Black Gate 'super E' caps

Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
Here's quote from his site:

>Exclusively for our customers we have measured for & marked the outer foil lead
end of most larger value capacitors with a black dot for optimum orientation.
For most series signal path applications I recommend orienting the outer foil lead
toward the load, as though the signal were exiting the cap at the end with the
dot. For shunt and power supply bypass applications, orient the black dot toward
ground. At the very least, observe the same alignment in the left & right channels.<

And here's a pic of some of the caps from him. You can see that there is only one cap which has a black dot according to flow of the lettering. I'm not sure how he measures that, maybe something about the inductance?
 

Attachments

  • mit.jpg
    mit.jpg
    22.2 KB · Views: 1,552
diyAudio Senior Member
Joined 2002
BLACK DOTS.

Hi Peter,

I'm not sure how he measures that, maybe something about inductance?

Quite probably...and I don't have a measuring bridge for that.:bawling:

I notice one cap in the pic has already delvelopped fruckles.:bigeyes:

Thanks Peter,if I find an easy way to tell which end is which,I'll let you know.

Eh,eh...wait 'till Bob finds out about this...:goodbad:

Cheers,;)
 
Re: Re: Re: LE CHEF.

Peter Daniel said:


I'm still experimenting with the caps and although the end of the road is nowhere in sight, the best way is to try everything myself.;)

Bob,

I wonder what are your findings regarding Cerafines. I thought they were next best thing after BG, but recently found some posts, with people having different views regarding those Elna caps. I bought last batch of them from Parts Connections and was hoping to use them in my best amp project.

As to the price of BG, they are not that awfully expensive, it's just dealers markup makes it seem like. We recently purchase 100 of them directly from Japan and the price was about 1/3 of what the local dealer is asking for.;)

Peter,

Prior to getting hooked on (Non-Polar) BGs, my favourite electrolytics were Cerafines and Oscons, depending on locations and required voltages etc.

I had also tried a few Elna Silmics which were at least as good as, if not rather better, than their Cerafines, but they were not (when I last bought any electrolytics) as readily available in so many different values/voltages etc.

It is always hard to contemplate 'going back', so to speak, when you have experienced something that seems superior, but I always quite liked Cerafines and found that they had no overt 'nasties', and certainly they were very much better IMO than any of the alternatives which were then available.

Before the days of the Internet, and when communication was a pain in the a*s*, I tended to buy 'special' components like these 'direct' in quite large quantities to get a good price on them, and, incidentally, I am thinking about putting some of them up for sale as I will probably never need many that I still have left.
RTXs for example, I bought in 100's, and I have a lot of them in boxes.

Because I did buy a lot of components at one time, I tended to use what I had available (for obvious reasons), but nowadays I am only really interested in the very best components available, and I only build a very few new circuits now.

I still have a few Cerafines in use in odd bits of gear (and some in boxes!) and they are certainly not poor enough to warrant panicking over replacing them, but I feel that where I do still use them, they could now be the weakest link in the chain in my equipment.

In saying this, before BGs, I was not in any way dissatisfied with the Cerafines, it is just that I have now experienced something rather better, but the cost differential is enormous, and for many people, I would strongly suggest that there are better ways to spend an audio budget, than to replace Cerafines with NP BGs.

I am not a Scotch drinker (my Brother makes up for it! :nod: ), but I guess it would be like going back to drinking a younger and less enjoyable Malt Whiskey, perhaps, with a slightly less 'refined' taste, but most electrolytics would be akin to cheapo blended stuff!

Every other passive component in my system is now just about the highest quality I know of, sonically, and at present I have not been sufficiently impressed with any new circuit (except some of Nelson's, but I have this mental block over the electrolytics here!), so any audio budget I have will be very likely spent on 'putting the icing on the cake' with my existing gear.

I have always been an 'evolutionary' by nature, rather than a 'revolutionary', and ever since I started to 'roll my own' with audio gear I have tended to improve the existing circuits, wherever possible, instead of continually starting over again.

The very few Cerafines I have left, are one of the equally few areas where there is any realistic possibility of gaining any further improvements, so, if I do replace these, it will be on this basis, rather than through any dissatisfaction with these particular caps.

