@L0rdGwyn . What resistor type do you use as cathode bias, please? I
I plan 10R. Mytemptation is to leave it alone but I do not know the best practice here...
I wonder if same caps qualities apply here than when used with SS decoupling ? Seems low ESR is wanted here more than low inductance ? What about a tinfoil styren there as bypass?
Any experience with the 0,1 uF gyrathorMu follower film cap as well ?
I plan 10R. Mytemptation is to leave it alone but I do not know the best practice here...
I wonder if same caps qualities apply here than when used with SS decoupling ? Seems low ESR is wanted here more than low inductance ? What about a tinfoil styren there as bypass?
Any experience with the 0,1 uF gyrathorMu follower film cap as well ?
Last edited:
Hi L0rdGwyn,
Well, yes. My opinion gained from both formal education involving components, further education from component manufacturers backed up by testing with test equipment designed for testing these things. Finally, decades of feedback from customers without any preconceived ideas, many before the internet was popular.
Consider this. Industry absolutely cannot have unreliable equipment or things that don't sense processes correctly. In addition, test equipment far more precise than any audio equipment. These products designed by teams of well trained, well educated engineers.
All these sources are at odds with much of what has been said in this thread. I've been a professional tech for over 45 years now doing high end audio, recording studio equipment, test equipment and I design same. All I'm trying to do is save people money, equipment from damage and interject a little truth. I realise this is a big problem for some folks, but those are the people who are least educated on this subject.
So you're telling me that all these professional engineers backed by fully equipped labs have been wrong since forever, and some dudes listening to hacked gear have all the answers as they argue which brand of capacitor is the best? Okay, sure. I can see where every well educated engineer is dead wrong.
Like, wow dude!
Well, yes. My opinion gained from both formal education involving components, further education from component manufacturers backed up by testing with test equipment designed for testing these things. Finally, decades of feedback from customers without any preconceived ideas, many before the internet was popular.
Consider this. Industry absolutely cannot have unreliable equipment or things that don't sense processes correctly. In addition, test equipment far more precise than any audio equipment. These products designed by teams of well trained, well educated engineers.
All these sources are at odds with much of what has been said in this thread. I've been a professional tech for over 45 years now doing high end audio, recording studio equipment, test equipment and I design same. All I'm trying to do is save people money, equipment from damage and interject a little truth. I realise this is a big problem for some folks, but those are the people who are least educated on this subject.
So you're telling me that all these professional engineers backed by fully equipped labs have been wrong since forever, and some dudes listening to hacked gear have all the answers as they argue which brand of capacitor is the best? Okay, sure. I can see where every well educated engineer is dead wrong.
Like, wow dude!
Anatech, why Papa asked then ?
I do not see the problem of having a red Ferrari from the factory and painting it in violett and adding shoeshine on the wheels if one prefer the aesthical presentation.
Nothing wrong to add color...the main motor will make the main noise yet.
I do not see the problem of having a red Ferrari from the factory and painting it in violett and adding shoeshine on the wheels if one prefer the aesthical presentation.
Nothing wrong to add color...the main motor will make the main noise yet.
Yes, most of them, and most of the time! 🙂
Being an EE myself, I don't mean disrespect, but a degree is mostly useful to get pass the HR gate when applying for a job, and serves as a foundation for further learnings. In EE in particular, the syllabus is strongly oriented toward analytics, whereas synthesis is barely touched upon, if at all. I know: for 10+ years, I sat in the jury to help the profs grade the final thesis: this is specific to the Uni of Geneva. So I had my contributions to the "fabrication" of literally 100's of BS & MS; and I'm very happy if 10% of them are outstanding.
And there's nothing wrong with being wrong: you learn as much or more with "do wrong" than "do right".
I can understand why you would be frustrated with the capacitor voodoo given your training and experience. If people engaged in an amateur version of my profession for fun, I would also be outraged at their lack of knowledge, although amateur critical care would have bigger ramifications than audiophiles playing with capacitors. Whether the audible differences are real or imagined, I think it's a harmless activity. I partake in this hobby for fun, but if you are concerned about tainting the pool of knowledge, then delete my post, and this thread for that matter, it makes no difference to me.
I am an engineer myself and I was of the belief that caps can’t possibly sound different and I based this on my own experience too. Over the past few years, with changes to the system now I can hear differences. Point is, I keep an open mind. Sometimes we can’t rationally explain the experience but that doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. Now I think you’d have to be deaf to not hear the differences.
