Test Bed
This is a picture of the Test Bed I am using for the Coupling Cap Test.
I have labeled the various caps on the test bed, and the major components external to the AMP6. Just above Vol (Volume Control) is the sleep toggle for the AMP6, which is not labeled..
All of the cabling is CAT5 and the leads to the caps are all the same length. Thus, any aboration due to the length of the wires is the same for all caps under test.
I regret not having posted tests results of late. Other demands on my time - family, work, etc. have gotten priority over the tests. I will be posting results of test conducted on a pair of film caps over the next week.
This is a picture of the Test Bed I am using for the Coupling Cap Test.
I have labeled the various caps on the test bed, and the major components external to the AMP6. Just above Vol (Volume Control) is the sleep toggle for the AMP6, which is not labeled..
All of the cabling is CAT5 and the leads to the caps are all the same length. Thus, any aboration due to the length of the wires is the same for all caps under test.
I regret not having posted tests results of late. Other demands on my time - family, work, etc. have gotten priority over the tests. I will be posting results of test conducted on a pair of film caps over the next week.
Attachments
WIMA Burn-in vs Non-Burned-in Capacitors
I have been testing WIMA 2.2 capacitors at the suggestion of Keith (KP11520). I have tested these caps that currently have about 8 hours burn-in time on them; compared to caps that have had 144+ hours burn-in on them. Evidently, the caps burn-in quite quickly. The distinct difference I heard when I first tested these caps right out of the box (no burn-in) is not as apparent after 8 hours. Therefore, the following was my initial impression of the WIMAs (zero hours burn-in).
I have since compared the burned-in WIMA caps (BIC) to the non-burned-in WIMA caps (NIC). The BIC is just ever so much smoother. Oboes in Pictures at an Exhibition sound woodier (if that is possible). The BIC seems to have a mellowness to the highs that is not there when the caps were initially tested. I should point out this is not an uncommon phenomena. Comparing the BIC to the NIC - the BICs are just easier to listen to. The highs from the trumpet and the violin on Hold that Tiger from the Mark O’Connor CD will run you out of the room if the cap has not settled down. This was the case in the initial test above, but is not the case at present (8+ hours).
I must say that after 8+ hours on the NIC cap - I no longer make a run for the door. The cap evidently settles comparative quickly. I still hear quite a bit of sibilance on female vocals though on The NIC. This sibilance for the BIC is, virtually, nonexistent. The only real difference I hear between the WIMA BIC and the NIC is in the upper region (highs). There is a certain “sweetness” to the performance from the BIC.
I will subsequently compare the WIMAs to other caps previously tested.
I have been testing WIMA 2.2 capacitors at the suggestion of Keith (KP11520). I have tested these caps that currently have about 8 hours burn-in time on them; compared to caps that have had 144+ hours burn-in on them. Evidently, the caps burn-in quite quickly. The distinct difference I heard when I first tested these caps right out of the box (no burn-in) is not as apparent after 8 hours. Therefore, the following was my initial impression of the WIMAs (zero hours burn-in).
I have since compared the burned-in WIMA caps (BIC) to the non-burned-in WIMA caps (NIC). The BIC is just ever so much smoother. Oboes in Pictures at an Exhibition sound woodier (if that is possible). The BIC seems to have a mellowness to the highs that is not there when the caps were initially tested. I should point out this is not an uncommon phenomena. Comparing the BIC to the NIC - the BICs are just easier to listen to. The highs from the trumpet and the violin on Hold that Tiger from the Mark O’Connor CD will run you out of the room if the cap has not settled down. This was the case in the initial test above, but is not the case at present (8+ hours).
I must say that after 8+ hours on the NIC cap - I no longer make a run for the door. The cap evidently settles comparative quickly. I still hear quite a bit of sibilance on female vocals though on The NIC. This sibilance for the BIC is, virtually, nonexistent. The only real difference I hear between the WIMA BIC and the NIC is in the upper region (highs). There is a certain “sweetness” to the performance from the BIC.
I will subsequently compare the WIMAs to other caps previously tested.
Keith,
Each of the various capacitors has its own character. I think it depends on your budget, how the capacitor will be mounted, etc. Each of the capacitors I reviewed has merits and it all depends on what the individual desires as to their ultimate choice.
