Never assume that just because a product commands a high price that it consists of high quality high spec components, Sanders electronics is one such brand that you can never assume. The Caps in his pre are definately Panasonic, however I can't identify the series with the Markings on it. There's Panasonic 330/35v NHG series that's placed after the regulators 7912, the 10uf, 22uf and 3300uf are not indentifiable via there coding, that's why I opted to replaced the 22uf/35v with Panasonic FC and the 330uf and 3300uf with the TP range. The reason I chose the TP range is that are a new range and it can't be sitting on the self long!
Using cheap Asian toroidal, garden variety 14004 and cheap Panasonic caps doesn't justify $5990AUD in my books.
Sanders even uses Jamicon 100V 8200uf that I have seen leaked in a sanders Magtech power amp. When you bring a product with that spec into a country like Australia, the mains can get from the official 230AC to around the 270VAC. At 240VAC measured at the mains, those 100v/8200uf caps are sitting on 98-100VDC. Luckily Sanders put his reputation on his product by advertising a lifetime warranty for the primary owner, that's not reassuring for the secondary owner.
The other thing worth noting is that the Sanders preamp uses a BB PGA 2310 chip to control volume, I'm under the impression the AVM uses the same BB PGA but not sure of which chip.
Last edited:
Oh, that's really surprising nowadays, as to sell separate preamps you really have to justify how much you charge for them. Parts quality and discrete design should be one of the ways.
Apparently they do not address the audiophile market if they are using such low quality parts. Even the regulators are a let down, as that is certainly an area that might get you considerable improvements.
Using a PGA control, when you could use relays for remote selection and motorized pot for remote level, also seems poor. Even more for the AVM.
Are you the primary Sanders owner? If you are not you could get some serious improvements.
Apparently they do not address the audiophile market if they are using such low quality parts. Even the regulators are a let down, as that is certainly an area that might get you considerable improvements.
Using a PGA control, when you could use relays for remote selection and motorized pot for remote level, also seems poor. Even more for the AVM.
Are you the primary Sanders owner? If you are not you could get some serious improvements.
I'm not the Primary owner for the Sanders Preamp, I'm the 3rd owner, it's was just a few months old when it was let go by the primary owner! I puchased it at a 1/3 of the price to matched the A brand new Sanders Magtech.
I've been at it for over 30yrs experimenting with different types of volume attenuation, that include expensive Alps, Allen Bradley's conductive plastics, carbon and relays. And I think for this day and age, the PGA 2310 is a real godsend; no wear and tear, perfect channel balance to what the data sheet specifies so you can't pick the difference, consistent SQ for the life of that product, I can't say that for even the most expensive Alps around! Then you wonder why Nelson has used a Muses 72320 volume control chip in his flagship preamp! And then you have Sanders and AVM using BB PGA.
Where's the question that I didn't answer?
And how do you expect me to know?
Ask Jensen !
Things usually sound better with a little hemp lol.We can't always afford polypropylene capacitors, much less
Teflon (tm), so we often make do with electrolytics when
we need those higher values.
There's all sorts of caps out there with claims to being better,
and they certainly are more expensive.
My favorite is the Elna silk capacitors, available from Digikey,
and really cheap. The measure spectacularly, sound great,
and the manufacturer's translated description of why they
sound better is a Babelfish classic.
So before you run out and spend a lot on the highly hyped
spendy caps, try the Elna silk caps.
There's hemp in them, too.
From post#544
Because by your question..made it seem
quite clear that you knew.
Please tell me what duties they do well.
That way I'll know and other following along
will know and learn as well.
Cheers,
Sync
Last edited:
Elna Silmic II vs. Panasonic FM in signal path
I just experimented swapping in Elna Silmic II and Panasonic FM capacitors in a low-level signal path application - thought it might be relevant to this discussion.
Context: discrete op amp preamplifier, electrolytic used in the feedback voltage divider - C579 at the bottom of the schematic below. Original part was United Chemi-Con KME 220uF 16V. Nothing wrong with it, just tweakin'.