Anecdote: this week I’m going through the very same test presented here on a diy preamp and four family members could reliably identify differences. And all the caps are cheap, no boutique bias here.
If there are so many people reporting hearing these things, there’s gotta be something there, right? We didn’t all start tied to this religious idea that there MUST be differences. We all came to this conclusion.
I have a friend who is in the recording business. Him and his brother, who plays in a band and loves music, can identify the mics and recording equipment used upon hearing a song. This one’s ADAT, this one went straight to tape, this one used 4 mics mixed to stereo and straight to tape. Things like that. We hear the same music but they get much more out of it. Part of it is training and experience.
Anecdote: this week I’m going through the very same test presented here on a diy preamp and four family members could reliably identify differences. And all the caps are cheap, no boutique bias here.
If there are so many people reporting hearing these things, there’s gotta be something there, right? We didn’t all start tied to this religious idea that there MUST be differences. We all came to this conclusion.
I have a friend who is in the recording business. Him and his brother, who plays in a band and loves music, can identify the mics and recording equipment used upon hearing a song. This one’s ADAT, this one went straight to tape, this one used 4 mics mixed to stereo and straight to tape. Things like that. We hear the same music but they get much more out of it. Part of it is training and experience.
From my point of view, I am deeply annoyed when people profit from others through ignorance. Products are damaged and the average person simply wants to know how to get the best sound out of what they have. I understand that and try to help that happen.
The reasons why this debate is on varies. Some directly profit from these things and do not sell products honestly. I have a deep dislike for those folks. Others want to appear knowledgeable without actually knowing the subject matter. Annoying, but human nature. Others through mostly expectation bias do actually believe most of this clap-trap, they have been misled. in any event, when a belief is challenged most people become defensive and will fight against whatever challenges whatever idea they had. Some of you will actually do some research - but in actual material science from industrial component manufacturers. Hopefully. My point is simple. I'll offer you the truth and hope you actually think about it and research factual evidence.
There are some applications where a change in capacitor type makes a difference in sound. Not brand and model, type. One thing to consider is that if you can actually hear a difference, there absolutely will be large measurable changes. Today we can measure everything far beyond what humans can hope to perceive. That is a fact of life. The other fact is that changes are not always to the better, but can be seen that way. Don't ask me why, sometimes people rejoice in what sounds different. We aren't test instruments, but I have seen that the more accurate something is, the more people accept it as being enjoyable / preferable.
So, what is the harm? Well, if you decide on your own to trash your own gear - fine. However, when others encourage people who don't know to do the same and spend money doing it, I have a problem with that. "Oh, but this is what I experienced". Nope, I don't buy that argument one bit. To advise someone else, you ought to be certain you are correct and have actually studied the subject. To argue against established findings and truth borne through lab experiments done by people who understand the test equipment and test setups is pretty irresponsible in my book.
One massive problem is that you can find support on the internet for any viewpoint. You have to be careful where you get your information from, but we all want to be right and will believe whatever information supports our viewpoint.
No, many reports do not mean there is anything there. Area 51 anyone? How about CDs and green markers? The list is endless. Generate controversy or a debate and you will generate endless reports of something. This is how people who make their living out of false information survive. The problem here is that changes are normally so slight that your mind pays a larger role in what you think you heard than what you did.
Okay, case in point. The separator that holds the electrolyte is inert. Period, electrically neutral in any quality electrolytic capacitor. The circuit is composed of two plates and an electrolyte, and that is all. Some audiophile approved capacitors use materials that are not electrically inert, and those capacitors are actually less good quality. But, they can cause distortion and that sounds different. I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that distortion is not a good thing.
I can hear different mics too. I know all about A-DAT recorders (essentially a VCR transport, cheaper than real DAT machines), and some have high digital error rates. Digital isn't always perfect, I was in the business. You can also have circuits that will generate distortion depending on various components. Music creation equipment often does just that. Music reproduction is a completely different set of goals than music creation. Don't confuse the two. Common vacuum tube "shoot outs" use guitar amplifiers where tubes are not operated in their linear range at all. Music reproduction equipment is designed differently to the point where those comparisons are inaccurate and useless if you have well designed equipment.
You can pick at exceptions to the rule all day long if you want. But with the equipment we buy to listen to music, maybe we want to concern ourselves with that set of circumstances instead of dragging results from totally different setups to something else.
You can either be truthful from a position of knowledge - or not. But at least be honest with others about what you are saying. Anything I have said so far is backed up by real science, careful measurements and more people's reports than I can count. My knowledge has been gleaned from quality manufacturers and verified by my own testing and experience, plus what I was taught about how components work in university. All I can do is offer that information to you. I am really tired of trying to repair equipment damaged physically by soldering, leads too large for holes, or my favorite, parts so large they don't fit the PCB right up to holes drilled in classic equipment to mount capacitors unintended for the use they were put to. Usually by "technicians" who charged for that destruction. In every single case, customers greatly preferred their equipment returned to stock form, or using capacitors and resistors that actually were better quality. It is just a crying shame seeing wrecked equipment.
The reasons why this debate is on varies. Some directly profit from these things and do not sell products honestly. I have a deep dislike for those folks. Others want to appear knowledgeable without actually knowing the subject matter. Annoying, but human nature. Others through mostly expectation bias do actually believe most of this clap-trap, they have been misled. in any event, when a belief is challenged most people become defensive and will fight against whatever challenges whatever idea they had. Some of you will actually do some research - but in actual material science from industrial component manufacturers. Hopefully. My point is simple. I'll offer you the truth and hope you actually think about it and research factual evidence.
There are some applications where a change in capacitor type makes a difference in sound. Not brand and model, type. One thing to consider is that if you can actually hear a difference, there absolutely will be large measurable changes. Today we can measure everything far beyond what humans can hope to perceive. That is a fact of life. The other fact is that changes are not always to the better, but can be seen that way. Don't ask me why, sometimes people rejoice in what sounds different. We aren't test instruments, but I have seen that the more accurate something is, the more people accept it as being enjoyable / preferable.
So, what is the harm? Well, if you decide on your own to trash your own gear - fine. However, when others encourage people who don't know to do the same and spend money doing it, I have a problem with that. "Oh, but this is what I experienced". Nope, I don't buy that argument one bit. To advise someone else, you ought to be certain you are correct and have actually studied the subject. To argue against established findings and truth borne through lab experiments done by people who understand the test equipment and test setups is pretty irresponsible in my book.
One massive problem is that you can find support on the internet for any viewpoint. You have to be careful where you get your information from, but we all want to be right and will believe whatever information supports our viewpoint.
No, many reports do not mean there is anything there. Area 51 anyone? How about CDs and green markers? The list is endless. Generate controversy or a debate and you will generate endless reports of something. This is how people who make their living out of false information survive. The problem here is that changes are normally so slight that your mind pays a larger role in what you think you heard than what you did.
Okay, case in point. The separator that holds the electrolyte is inert. Period, electrically neutral in any quality electrolytic capacitor. The circuit is composed of two plates and an electrolyte, and that is all. Some audiophile approved capacitors use materials that are not electrically inert, and those capacitors are actually less good quality. But, they can cause distortion and that sounds different. I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that distortion is not a good thing.
I can hear different mics too. I know all about A-DAT recorders (essentially a VCR transport, cheaper than real DAT machines), and some have high digital error rates. Digital isn't always perfect, I was in the business. You can also have circuits that will generate distortion depending on various components. Music creation equipment often does just that. Music reproduction is a completely different set of goals than music creation. Don't confuse the two. Common vacuum tube "shoot outs" use guitar amplifiers where tubes are not operated in their linear range at all. Music reproduction equipment is designed differently to the point where those comparisons are inaccurate and useless if you have well designed equipment.
You can pick at exceptions to the rule all day long if you want. But with the equipment we buy to listen to music, maybe we want to concern ourselves with that set of circumstances instead of dragging results from totally different setups to something else.
You can either be truthful from a position of knowledge - or not. But at least be honest with others about what you are saying. Anything I have said so far is backed up by real science, careful measurements and more people's reports than I can count. My knowledge has been gleaned from quality manufacturers and verified by my own testing and experience, plus what I was taught about how components work in university. All I can do is offer that information to you. I am really tired of trying to repair equipment damaged physically by soldering, leads too large for holes, or my favorite, parts so large they don't fit the PCB right up to holes drilled in classic equipment to mount capacitors unintended for the use they were put to. Usually by "technicians" who charged for that destruction. In every single case, customers greatly preferred their equipment returned to stock form, or using capacitors and resistors that actually were better quality. It is just a crying shame seeing wrecked equipment.
Amen, my neigbhoor is saying the same as a religious guy he is. Then he will explain I am biased being not a believer myself.
