Removing Plastic covers from Capacitors - Page 9 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Design & Build > Parts

Parts Where to get, and how to make the best bits. PCB's, caps, transformers, etc.

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 16th September 2002, 08:00 PM   #81
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Boulder Creek, CA
I find it amazing to see so many opinions about something that no one has tried!!! Why don't you try to remove the plastic and report your findings? Why don't you try to damp some passive and active components and listen for yourself? Wouldn't that make sense? As they say "your mind is like a parachute, it works best when it is open".

I have been damping passive and active parts for about 20 years with great success and have removed the plastic from electrolytics with amazing results. If someone tells me that something makes an audible difference, then I usually try it (call me gullible or just plain open minded). I have found that the tiniest vibration on a part is very audible. I am not the only one who hears this.

The only "truth" in audio is what you experience. The direct experience will tell you whether something is real or not. The tests can be repeated by yourself and others and will confirm the worthiness of your initial listening test. In other words, tell a few buddies what you heard and have them try the test. If they hear the same thing and many others state the same thing, then there is got to be something to it.

I certainly believe we can fool ourselves into believing what we want, but a relatively objective listening experience is possible. What I find is that my confidence increases each year that I do these kinds of tests. I trust my direct experiece. It is rarely wrong. The most scientific thing we can do is to use our own senses. The ear is most sensitive instrument for determining sound quality.

Some people are not interested in finding or promoting better sound or in helping people. All they want is to promote what they think is right. The evolution of sound reproduction is like that of a human being. There is no limit to what can be done and experienced. However, to go to the edge of what we now think of as real and step into the unknown (where true breakthroughs occur) requires and open mind and much courage.

Please spend more time listening and less time thinking about what something "should or should not do". Most audible differences can not be measured (wires, solder, passive and active parts, damping, shielding, etc.) The truth can be directly experieced. I wish you the direct experience of your inner being!

Love,
Ric Schultz
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th September 2002, 08:07 PM   #82
diyAudio Member
 
Peter Daniel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Send a message via AIM to Peter Daniel
Well said Ric. I have to admit, that it was you I've heard about plastic removal from caps first.
__________________
www.audiosector.com
“Do something really well. See how much time it takes. It might be a product, a work of art, who knows? Then give it away cheaply, just because you feel that it should not cost so much, even if it took a lot of time and expensive materials to make it.” - JC
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th September 2002, 08:19 PM   #83
diyAudio Senior Member
 
fdegrove's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Belgium
Default CAPS

Ric,

I couldn't agree more.
The only way to evolve is to try it out and see.
I'm amazed sometimes at how long it takes for some things to get accepted as an advance in the reproduction of music.
And there's a lot more to hi-fi then just damping of course.
The "graphite treatment" of any conductors surrounded by plastic materials (pvc etc.) was first experienced 20 years ago.
It was simple and cheap to apply but scientifically probably very hard to understand.
Care to give it a try and report on it here?


Rgds,
__________________
Frank
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th September 2002, 08:27 PM   #84
eduard is offline eduard  Netherlands
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Holland
Send a message via Yahoo to eduard
Default PLASTIC COVERS

hELLO,
i SUGGEST THAT MOST OF THE PERSON WHO DID SENT A REPLY MUST TRY SOME GRAPHITE SPRAY. i DID FIND THE ORIGINAL INFO IN fRENCH.oNE SHOULD REALIZE THAT A LOT OF IDEAS USED IN TODAYS AUDIOPHILE CIRCLES DID COME FROM fRANCE AND jAPAN. hAVE CONFIDENCE, EVER SEEN A jAPANESE diy MAGAZINE. wE DON'T MAKE MONEY BY GIVING IDEAS SO GIVE IT A TRY AND TELL US, eD
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th September 2002, 08:30 PM   #85
diyAudio Senior Member
 
fdegrove's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Belgium
Default CAPS

Ed,

Did you spray your capslock ?
__________________
Frank
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th September 2002, 08:32 PM   #86
artnyos is offline artnyos  United States
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: New York
Default Cap damping

Hey that Rick guy is not kidding about damping parts.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg damped caps.jpg (63.1 KB, 398 views)
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th September 2002, 08:45 PM   #87
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Is it possible that the original post or the reference it refers to is a hoax?