I have only tested one cap whose overall character I wouldn't use. Even then that specific capacitor has a sonic quality that I might choose for listening to specific types of music.
I fear any race will come out as a draw depending on your druthers.
Each of the various capacitors has its own character. I think it depends on your budget, how the capacitor will be mounted, etc. Each of the capacitors I reviewed has merits and it all depends on what the individual desires as to their ultimate choice.
I have only tested one cap whose overall character I wouldn't use. Even then that specific capacitor has a sonic quality that I might choose for listening to specific types of music.
I fear any race will come out as a draw depending on your druthers.
WIMA 2.2 MFD Review
The following only applies to the burned-in (BIC) WIMA MKP-series 2.2 MFD capacitors as compared to other capacitors I have tested. I also have a set of MKP-series 3.3 MFD WIMAs I will write up only if there is a significant difference over the 2.2 MFD caps.
The WIMAs yields the broadest soundstage of any capacitor I have tested. The sounds seem to emanate from a much wider field than the speakers by at least a meter or so. These capacitors also yield the most body – not presence. Bass just sounds much fuller and acoustic string instruments just have a woody tone. Although, there is more body the presentation is not artificial. The bass sounds balanced and is not so pronounced as to be distracting.
These capacitors play much louder than any other capacitor I have tested. For those that may have concerns about the Tripath amplifiers being able to drive or play louder; then the WIMA is the cap one should choose.
The WIMAs have a certain holographic effect especially on the Mark O’Connor Hot Swing Trio CD. The effect of the violinist swaying back and forth before the microphone is surreal in its life likeness. These capacitors did everything all the other caps did “just” a little better. Only the Auricaps sounded better on large symphonic works. The hall on Pictures at an Exhibition sounds considerably larger when played through the the Auricaps. The WIMAs have a much broader soundstage but the depth is not a great as the Auricaps.
I would use the WIMAs for rock, blues, pop, and any electronic based music. This is not to say that these caps are not to be used for classical recordings. I just think that they are better suited to chamber performances or smaller works over symphonic works. On symphonic works thes caps place you one or two rows back from the orchestra – up close and personal. The WIMAs will just move you so much more than the other caps. If you want to become physically involved in the recording this cap is the one. There is some overall sibilance on female vocals compared to the other films but not as much as the Solens. The sibilance would not be noticeable at all if I had not tested other caps.
The WIMAs are physically large. Not as large as the Obbligatos, but not as small as the Solens, Auricaps, or Radio Shack films. The electrolytic capacitors are microscopic compared to the film caps. These caps should fit on a TA-10.1, printed circuit board but will pose mounting problems for everthing else.
The Auricaps sound somewhat more refined to my ear. This is a personal taste “thing”. I just prefer the overall presentation of the Auricaps. It sounds that the Auricaps just has more air around the performers. The Auricaps are more “relaxed” or laid, back. The performances played through the Auricaps just sound more alive to me.
Detail wise the WIMAs leave nothing to the imagination. These caps deliver everything in a big way.
The BIC WIMAs measured 2.23 MFD and 2.29 MFD. These caps are 10% tolerance 250 Volt units. The MKP series also comes in 5%tolerance. Cost vary widely depending on tolerance, voltage, and distributor. Select a distributor from http://www.wima.com/EN/distribution_int.htm or perform a web search.
The following only applies to the burned-in (BIC) WIMA MKP-series 2.2 MFD capacitors as compared to other capacitors I have tested. I also have a set of MKP-series 3.3 MFD WIMAs I will write up only if there is a significant difference over the 2.2 MFD caps.
The WIMAs yields the broadest soundstage of any capacitor I have tested. The sounds seem to emanate from a much wider field than the speakers by at least a meter or so. These capacitors also yield the most body – not presence. Bass just sounds much fuller and acoustic string instruments just have a woody tone. Although, there is more body the presentation is not artificial. The bass sounds balanced and is not so pronounced as to be distracting.
These capacitors play much louder than any other capacitor I have tested. For those that may have concerns about the Tripath amplifiers being able to drive or play louder; then the WIMA is the cap one should choose.