You do not get the point, most of us do not want to steal anyone but just experienced some things they do not care to measure, all having not a scientifical curiosity. But honest people with engineering background noticed things with caps while nothing magic... just sometimes esr, esl and capacitance over voltage are not always sufisant to explain some changes that certainly happens because of non writed process or documents for basic consumers or kitchen techs for reparation purpose...whatever that is : plant process, dielectric process, facilities quality, precision of the tools...chemicals, etc...some difference happens and people that experience noticed behavior concistency at some places.
That does not say there is no electrical rules of use. That is not one people or few whom are saying this here. Yes you must apply the cap technologie made for your circuitry application. But even there at iso tech, some experienced differences. Whatever a default and of course the sum of all the interaction ears can check. Here they do not care if it is not the best practice, what they hear is what matter to them...good engineering practices are second... reliability (or not chosed by factories and good teams are not their first concern). You like emphased upper bass gets a Silmic II... you want short bass while good snap and colored nice mid then take a KZ...it enters in their knowledge mix to save time. The more experienced are knowing often when some brands at iso specs will sounds better in a part of the circuitry. Diferences applies because the original circuitry is not perfect in your system despite the bunch of engineers that made it in the labs, amen, this should happen as well.
I agree that in the discussion we make horific shortcuts that is too much for good educated and honnest people like you. But that is not to exploit credulity it is just for convenience.
What say Science : make a theory, then measure it. If measurement are repetable, you have a concistency that makes a paradigm.
To follow you, we should know and measure exactly what happen when using a Black Gate over a Panasonic for illustration and expose each time the datas. Most of us simply do not know where to start or having sufisant background and experience but still want to share what they experienced as simple and often repetable...no magic or dhysonest thing...just easy sharing. For sure it upsets you because you see Evil in that and eventually chased some that were certainly less bad that you think.
You could put a little water in your wine and accept differences happens than simple enthusiasts do not rule as you do but simply try to share because it is easier for them to do. OK not clever enginnering here and the beauty is in the sheme of a good circuitry by clever engineering applied rule. Just here this is not the subject, people want to easily change the sound for the better and often the worse by changing 0,0001% of the design.
After all some buy discrete aops in tower a la Burson because they love distosion, sole like tubes with bad measurements...that is life, we need it all to make a world, me, you, my neigbhor, even if you are the most knowledgeable of us... 🙂. You make me thinks of the guys at audioscience reviews that want all to measure even not in stereo because only their brain, engineering and mathematical part of it are listening Wagner, they make war like walkyries but look more like a consumers magazines that talk of painting tubes material than the final painting... Do you go in the museum hidding one eyes and viewing in mono ?
You do not get the point, most of us do not want to steal anyone but just experienced some things they do not care to measure, all having not a scientifical curiosity. But honest people with engineering background noticed things with caps while nothing magic... just sometimes esr, esl and capacitance over voltage are not always sufisant to explain some changes that certainly happens because of non writed process or documents for basic consumers or kitchen techs for reparation purpose...whatever that is : plant process, dielectric process, facilities quality, precision of the tools...chemicals, etc...some difference happens and people that experience noticed behavior concistency at some places.
That does not say there is no electrical rules of use. That is not one people or few whom are saying this here. Yes you must apply the cap technologie made for your circuitry application. But even there at iso tech, some experienced differences. Whatever a default and of course the sum of all the interaction ears can check. Here they do not care if it is not the best practice, what they hear is what matter to them...good engineering practices are second... reliability (or not chosed by factories and good teams are not their first concern). You like emphased upper bass gets a Silmic II... you want short bass while good snap and colored nice mid then take a KZ...it enters in their knowledge mix to save time. The more experienced are knowing often when some brands at iso specs will sounds better in a part of the circuitry. Diferences applies because the original circuitry is not perfect in your system despite the bunch of engineers that made it in the labs, amen, this should happen as well.
I agree that in the discussion we make horific shortcuts that is too much for good educated and honnest people like you. But that is not to exploit credulity it is just for convenience.
What say Science : make a theory, then measure it. If measurement are repetable, you have a concistency that makes a paradigm.
To follow you, we should know and measure exactly what happen when using a Black Gate over a Panasonic for illustration and expose each time the datas. Most of us simply do not know where to start or having sufisant background and experience but still want to share what they experienced as simple and often repetable...no magic or dhysonest thing...just easy sharing. For sure it upsets you because you see Evil in that and eventually chased some that were certainly less bad that you think.
