So you can distinguish quite easily between the two samples here: http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1342622#post1342622Bobken said:
Be my guest to prove your claim via ABX software or whatever.
Regards,
Jacco
Not everyone likes to listen to music through computers. Nor do many have quality sound cards other than the default on-board chips. Much more people have CD burning capability. Why not just provide more samples so that we tell you what we think and you tell us which is which?dekkersj said:
You can burn the provided samples on a cd and listen to it on a regular audio set. The samples are not compressed or in a different way manipulated.soongsc said:
One of samples is a signal which has gone through an Audyn Cap Plus of 8.2 uF and the other one is the same set-up but with two 22 uF Panasonic elco's in series. 20 euro versus 0.68 euro and according to the claims this would give a tremendous difference in sound quality.
If you provide some cymbals I can redo the experiment with that sample. 10 to 30 seconds of material is enough.
Regards,
Jacco
Ripping off a CD is something I have not tried before, but I'll see what I can do.dekkersj said:
By the way, here's someone else in the Netherlands
http://www.humblehomemadehifi.com/Cap.html
Cap Orientation Test
I connected the Radio Shack capacitors with the writing face down (CFD). I played a few selections from the test suite. I then reversed the orientation of the caps with the writing face up (CFU) and repeated the test suite selections.
I found the test suite selections played CFD yielded a soft withdrawn sound. Withdrawn is to say the performances did not have the presence experienced when the orientation was reversed. It just sounds as if the volume had been turned down a notch.
When CFU are tested, there is definitely more bass, thus the perception of greater presence than when CFU.
To my ears the more relaxed presentation was less fatiguing than when face up. The perception of less presence can be adjusted somewhat by increasing the volume.
So, yes, I hear a difference based on the orientation of these specific film capacitors. I would suspect that the same may be true of other film caps, but I have no plans to cinduct further test of cap orientation.
I connected the Radio Shack capacitors with the writing face down (CFD). I played a few selections from the test suite. I then reversed the orientation of the caps with the writing face up (CFU) and repeated the test suite selections.
I found the test suite selections played CFD yielded a soft withdrawn sound. Withdrawn is to say the performances did not have the presence experienced when the orientation was reversed. It just sounds as if the volume had been turned down a notch.
When CFU are tested, there is definitely more bass, thus the perception of greater presence than when CFU.
To my ears the more relaxed presentation was less fatiguing than when face up. The perception of less presence can be adjusted somewhat by increasing the volume.
So, yes, I hear a difference based on the orientation of these specific film capacitors. I would suspect that the same may be true of other film caps, but I have no plans to cinduct further test of cap orientation.
Re: Question for Davet
First, I would think the Bennics may sound better than the Radio Shacks. I have a TA-10.1, but I did not remove the caps from my TA=10.1 to test.
To remove the cap, place your soldering iron on one lead at the junction of the lead and the printed circuit board (PCB). Then, use pliers or tweezers to pull the lead from the board. I would suggest trying to heat the connection from the capacitor side of the board using pressure on the the iron to try to insure the solder pad on PCB doesn't lift.
The leads may be bent on the underside of the PCB. You may have to straighten this lead in order to remove the cap. Heat the connection and either straighten the lead or lift the cap.
To connect the RS caps in parallel take the two caps with the writing facing up on both. Wrap the lead of one of the caps around the lead of the other. Solder this connection and trim the lead of the soldered cap. Leave the other lead for mounting on the PCB. Repeat for the other lead: wrap, solder, and trim.
Repeat for the other two caps.
Use the non trimmed leads to mount the parallel caps on the TA-10.1 PCB.
The attached photo should help.
Tripath07 said:
First, I would think the Bennics may sound better than the Radio Shacks. I have a TA-10.1, but I did not remove the caps from my TA=10.1 to test.
To remove the cap, place your soldering iron on one lead at the junction of the lead and the printed circuit board (PCB). Then, use pliers or tweezers to pull the lead from the board. I would suggest trying to heat the connection from the capacitor side of the board using pressure on the the iron to try to insure the solder pad on PCB doesn't lift.
The leads may be bent on the underside of the PCB. You may have to straighten this lead in order to remove the cap. Heat the connection and either straighten the lead or lift the cap.
To connect the RS caps in parallel take the two caps with the writing facing up on both. Wrap the lead of one of the caps around the lead of the other. Solder this connection and trim the lead of the soldered cap. Leave the other lead for mounting on the PCB. Repeat for the other lead: wrap, solder, and trim.
