over sized caps?

Status
Not open for further replies.
This thread has turned into a prime example of forum miscommunication. From the pic attached to post #1 i drew the wrong conclusion that the OP intended squeezing those lovely Jensens into the Cary and as a result tried to dissuade him as IMO the Cary wasn't worth the trouble and expense.

In the end it turned out no Jensens were about to be harmed; it was just an exercise of replacing a pair of mediocre, inappropriately sized china-caps with an almost exactly the same pair. Ironically, below what the Cary deserves 🙂
 
Trying my best to avoid coupling caps as much as possible.

All tube projects use amorhous or permalloy transformers but strangely in the dac i seemed to prefer caps and ended up using Clarity MR. It has been bugging me for a while as there is no good excuse not to dc couple in a dac. My old excuse was minimalism but the next dac will definitely be dc coupled.

Reading cap reviews and opinions on the net has not done me much good.

Especially if the reviewed caps are used in crossovers and i intend using them as couplers. Even more so if the reviewer specifically targets tweeter crossovers but my application is full range.

So, you don't manufacture any of your components? (off the shelf stuff is used in your projects)... pity you can't send me some of your work to try out? If I liked your work I would give very good reviews, but if I didn't like your work I would stay silent - no harm done - wink wink! I think there is a place in the market for your products!
 
True, but the harmonics of the DC are not exactly a problem....

In band filter caps I can see C0G or film (C0G is less critical on reflow profile if suitable values are available), but for coupling, I find a suitably large value to be more important as limiting the signal voltage developed across the thing trumps lower intrinsic distortion (Which is a function of signal voltage).

A DAC should really be able to be designed DC coupled with acceptably small offset at the output you would think.

Where the things become a problem is in speaker crossovers where high values and large signal voltages are needed in filters, but that is a fundamentally different application (And a good reason to add an extra power amp channel so the crossover can be done in the small signal domain at much more reasonable impedance).

What I have never really understood is why this cap fetish is so much of a thing on the replay side, but hardly even gets a thought among those designing studio electronics, the big desk manufacturers are all about 5532s as opamps and elcos as coupling, nobody bats an eyelid (There are a few companies specialising in adding 'secret sauce' of various tweaky sorts, but they get very short shift once you get away from the home studios).

Regards, Dan.

Yes, interesting comments - thank you!
 
This thread has turned into a prime example of forum miscommunication. From the pic attached to post #1 i drew the wrong conclusion that the OP intended squeezing those lovely Jensens into the Cary and as a result tried to dissuade him as IMO the Cary wasn't worth the trouble and expense.

In the end it turned out no Jensens were about to be harmed; it was just an exercise of replacing a pair of mediocre, inappropriately sized china-caps with an almost exactly the same pair. Ironically, below what the Cary deserves 🙂

In post 1 the pic was a (OTT) joke about using massive caps causing all sorts of parasitic inductance with long flying leads and massive voltage leakage. The cap needs to fit the design/circuit, it's all about design. Massive caps are inappropriate for the 100t design. Are there no smaller quality caps available in your opinion?

What does the Cary 100t deserve?
 
this is an exercise of replacing a pair of mediocre, inappropriately sized china-caps with an almost exactly the same pair. Ironically, below what the Cary deserves 🙂

What does the cary deserve please?

sounds like you are bias against ALL china caps? what data/evidence do you have to back up your aversion please?

I.M.O. the monacor is over priced and cheap, whereas the JB-JSX is well under valued as it has been compared to the best boutique caps by independent reviews and found to be "hot on the heals" of the usual 'big names', i.e. much better value (per buck $) - genuine bargain. IMO these are not "exactly the same pair" and they are not inappropriately sized.
What makes you think they are inappropriately sized?
 
Last edited:
What makes you think they are inappropriately sized?


Only in respect of the physical size. What was the board supposed to carry? It should be obvious from the outline and lead spacing if it was an electrolytic or no. There should also be a polarity marking. Maybe you should upload a pic or two.


The Obbligatos are probably a sensible suggestion. Yes, Chinese made, but under directions and supervision from someone who really knows what they are doing. Never tried them myself.

Within the "sensible" price range are also the Mundorf Evo, but they do take a lot of space and are very awkward to mount.
 
Only in respect of the physical size. What was the board supposed to carry? It should be obvious from the outline and lead spacing if it was an electrolytic or no. There should also be a polarity marking. Maybe you should upload a pic or two.
The Obbligatos are probably a sensible suggestion. Yes, Chinese made, but under directions and supervision from someone who really knows what they are doing. Never tried them myself.
Within the "sensible" price range are also the Mundorf Evo, but they do take a lot of space and are very awkward to mount.

On 'humble' this (Obbligato) rates 10- and it's only $7.50 per cap! don't think there are any other 10 rated caps for $7 ? (on 'humble') Seems too good to be true!!

This looks remarkably like a re-branded SCR MKP Axial SCR Audio
...your thought?

Mundorf Evo's diameter is far too large.

The original fitment was RADIAL/rectangular.
 

Attachments

  • P1070253a.jpg
    P1070253a.jpg
    112.6 KB · Views: 89
  • P1070254.jpeg
    P1070254.jpeg
    133.4 KB · Views: 88
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.