Capacitors and hype!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
#61
Evenharmonics said:


Thus the importance of backing one's claim with evidence such as measurements.
Click to expand...

The question is, what and how to measure, and how to interpret the results of measurements. There are many results of measurements available for those who are really interested where capacitors were pushed hardly by voltages and currents to catch up results that are very subtle when used properly, but also there are articles that claim that such results appear only when capacitors are pushed hard, and don't exist when they are properly used. Beliefs and fashions rule the world.

I.e. the first step is, to say good-bye to the belief that capacitors don't sound, then to get curious why they sound, then to figure out why they sound, then to predict when and how to use different capacitors for desired results. I.e. the usual path from subconscious inexperience to conscious inexperience to conscious experience then finally to subconscious experience.
 
#62
Wavebourn said:
The question is, what and how to measure, and how to interpret the results of measurements. There are many results of measurements available for those who are really interested where capacitors were pushed hardly by voltages and currents to catch up results that are very subtle when used properly, but also there are articles that claim that such results appear only when capacitors are pushed hard, and don't exist when they are properly used. Beliefs and fashions rule the world.

I.e. the first step is, to say good-bye to the belief that capacitors don't sound, then to get curious why they sound, then to figure out why they sound, then to predict when and how to use different capacitors for desired results. I.e. the usual path from subconscious inexperience to conscious inexperience to conscious experience then finally to subconscious experience.
Click to expand...

I see that it can get very complex but the goal itself is simple in my opinion. Some say the sound (coming out of their speakers) changed when they swapped caps in their audio gears. Put the microphone at where the ears were, play the same source and measure it with whatever the program there are. Before and after. The graphic results can be zoomed in and juxtaposed to each other (not so hard with today’s computer programs). That doesn’t sound all that complex to me. 🙄

One potential roadblock for typical audiophiles though, the cost of good measuring devices. But that doesn’t mean people should just forgo the evidence part of the claims.
 
#63
Audiophiles usually don't use feedbacks to correct errors so all of them are summed up giving an accumulative results. If you put the same cap between stages with a negative feedback around them the results will be less audible, and much less measurable. Theoretically, from low order harmonics you will get lower level of them, but wider specter. Practically, the rest of circuitry where you put your cap is not ideal, so it's artifacts always will be masked by other errors, i.e. hard to measure. That's why in order to catch up subtle results an extrapolation is used, when multiple stages are used instead of one, or currents/voltages applied to capacitors are applied much bigger that in the real life. If you want you may find a lot of such results already published, as I stated in my previous message. Let me repeat, I mean results of measurements. You may find them once instead of repeating many times that such results are needed.

Good luck! 🙂
 
#64
Evenharmonics said:


I see that it can get very complex but the goal itself is simple in my opinion. Some say the sound (coming out of their speakers) changed when they swapped caps in their audio gears. Put the microphone at where the ears were, play the same source and measure it with whatever the program there are. Before and after. The graphic results can be zoomed in and juxtaposed to each other (not so hard with today’s computer programs). That doesn’t sound all that complex to me. 🙄
Click to expand...



Bingo. But we all know that ears are much more sensitive than measurement mics.

🙄
🙂
 
#66
Speaking of listening tests...

One Russian trio bought stock condenser microphones and asked me to test them.

I believe that when used on a measurement stand in anechoic camera they may be fine, but when used for what they were designed for anyone who has ears can hear the differences.

There is the test record: the left channel uses my microphones with Chinese copies of M7 capsules, the right one is the one I tested.

Though you don't understand Russian you for sure will understand that the right one sounds harsh, it modulates the signal by an envelope of upper frequency sounds, and on transients it has crossover distortions that absent on steady sounds.

No need for golden ears to hear the difference, if you have under your control knobs to dial both devices you compare, right?

Here it is: http://wavebourn.com/mictest.mp3
 
#67
Most of the capacitors that I use run at 15GHz, could this be termed running them hard?
(15GHz = 15,000,000,000Hz or put another way nearly 1 million times higher than the highest generally heard audio frequency)
Sometimes I run them at 39GHz too, maybe this would be superhard!!
I have often used capacitors rated at 100KV,they weren't run very hard though, decoupling only a mere 35KV 10Amp supply.
Mike.
 
#69
A first. it is not enough to run them hard; what is needed, to measure distortions when running hard and to analyze their nature in order to extrapolate results on lower currents and voltages. However, people who disagree with such approach claim that extrapolations themselves are not valid as if on lower currents and voltages observed effects do not exist.
Second, you are right ebout signidicance of the circuitry for distortions in that particular case, since both capsules were of condenser type. My point was, my hereetical testing approach with open ears and open eyes, with dials to control and listen, is more intormative than a double blind test borroved by AES (Audio Engineering Society) from FDA (Food and Drug Administration).
 
#70
Well, the best I can figure out is that capacitor differences have to do with energy storage and the manner in which that energy is released again. I'm sure there are other effects also, but the main difficulty is in quantifying those effects.

I'm sure that you can do this with a nice Agilent network analyzer setup, but how many variables are there really? Do they perhaps mask each other in testing? Then, to figure out what the human brain responds to most easily so the relative effects can be placed in a hierarchy, things to solve in order of importance. If we consider the effect of preconceptions impacting a panel of listeners, the task becomes impossible.

I guess we would have to sequester some children to get any truth out of any of this.

-Chris
 
#71
I recently made a single ended and very simple single mosfet amplifier.
The output of course required a 4,700uf coupling cap. So, what to do - bearing in mind that electrolytics sound AWFUL, HORRIBLE, HARSH🙄 ???
I had some 8200uf 80v Samwha electros that were at least 15 years old, but measured identically - exactly 8200uf each!
I chucked them in and had no complaints or recognised any of the above abnormal tonal qualities.
After coming accross a couple of articles on the internet about modifying and re-casing electrolytic Elna caps(can't find the link anymore:bawling: ), as a true audiophile, I had to do this to make eveything ''mo better''🙄
The guts were removed from their aluminium, highly resonant cans, and then....................