You could put a little water in your wine and accept differences happens than simple enthusiasts do not rule as you do but simply try to share because it is easier for them to do. OK not clever enginnering here and the beauty is in the sheme of a good circuitry by clever engineering applied rule. Just here this is not the subject, people want to easily change the sound for the better and often the worse by changing 0,0001% of the design.
After all some buy discrete aops in tower a la Burson because they love distosion, sole like tubes with bad measurements...that is life, we need it all to make a world, me, you, my neigbhor, even if you are the most knowledgeable of us... 🙂. You make me thinks of the guys at audioscience reviews that want all to measure even not in stereo because only their brain, engineering and mathematical part of it are listening Wagner, they make war like walkyries but look more like a consumers magazines that talk of painting tubes material than the final painting... Do you go in the museum hidding one eyes and viewing in mono ?
Last edited:
What you say is true, and I accept that. But let's be honest about this.
I have to clean up after everything, and it is sad to see good equipment damaged. It is even more frustrating when internet "experts" charge high fees for parts and work that is substandard. Many untrained people claim to be technicians, and they blindly perform what is written in these threads and others. The average person really does suffer for it. I have had people sell their equipment because it not longer works properly and they can't afford the work required even at discounted rates. That is the cost.
So it isn't just me, to be clear. There are a number of really good techs who do understand how parts work. We all have the same identical problems. People suffer from the following issues. Substandard performance, repair bills when they already paid to have equipment sound better, the loss of equipment because it isn't worth repair or will no longer be reliable (some cases, board damage usually). There is a very real cost to people who just want something to sound better.
It is possible to really improve performance of equipment. However, not much written in these threads actually achieves that goal. Other things are done, often less expensive things.
I listen to everything I do, but I never tell a customer what they will hear before or after except in broad terms when what they will hear is well known. I don't know what a person will hear or pay attention to. They generally all agree. I also never push upgrades. #1, make equipment work properly once again as it doesn't after 30 + years.
To make something really sound better, you have to come at it from knowledge and understanding of how this stuff really works. No surprise that people who are trained properly do and others haven't really got a clue. I don't rebuild my car engine, fix appliances or many other things. There are people trained who do it much better than I could. I can rebuild an engine, and have successfully. But an expert I am not and will never try to give advise over someone trained in any field. I'll certainly never charge to rebuild an engine or whatever, but this is what people do in audio.
Anyway, whatever. Justify things however you want, but there is a truth.
I have to clean up after everything, and it is sad to see good equipment damaged. It is even more frustrating when internet "experts" charge high fees for parts and work that is substandard. Many untrained people claim to be technicians, and they blindly perform what is written in these threads and others. The average person really does suffer for it. I have had people sell their equipment because it not longer works properly and they can't afford the work required even at discounted rates. That is the cost.
So it isn't just me, to be clear. There are a number of really good techs who do understand how parts work. We all have the same identical problems. People suffer from the following issues. Substandard performance, repair bills when they already paid to have equipment sound better, the loss of equipment because it isn't worth repair or will no longer be reliable (some cases, board damage usually). There is a very real cost to people who just want something to sound better.
It is possible to really improve performance of equipment. However, not much written in these threads actually achieves that goal. Other things are done, often less expensive things.
I listen to everything I do, but I never tell a customer what they will hear before or after except in broad terms when what they will hear is well known. I don't know what a person will hear or pay attention to. They generally all agree. I also never push upgrades. #1, make equipment work properly once again as it doesn't after 30 + years.
To make something really sound better, you have to come at it from knowledge and understanding of how this stuff really works. No surprise that people who are trained properly do and others haven't really got a clue. I don't rebuild my car engine, fix appliances or many other things. There are people trained who do it much better than I could. I can rebuild an engine, and have successfully. But an expert I am not and will never try to give advise over someone trained in any field. I'll certainly never charge to rebuild an engine or whatever, but this is what people do in audio.
Anyway, whatever. Justify things however you want, but there is a truth.
... I think all of that happened because you can see manufactured audio devices fromm 100 bucks amps to 100 000 bucks, that not translate always technically the price gap.
Hapilly but certainly faster than before forums, understanding is climbing slowly. Situation is not desperate and that only caps despite some abuse you only highligths, all advices here are not good nore all are bad even if it is not a proper enginneering way, appetite grows with eating. Nothing bad to benchmark two passive parts in front of a good scheme. There are a lot of trade offs and again not everyone have acess to the best knowledge or can affoard the devices of the best engineers you talk about. Because most can not affoard make them not bad people... sometiles enthusiasts try here to make things despite is not always good, I see it as acceptable way to progress even if monney lost... the hobby thing you know.
That is not the engineers that always rule, more often thta is the cold guys in the marketing office with the sniper purchasing dpt behind, etc, etc. No really, things are better since we can exchange on forums, all is not bad.
Hapilly but certainly faster than before forums, understanding is climbing slowly. Situation is not desperate and that only caps despite some abuse you only highligths, all advices here are not good nore all are bad even if it is not a proper enginneering way, appetite grows with eating. Nothing bad to benchmark two passive parts in front of a good scheme. There are a lot of trade offs and again not everyone have acess to the best knowledge or can affoard the devices of the best engineers you talk about. Because most can not affoard make them not bad people... sometiles enthusiasts try here to make things despite is not always good, I see it as acceptable way to progress even if monney lost... the hobby thing you know.
That is not the engineers that always rule, more often thta is the cold guys in the marketing office with the sniper purchasing dpt behind, etc, etc. No really, things are better since we can exchange on forums, all is not bad.
To answer your question @diyiggy , I have had good success using carbon film resistors in the cathode if left unbypassed paired with CCS or gyrator loading, specifically Kiwame or Riken Ohm if you can find them in the value you require (they have been discontinued). If the cathode is bypassed however, the type is less important. In a gyrator circuit, I have used ClarityCap ESA with good results, they are affordable as far as film caps go, but admittedly I have not experimented with many others in that application.
Sadly, great capacitors aren't much more expensive than the ones not suited to audio. Often they even fit properly if you pay attention to what you are buying.
Over many years in the industry, I've seen there is a happy spot in price where you can get very good quality. Very expensive things are very often way over-priced and may be unreliable with poor quality. Cheap things are typically not designed carefully and PCB layout is poor. That and support is very limited if existent at all. Mass production methods can block steps needed for best performance, but not always. Some parts must be hand soldered as wave soldering will destroy them.
Therefore the best you can do is get something with very good basic design and layout, then take the extra steps to allow it to reach it's maximum potential. But, this can't be done via internet forums as the investment in research on that one model will be many hours by a skilled person. Absolutely none of them give their work away. Can you blame them? It is important to note that the people who do know what they are doing are not smarter than the original designer, and some original designers do improve their designs on their own. As soon as you hear a person claiming to be more intelligent than trained designers - be highly suspect. To a person that doesn't know the engineering behind something, and the trade-offs, everything can look pretty simple. That's not to say that every designer is good. There are many pretty terrible designers out there as well. Not every designer has a well rounded goal, many focus on one aspect they toot their horn about. Again, be very suspicious when you see that.
Coming in behind a successful design has many advantages. The heavy lifting has been done, you just need to carefully optimise the design. But you do so carefully knowing what the original designer did and why. Only then can you be certain you have improved the design. One very common procedure is to take "as found" data (careful measurements), then again once you are done. Of course, listening supplements your work, measurements and listening supporting each other. You can't do this by listening only, you are easily led astray. You absolutely need to do both - and it ain't cheap. Simulator drivers often get it totally wrong as well, but they generate great graphs and almost never actually measure their own work. Hmm, see a problem? The real world is a cruel teacher.
So who do you want to work on your gear? Some person that only knows what they read on the internet (it must be right - right?), or someone who knows what they are doing, has the instrumentation and parts knowledge to back them up, and has respect for previous work? There are a number of really great techs out there, some in every area. There are vastly more hacks and very misguided individuals that advertise and make a lot of noise. You might do a better job because you aren't rushing through each piece quickly if you know how to solder. But, you will never get very good performance doing that and may actually degrade performance. I guess it depends on what you want to end up with.
Over many years in the industry, I've seen there is a happy spot in price where you can get very good quality. Very expensive things are very often way over-priced and may be unreliable with poor quality. Cheap things are typically not designed carefully and PCB layout is poor. That and support is very limited if existent at all. Mass production methods can block steps needed for best performance, but not always. Some parts must be hand soldered as wave soldering will destroy them.
