audio capacitors 1800/150 uF ?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
#181
Review: Cary Audio DAC-100t, ??????????? d/a [avmentor.gr]

look at the last picture : the dac seems stock so you have the original caps ! But the DC blocking caps perhaps ! So why bother ?

You can ask to the people at Carry audio what DC blocking cap they uses for the output and the capacitance value to be sure !

good caps can be for instance what Thorsten Loesch uses in his high end DAC, iirc : tin foil MKP from Mundorf. They use Jensen Paper in oïl at Carry for their High End I believe. And simple WIMA (radial cap) on the Dac 200 !

One path of upgrade is maybe also to find better 6922 tubes finding NOS ones : better money spent maybe !

But up to you.

Hope that helps...
 
Last edited:
#183
Eldam said:
Review: Cary Audio DAC-100t, ??????????? d/a [avmentor.gr]

look at the last picture : the dac seems stock so you have the original caps ! But the DC blocking caps perhaps ! So why bother ?

You can ask to the people at Carry audio what DC blocking cap they uses for the output and the capacitance value to be sure !

good caps can be for instance what Thorsten Loesch uses in his high end DAC, iirc : tin foil MKP from Mundorf. They use Jensen Paper in oïl at Carry for their High End I believe. And simple WIMA (radial cap) on the Dac 200 !

One path of upgrade is maybe also to find better 6922 tubes finding NOS ones : better money spent maybe !

But up to you.

Hope that helps...
Click to expand...

The DC blocking caps have been changed several times by previous owners. I have got JB-JSX. According to Cary any voltage over 22 is fine and the uF has increased from 3.9 to 4.7 to aid bass response.

I have the Amperex Bugle Boys 6DJ8 (NOS).
 
#186
thedoc735 said:
Must be using values that are far too large!
Click to expand...
Common mistakes include:
- soldering/wiring errors - adding shorts or leaving something open circuit
- overheating nearby components when soldering (or lifting PCB tracks)
- wrong value replacement
- wrong dielectric replacement (often doesn't matter, but sometimes does)
- physically larger replacement causes trouble due to stray capacitance

All these risks might be worth taking if the end result is a definite improvement, but in many cases the best that can be achieved is no degradation of performance.
 
#187
DF96 said:
Common mistakes include:
- soldering/wiring errors - adding shorts or leaving something open circuit
- overheating nearby components when soldering (or lifting PCB tracks)
- wrong value replacement
- wrong dielectric replacement (often doesn't matter, but sometimes does)
- physically larger replacement causes trouble due to stray capacitance

All these risks might be worth taking if the end result is a definite improvement, but in many cases the best that can be achieved is no degradation of performance.
Click to expand...

:up:
:up:
:up:
:up:
:up:

...thanks for re-iterating these points, not fell foul of these so far though :xfingers:
 
#192
DF96 said:
It is a fuzzy line. On a forum like this it is only usually possible to take someone a little further in knowledge in a single thread. A few years later after many threads they may have learnt quite a lot. However, it is quite common for newbies to ask questions which they don't properly understand so they cannot understand the answer; also some false answers may be given but they cannot understand why they are false, so then they think there is a debate between two schools of thought when in fact it is just knowledge vs. confusion.


A 'fixer' simply replaces what is faulty. If nothing is faulty then there is nothing to fix. To improve a circuit you first have to understand it better than the original designer. Simply replacing components of Brand X with Brand Y is most likely to make no difference at all; it may make things worse or better. It may introduce new faults: "I recapped it; now it doesn't work" is a plaintive cry for help we get from time to time.
Click to expand...

i politely turn down units for repairs when i see someone else has tampered with it......typically, you see the unit messed up, there are believers in caps who would just go shotgun on any cap they lay their hands on....
without knowing why....
result is usually a disaster...
and a lot of times when you ask them why, they say they read in in the internet....
 
#193
Jeremey Clarkson once said something like: "...it took me a long time to finally figure out what this is ...don't think of it as a Aston Martin 9S, think of it as a DB9S ...were every single part is that tiny little bit better (more efficient)".

It maybe that all these tiny changes make it "greater than the sum of its parts" in total. The vast majority of the work was infact done by previous owners, not me! Mine is a small contribution! I would say this has been seriously 'messed with' in the past with no obvious degradation! :cheeky:

...need a bog standard 100t to compare! - anybody?
 
Last edited:
#195
thedoc735 said:
It maybe that all these tiny changes make it "greater than the sum of its parts" in total.
Click to expand...
Perhaps, but more likely that all these tiny changes make no significant difference at all to electrical behaviour but a huge difference to perceptions.

I would say this has been seriously 'messed with' in the past with no obvious degradation!
Click to expand...
Degradations often need to be significant before they are perceived as such. This is shown by the popularity of peculiar DIY (and 'high-end') interconnects - both analogue and digital - which at best can do no good and at worst can do harm to the signal, yet people who have spent time or money on them almost always believe the sound has improved. Poor analogue interconnects let in RF, while poor digital interconnects increase jitter. A lot of RF means you hear the local AM station or your phone talking to the base station; a little RF means you don't recognise this so you just assume the extra noise is actually 'sparkle' or 'detail' which merely competent interconnects are filtering away.
 
#196
DF96 said:
Perhaps, but more likely that all these tiny changes make no significant difference at all to electrical behaviour but a huge difference to perceptions.


Degradations often need to be significant before they are perceived as such. This is shown by the popularity of peculiar DIY (and 'high-end') interconnects - both analogue and digital - which at best can do no good and at worst can do harm to the signal, yet people who have spent time or money on them almost always believe the sound has improved. Poor analogue interconnects let in RF, while poor digital interconnects increase jitter. A lot of RF means you hear the local AM station or your phone talking to the base station; a little RF means you don't recognise this so you just assume the extra noise is actually 'sparkle' or 'detail' which merely competent interconnects are filtering away.
Click to expand...

I gather you are not a fan of £300 cables then? LOL 😀
 
#197
Just to keep up to date...

after waiting all weekend (broadly 4 days) the supplier informs me that UHV1V182MHD 1800uF is not available anywhere 😡

So, I have plumbed for the UHW1V222MHD 2200uF instead, just hope it's OK as it is just outside the 20% tolerance rating? 😕

:dunno::cannotbe:😱
 
#198
You should have bought a bunch plus a small C-meter, so you could select out the ones that were still within 1800+20%.

If you can't select them out, I would be very carefull with switching on the unit after putting in those new caps. Safety glasses come to mind, and a fire-resistant jacket.

Jan
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom