You got my interest piquiqued....so that I can find this stuff as I'm not so
good a solid state stuff.What are the parts for the Nichicon NP? I found nothing in their current catalog.
Bob was discussing some type of NP cap...I couldn't find that mark/brand/series.
For someone like me it is frustrating.
NOW which Non Polarized caps do we mean, OR Bi Polar capacitors?
1. are we talking the MUSE ES line of B P caps?
0.47uf to 1000uf, 6.3V to 50V.
2.Nichcon DB series Bi Polar capacitors:
1uf to 68 uf, 50V only.
3. Nichicon KT 105C series:
0.1uf to 33000uiF, 6.3V to 50V
0.47uf to 1000uf, 6.3V to 50V.
2.Nichcon DB series Bi Polar capacitors:
1uf to 68 uf, 50V only.
3. Nichicon KT 105C series:
0.1uf to 33000uiF, 6.3V to 50V
4. Nichicon KA 105C Series:
22uf to 22000uf, 6.3V to 50V.
22uf to 22000uf, 6.3V to 50V.
5. Nichicon KZ Series:
10uf to 1000uf, 25uf to 100V.
10uf to 1000uf, 25uf to 100V.
6. Nichicon FG Serice:
0.1uf to 10000uf, 6.3V to 100V.
Which caps for what spot?0.1uf to 10000uf, 6.3V to 100V.
Thank you for your help.
Did you put a scope on the output to see if it was clipping when it is 'loud' ?
The power needed depends on the speaker effec, impedance, room size and listening distance to name a few. Some need more power to prevent clipping on peak demands with wide dynamic range material.
THx-RNMarsh
These are the ones to use in Nichicon's line of NP caps. [IMO]
THx-RNMarsh
At the risk of starting a brand name war, I must admit I always preferred Nichicon to Elna, and only in case of the biggie PSU main caps, I would go for German made Roe(derstein), Simens (Sikorel) and Fisher & Tausche. In my view, Elan and Nichicon are just as clear overall, but my feeling is that the bass lines sound more meaty and substantial with German caps without losing clarity and definition. BC Components are also very good, although a tad more expensive.
Richard's choice of Nichicon caps would also be my choice.
Richard's choice of Nichicon caps would also be my choice.
Nichicon VP and EP for blocking caps (220-470u 50V BP).
Nichicon PM for any OPS decoupling (22u -470u/100v) - the hot stuff !!
Since I don't do class A , general quality CD (cornell-dublier) main PS caps.
For an enclosed setup (sub or high ripple) , I might get the PM's.
I use HV Mylars and poly for input caps 4.7-10uF / 100-250V. My 2 Leach
(spooky) amps have 4.7u /50V wima polypropylene's.
I can't hear any difference between any of these (input) caps -
if they are HQ , everything sounds spectacular.
OS
A mistake to use caps in the feedback path, anyway. As the phase of the feedback signal if affected in the audio band before comparing direct signal and feedback one, it increase the distortions at low frequencies. As we are stuck with low impedance in the feedback of a CFA (slew-rate), it leads to insane caps values.
www.esperado.fr - VSSA with Diamond input and DC servo
[Edit]Not to talk of the 'cap's sound' unsing electrolytic in this very critical place.
Last edited:
Yup , that is my "old VSSA". It does simulate quite low at 20hz (<20 ppm).
My next one is going a true DC route with no caps.
The best bass of my cap-less DC leach is real proof of this. Servo's are NOT
evil.
Edit - I went higher Z with my old CFA , it's baxandall based - does not need
all that current .... so i could also use a smaller cap.
OS
Last edited:
Richard will be happy to read thisServo's are NOT evil.
Not only "NOT evil", but as it help us to get rid of DC offset adjustments, with all the evils of the adjustable potentiometers, it save time (money) and bring a better reliability over the long term.
In fact, the only annoyance of servos is the need of +-12V DC rails to power the IC.
I like Panasonic FR for price/performance, Oscon for low R, and Würth for having a stunning colour scheme which can brighten up otherwise dull PCB's .
I may be backward, but I always thought choosing a cap was sort of a technical exercise, balancing specs ands prices with the requirements for the job. The fact that Elna prints 'for audio' on it's cans doesn't do anything for me.
. I may be backward, but I always thought choosing a cap was sort of a technical exercise, balancing specs ands prices with the requirements for the job. The fact that Elna prints 'for audio' on it's cans doesn't do anything for me.