Therefore the best you can do is get something with very good basic design and layout, then take the extra steps to allow it to reach it's maximum potential. But, this can't be done via internet forums as the investment in research on that one model will be many hours by a skilled person. Absolutely none of them give their work away. Can you blame them? It is important to note that the people who do know what they are doing are not smarter than the original designer, and some original designers do improve their designs on their own. As soon as you hear a person claiming to be more intelligent than trained designers - be highly suspect. To a person that doesn't know the engineering behind something, and the trade-offs, everything can look pretty simple. That's not to say that every designer is good. There are many pretty terrible designers out there as well. Not every designer has a well rounded goal, many focus on one aspect they toot their horn about. Again, be very suspicious when you see that.
Coming in behind a successful design has many advantages. The heavy lifting has been done, you just need to carefully optimise the design. But you do so carefully knowing what the original designer did and why. Only then can you be certain you have improved the design. One very common procedure is to take "as found" data (careful measurements), then again once you are done. Of course, listening supplements your work, measurements and listening supporting each other. You can't do this by listening only, you are easily led astray. You absolutely need to do both - and it ain't cheap. Simulator drivers often get it totally wrong as well, but they generate great graphs and almost never actually measure their own work. Hmm, see a problem? The real world is a cruel teacher.
So who do you want to work on your gear? Some person that only knows what they read on the internet (it must be right - right?), or someone who knows what they are doing, has the instrumentation and parts knowledge to back them up, and has respect for previous work? There are a number of really great techs out there, some in every area. There are vastly more hacks and very misguided individuals that advertise and make a lot of noise. You might do a better job because you aren't rushing through each piece quickly if you know how to solder. But, you will never get very good performance doing that and may actually degrade performance. I guess it depends on what you want to end up with.
I'm glad this thread is alive and I'm glad people share real experiences, whether its from an 'evangelistic' perspective or not. The idea we are able to measure all the factors that directly affect what we hear is simply not true, just think how long voice recognition took to materialise and how complex.
I'll continue to skip those who want to use science as a backdrop for some weak 'proof' of their point, very happy to understand more, but I will adopt the trial and error method when in doubt. I always though the point of science were rules as yet not unproven
Anyhow I am a big fan of Silmics 🤐
I'll continue to skip those who want to use science as a backdrop for some weak 'proof' of their point, very happy to understand more, but I will adopt the trial and error method when in doubt. I always though the point of science were rules as yet not unproven
Anyhow I am a big fan of Silmics 🤐
Well, I hate to say this, but the science and truth of how capacitors are constructed do play a part. Poor capacitors do impart a sound, good ones not so much. Once you get into brands and models you are quite frankly splitting hairs. In a blind test, you can't tell them apart. Sorry.
Silmics aren't a bad cap. There are many worse ones out there, so if they make you happy then great. I just wouldn't obsess if they weren't in stock.
Evangelistic? no. That would be those arguing for specific capacitors. The truth is out there right in front of you. But, whatever makes you happy short of wrecking equipment needlessly. The science and physics are your friend and will save you from false claims.
Silmics aren't a bad cap. There are many worse ones out there, so if they make you happy then great. I just wouldn't obsess if they weren't in stock.
Evangelistic? no. That would be those arguing for specific capacitors. The truth is out there right in front of you. But, whatever makes you happy short of wrecking equipment needlessly. The science and physics are your friend and will save you from false claims.
I don't think you hate to say it 😉 , but I don't mind.
I'm very happy with the results following reading, learning and experimenting.
I'm very happy with the results following reading, learning and experimenting.
Well, I kinda do. I know the message isn't getting through to some for the simple reason that people want to believe there is more to audio than simple measurements.
The measurements are not simple, so not everyone can do them. Not everyone can interpret what the readings are even if they have them.
Finally, everyone does want to contribute or feel that their experience is valuable. I completely understand this. What I don't like are those who profit from misdirection. People also do not like thinking they could be wrong about something and will defend that point of view until they can't ignore the evidence. To be honest, you can hear differences when they are gross. It has been shown time and time again that if you can compare two things side by side, people can discern some differences to a higher degree. But once you inject any time delay all bets are off. From that point it is in their mind as to what they want to hear. This may not be a conscience thought, a lot is planted from what you read and hear.
We are not walking test instruments and our audio memory has no reference. Testing can be very fine, and well below our ability to sense a change. I can't tell you how many times someone will bring a new acquisition in for checking they feel is working great, only to see the equipment is well out of spec for performance. Once the problems are corrected, they are generally shocked by what they felt was fine by listening. This is before any improvements are made. These issues are also normally far greater than changes that can be made. But they could tell then, and I am impressed by that.