What I am also attempting to establish is the truth over Jelmax's claims about the advisability of going over to using BGs *exclusively* in a particular circuit, to eliminate the supposed distortions they claim are apparent with all other electrolytic caps.

A while ago I fought a vigorous campaign in the Forum which most people seemingly took be blind and wholehearted support for BGs, but this was never so, and I also suffered from the "don't shoot the messenger" syndrome, merely because I had frequently asked people to read *properly* for themselves, what Jelmax had to say in their white-papers.

In reality, so far I have found that every claim that Jelmax had made, and which I had personally put to the test, seemed to be valid, even though their literature was very poorly worded etc., and they are undeniably superb sounding caps when they have been properly burned-in.

However, as I also said on numerous occasions in the BGs threads, I don't believe all that I read from anyone, until I have actually found out for myself, and this 'synergy' suggestion, is one area where I wonder if there is some 'marketing license' occurring.

Only time will tell about the BGs, and I believe that you will not regret purchasing the Cerafines, especially if you got them at a good price. On a simple value-for-money basis, even at full price, they were a good deal, in my view.

Regards,:)
 
I'm not a greenhorn!

fdegrove said:
Hi Peter,



Quite probably...and I don't have a measuring bridge for that.:bawling:

I notice one cap in the pic has already delvelopped fruckles.:bigeyes:

Thanks Peter,if I find an easy way to tell which end is which,I'll let you know.

Eh,eh...wait 'till Bob finds out about this...:goodbad:

Cheers,;)

Come on Frank, give a guy a little credit when he has been playing about with these kind of things for over 30 years!!! :nod:

I was about to respond to your earlier post after just spending an hour answering Peter, when I read your subsequent comment about MIT cap's orientation.

You do need to measure them, as they are *not* consistant exactly as Peter said, and I am your man for the methodology. :)

I am supposed to be doing something for the SOH for a few minutes, and when this is done, I will post again.

I imagine (being a valve freak, and with all the problems they need to have sorted out!) you do have a 'scope?

Regards,
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: LE CHEF.

Bobken said:


Prior to getting hooked on (Non-Polar) BGs

Hi Bob,

Are you trying to say that you are using only Non-Polar BG in amp's PS?

If we are talking about SS and considering average Aleph amp with at least 60,000uF per channel (although it is on a lower side) the cost of N type BG, even when buying directly from Japan, would be in a range of $2000 USD (which is actually not that bad when I think about it).

I might organise a group purchase order when there is enough interest.

How Non-Polar compare to Standard Polarised which are 3 times cheaper?
 
diyAudio Senior Member
Joined 2002
MIT.

Hi Bob,

Come on Frank, give a guy a little credit when he has been playing about with these kind of things for over 30 years!!!

Bob,I don't doubt neither Peter nor Michael Percy for a minute.

It's just that I distinctly remember the instructions that came with the caps where they distinctly stressed that the caps had to be hooked up as I described in a post above.

I imagine (being a valve freak, and with all the problems they need to have sorted out!) you do have a 'scope?

What problems,Bob?
I sold about 2.000.000 valves in ten years time,every single one got tested and I never had more than 1% drop outs.:cool:
Much closer tolerances than any semi-conductors I've seen.

Still,to answer your question,yes I can get a scope to measure the caps.
If you don't mind,that is.

Come to think of it,I always selected the MITs for close channel to channel matching and to neutralise any static charge on the plastic surrounding wrap I put a little dot of grapphite charged spray on them with a pencil.
Incidentally about the size of what is shown on Peters' caps.
Naturally that works for any film cap.

Peter,give it a try too.;)


Cheers,;)
 
Hi Frank,

First, the earlier post.

Yes, I too like Ansars, and they are probably better than Solens sonically.

In fact they are the only polyprop cap I will use in speaker X'overs, apart from Hovlands (I don't just now recall for sure, but I think they are also polyprop), but I will only use them for the big jobs, (i.e. 100uFs etc., shunting woofers).

Anything much smaller I like to use RTXs, so you can imagine how much my X'overs cost to make!:bigeyes:

Who is Brian cherry, and what are his "Jupiters"? :devily:


***Sexing Capacitors***

Before I start on the cap orientation methodology, I will clearly state that these 'instructions' stem entirely from my own experiments, I do not claim in any way that they are the best way of doing the job, I am not a cap orientation expert, but THEY DO WORK-period. :irked:

I am only posting them because someone has asked for this information, and I happen to know from my own experiences, how this job can be done.