First in was Silmic II 100uF 16V. Unfortunately 220uF wouldn't physically fit, but the impedance of the divider is high enough to keep the pole well out of audible range so there should be minimal voltage across it. I applied 12V DC to the cap for 24 hours to measure leakage and make sure it was formed (date code is 2009). Sonic impressions: initially a little light and subdued, tonal balance improved after 100 hours. Midrange is sweeter and less murky than the original part, but dynamics still sound a little restrained. Not totally sure the bottom end is as deep, perhaps affected by the lower capacitance value after all, but there were also some other small parts change that could be factoring.
I originally planned to keep the Silmic in permanently but I wasn't totally satisfied, so I dug up some 220uF 25V Panasonic FM's I had lying around. They're pretty old, probably at least 15 years, so I applied DC for 48 hours or so (leakage looked good), then applied 5V test tones and music signals for 24 hours to get the burn-in started. I'm listening to them now, and I have to say I like them. They're definitely brighter than the Silmics, and bring out the steeliness of a violin E string a tad too much, but they're snappier and more dynamic and brilliant, with excellent midrange clarity that e.g. helps distinguish wind instruments in an orchestra more clearly. They also sound faster, as if they settle a little quicker, with clearer spaces between notes, and give me a bit more "live music" presence. Bass doesn't sound any deeper, might actually be a little weaker, but I'll give it more time to settle. Overall I'm finding it more engaging and realistic sounding than the Silmics in this circuit. Makes me wonder how good they could sound if they didn't have steel leads...
Anyway, just relaying what I'm hearing, not making any argument about which part is "better." I had a similar surprisingly positive experience in the past using a Panasonic FC as an input coupling capacitor, so before you poo-poo them as "unsuitable for audio," maybe give them a try. (Much of this comes down to circuit/system synergy too.)
I just experimented swapping in Elna Silmic II and Panasonic FM capacitors in a low-level signal path application - thought it might be relevant to this discussion.
Context: discrete op amp preamplifier, electrolytic used in the feedback voltage divider - C579 at the bottom of the schematic below. Original part was United Chemi-Con KME 220uF 16V. Nothing wrong with it, just tweakin'.
First in was Silmic II 100uF 16V. Unfortunately 220uF wouldn't physically fit, but the impedance of the divider is high enough to keep the pole well out of audible range so there should be minimal voltage across it. I applied 12V DC to the cap for 24 hours to measure leakage and make sure it was formed (date code is 2009). Sonic impressions: initially a little light and subdued, tonal balance improved after 100 hours. Midrange is sweeter and less murky than the original part, but dynamics still sound a little restrained. Not totally sure the bottom end is as deep, perhaps affected by the lower capacitance value after all, but there were also some other small parts change that could be factoring.
I originally planned to keep the Silmic in permanently but I wasn't totally satisfied, so I dug up some 220uF 25V Panasonic FM's I had lying around. They're pretty old, probably at least 15 years, so I applied DC for 48 hours or so (leakage looked good), then applied 5V test tones and music signals for 24 hours to get the burn-in started. I'm listening to them now, and I have to say I like them. They're definitely brighter than the Silmics, and bring out the steeliness of a violin E string a tad too much, but they're snappier and more dynamic and brilliant, with excellent midrange clarity that e.g. helps distinguish wind instruments in an orchestra more clearly. They also sound faster, as if they settle a little quicker, with clearer spaces between notes, and give me a bit more "live music" presence. Bass doesn't sound any deeper, might actually be a little weaker, but I'll give it more time to settle. Overall I'm finding it more engaging and realistic sounding than the Silmics in this circuit. Makes me wonder how good they could sound if they didn't have steel leads...
Anyway, just relaying what I'm hearing, not making any argument about which part is "better." I had a similar surprisingly positive experience in the past using a Panasonic FC as an input coupling capacitor, so before you poo-poo them as "unsuitable for audio," maybe give them a try. (Much of this comes down to circuit/system synergy too.)
I read a long time ago that Silmic were not designed for audio duty but better suited to decoupling particularly in digital circuits which have some very fast rise times.
As a result of reading that I have never dreamed of using a Silmic in the DC blocking, AC coupling location in any audio processing equipment.
when you completed your reforming, what leakage levels did you find for the two types?
I find that Leakage <0.0001 CV, i.e. <0.63uA for a 100uF charged to 63Vdc. That is equivalent to the current passing a 100M resistor.
As a result of reading that I have never dreamed of using a Silmic in the DC blocking, AC coupling location in any audio processing equipment.
when you completed your reforming, what leakage levels did you find for the two types?