Repeat for the other two caps.
Use the non trimmed leads to mount the parallel caps on the TA-10.1 PCB.
The attached photo should help.
Re: Question for Davet
First, I would think the Bennics may sound better than the Radio Shacks. I have a TA-10.1, but I did not remove the caps from my TA=10.1 to test.
To remove the cap, place your soldering iron on one lead at the junction of the lead and the printed circuit board (PCB). Then, use pliers or tweezers to pull the lead from the board. I would suggest trying to heat the connection from the capacitor side of the board using pressure on the the iron to try to insure the solder pad on PCB doesn't lift.
The leads may be bent on the underside of the PCB. You may have to straighten this lead in order to remove the cap. Heat the connection and either straighten the lead or lift the cap.
To connect the RS caps in parallel take the two caps with the writing facing up on both. Wrap the lead of one of the caps around the lead of the other. Solder this connection and trim the lead of the soldered cap. Leave the other lead for mounting on the PCB. Repeat for the other lead: wrap, solder, and trim.
Repeat for the other two caps.
Use the non trimmed leads to mount the parallel caps on the TA-10.1 PCB.
The attached photo should help.
Tripath07 said:
First, I would think the Bennics may sound better than the Radio Shacks. I have a TA-10.1, but I did not remove the caps from my TA=10.1 to test.
To remove the cap, place your soldering iron on one lead at the junction of the lead and the printed circuit board (PCB). Then, use pliers or tweezers to pull the lead from the board. I would suggest trying to heat the connection from the capacitor side of the board using pressure on the the iron to try to insure the solder pad on PCB doesn't lift.
The leads may be bent on the underside of the PCB. You may have to straighten this lead in order to remove the cap. Heat the connection and either straighten the lead or lift the cap.
To connect the RS caps in parallel take the two caps with the writing facing up on both. Wrap the lead of one of the caps around the lead of the other. Solder this connection and trim the lead of the soldered cap. Leave the other lead for mounting on the PCB. Repeat for the other lead: wrap, solder, and trim.
Repeat for the other two caps.
Use the non trimmed leads to mount the parallel caps on the TA-10.1 PCB.
The attached photo should help.
Attachments
DC Coupling
I am interested in trying/testing the DC Coupling Circuit you cooked up for the Tripaths. Please, direct me to th circuit.
As to the ABX Testing; Start an independent thread for this topic!
There is obviously, interest in this topic, but it has become "static on the line" for this thread. TIA.
theAnonymous1 said:
I wonder if Dave would be interested in trying one of the DC coupling circuits I cooked up for the Tripaths. I would like to know his impressions of it compared to all of his caps.
I am interested in trying/testing the DC Coupling Circuit you cooked up for the Tripaths. Please, direct me to th circuit.
As to the ABX Testing; Start an independent thread for this topic!
There is obviously, interest in this topic, but it has become "static on the line" for this thread. TIA.
Re: DC Coupling
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1301503#post1301503
If you don't mind my hybrid SMD/point-to-point hack job, I can send you the one I built. Pics are in the post above.
If your using a passive pot for volume it doubles as a nice buffer with 50R output impedance.
Davet said:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1301503#post1301503
If you don't mind my hybrid SMD/point-to-point hack job, I can send you the one I built. Pics are in the post above.
If your using a passive pot for volume it doubles as a nice buffer with 50R output impedance.
Re: DC Coupling
I have started a new thread here.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=111414
Davet said:
I have started a new thread here.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=111414
Test to come
Keiyj,
I am still around. I have had some other commitments this week and I haven't had the time to focus on testing.
I have a a test forthcoming which I had not planned for. I am rather excited about it. This test is a little off the beaten path, but should expand some horizons regarding coupling.
There were some comments on the thread referenced by BobKen regarding "not" bypassing coupling capacitors. This has had me second guessing this bypass cap test. I have had tremendous success in bypassing power supply caps. We will see how things turn out with the bypassed coupling caps test.
I have some 0.01 MFD silver mica caps to bypass the BGs as suggested. Most boutique caps including BG poo-poo bypassing boutique audiophile caps. I am wary, but I will push on.
Barring no other unforeseen events I should have a test result early next week.
Keiyj,
I am still around. I have had some other commitments this week and I haven't had the time to focus on testing.
I have a a test forthcoming which I had not planned for. I am rather excited about it. This test is a little off the beaten path, but should expand some horizons regarding coupling.