I have done this (i.e. sexing capacitors) using this methodology many hundreds of times, even though I cannot provide any written proof to support it, and I don't have any outside references to quote.

Therefore, I will not appreciate any smartarse theoretician subsequently telling me why they don't work, nor giving me a load of irrelevant techno-crap reasons to support their contention.

Method.

AC power is supplied to the DUT via a Variac set to approx. 10-15 volts AC output, but if a sine wave generator or similar is available with this level of output, this would be fine too. (Generally use lower voltages for larger caps, to avoid too much loading of the generator and DUT, but very small caps may need higher voltages to give a proper reading)

Regrettably, most audio oscillators I have seen don't give a high enough voltage output.

Readings are obtained by attaching a 'sensing' coil to the probe of an oscilloscope and I have found that a miniature 12 volt relay with a coil of 700 ohms impedance (which I just had to hand) was ideal, but this is in no way critical. I would *guess* that almost any small multiturn coil of wire will indicate some kind of reading when one end (only) is attached to a 'scope probe.

Set scope Probe to X1, Time/Div set at 5mS, and Sensitivity set to 20mV. Again, these settings can be varied, but this is a good starting point to see some readings on an 'average' cap.

The coil should be rested at the side of the DUT, but precise location is unimportant since the two 'opposite' readings should be quite positive. Don't deliberately move the coil position between the two readings, though, as this may distort the results.

At rest (i.e. with no signal applied to the DUT) a clipped sinewave should be seen on the scope, and this waveform is the 'datum'.

Connect the AC generator (using both leads) to the cap, and one of two things will happen to the 'scope trace.

1) The 'scope waveform will increase by a significant factor.

2) The 'scope waveform will stay pretty much the same (possible marginal increase).

If the *difference* between the two waveforms is not very well defined, try to reorientate the cap and/or move the coil about relative to the cap until a very positive difference is seen.

When the waveform is as in 1) above (i.e. larger), the 'live' lead of the generator is attached to the 'outer' cap foil.

In reality, it is a lot easier to do than perhaps the above might suggest, but if those instructions are followed carefully, it will give a satisfactory result. There is nothing critical about the procedure, and having achieved a satisfactory reading once, it will seem like 'riding a bicycle' thereafter, and it merely takes seconds for each cap.

All that is being attempted here is to inject a signal, which is then
picked up by the coil through inductance, to either the outer or inner foil. When the signal is sent to the outer foil, a much larger signal will be picked up by the 'proximity' coil than if the signal is sent to the inner foil, which is partially shielded by the then grounded outer foil. :nod:

Lets see what the fans can make out of that, Frank! :)

Regards,
 
diyAudio Senior Member
Joined 2002
VIVA BOB.

Hi Bob,

Makes sense to me.:cool:

Thank you so much for making the effort.

When I mentioned the Ansar Caps I was thinking of them as used in valved PSUs of course.
I can't help it but I always think of you as a valve man rather than a solid state user...honest,I do.:devily:

Didn't Russ Andrews from RATA distribute these at one point in time ?
Maybe he still does anyway...

Thanks again,;)
 
diyAudio Senior Member
Joined 2002
PLUTO AND MARS

Hi,

Has anyone ever tried the beeswax caps Jupiter is making?

I forgot this part...

Apparently a new brand,I noticed Welborne Labs carry them amongst others and some Dutch guys put them to the test already with very promising results.

Brian Cherry is one of our members and runs an audio business in China,dealing tubes and high-end components.

Cheers,;)
 

Attachments

  • jupiter.jpg
    jupiter.jpg
    45.3 KB · Views: 1,438
As long as the film cap value is not too big, you can use a precision AC millivoltmeter to check the polarity. Ground yourself, hold the cap body in your bare hand, hook up the millivoltmeter input to the cap leads (first with plus to one lead, minus to the other, then flip the leads) and look at how much the needle swings (you may need to switch the range setting on the millivoltmeter). The polarity that gives the lower needle swing is the "right" one.

Mark the film cap, and use it thereafter in the same orientation that you would use an electrolytic cap. Most film caps sound smoother and a little darker when the outer foil is connected to ground, or the signal output side (the side at the lower voltage potential).