I find that Leakage <0.0001 CV, i.e. <0.63uA for a 100uF charged to 63Vdc. That is equivalent to the current passing a 100M resistor.
Last edited:
Don't know where you got your info. As far as I am aware they were intended for audio duty and are advertised as such. Nelson Pass loves them; I find them slow, fat and bloated, particularly at the bottom end and would never use them for coupling. YMMV.
They are **** at decoupling compared to Oscons and FMs.
They are **** at decoupling compared to Oscons and FMs.
Silmic ARS, are the only type I use, analog only, higher voltage ratings only. The rfs or regular silmic II, get yanked out, don't like them at all, kill the mid range, and details.
I did try an experiment with the ARS where they were tried as coupling caps, and they spoiled the dynamics.
The Panasonic pureism do help with the midrange in the ways you had mentioned with the FM, but without the harshness, when used for power decoupling anyways.
Sorry, no measurements...
I did try an experiment with the ARS where they were tried as coupling caps, and they spoiled the dynamics.
The Panasonic pureism do help with the midrange in the ways you had mentioned with the FM, but without the harshness, when used for power decoupling anyways.
Sorry, no measurements...
I've tried Mundorf bipolar E-caps (plain foil) and am a fan. They're not as transparent as, say, polypropylene films but they're very musical (maybe erring on euphonic, not a terrible thing in an opamp preamp) and articulate once broken in. Unfortunately the space is much too tight and I need a large value. (Though, I just spotted a 220uF 6.3V Nichicon Muse ES that would fit... adding to my shopping list...)
Not much room for a film bypass either, and I'm generally not a fan. I've noticed you can end up getting a shelving effect (tilted up treble) and unnatural coloration/discontinuity in the spectrum, at least to my ears... I'd rather trade off the extra detail for coherence. Even with film caps I haven't loved bypassing - e.g. I actually clipped out a 10nF polystyrene bypass of a 3.3uF WIMA cap because it made the treble sound faster than the midrange, though I lost some detail in the process. (My wife, who has more sensitive HF hearing, preferred the bypass in though.) That said, for the output coupling part of the circuit I'm planning on trying Mundorf E-cap bypassed by 10nF Vishay MPK1837, value chosen to give a "crossover point" into intended load that's high enough not to muck with the midrange (> 2kHz, similar to a speaker crossover best practice). Might still hate it, we'll see!
Anyway, totally understand signal coupling wasn't the intended application of these caps. But clearly that doesn't stop people from putting them in circuits for that purpose.
I didn't test properly as I don't have a variable supply above 12V at the moment. But @ 12V, all the caps were leaking under a few uA's, so seemed well within reasonable limits.
Here you go i have fiddled with silmics for 3 years to get the right position they never sound good just as decoupling in IC based circuits either its OPamp or voltage drivers like lme498xx series.
The best signature of silmic has to be in regulators and use normal capacitors in amplifiers etc.
The reason seems that i always felt that even a value of 1uf does degrade the sound lost in details or smearing of tones too rounded sound. Freq response measures the same but why does this happen was always a question to me.
Instead try using it only in preamp but bigger value like 1000uf/25v you will see the advantage of this cap.
One word even little is very high dose in amps so use it in preamp regulators. That is where i found best position after 3 years of observation of various values form 1uf to 3300uf and listening to it for min 300hours each...
The best signature of silmic has to be in regulators and use normal capacitors in amplifiers etc.
The reason seems that i always felt that even a value of 1uf does degrade the sound lost in details or smearing of tones too rounded sound. Freq response measures the same but why does this happen was always a question to me.
Instead try using it only in preamp but bigger value like 1000uf/25v you will see the advantage of this cap.
One word even little is very high dose in amps so use it in preamp regulators. That is where i found best position after 3 years of observation of various values form 1uf to 3300uf and listening to it for min 300hours each...
Mundorf Mlytic AG caps are very good and no comparison with any Nichicon caps. Nichcon sounds as if its etched too much. Mlytic sound very natural tones and very silent.
Once you use Mundorf you will not go back to nichicon believe me I have alot of Nichicon KS capaitor stock. If you like enormous artificial detail go with Nichicons.
Once you use Mundorf you will not go back to nichicon believe me I have alot of Nichicon KS capaitor stock. If you like enormous artificial detail go with Nichicons.