The WIMAs have a certain holographic effect especially on the Mark O’Connor Hot Swing Trio CD. The effect of the violinist swaying back and forth before the microphone is surreal in its life likeness. These capacitors did everything all the other caps did “just” a little better. Only the Auricaps sounded better on large symphonic works. The hall on Pictures at an Exhibition sounds considerably larger when played through the the Auricaps. The WIMAs have a much broader soundstage but the depth is not a great as the Auricaps.
I would use the WIMAs for rock, blues, pop, and any electronic based music. This is not to say that these caps are not to be used for classical recordings. I just think that they are better suited to chamber performances or smaller works over symphonic works. On symphonic works thes caps place you one or two rows back from the orchestra – up close and personal. The WIMAs will just move you so much more than the other caps. If you want to become physically involved in the recording this cap is the one. There is some overall sibilance on female vocals compared to the other films but not as much as the Solens. The sibilance would not be noticeable at all if I had not tested other caps.
The WIMAs are physically large. Not as large as the Obbligatos, but not as small as the Solens, Auricaps, or Radio Shack films. The electrolytic capacitors are microscopic compared to the film caps. These caps should fit on a TA-10.1, printed circuit board but will pose mounting problems for everthing else.
The Auricaps sound somewhat more refined to my ear. This is a personal taste “thing”. I just prefer the overall presentation of the Auricaps. It sounds that the Auricaps just has more air around the performers. The Auricaps are more “relaxed” or laid, back. The performances played through the Auricaps just sound more alive to me.
Detail wise the WIMAs leave nothing to the imagination. These caps deliver everything in a big way.
The BIC WIMAs measured 2.23 MFD and 2.29 MFD. These caps are 10% tolerance 250 Volt units. The MKP series also comes in 5%tolerance. Cost vary widely depending on tolerance, voltage, and distributor. Select a distributor from http://www.wima.com/EN/distribution_int.htm or perform a web search.
Attachments
Hi Dave,
Nice work! I am with you that each has a nuance to its own and you may choose certain caps based on what your equipment is missing. My CD Player for instance is nice but kind of cold so the Wima MKP10 and the Obbligato Film/Oil are what I am going to test! I think it is going to be a hard decision and I might also try the Auricaps just to really make the decision really painful!
So are you going to change the Output Caps in your CD/DVD Player now too? What about your Preamp? This can really turn into a sickness?
I need a nice Steamed Crab dinner and watch re-runs of "The Deadliest Catch," while I am changing the caps in all my equipment!
So sad and so exciting! Pass the melted butter, please!
Regards//Keith
Nice work! I am with you that each has a nuance to its own and you may choose certain caps based on what your equipment is missing. My CD Player for instance is nice but kind of cold so the Wima MKP10 and the Obbligato Film/Oil are what I am going to test! I think it is going to be a hard decision and I might also try the Auricaps just to really make the decision really painful!
So are you going to change the Output Caps in your CD/DVD Player now too? What about your Preamp? This can really turn into a sickness?
I need a nice Steamed Crab dinner and watch re-runs of "The Deadliest Catch," while I am changing the caps in all my equipment!
So sad and so exciting! Pass the melted butter, please!
Regards//Keith
Cap Replacement
For the moment I will not be changing any of the caps in my equipment. This would alter my test platform. Although, the preamp is not a part of this test platform. I still have a number of test, yet, to perform
The coupling caps in my tube preamp are Auricaps. I don't recall what coupling caps are in my DVD player, but they are not the stock caps. They are either Panasonics or Blackgates. I know I have Auricaps for the Swenson mod, but I never implemented it.
I admit I had a bias to Auricaps before undertaking these tests. I wonder if there is a degree of synergy that exist, for there are Auricaps in my speaker crossover, as well. Be forewarned the Auricaps take a long time to break in and settle down - around 200+ hours.
Everyone has their favorite cap. I really enjoy all of the films I tested. The various strengths make it hard to like just one. In my "ultimate" T-Amp I will probably include three or more caps with a switch that allows me to switch between them for various recordings.
As to steamed crab dinner - you aren't referencing the "Burn-in Crab" are you? It might be a little tough to chew compared to Chesapeake Bay Blue Crabs.
For the moment I will not be changing any of the caps in my equipment. This would alter my test platform. Although, the preamp is not a part of this test platform. I still have a number of test, yet, to perform
The coupling caps in my tube preamp are Auricaps. I don't recall what coupling caps are in my DVD player, but they are not the stock caps. They are either Panasonics or Blackgates. I know I have Auricaps for the Swenson mod, but I never implemented it.
