I have no idea if I posted in this thread.
But for the record I also back Vincent77 in his observations on caps.
There is a article by a former professor of psychology called "Sharpeners & Levelers" It's about how our brains work in relation to hearing differences/changes.
It's not going to change the minds of the doubters though...
Last edited:
The Sanyo OS-CON is not primarily an audio capacitor, but a business-like low-impedance replacement for electrolytics in voltage converters, and video sub-circuit power supplies. I have been using them in professional computer design work for 20 years, and they perform very well.
They don't really need to sell them into low-volume audio markets, and their high cost makes ensures that mass-fi audio applications never use them.
Nonetheless, they did publish applications information for audio-use, in the late 1990s.
And, in one application note, this footnote appears:
" Note: the tone quality of OS-CONs must be aged.
* The effects listed in the table above are not fully demonstrated in the initial state.
* Tone quality improves rapidly during the first ten hours, and stabilises at about 100 hours.
<..>
* It is recommended to wait at least ten hours before evaluating and analysing the OS-CON's tone quality."
Source: Saga Sanyo Industries Co., Ltd "Sanyo OS-CON Technical Book"
Edition 5.2: October 1st, 1997
They don't really need to sell them into low-volume audio markets, and their high cost makes ensures that mass-fi audio applications never use them.
Nonetheless, they did publish applications information for audio-use, in the late 1990s.
And, in one application note, this footnote appears:
" Note: the tone quality of OS-CONs must be aged.
* The effects listed in the table above are not fully demonstrated in the initial state.
* Tone quality improves rapidly during the first ten hours, and stabilises at about 100 hours.
<..>
* It is recommended to wait at least ten hours before evaluating and analysing the OS-CON's tone quality."
Source: Saga Sanyo Industries Co., Ltd "Sanyo OS-CON Technical Book"
Edition 5.2: October 1st, 1997
... poor old Columbus had to deal with a similar thing some time ago
Turns out everyone else was right and Columbus was wrong, if you actually know the story.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Columbus#Geographical_considerations
It's bumblebees all the way down.
I just spoke to a cap manufacturer. He states that film caps, if made OK, should NOT need any extra break-in. HOWEVER, polar or aluminum caps need to be 'aged'. Usually full or more rated voltage AND heat. Now I know why my JC-1 caps take so long to break-in, they are so big. Thanks Bas Lim!
"They actually should start smoking as soon as get to India and buy some weed, but they started to smoke way before, as the result discovered wrong India, and brought wrong grass. Since then Europa smokes tobacco waiting for capacitors to break-in."
Good one Wavebourn .... you beat the timer by 13 minutes
Good one Wavebourn .... you beat the timer by 13 minutes
Last edited:
Thanks for the clarification. No, I haven't. I don't really read post-JGH Stereophile except for the occasional Measurements section when someone points to it. May I assume that since they used that term, they referenced the original source?
Not sure, as I have not read anything along those lines, and while I agree with it in a loose sense I think the differences in perceptive abilities from one person to the next can be substantial.
Ah! the next post, he says no difference in well made film caps?
That's not my experience with film caps, like many folk I can hear the difference between many of them, some are more noticeable than others of course.
But, at the end of day if someone doesn't hear differences, they are not about to change there stance on the subject.
and if someone early on perceives differences for any reason they likewise will often have persistent bias toward that position - and "Protect" their idee fixe with the usual psychological defenses that humans are prone too
List of fallacies - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
including rationalizing away the evidence of their own ears in a proper Blind test
List of fallacies - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
including rationalizing away the evidence of their own ears in a proper Blind test
Last edited:
@data:
Well, let me distinguish between two things which I think you're conflating:
1. Can *I* hear a difference between X and Y?
2. Can *anyone* hear a difference between X and Y?
A "no" to number 1 doesn't mean "no" to number two, though it's a strawman often thrown out in these discussions. One example- I can't hear a 20kHz sine wave, but other people have certainly demonstrated that they can.
It's the total lack of evidence for cap sound in any reasonably competent design (that is, one where the signal voltage across the coupling cap is very low compared to the size of the signal) that arouses one's Inner Skeptic, as it should. Merely believing one hears the difference between X and Y doesn't make it actually true. We extend this to the question at hand, caps changing from running small signals through them in such a way as to audibly alter the output of the system. Page after page of huffing and puffing, remarkably creative pseudoscientific arguments and inapt analogies, but not a single piece of actual evidence, whether measurement to show effects near or above established thresholds or ears-only listening data.
For some, I suppose "because I say so" ought to be convincing. It is probably a defect in my personality that I don't accept remarkable statements without evidence. Others can base their engineering decisions on faith, but all I can say is that I'm glad they don't design airplanes.
Well, let me distinguish between two things which I think you're conflating:
1. Can *I* hear a difference between X and Y?
2. Can *anyone* hear a difference between X and Y?
A "no" to number 1 doesn't mean "no" to number two, though it's a strawman often thrown out in these discussions. One example- I can't hear a 20kHz sine wave, but other people have certainly demonstrated that they can.
It's the total lack of evidence for cap sound in any reasonably competent design (that is, one where the signal voltage across the coupling cap is very low compared to the size of the signal) that arouses one's Inner Skeptic, as it should. Merely believing one hears the difference between X and Y doesn't make it actually true. We extend this to the question at hand, caps changing from running small signals through them in such a way as to audibly alter the output of the system. Page after page of huffing and puffing, remarkably creative pseudoscientific arguments and inapt analogies, but not a single piece of actual evidence, whether measurement to show effects near or above established thresholds or ears-only listening data.
For some, I suppose "because I say so" ought to be convincing. It is probably a defect in my personality that I don't accept remarkable statements without evidence. Others can base their engineering decisions on faith, but all I can say is that I'm glad they don't design airplanes.
"They actually should start smoking as soon as get to India and buy some weed, but they started to smoke way before, as the result discovered wrong India, and brought wrong grass. Since then Europa smokes tobacco waiting for capacitors to break-in."
Good one Wavebourn .... you beat the timer by 13 minutes
What do you mean I beat the timer?
They had some grass, for themselves. The purpose of the expedition was to bring more grass for Europa.
I'm saying just that, some can hear a very noticeable difference and some can't and many are in between the two extremes.
Some things can't be measured at this point and time, but in the future maybe some of these things will be able to be proven with so called hard evidence and old ideas (so called facts) will be pushed aside, that's how we advance in our understanding of the world around us
But for now, these debates will continue.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.