Richard,
I never checked that amp to see if it was clipping, at the same time I could never run it wide open, there was no way you could stay in the room and you would reach the excursion limit before you would need any more power. At the same time since I don't want any clipping in my powered speaker to ever happen I wanted to have at least a 3db margin for any possibility. I do know that the voicecoil has a rated power of 150 watts before I fry it, at this point it is a physical limit to excursion that will damage the speaker, unless of course you are clipping an amp and taking it out that way. The physical limit is caused by the surround, I am looking into that but there are other issues in trying to increase the physical size of the surround. As in any design you do have to chose your limits and consider all the goals you want. At the same time I don't want to build an amp for the speaker that is so over s9zed it makes no practical sense. Physical size of the amp to go inside the enclosure is also an issue. If I did what everyone else is doing I would just use a monolithic amp, not going to do that though.
The vssa amp of Lazy Cat is extremely small but does require many surface mount devices, that would be a way to go but that is his design and he is the manufacture of that amp. not sure he would give away his Gerber's for it?
I never checked that amp to see if it was clipping, at the same time I could never run it wide open, there was no way you could stay in the room and you would reach the excursion limit before you would need any more power. At the same time since I don't want any clipping in my powered speaker to ever happen I wanted to have at least a 3db margin for any possibility. I do know that the voicecoil has a rated power of 150 watts before I fry it, at this point it is a physical limit to excursion that will damage the speaker, unless of course you are clipping an amp and taking it out that way. The physical limit is caused by the surround, I am looking into that but there are other issues in trying to increase the physical size of the surround. As in any design you do have to chose your limits and consider all the goals you want. At the same time I don't want to build an amp for the speaker that is so over s9zed it makes no practical sense. Physical size of the amp to go inside the enclosure is also an issue. If I did what everyone else is doing I would just use a monolithic amp, not going to do that though.
The vssa amp of Lazy Cat is extremely small but does require many surface mount devices, that would be a way to go but that is his design and he is the manufacture of that amp. not sure he would give away his Gerber's for it?
Last edited:
for what it is worth on bipolar caps
I sampled some 100uF/50V bipolar parts from Nichicon for use as the output coupling cap for the cathode follower stage in a hybrid MM RIAA preamp. The operating voltage across was just a few volts.
It's in the "Muse" ES series. Oddly it is only an 85C rated part.
No distortion data was obtained as the project got put on the shelf indefinitely before completion.
I sampled some 100uF/50V bipolar parts from Nichicon for use as the output coupling cap for the cathode follower stage in a hybrid MM RIAA preamp. The operating voltage across was just a few volts.
It's in the "Muse" ES series. Oddly it is only an 85C rated part.
No distortion data was obtained as the project got put on the shelf indefinitely before completion.
The biggest potential problem with voltage biased polar electrolytic caps seems to be the dielectric absorption, or DA, that is dominant in aluminum electrolytic caps. I like the Muse caps, and the Elna Silmic caps as well, when an electrolytic cap is necessary.
The problem with DA is that it does NOT show up with harmonic or IM distortion measurements. You have to use an unsymmetrical test signal, like a bandwidth limited pulse to get any results. However, the bandwidth limited pulse is more inclusive of an actual music signal compared with a sine wave or two only.
The problem with DA is that it does NOT show up with harmonic or IM distortion measurements. You have to use an unsymmetrical test signal, like a bandwidth limited pulse to get any results. However, the bandwidth limited pulse is more inclusive of an actual music signal compared with a sine wave or two only.
Last edited:
Don't worry this nonsense will never go away. We used to have a running joke that the most egregious mistakes on datasheets would reappear in later revs sort of like a s**t magnet.
The frequency components of the pulse get ever so slightly changed in magnitude and phase and the bridge greatly magnifies this. Nothing there but tiny fractions of a dB and a few degrees of phase.
Last edited:
Jeez Dick, you do porn sites? I'm still stuck on the Wendy's spokeswoman.
Last edited:
I presume that DA doesn't matter with analog computing and sample and holds as well? Music has a lot a asymmetry and this mimics a sample and hold condition. IF you want the most accurate signal, then a low DA cap is necessary. It is not that expensive these days. Polypropylene will get you there. Scott has done a complete reversal from his opinion 30 years ago. Perhaps Scott, you can show me where we all went wrong.
No, I questioned the measurements from day one, it just didn't fit the agenda of certain parties ie. it does not matter to audio.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.