I admit I had a bias to Auricaps before undertaking these tests. I wonder if there is a degree of synergy that exist, for there are Auricaps in my speaker crossover, as well. Be forewarned the Auricaps take a long time to break in and settle down - around 200+ hours.
Everyone has their favorite cap. I really enjoy all of the films I tested. The various strengths make it hard to like just one. In my "ultimate" T-Amp I will probably include three or more caps with a switch that allows me to switch between them for various recordings.
As to steamed crab dinner - you aren't referencing the "Burn-in Crab" are you? It might be a little tough to chew compared to Chesapeake Bay Blue Crabs.
Hi Dave,
Well maybe you were biased to the Auricaps but that is OK. You were more than fair with every assessment. If the Auricaps remained on the top, then that's where they still belong. Like I said before, many with a lot of experience put them there too. The only one that gives the Auricap a run is the Obbligato by the few who have tried them, they really aren't mainstream yet. Now the question is, is there a number 2 and 3 and 4, etc.? That may be harder because , like you said, they each have something special and my number 1 and 2 might be different from yours. Especially in my application, where my CD Player is kind of cold and sterile and might just need a little exaggerated warmth (that is why the obbligatos might be better than the Auricaps in my situation, but that is a MIGHT). We will see over the next few weeks!
Yeah, we got hosed here this past Summer. The Blue Claws were tiny (even in August) and not worth the work to eat them. But I understand they sent them all to you guys. Lobster was also harder to get and prices went crazy. Looks like shellfish might be a good investment move. Maybe I will hermetically seal up the "Burn in Crab" and sell it, in mint condition, in a few years and buy a vacation house with the money! I don't want to eat it just yet, I used silver solder and I know that would break my teeth. But that is better that Tin/Lead solder, at least I won't get lead poisoning and who needs teeth anyway?
Regards//Keith
Well maybe you were biased to the Auricaps but that is OK. You were more than fair with every assessment. If the Auricaps remained on the top, then that's where they still belong. Like I said before, many with a lot of experience put them there too. The only one that gives the Auricap a run is the Obbligato by the few who have tried them, they really aren't mainstream yet. Now the question is, is there a number 2 and 3 and 4, etc.? That may be harder because , like you said, they each have something special and my number 1 and 2 might be different from yours. Especially in my application, where my CD Player is kind of cold and sterile and might just need a little exaggerated warmth (that is why the obbligatos might be better than the Auricaps in my situation, but that is a MIGHT). We will see over the next few weeks!
Yeah, we got hosed here this past Summer. The Blue Claws were tiny (even in August) and not worth the work to eat them. But I understand they sent them all to you guys. Lobster was also harder to get and prices went crazy. Looks like shellfish might be a good investment move. Maybe I will hermetically seal up the "Burn in Crab" and sell it, in mint condition, in a few years and buy a vacation house with the money! I don't want to eat it just yet, I used silver solder and I know that would break my teeth. But that is better that Tin/Lead solder, at least I won't get lead poisoning and who needs teeth anyway?
Regards//Keith
WIMA 3.3 MFD
I listened to the WIMA 3.3 MFD Burned-In Caps (BIC) which had been burned in for 96+ hours compared to the same caps with no (zero) time on them at all. The edginess of the Non-burned-In Caps (NIC) in the upper frequencies is not as pronounced as it was when I first listened to the 2.2 MFD WIMAs when making the same comparison.
It may have been my ears but the WIMAS don't sound that much different between NIC and BIC. There is a very subtle edginess in the highs of the NIC. This would not really stand out if I had not tested other caps.
There is just a little more bottom with the 3.3 MFDs, than with the 2.2 MFDs. The balance from high to low seems to better proportioned with the 3.3s. The does not seem to be as much air around the performers as with some other caps, but nothing is lost in presentation. Longer time in my system may mellow them even more.
Because of the bass performance I listened to Verve's Jimmy Smith's Compact Jazz CD. This is a performance that has bass drum and a Hammond organ, which I was concentrating on and a jazz orchestra. These caps really showed off here. The undulating bass from the organ is felt and the punched accent of the bass drum comes through loud and clear. The sound stage is broad (really broad) and layered from front to rear. Localization of the performers is superb.