1. the cap was wrapped many times with rice paper.
2. beeswax was painted on all surfaces which coated and sealed the paper.
3. solid silver 1mm thick silver wire was soldered to the connections and the capacitor was configured as an ''axial'' insted of radial type.
4. a cardboard heavy walled tube of the correct diameter was cut to size and the capacitor lowered in to it.
5. the last stage was to pour beeswax in to the remaining cavities and creating sealed wax end caps with silver wire lead out connectors at each end of the tube.
6. a red printed label was done on Word through a computer with description on capacitance and votage etc and this was stuck to the outside as a cosmetic finish and varnished with satin water based artist's varnish.

The result?................there was a definate difference to the sound - more open, better bass..........just different to before..........believe it or not............:cannotbe:
 
#75
boiss said:
OK, I have read all that was written so far in this thread and I have few more questions;-
1, Having read the blurb on a US maker of teflon caps site which can cost over $600 each, I see that there is no info published regarding things like inductance and resonant frequency. No mention of resistance, either internal or in connecting leads. No mention of anything at all technical except the Vmax and size. There is no mention of ageing effects.
2, what are the ageing effects, What are they due to and how can they be countered.
3, How can you be sure that a cap has been "aged correctly"
4, how can you keep it like that or do you throw it away as it ages more, buy another and go through the process again.
Mike
Click to expand...


I can only say this about the US Maker of Teflon caps, a line of
silver and teflon that were pitched by some guy with the initials of
C.K. My ex-friend is a noted hi-end audio manufacture of hand
made battery powered pre amps. The results of his spending
money on these high dollar/high end cap purchase was the caps
failed under real world conditions. The seller refused to provide
a refund for "installed caps". Those caps are no longer made.
 
#76
SynctronX is apparently referring to Charlie Kittleson, the former publisher of Vacuum Tube Valley magazine. In case you weren't aware, Charlie died (by his own hand) several months ago. His original coupling caps did have a problem with leakage which was acknowledged by Charlie several years ago. I have since heard rumors about a revised version of this cap being in the works, presumably without the leakage problems, but I don't know any details.

Dave
 
#77
Salectric said:
SynctronX is apparently referring to Charlie Kittleson, the former publisher of Vacuum Tube Valley magazine. In case you weren't aware, Charlie died (by his own hand) several months ago. His original coupling caps did have a problem with leakage which was acknowledged by Charlie several years ago. I have since heard rumors about a revised version of this cap being in the works, presumably without the leakage problems, but I don't know any details.

Dave
Click to expand...

Thanks Dave,

No, I was not aware that Charlie had taken his own life. I'm sorry
to hear that; it is always sad when I hear about this sort of thing.
Life is to be treasured no matter how hopeless it seems at times.

Kind of like electronics in a way at times...working on that POS piece
of gear that seems to have gremlins, or is a hopeless worthless to
thing to toss on the dung heap of the world, the 3 Ps come into play.

Patience

Persistence

Perseverance

Not that I've ever had a piece of gear I wanted to throw against
a brick wall and smash it to pieces with a sledge hammer, nope.

Nor have I waited upon deaths door, only to have what some
have called the grim reaper approach me only to be scared half
out of my mind and gotten religion--praise the Lord and pass
the ammunition.

Rather it is better to keep your wits about you when you feel
you have none left and no reason to believe in anything other than
to just keep on keeping on for the simple reason that, well to quote
a fellow Texan here, Quitting lasts forever -- Lance Armstrong.

I pray for Charlies soul, so that he may find some peace
where he could find none here on earth.

Amen.
 
#78
Evenharmonics said:
For the clarity sake As for the measurements, I’m talking about presenting the difference in sound, not preference.

I don't think human hearing is all that good compared to other species with eardrums. But we may be better at imagining things though. 😉
Click to expand...

Even,

Thinking that somethings are not all that clear. For example,
when Stewart Hegman (HK Citation I & II fame) was doing research
into audio, his experiments found that people responded favorably
to the amplifiers which had greater bandwidth than was audible.

Subjects preferred one amplifier over another even though they
could not say why. I belive the amps people liked better had
bandwidth greater than what human hearing is considered tops
(at 20,000 cps) extended up to that 40,000 - 70,000 cps. So
Hegman speced his output trannies to have flat response up
to about 100,000 Hz.



Evenharmonics said:
Thus the importance of backing one's claim with evidence such as measurements.
Click to expand...

Sometimes it takes our species a while to measure things.

I mean, we knew gravity was there right? But didn't it take
that Iltalian guy, Galileo to actually measure it? We knew it
existed though, didn't we?

Same thing with that Jewish guy who came up with the numbers
E=MC Squared. Didn't it take us a while to actually measure it?

The atomic bomb points to it, but I believe the actual measurements
didn't occur until the 1960s with atomic clocks. Two synched atomic
clocks placed on Jets then sent into the Stratosphere to fly in
opposite directions for X amount of time. When they came back
the clocks had differences in time. The gap was accounted for
by Einstein's equations but It took 70 years for that one.

Okay, enough of this I'm getting back to tweaking stuff.
 
#80
Wavebourn said:
What happens if vibration is applied to capacitors?
Click to expand...

The converse of what happens when voltage is applied. 🙂 Any idea where can I find a ranking of dielectric materials by susceptibility to piezoelectric effect? Of particular interest is silver mica. Trying to find reasons for my impressions more grounded than 'too much cough syrup'.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom