How can-you measure the DC voltage across one of two caps connected in serial (if I understood well ?), witch have a near infinite impedance at DC (once charged) with a meter that have a finite impedance ?
While not "in the signal path", the B/H curve of magnetizing current in iron-cored inductors has a low level flattening that looks crossover distortion -ish. It's parallel to the inductance per se, but could probably be made in any size. Would that be useful?
Thanks,
I would expect that the massive frequency response changes would swamp any imaginable capacitor effect there might be.
When you make up a story it better be consistent ;-)
Jan
For the electrolytic capacitor the leakage current is not exactly zero. 2 uA is more than enough.
Strangely enough bass was improved... everything across the board was better. So what you're thinking isn't correct. The effect DC bias can have on lytics for signal is pretty incredible(ly bad). It would be unfair to say the lytics even worked correctly enough to compare FR.
Subjective bass improvement occurs very often if you put a HP filter with -3dB point somewhere between 20 - 50 Hz, so I am not surprised at all. Interestingly enough, all DC coupling does not automatically mean better subjective perception of bass.
Last edited:
I'm sure it does not. I'm just wanting to illustrate how drastic DC biasing on capacitors can be, as an anecdote for why I am not sold on capless signal chains unless you can design each component yourself.
Destroyer, there are two logical possibilities here, on the assumption that the film cap was of much lower capacitance than the electrolytic:
1) if there was no change in frequency response on the low end, the electrolytic was much higher in capacity than needed. In that case, there was no voltage over it, and no distortion produced, it was just a piece of wire at the frequencies of relevance. Putting a film cap in series with it can for that reason not have made any audible difference at all.
2) Jan is right.
1) if there was no change in frequency response on the low end, the electrolytic was much higher in capacity than needed. In that case, there was no voltage over it, and no distortion produced, it was just a piece of wire at the frequencies of relevance. Putting a film cap in series with it can for that reason not have made any audible difference at all.
2) Jan is right.
Anyway, professor, I am deeply disappointed. Did you actually read that post where my comment was directed to? If you know even the basic things about how coupling caps impact freq response, the values of those caps, values of electrolytics, of film caps, you know it was a made up story. 99.9% sure and I take a chance for the remainign 0.1%.
Then the reply, to the effect that the electrolytic was so distorting that it masked the freq response changes. Another string of words plucked from thin air with zero connection to reality.
Why don't you take that guy to task for his BS, rather than jump on the messenger.
You are unfair to me. Very.
Jan
Then the reply, to the effect that the electrolytic was so distorting that it masked the freq response changes. Another string of words plucked from thin air with zero connection to reality.
Why don't you take that guy to task for his BS, rather than jump on the messenger.
You are unfair to me. Very.
Jan
It was not my intention.
There were a message (more friendly than you can imagine) in the two links in my message.
We are all here to exchange about our passion for the technology that brings us the pleasure of listening to music.
All the approaches that can improve the quality of this make believe game are respectable. "Tous les chemins mènent à Rome."
We all have our faults. But, we all have to learn from people with different approaches than ours, and i have an equal *respect* for the rigor of Scott and the subjectivism of J.C.
Both had produced very good products, and I loved many IC from A.D. and the Ampex with pieces of J.C. inside ;-)
Yes, we all have to learn, not to teach unless some one is specifically asking for.
The thing that bothers me is that if people like J.C or Mr. Marsh and some others here use a lot their feelings to decide their ways, they do not exclude at all the scientific and rigorous approach. I am less sure of the opposite brigade, which would reduce everything to technology and forbid a more "sensitive" approach in a very aggressive way.
Why ? Everything in the universe do have a 'character'. And this character, we can sometimes "feel-it" more finely than measurements can do.
As an example, we cannot reduce the different pleasures we can take, driving various cars, to their performances on paper.
I think lot of the major scientific discoveries were the produce of a "feeling", or an intuition. (Newton, Einstein etc.)
As i was, during all my life, working in the two sides of this pseudo science that produced so many musical masterpieces, a group work combining science and technology, subjectivity and creativity, that was the sens of my link:
"We built this city on Rock'n'roll" ;-)
Last edited:
The very low end, like 20hz would be different if the speakers could produce it. The corner frequency rose from 6.4hz to 12.7hz - exactly.
Removing the lytics left a sound that was close to having them in series, but vastly different from lytics alone.
Conclusion, dont tell me what I hear. I diagnosed a legit issue and you can go step on a rake.
So your film cap was the same capacitance as your electrolytic?
Still trying to figure this out without damaging any rakes.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.