I prefer the 3.3 WIMAs just a little over that of the 2.2s. For one who does not want to take the roller coaster ride of burning in capacitors I would suggest the WIMAS either 2.2 or 3.3 MFD. They yield a clean detailed presentation. These caps are physically tall, but will easily fit on a TA-10.1 PCB, but it may require a larger chassis to house the caps. They are not as large as any of the Obbligatos, but sizable nonetheless.
The recommendations for use of the WIMAs 2.2 MFD earlier in this thread hold true for this cap as well. I have no real feel for cost or shipping constraints for these caps.
I apologize for limiting distributors in the 2.2 MFD to the USA. That was narrow focused on my behalf, for I was trying to get a cost for the review. WIMAs are manufactured in Germany and they should be available from distributors worldwide.
These were 10% tolerance 250 volt units. The BICs measured 3.25 and 3.32 MFDs. The NICs measured 3.30 and 3.32. Next time I will measure the caps before I burn them in such that I will have better matched pairs.
WIMA Distribution WebPAge
I listened to the WIMA 3.3 MFD Burned-In Caps (BIC) which had been burned in for 96+ hours compared to the same caps with no (zero) time on them at all. The edginess of the Non-burned-In Caps (NIC) in the upper frequencies is not as pronounced as it was when I first listened to the 2.2 MFD WIMAs when making the same comparison.
It may have been my ears but the WIMAS don't sound that much different between NIC and BIC. There is a very subtle edginess in the highs of the NIC. This would not really stand out if I had not tested other caps.
There is just a little more bottom with the 3.3 MFDs, than with the 2.2 MFDs. The balance from high to low seems to better proportioned with the 3.3s. The does not seem to be as much air around the performers as with some other caps, but nothing is lost in presentation. Longer time in my system may mellow them even more.
Because of the bass performance I listened to Verve's Jimmy Smith's Compact Jazz CD. This is a performance that has bass drum and a Hammond organ, which I was concentrating on and a jazz orchestra. These caps really showed off here. The undulating bass from the organ is felt and the punched accent of the bass drum comes through loud and clear. The sound stage is broad (really broad) and layered from front to rear. Localization of the performers is superb.
I prefer the 3.3 WIMAs just a little over that of the 2.2s. For one who does not want to take the roller coaster ride of burning in capacitors I would suggest the WIMAS either 2.2 or 3.3 MFD. They yield a clean detailed presentation. These caps are physically tall, but will easily fit on a TA-10.1 PCB, but it may require a larger chassis to house the caps. They are not as large as any of the Obbligatos, but sizable nonetheless.
The recommendations for use of the WIMAs 2.2 MFD earlier in this thread hold true for this cap as well. I have no real feel for cost or shipping constraints for these caps.
I apologize for limiting distributors in the 2.2 MFD to the USA. That was narrow focused on my behalf, for I was trying to get a cost for the review. WIMAs are manufactured in Germany and they should be available from distributors worldwide.
These were 10% tolerance 250 volt units. The BICs measured 3.25 and 3.32 MFDs. The NICs measured 3.30 and 3.32. Next time I will measure the caps before I burn them in such that I will have better matched pairs.
WIMA Distribution WebPAge
Dweekie,
In my testing I oriented all the caps the same way. All of the test caps were oriented the same way you did for your RS caps; with the writing facing up the left lead was input and the right lead was output.
Capacitor orientation difference is a test I may try to undertake while setting up for some other test. I will immediately, try it with the RS caps and let you know.
I have a DPDT switch (not being used) already mounted on the test bed which could be used to reverse the orientation of the cap on one channel. To do it for both channels I would have to add another switch, which I already own. If the RS cap test yields an apparent difference I will make the adaptation and publish subsequent results.
I was glad to read you tried the Radio Shack caps and that they seem to a least be doing the job. These caps were, IMO, the unexpected gems that came out of the testing.
In my testing I oriented all the caps the same way. All of the test caps were oriented the same way you did for your RS caps; with the writing facing up the left lead was input and the right lead was output.
dweekie said:
Capacitor orientation difference is a test I may try to undertake while setting up for some other test. I will immediately, try it with the RS caps and let you know.
I have a DPDT switch (not being used) already mounted on the test bed which could be used to reverse the orientation of the cap on one channel. To do it for both channels I would have to add another switch, which I already own. If the RS cap test yields an apparent difference I will make the adaptation and publish subsequent results.
I was glad to read you tried the Radio Shack caps and that they seem to a least be doing the job. These caps were, IMO, the unexpected gems that came out of the testing.
KP11520 said:
Keith,
As to the burning-in caps in both directions, that will require quite a bit of time and patience. I have a Hagermann cable burner which I may try to set up for such an experiment. You may have to remind me to try it at some later point.
I believe the use of Panomaniac's circuit achieves this to some degree.
dweekie said:
I've noticed a definite difference in sound presentation by reversing the orientation of signal caps. Out of the caps I've tested, the TRT Dynamicaps stand out in my mind as exhibiting the most varitation, to my ear, though just about every signal cap I've tried has, in my exerience, shown a notable difference when flipped.
As I was going through the process of figuring this out, I would often see references to certain caps sounding preferable with either the outer or inner winding of the foil pointed in the direction of the signal flow. I would also see recommendations based on a cap sounding preferable when either the outer or inner winding of the foil was oriented in the direction of the lowest ground potential.
I know that with the non-polar Blackgate N these two concerns coincide regarding inner/outer foil orientation: one of the legs, the shorter or longer, I can't remember which, should face the direction of the signal flow for best sonics, and this orientation also coincides with the way one should orient it to ground potential.
My question with the Tripath based amps is that since they have a biasing voltage of 2.some volts on the downstream side of the signal flow, the lowest ground potential would actually be facing toward the source. With the Blackgate N, this actually means that if one were to orient it for best sonics towards ground potential, it would be the reverse of what is recommended for best sonics in regard to direction of signal flow. Which is the correct way to orient it in this case?
If someone has done a comparison of the BG Ns or any of the other caps, please let us know. In particular, I'm interested in playing with the Radio Shack caps and was wondering if anyone has determined any sort of directionality preference for this cap in a circuit without a biasing voltage, what that directionality might be, and whether placing it in a circuit with a biasing voltage, like the Tripath circuits, reversed that directionality in regards to best sonics. Whew!
Best,
KT
Has anyone on this forum ever tried to perform an ABX test to find if the differences between different coupling capacitors are audible?
I'm asking this because recent listening tests of a limited number of different coupling capacitors performed by people on a Dutch audio forum has shown that the differences - which are easily measurable - are not audible.
I'm asking this because recent listening tests of a limited number of different coupling capacitors performed by people on a Dutch audio forum has shown that the differences - which are easily measurable - are not audible.
Hi Dave,
This is good, now we are starting to beat this topic to death. This is where anything goes and we will all be surprised to the additional things we find out.
Yes Panomaniac's burn in circuit (ala the Stone Tablet and Burn in Crab) can achieve this but one direction at a time! So If you want to burn a pair of caps for 200 hours, 100 with the flow left to right and 100 hours with the flow right to left. Then test with the direction both ways in the audio equipment you are modding before making it permanent. This will obviously add more steps if more than one pair of Caps are being auditioned! YIKES!
KT, is this phenomenon more about type of caps? Each type has a different impact. Say, Electrolytics are most pronounced, films are moderately pronounced and oils no affect at all, something along these lines?
ravon, do you mean the opposite? Where they can hear the difference but not measure any difference? Different manufacturers or the same one but just different caps (several pairs of the same values)?
Regards//Keith
This is good, now we are starting to beat this topic to death. This is where anything goes and we will all be surprised to the additional things we find out.
Yes Panomaniac's burn in circuit (ala the Stone Tablet and Burn in Crab) can achieve this but one direction at a time! So If you want to burn a pair of caps for 200 hours, 100 with the flow left to right and 100 hours with the flow right to left. Then test with the direction both ways in the audio equipment you are modding before making it permanent. This will obviously add more steps if more than one pair of Caps are being auditioned! YIKES!
KT, is this phenomenon more about type of caps? Each type has a different impact. Say, Electrolytics are most pronounced, films are moderately pronounced and oils no affect at all, something along these lines?
ravon, do you mean the opposite? Where they can hear the difference but not measure any difference? Different manufacturers or the same one but just different caps (several pairs of the same values)?
Regards//Keith
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.