There were some comments on the thread referenced by BobKen regarding "not" bypassing coupling capacitors. This has had me second guessing this bypass cap test. I have had tremendous success in bypassing power supply caps. We will see how things turn out with the bypassed coupling caps test.
I have some 0.01 MFD silver mica caps to bypass the BGs as suggested. Most boutique caps including BG poo-poo bypassing boutique audiophile caps. I am wary, but I will push on.
Barring no other unforeseen events I should have a test result early next week.
With a nasally sort of voice over a cheap PA system, the voice says: Buckle your seatbelts ladies and gentlemen, we are now entering Phase 2!
Dave,
I hate to ask you this because it is work and time. Do you think putting your Cap preference in order from top to bottom with some highlights is a good idea? Or just leave it as is, as you said, most had different strengths and the members need to decide what their mod needs to enhance what is missing in their system?
On the second set of burned Wimas, they were 3.3 uF. I wonder if all the other caps would have sounded better at that higher value too? But Input Caps aren't supposed to be too high, are they? That's just insurance, the Output Caps of the Preamp are really supposed to do the work (blocking DC).
One more question, which did you prefer, the Obbligatos or the Wimas if you had to choose one?
Onward and enjoy the ride (ladies and gentlemen)!
I hope all is well!
Regards//Keith
Dave,
I hate to ask you this because it is work and time. Do you think putting your Cap preference in order from top to bottom with some highlights is a good idea? Or just leave it as is, as you said, most had different strengths and the members need to decide what their mod needs to enhance what is missing in their system?
On the second set of burned Wimas, they were 3.3 uF. I wonder if all the other caps would have sounded better at that higher value too? But Input Caps aren't supposed to be too high, are they? That's just insurance, the Output Caps of the Preamp are really supposed to do the work (blocking DC).
One more question, which did you prefer, the Obbligatos or the Wimas if you had to choose one?
Onward and enjoy the ride (ladies and gentlemen)!
I hope all is well!
Regards//Keith
Cap Preference Order
It is my intent to build a table of various aspects of the capacitors. My thoughts on these aspects are: cost, shipping, physical size, soundstage breadth, soundstage depth, bass, treble, loudness, presence, etc. I want to put it in the form that Consumer Reports or a lot of retailers do and allow you to click on fields to sort the information. This would allow a tweaker to sort on aspects that they feel are important for their application.
I have tried to maintain a certain degree of objectivity and my preferences are just that. I don't want to get into a p_ssing match with anyone because I trumped their choice for some (to them) irrelevant reason. Ranking caps would and will require constant revision.
At this point a best value, IMO, are the Radio Shack paralleled caps. 1) based on availability 2) cost, 3) size, and 4) performance. There are caps that, generally, perform/sound better, but are deficient in other aspects. as I said it depends on what is important to you.
I will respond regarding the Obbligatos vs WIMAs in a private email.
It is my intent to build a table of various aspects of the capacitors. My thoughts on these aspects are: cost, shipping, physical size, soundstage breadth, soundstage depth, bass, treble, loudness, presence, etc. I want to put it in the form that Consumer Reports or a lot of retailers do and allow you to click on fields to sort the information. This would allow a tweaker to sort on aspects that they feel are important for their application.
I have tried to maintain a certain degree of objectivity and my preferences are just that. I don't want to get into a p_ssing match with anyone because I trumped their choice for some (to them) irrelevant reason. Ranking caps would and will require constant revision.
At this point a best value, IMO, are the Radio Shack paralleled caps. 1) based on availability 2) cost, 3) size, and 4) performance. There are caps that, generally, perform/sound better, but are deficient in other aspects. as I said it depends on what is important to you.
I will respond regarding the Obbligatos vs WIMAs in a private email.
I was excited about the new AuraT caps from the makers of the Auricap, but those turned out to be very, very expensive. It would be nice to see you review some of the $$$ caps for comparison, but I doubt anyone would be willing to donate them. I'm curious as to how much better these caps are next to the best of the bargain caps. The bypass cap test may allow these caps to be in a somewhat affordable price range. Could lower values of these caps bypassing a cheap cap offer improvements to justify the cost?
Davet, I sent you an email about some bypass caps, but I didn't receive a response. Did you happen to get something from me? My email address is the same name as my screenname.
Davet, I sent you an email about some bypass caps, but I didn't receive a response. Did you happen to get something from me? My email address is the same name as my screenname.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.