This reminds me of an article i read at esp about "magic laquer" that you coat components with. that article is here.
__________________
"There's no greater sign of genius than the scorn of fools"
-Albert Einstein.
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th September 2002, 08:49 PM   #88
diyAudio Senior Member
 
fdegrove's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Belgium
Default CAPS

Newmz,

Know that one too.
But no,it's got nothing to do with C37.

Rgds,
__________________
Frank
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th September 2002, 09:36 PM   #89
diyAudio Senior Member
 
fdegrove's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Belgium
Default CAPS

To all C37 fans,

http://cst-www.nrl.navy.mil/lattice/struk/c37.html

Cheers,
__________________
Frank
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th September 2002, 12:15 AM   #90
diyAudio Member
 
Steve Eddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Sacramento, CA
Quote:
Originally posted by Ric Schultz
I find it amazing to see so many opinions about something that no one has tried!!! Why don't you try to remove the plastic and report your findings? Why don't you try to damp some passive and active components and listen for yourself? Wouldn't that make sense?
Sure. So why don't people just stick to that instead of offering up physical explanations and asserting their subjective perceptions as objective facts? Wouldn't that make a bit more sense?

If one simply states that they prefer their caps with the covers removed, then there's absolutely nothing to argue as it does not attempt to establish any particular reality beyond that of the individual.

When one goes beyond that point and starts making assertions with regard to objective realities, then it is no longer simply a matter of opinion and the person making the claim(s) now bears the burden of substantiating them and subjecting them to question and challenge.

Quote:
As they say "your mind is like a parachute, it works best when it is open".
Yes. And my mind is open. However I see quite a lot of closedmindedness here. Closed minds which dogmatically adhere to singular possibilities to the total exclusion of other possibilities.

Quote:
I have been damping passive and active parts for about 20 years with great success and have removed the plastic from electrolytics with amazing results. If someone tells me that something makes an audible difference, then I usually try it (call me gullible or just plain open minded). I have found that the tiniest vibration on a part is very audible. I am not the only one who hears this.
And here is a perfect example.

You assume that ANY perceived difference MUST only be the result of an actual audible stimulus. Such an assumption requires a complete denial of other very real possibilities.

Please explain to me how this is to be considered open minded.

An open mind doesn't make such assumptions but instead allows for all other possibilities until such time as they can be eliminated. In other words, whenever there is more than one possibility, there is ambiguity. And where there is ambiguity, one cannot draw conclusions except by way of dogma.

Please explain to me how dogma is considered open minded.


Quote:
The only "truth" in audio is what you experience.
Yes. But it must be remembered that this is only a subjective truth and has no inherent implications beyond the particular individual doing the experiencing.

This is in fact how I approach audio. The only thing that matters to ME are my own subjective experiences. I don't care if those experiences are due to physical or psychological influences. Even if they are due solely to psychology, the experience is no less "real" for me.

The difference is that unlike some others, I don't make any attempt to assert MY subjective experiences as anything more than subjective experience and fully recognize the fact that it may well be influenced by things other than what's going on inside my audio system.

What puzzles me is why some people can't be content with the same thing. I don't understand why they feel they have to justify their subjective experiences on objective grounds and why they feel they have to assert their subjective experiences as objective realities.

Quote:
The direct experience will tell you whether something is real or not.
The direct experience, being a subjective one, will only tell you about the subjective reality. It tells you nothing inherently about the objective reality.

Quote:
The tests can be repeated by yourself and others and will confirm the worthiness of your initial listening test.
That will only confirm that other individuals are fundamentally the same as yourself. They all have the same ear/brain systems which are as prone to psychological biases same as everyone else.

Quote:
In other words, tell a few buddies what you heard and have them try the test. If they hear the same thing and many others state the same thing, then there is got to be something to it.
No, there needn't necessarily be something to it beyond humans being fundamentally the same.

Quote:
I certainly believe we can fool ourselves into believing what we want, but a relatively objective listening experience is possible.
Not until you're able to weed out the psychological element.

