"Bypass caps" and their effect on perceived sound - Page 4 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Amplifiers > Tubes / Valves

Tubes / Valves All about our sweet vacuum tubes :) Threads about Musical Instrument Amps of all kinds should be in the Instruments & Amps forum

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 9th October 2012, 08:57 PM   #31
diyAudio Member
 
Davec113's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wavebourn View Post
$300 for a pair of 470 uF? No thank you, I will better shunt pair of electrolytics by a pair of 4 uF caps.
I have a small amp so the prices weren't too bad, two 110 uF caps are $100. I am also running motor run caps in parallel to increase capacitance at a lower cost. But removing the electrolytic was a huge improvement. From my limited experience, the TC series caps are a huge improvement over a bypassed electrolytic, which was also the case in my preamp...

The other factor is that with the TC series caps you don't need as much capacitance, so you could likely get away with using the ~200 uF caps instead...

People spend all sorts of money on stuff that makes tiny differences... this is a HUGE improvement over running electrolytics, with or without bypasses. I spent $180 on the TC series caps in my amp and preamp, IMO it was one of the best bang for the buck upgrades I've ever done.
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th October 2012, 09:39 PM   #32
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Davec113 View Post

The other factor is that with the TC series caps you don't need as much capacitance, so you could likely get away with using the ~200 uF caps instead...

They have an alternative definition of Farad?
__________________
I'm not allowed to do magic, union rules...
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th October 2012, 09:58 PM   #33
diyAudio Member
 
Davec113's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by hemgjord View Post

They have an alternative definition of Farad?
lol, with PS caps there isn't just one value that will work out... do your own research on the subject if it interests you rather than making snide remarks.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th October 2012, 08:26 AM   #34
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: London
One person's snide remarks is another person's healthy sarcasm!
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th October 2012, 06:45 PM   #35
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Sorry, couldn't resist.
The capacitance value needed for desired ripple rejection in a given circuit is not really open for debate.
As for sound quality, everything is open...

/Olof
__________________
I'm not allowed to do magic, union rules...
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th October 2012, 06:50 PM   #36
diyAudio Member
 
Shoog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Eire
Then there is the size to consider - after cost. My amps are big enough without bulky film caps in the power supply.

Bypassing works for me.

Shoog
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th October 2012, 09:06 PM   #37
diyAudio Member
 
soulmerchant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: in the air
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rush View Post
You guys not aware of Walt Jung and Richard Marsh work on this issue back in the late seventies? Dig up the Audio Ameteur issue.
Use a 4.7 , .47, .047 (.1) uF film caps across the power supply caps.
This was after extensive testing and listening.

Rush
A+ This works, however you can get carried away with it. Today I just make space in my projects for film and avoid electrolytics as much as possible.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th October 2012, 09:10 PM   #38
diyAudio Member
 
Wavebourn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pleasant Hill, CA
Send a message via Skype™ to Wavebourn
I replaced electolyics in 16-channel TOA console by metalized films. Now it weights twice more, so when I go to remote locations I borrow some small Behringer mixer. It dos not sound so real, but at least is much easier to carry.
__________________
The Devil is not so terrible as his math model is!
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th October 2012, 09:17 PM   #39
diyAudio Member
 
soulmerchant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: in the air
asc x386s are very good and still affordable. If you want to spend more then search out some GE oil filled capacitors.

40uF, 25uF, 10uF are all values that I like to use. Higher values seem to create a darker sound and dampen transients - but maybe it is just me. I use chokes..
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th October 2012, 09:21 PM   #40
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: London
I agree with soulmerchant - I also use 10uF and 40uF and sometimes 4uF for a lower HT. I also use chokes - two when I can. I bought a whole lot of 40uf and put them in parallel when I need to, or usually just use a small dropper resistor between them.
  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
FS: Black Gate "F" and "Nonpolar" caps gripracer Swap Meet 3 10th December 2009 07:31 PM
What makes Nichicon "muse"/"for audio" caps different ? percy Parts 2 3rd October 2009 05:53 PM
suspending a small tweeter in front of woofer for "coaxial" effect? bikehorn Multi-Way 3 2nd January 2006 02:04 PM
Effect of cross-coupled "local" FB on plate load of previous stage ray_moth Tubes / Valves 23 27th April 2005 08:55 AM
Which stuffing material to increase "perceived" enlosure size? Two Moons Multi-Way 4 6th January 2002 04:27 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 10:01 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