In practice, if I have unmarked film caps that I plan to use, I will test them all in one sitting. It doesn't take that long.

regards, jonathan carr
 
Hi Frank,

Thanks for the info on Jupiters, and I should be interested to see in due course what people think of them generally.

**Cap Sexing** (don't mention this to Eric!:bigeyes: )

Jonathan's method looks to be quicker to set up, but I would be interested to know what the size limitations are which he mentioned.

I will try out Jonathan's way next time, but in any case, my suggestion will deal with all sizes which I have tried (including 100uF's), but, as I mentioned, with the larger values it is better to keep the voltage a bit lower, as momentarily (as they charge up) the big caps look like a 'short' to the generater, and there is no current limiter.

Also as Jonathan suggested, once you have the setup to hand, it is so easy to sit there and sex dozens of them in a few minutes, as it really isn't in any way critical.

One thing I didn't mention before, is that I have come accross an occasional 'rogue' cap, which didn't show very positive 'differences' when initially tried, and subsequently the very marginally larger signal turned out to be wrong way, if you see what I mean, as when I got a better defined reading, the opposite orientation turned out to be correct.

That's why I mentioned the caveat that if you don't see clearly different readings, move the bits around and try again.

I think in those cases that the ends of the foil must have been overlapped or cut short or something, as I couldn't be bothered to cut them up to see.

When I first considered the subject, it took me an hour or so of
thinking and a little while trying out some different coils I had lying around, together with trying the best scope settings etc., but once a working method was found, it seemed so easy.

The great thing about the Forum is the way we can share ideas like this, provided of course one doesn't get into the furore I just did with the 'oxidation' thread. I must have wasted many hours on that because of the amazing remarks which came out of the woodwork, and I confess to having been quite fed-up at one point. Little wonder that J-P pushed off for a while!

The consolation was in finally seeing Niclas' (the original enquirer) appreciative comments and that he is intending to try out what I had suggested. If he does, it will work OK, just like the cap sexing does.:nod:

When I said "give the guy a bit of credit", this was a leg pull over your post to Peter which suggested you thought I wasn't aware of the existance of such a thing!:cool:

I tell you man, I have been around for over 30 years playing about with these bits and 'listening' to them, and I have picked up one or two little tips in all that time.
I have certainly learned enough not to get blown away by the big gun arm-chair theorists, anyway!! :nod:

Regards,
 
Yes I have used the super E=Cap configuration. First, I love the BG's especially the N/NX series. Super E cap seems to keep the same tonal balance as a single NX but adds a little more extension and a bit more refined and a a lomer noise floor. Not a huge difference but a step in the right direction with no downsides in my applications.
 
diyAudio Senior Member
Joined 2002
CAPS.

Hi,

Jonathan's method looks to be quicker to set up, but I would be interested to know what the size limitations are which he mentioned.

IME,the size limit of the cap will be dependent on your meters' capability to respond.

I think a size up to 50 mF would be usable in most cases.

Cap Sexing

He talks too much about it anyway....love the man though.

One thing I didn't mention before, is that I have come accross an occasional 'rogue' cap, which didn't show very positive 'differences' when initially tried, and subsequently the very marginally larger signal turned out to be wrong way, if you see what I mean, as when I got a better defined reading, the opposite orientation turned out to be correct.

Just as with valves,Bob,that cap wouldn't get a chance to see the real life.Out.

The great thing about the Forum is the way we can share ideas like this, provided of course one doesn't get into the furore I just did with the 'oxidation' thread. I must have wasted many hours on that because of the amazing remarks which came out of the woodwork, and I confess to having been quite fed-up at one point. Little wonder that J-P pushed off for a while!

One thing I learned is that there's no point in playing "Don Quichote".
The windmills are stronger,Bob.

When I said "give the guy a bit of credit", this was a leg pull over your post to Peter which suggested you thought I wasn't aware of the existance of such a thing!

Sorry about the mishap.

I have picked up one or two little tips in all that time.

If only I could remember all of the tips I received....:bawling:

I have certainly learned enough not to get blown away by the big gun arm-chair theorists, anyway!!

A lot of theory is based on assumptions to make people understand that ultimately it is just that...theory.

