it). So this will help me frame out what I can do to give me an upgrade and not a step sideways. It also gives me some ideas for when I build my own amp down the road a bit!
So there is a decent amount of info, logic and methodology that is quite universal here and other places too and then there is some that requires us to do our own work. But threads like these help us with the methodology that would be required to really make a convincing improvement to ourselves and others too. So lessons and tutorials like these never go to waste because they are part of the foundation (although many of us learn these at different times in our journeys).
This comes from a beginner that started and also joined in April 2007. So I hope that most would already know this. But I and I am sure the others, appreciate your intentions to ensure clarity!
Keep that clarity coming! How's that Cap direction tester going? Are you working on your dreams? They need to be Modded too! LOL Anything is possible in your dreams!
Regards//Keith
Hi Keith,
Out of interest, which Rotel CD player is it, as I might just be able to help with some specific suggestions?
Maybe you missed it before because the original quote of yours about dreaming (which I had tried to copy) also included my brief response to you which was somewhat obscured by appearing in the same highlighted "QUOTE" box, weirdly.
But, some appendages of mine are less active nowadays, even in my dreams!
Regards,
Out of interest, which Rotel CD player is it, as I might just be able to help with some specific suggestions?
Maybe you missed it before because the original quote of yours about dreaming (which I had tried to copy) also included my brief response to you which was somewhat obscured by appearing in the same highlighted "QUOTE" box, weirdly.
But, some appendages of mine are less active nowadays, even in my dreams!
Regards,
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.