Sy you over simiplifed my point which is how is it that capacitors are the only thing in the know universe that do not change with use . Yes machinery and electronic are two different thing and change at different rates . To dismiss what has not yet proved in a repeatable manor as not possible is a flat earth view . I summit that it just take some time money effort . It has taken billions and billions of dollars to generate soft proof of the higgs boson effect. Rather here is my challenge prove how capacitors of teflon and polyprop are of such an absolute reference standard that they are totally impervious to change when used within their ratings.
"We are not saying that there is sound we can hear but not measurable with modern device, are we?"
If you are answering to my question above, what aspect of sound we hear through airwaves cannot be measured with devices available these days? Could that be variations in harmonics, phase, frequency response... or something else? I would like to learn about it.
Do Bipolar Transistors require break in?
Do MOS-FETs require break in?
Do J-Fets require break in?
Do resistors require break in?
Certainly when overstressed, these components will shift value, but that is not the question.
Reformation of the dialectic in Al electrolytics could account for changes in performance, so I don't doubt they might be audible shifts.
So do film capacitors change during the initial use period in a circuit?
Select N caps of the same manufacturer and ratings (uF, V, etc) where selection is based on measured capacitance value.
Install the capacitors in a circuit in which they are noted for changing, with the capacitors selectable with a switch (rotary, relay, whatever), and break in a subset of the capacitors. Then have a listening group compare selections of capacitors where they don't know what you are testing or in what sequence. They are only to know that they are comparing two events.
Can they tell the difference?
Do MOS-FETs require break in?
Do J-Fets require break in?
Do resistors require break in?
Certainly when overstressed, these components will shift value, but that is not the question.
Reformation of the dialectic in Al electrolytics could account for changes in performance, so I don't doubt they might be audible shifts.
So do film capacitors change during the initial use period in a circuit?
Select N caps of the same manufacturer and ratings (uF, V, etc) where selection is based on measured capacitance value.
Install the capacitors in a circuit in which they are noted for changing, with the capacitors selectable with a switch (rotary, relay, whatever), and break in a subset of the capacitors. Then have a listening group compare selections of capacitors where they don't know what you are testing or in what sequence. They are only to know that they are comparing two events.
Can they tell the difference?
If you build a new (designed by you) amp and when you first turn it on, and it sounds like crap, it probably is crap. No 100 hr. break-in of the coupling caps or filters is going to make it miraculously become the perfection of Hi-Fi.
By what law of physics do you use to say any component has to perform better after use? That one cap you used may have been the perfect cap coming off the production line and now that is subjected to stress it may not perform as highly. Why imagine or assume that every "break-in" creates a "better" performing (sounding) component? It may go the other way!
Nichicon's technical papers say that a new cap that has been stored for a few years in an unused device or by itself needs about 30 minutes to reform under normal operating conditions.
If after 100 hrs. of playing "break-in" time, you think the new amp has "blossomed", you are just kidding yourself, or you are playing some higher quality source material.
Just play it. The "break-in" period is the excuse amp builder/sellers use to allow themselves or customers to get used to the new equipment and be satisfied.
Psychobabble.
20
By what law of physics do you use to say any component has to perform better after use? That one cap you used may have been the perfect cap coming off the production line and now that is subjected to stress it may not perform as highly. Why imagine or assume that every "break-in" creates a "better" performing (sounding) component? It may go the other way!
Nichicon's technical papers say that a new cap that has been stored for a few years in an unused device or by itself needs about 30 minutes to reform under normal operating conditions.
If after 100 hrs. of playing "break-in" time, you think the new amp has "blossomed", you are just kidding yourself, or you are playing some higher quality source material.
Just play it. The "break-in" period is the excuse amp builder/sellers use to allow themselves or customers to get used to the new equipment and be satisfied.
Psychobabble.
20
That is precisely what you would expect from a non-linear dielectric. 'Break-in' goes beyond this, by claiming that the capacitor has a memory. Even further, this memory can allegedly be set by small AC voltages rather than the large DC voltages which will affect non-linearity.Andrew T said:
Of course capacitors change, although not necessarily with use. Some, such as paper-based dielectrics go leaky. Others, such as electrolytics, dry out. With these, as with mechanical things like machinery, there are well-known mechanisms which are easily seen and explained.Triodethom said:
With other film caps we have an alleged phenomenon which is not seen, not explained, would not affect audio circuits unless huge, yet is believed to exist. It is a bit like those who believe in a flat earth, despite all the evidence of a round earth.
The search for the Higgs boson was based on good science. Time will tell if it was right or not; at present it looks promising but not totally conclusive. Normally in science we are either seeking an explanation of a known phenomenon, or seeking experimental confirmation of a theoretical prediction. That is, theory can precede or follow phenomena.
Capacitor break-in does not fit this pattern. There is no theory; circuit theory and dielectric theory suggests there is no break-in. There is no clear evidence for a phenomenon, apart from anecdotal claims which have alternative explanations.
So give us some facts, then we can look for a theory. Alternatively, give us a theory which can then be used to design experiments. At present, break-in looks like weaker than N-rays.
http://diycore.com/patrick/files/electronics/capacitor/Cap_fallacies.pdf
this is the first pdf. There are 6 more pdfs.
It hasn't even been demonstrated in ANY manner. Until there's some actual evidence (electrical or controlled listening), no-one is going to chase a ghost.
I agree with your view that after a break-in period that it Psychobabble that the change has to be good . Here lies the two questions of this thread for me 1. Do caps change after a period of time the "break-in period" ? and 2. Is that change positve or negative.
I don't think you can dismiss it as easily as that.
What if an electrolytic or paper cap is leaking current into an adjacent circuit?
Could that leakage set up a DC bias?