Quote:
What I find is that my confidence increases each year that I do these kinds of tests. I trust my direct experiece. It is rarely wrong. The most scientific thing we can do is to use our own senses.
If you're trying to get at some OBJECTIVE truth, that's perhaps the LEAST scientific thing we can do. It's that kind of "science" that lead people to believe that the earth was flat. "Hey, just look at the horizon! It's FLAT!"

Want to see just how good your senses are at determining objective reality? Try this one:

<center>
<img src="http://www.q-audio.com/images/illusion.jpg">
</center>

Your sense of vision tells you that B is the opposite end of line A. The objective reality is that C is the opposite end of line A.

While our eye captures the image accurately, our subjective sense is based on how the brain INTERPRETS the image.

Quote:
The ear is most sensitive instrument for determining sound quality.
Well, as for determining SUBJECTIVE quality, it's the ONLY instrument we have. And you neglect the fact that the ear is but one element. Our ears do not hear on their own. Our ears are plugged into our brains, and our ultimate perception is based on how our brain interprets. And that interpretation can be influenced by things other than what's being sent to the brain by the ear.

That's all well and good as far as our subjective perceptions and subsequent enjoyment of audio goes. But when it comes to getting at objective realities, such as actual audibility of various things, that particular nature of our brain makes it a rather ****-poor and unreliable instrument.

Those who claim that our ear/brain system is this marvelously accurate instrument obviously have very little understanding of how the ear/brain system works even at the most basic level.

For starters, the ear actually throws out quite a lot of information right from the start. As an example, consider a sinusoidal waveform. In spite of the fact that its magnitude is continuously changing over time, we have no perception of it. The ear simply averages the magnitude over time and leaves us with a singular, unchanging sensation called amplitude.

To get a general idea, imagine a 1/3 octave equalizer with the dancing LED level indicators for each band. Those dancing LED level indicators are a rough approximation of the information that's actually sent to the brain by the ear. And what we perceive is the result of the brain's interpretation of those dancing LEDs.

So basically what we "hear" is the average energy within each band of a series of bandpass filters spaced roughly 1/3 octave apart.

Quote:
Some people are not interested in finding or promoting better sound or in helping people. All they want is to promote what they think is right.
I only entered this particular discussion in response to certain objective claims. There is no matter of opinion when it comes to objective claims. Either the claim is valid or it's not. If I see a claim I believe to be invalid, I challenge it. This is the process by which we get to objective truths.

If no one here were interested in getting at any objective truths, then they wouldn't bother making objective claims. Since objective claims have been made, then apparently some have an interest in getting at the objective truth. So I fail to see why questioning those claims should be so problematic.

Unless of course it's not really objective truth one is wanting to get at but rather the establishment of closedminded dogma.

Quote:
The evolution of sound reproduction is like that of a human being. There is no limit to what can be done and experienced. However, to go to the edge of what we now think of as real and step into the unknown (where true breakthroughs occur) requires and open mind and much courage.
For one who seems to place such importance on an open mind, why is it that part of your mind seems to be completely closed off to certain realities?

Quote:
Please spend more time listening and less time thinking about what something "should or should not do".
That works for me. Might try it yourself.

Quote:
Most audible differences can not be measured (wires, solder, passive and active parts, damping, shielding, etc.)
That presupposes an actual audible difference. But until the psychological element which you seem to have such a closed mind about is removed, that can't be established with any reasonable certainty.

Why is it so important to you to establish actual audibility? Is it an ego thing? Why not just become a Zen Hedonist like myself, not give a rat's ***, and just enjoy? Why impose your left brain on your right brain?

se
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
TO-3 Covers genther Parts 2 20th July 2008 06:52 PM
transformer covers space-cake Parts 7 28th March 2008 09:57 PM
How do you get the covers off Acoustat Rapidroy Multi-Way 3 16th January 2008 08:59 PM
Speaker Covers flchibear Multi-Way 0 18th June 2007 06:41 AM
IMF cm 2 front covers ? itsme1 Multi-Way 0 25th November 2005 08:43 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 06:21 AM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright ©1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2