To be truthful, some improvements are slight in measurements (but there they are), and the perception is that of a big change - and I hear it too. These are specific changes and do not involve coupling capacitors. So the focus here is on the wrong thing to begin with. I do install whatever the customer wants if it makes sense and it fits. If a part doesn't fit, I refuse to install it as this creates other problems. But, whatever brand the customer wants as long as it is good, I am fine with. I already know there will be no differences in measurements between quality parts, and I have seen people cannot hear the differences despite what is written on the internet. Lord knows I have listened to enough parts in controlled tests. I ahve also seen that audible changes always result in measurable changes - every single time.
My entire goal is to save people money, avoid unnecessary work done, and to hopefully stop people from wrecking equipment. One thing to consider is that most people can't seem to install the parts correctly. Most damage the rubber seal, and that creates problems down the road (too bad it wasn't instant). In many cases you are much further ahead leaving the original audio coupling capacitors in place, unless they are really cheap ones (as in Pioneer for one example).
So there you have it.
The measurements are not simple, so not everyone can do them. Not everyone can interpret what the readings are even if they have them.
Finally, everyone does want to contribute or feel that their experience is valuable. I completely understand this. What I don't like are those who profit from misdirection. People also do not like thinking they could be wrong about something and will defend that point of view until they can't ignore the evidence. To be honest, you can hear differences when they are gross. It has been shown time and time again that if you can compare two things side by side, people can discern some differences to a higher degree. But once you inject any time delay all bets are off. From that point it is in their mind as to what they want to hear. This may not be a conscience thought, a lot is planted from what you read and hear.
We are not walking test instruments and our audio memory has no reference. Testing can be very fine, and well below our ability to sense a change. I can't tell you how many times someone will bring a new acquisition in for checking they feel is working great, only to see the equipment is well out of spec for performance. Once the problems are corrected, they are generally shocked by what they felt was fine by listening. This is before any improvements are made. These issues are also normally far greater than changes that can be made. But they could tell then, and I am impressed by that.
To be truthful, some improvements are slight in measurements (but there they are), and the perception is that of a big change - and I hear it too. These are specific changes and do not involve coupling capacitors. So the focus here is on the wrong thing to begin with. I do install whatever the customer wants if it makes sense and it fits. If a part doesn't fit, I refuse to install it as this creates other problems. But, whatever brand the customer wants as long as it is good, I am fine with. I already know there will be no differences in measurements between quality parts, and I have seen people cannot hear the differences despite what is written on the internet. Lord knows I have listened to enough parts in controlled tests. I ahve also seen that audible changes always result in measurable changes - every single time.
My entire goal is to save people money, avoid unnecessary work done, and to hopefully stop people from wrecking equipment. One thing to consider is that most people can't seem to install the parts correctly. Most damage the rubber seal, and that creates problems down the road (too bad it wasn't instant). In many cases you are much further ahead leaving the original audio coupling capacitors in place, unless they are really cheap ones (as in Pioneer for one example).
So there you have it.
That all is well said for the audiophile tweaking market i.e. many times wrecking neatly made expensive equipment by blindly following the boutique parts industry hype. Even more so when paying someone dearly to install physically wrong parts.
But for diyers experimenting on self builds it's more fun than dangerous.
Regarding electrolytic capacitors more specifically, which are not that much expensive, some large manufacturers officially designate few product lines as audio grade.
When Nichicon, Elna, Nippon, Matsushita etc. had even described sonic traits in datasheets, it follows that people will naturally try to check about that in circuitry.
Such manufacturers are huge, very old, and technically sufficient industry leaders so to know the science of chemical capacitors in and out.
Do they find it necessary to be loughed at with such claims for few types among the huge variety of their catalogs? Is it cheap marketing for a far smaller revenue sector than their industrial types or they are actually convinced that some formulas do affect sound? Hmm...
But for diyers experimenting on self builds it's more fun than dangerous.
Regarding electrolytic capacitors more specifically, which are not that much expensive, some large manufacturers officially designate few product lines as audio grade.
When Nichicon, Elna, Nippon, Matsushita etc. had even described sonic traits in datasheets, it follows that people will naturally try to check about that in circuitry.
Such manufacturers are huge, very old, and technically sufficient industry leaders so to know the science of chemical capacitors in and out.
Do they find it necessary to be loughed at with such claims for few types among the huge variety of their catalogs? Is it cheap marketing for a far smaller revenue sector than their industrial types or they are actually convinced that some formulas do affect sound? Hmm...