Could the leakage current change with time or with use?
Could the DC bias change with time or use?
Could the distortion, resulting from the change of DC bias, change with time or use?
I find that ordinary polar electrolytics do NOT reform in 20minutes.
I can measure a reduction in leakage over a 48hr reforming period.
I can measure an improvement on a recently reformed electrolytic that has been put on the shelf and then brought back for further reforming.
That period on the shelf seems to have a memory. The leakage is always lower after 30 minutes of second reforming, than it was after 48hours. Even when the shelf period is only two days, or very extended to several weeks.
The variable leakage of electrolytics opens the door to variable effects in other parts of the circuit.
I read Bateman's original cap test. I did not pick up from that series of tests that DC bias was an issue.
This newer report makes a big issue out of DC bias and it's effect on capacitor distortion.
I think "the problem" requires some form of comparative testing.
Last edited:
Don't bring electrolytics into the discussion; they have well-known leakage and reforming issues which are fully understood and documented. Similarly for paper caps: a bit of warmth could affect leakage.
One hypothesis is that film cap break-in was invented by analogy to electrolytic reforming. Analogy can be used by both science and non-science as a source of ideas; the difference is that science drops the idea when it is shown to be false.
One hypothesis is that film cap break-in was invented by analogy to electrolytic reforming. Analogy can be used by both science and non-science as a source of ideas; the difference is that science drops the idea when it is shown to be false.
Lets say one designs a circuit with a computer and it says to be perfect a 52uF cap is required. You ain't got one of those. You are already in the hole. Your anal quest for perfection already has you contemplating the value of your existance.
Now suppose you do have one, but it is a 10% tolerance cap and you measure it and find it is actually a 57uF cap. Again, your anal pursuit is foiled again.
Now suppose you have one that measures exactly 52uF and you are ecstatic! The amp sounds perfect! But the cap slowly reforms and now becomes a 57uF cap, but you don't know it. You keep bragging about your perfect amp. Ignorance is bliss.
I am bringing in a DC bias issue.
Capacitors have been measured that show distinct distortion differences depending on the DC bias across the capacitor.
Bateman shows this effect.
I am simply suggesting that a CHANGE in DC bias could account for a CHANGE in sound.
If electrolytics were the reason for the CHANGE in DC bias then the effect could take many dozens or even hundreds of hours for the DC bias to become stabilised.
BTW,
I still don't believe in breaking in components.
Capacitors have been measured that show distinct distortion differences depending on the DC bias across the capacitor.
Bateman shows this effect.
You asked for a mechanism that might explain the apparent change in "sound" from equipment as use is extended.
I am simply suggesting that a CHANGE in DC bias could account for a CHANGE in sound.
If electrolytics were the reason for the CHANGE in DC bias then the effect could take many dozens or even hundreds of hours for the DC bias to become stabilised.
BTW,
I still don't believe in breaking in components.
Last edited:
For an electrolytic, yes. There is a known, measured, explained phenomenon called reforming. You do this by appling a DC voltage. In most cases the circuit does this for you. You can't reform an electrolytic by appling some AC noise from a break-in box.
I have just noticed that the OP was asking about PIO caps. For these I would recommend a few days in a warm oven, to drive off any water in the paper. Better still, use a decent dielectric instead.
I have just noticed that the OP was asking about PIO caps. For these I would recommend a few days in a warm oven, to drive off any water in the paper. Better still, use a decent dielectric instead.
Without going overboard, can you give a thumbnail description of why the two types of caps are so different in how they respond to a current? Are not the same laws of physics applied in both - moving electrons within a conductive substance ?
DF,
you appear not to be reading what I have posted.
I am not questioning the sound performance of the electrolytics.
I am giving a possible explanation for why a film cap may change it's distortion during an extended period of use. and may continue to change for a repeated series of uses.
This may be due to a CHANGING DC bias across a susceptible film cap.
you appear not to be reading what I have posted.
I am not questioning the sound performance of the electrolytics.
I am giving a possible explanation for why a film cap may change it's distortion during an extended period of use. and may continue to change for a repeated series of uses.
This may be due to a CHANGING DC bias across a susceptible film cap.
Sorry, Andrew, I did misread you. You are saying that an electrolytic could take a while to settle down, and so will shift the bias on a film cap. Yes, but the change is likely to be so small that it will not be noticed. People do not generally use very non-linear dielectrics for film caps, and electrolytics usually settle down within a few seconds of switch-on. Of course, there is no accounting for poor circuit design so anything is possible. Most people know that electrolytics are leaky and take account of this.
Bob:
Electrolytics have their dielectric (aluminium oxide) formed and maintained by electrolysis - a small DC current which to us is an annoying leakage current. This oxide degrades with time, but the leakage current when in use rebuilds it. No corresponding phenomenon exists for film caps - they use completely different technology.
Bob:
Electrolytics have their dielectric (aluminium oxide) formed and maintained by electrolysis - a small DC current which to us is an annoying leakage current. This oxide degrades with time, but the leakage current when in use rebuilds it. No corresponding phenomenon exists for film caps - they use completely different technology.
I see your point . But it raises the question if the cap was in fact perfect then it is no longer so when it changed and the anal persuit is yet again foiled thou that fact have not been found that out . Maybe knowing what matters and what does not is the question .
not "will" shift, just maybe shift the DC bias.
PET caps seem to be very susceptible to this bias induced distortion. PET=MKT=MKS=PES and are very common.
MKP are not nearly as susceptible, but I have not read the paper yet, so don't quote my recall of scanning very quickly.
Electrolytics do NOT settle in a few seconds. The leakage measurably changes over many minutes and even hours. and changes again after being switched off and changes depending on whether when OFF they are fully discharged, or hold charge.
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.