Cheers,;)

\Frank,"whatchening" Rumble Fish on the tele.:cool:
 
Jonathan,

Thanks for sharing your method of sexing caps. It looks to be quicker to set up than my suggestion, so I will try that next time.

I wonder why it doesn't work with the larger caps which you suggest, as one would have thought that the proximity of the hand to the outer foil would be much the same regardless of size.

I didn't say so in my earlier post as it was getting a bit wordy anyway, but I also found with some caps I could sex them using my suggested method, but by holding the caps (like you) instead of applying a voltage to the leads.
In some cases there was no need to even hold them, strangely, and there was still a positive difference.

Another method (which I have just remembered) was to connect the caps lead to the 'scope, and then move the cap close to an unshielded cable so it would pick up the radiated mains field.

It is really a question of what test gear is to hand, I suppose.

Just thinking about those DIYers who don't have much test gear readily to hand, I wonder if some signal could be induced in a caps' leads by proximity of the cap to the mains, perhaps, and use this to drive some kind of sensitive transducer?

Or a phono pre-amp, perhaps?

It would depend on relative signal levels and associated impedances, I guess. Have you any thoughts on this?

There must be dozens of different ways, but the one I had suggested did appear to be completely universal, although with hindsight, maybe not many DIYers will have the test gear needed.

Regards,
 
Brad Pontow said:
Yes I have used the super E=Cap configuration. First, I love the BG's especially the N/NX series. Super E cap seems to keep the same tonal balance as a single NX but adds a little more extension and a bit more refined and a a lomer noise floor. Not a huge difference but a step in the right direction with no downsides in my applications.

Hi Brad,

You got it in one, and I couldn't agree more with your description of the sonic results using the 'Super E Cap' configuration.

In this country (UK) we have a saying if something is rather expensive that "it costs an arm & a leg", and perhaps the only snag with super E, is that "it costs two arms & two legs" :nod:

Not that I have any vested interest because I would immediately switch to another make of cap if I found it to be better, but after all the naysayers' nonsense which cropped up a while ago on the Forum, I am pleased to see some 'independant' support for these very good sounding caps.

It is still a fact that no-one who has posted on the Forum,*and who has actually listened to BGs*, has said that they didn't like them as far as their sound goes!

Craig Buckingham has suggested some Jensen's which he believes are better-sounding in some circuits, but so far I haven't managed to get any to make a comparison. If Craig is right and they universally outperform Non-Polar BGs, then those Jensens have really got to be something!!!:bigeyes:

Regards,:)
 
Re: CAPS.

fdegrove said:
Hi,

Hi Frank,


***IME,the size limit of the cap will be dependent on your meters' capability to respond.

I think a size up to 50 mF would be usable in most cases.***

I am not sure here why the size of the cap should much alter the stray field or whatever is being picked up in such a test, but I have asked Jonathan and maybe he will let us know, and next time I do some 'sexing', I will try and see for myself.



***He talks too much about it anyway....love the man though.***

You are quite right, as usual. See my comments to Eric re. those who talk and don't do!;)

***One thing I learned is that there's no point in playing "Don Quichote".
The windmills are stronger,Bob.***

I know you are right again, of course, but I hate to see perhaps less experienced folks either from being deterred from trying things out for themselves, or being led astray by such apparently authoritative comments.



***Sorry about the mishap.***

No need for any apology, I was only "pulling your leg" :eek:



***If only I could remember all of the tips I received....:bawling:***

Same with me Frank, very few of the multitude of things I have ever tried were the result of my own 'virgin' thoughts.
Mostly they were sparked off by someone else's comments or hearing about their field trials.

I have done a bit of original thinking in my time, usually because I have hit a snag with something new I am trying to do, and there is no widely known-answer. That is why I will willingly 'expose' my results, even where they are not good, if the occasion arises.

The Internet is Godsend for this, and if people don't wish to take any notice they can switch over to another channel, can't they. In fact a couple of days ago, I was sorely tempted to say this to a certain TV person, but it seems he cannot read correctly, anyway!



***A lot of theory is based on assumptions to make people understand that ultimately it is just that...theory.***

Yes, I too have a lot of theories about theory!!! :bigeyes:


Lunchtime calls, Frank.;)

Regards,
 
Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.