I decided to upgrade the original components of a vintage Lafayette KT-550. Over a period of about 200+ hours break-in time, I logged values (subjective and objective) as the sonics changed.
Please see the attached grid which quantifies a) the original KT-550 components b) first 100 hours whereby only the PSU caps were upgraded to ClarityCap TC caps and c) next 102 hours whereby the signal path caps and resistors where upgraded to Rike Audio caps, Kiwame resistors and Charcroft Z-foil naked resistors. Also, I have included my random notes on how I perceived the sonic changes.
In the end, my system was completely transformed by upgrading to these boutique products. I whole heartedly recommend the ClarityCap TC and Rike Audio caps. These are first rate products and well worth the expense.
OK. Here are my random notes:
cap burn in
30 hours
-soft and mushy sound. too polite
-smooth, no edginess, no grain
-neutral tonality
-no dynamics, flat, lifeless
-limited transients, mid-fi
50 hours
-soft, still too polite
-smooth, no edginess, lack of electronic artifact
-neutral tonality, if not slightly tilted toward the upper end
-no edginess, lack of electronic artifact, no grain
-deeper soundstage
-lower noise floor
-dynamics improving, maybe more natural but still not 100% convinced
-transients improving, but ways to go. wondering if the prior perceived transients were just too much and electronic artifact coloration
75 hours
-softness has all but faded away and transformed into raw, shear power
-smooth yes, especially on piano, but still the rawness of live music
-neutral tonality, if not slightly tilted toward the upper end
-no edginess, lack of electronic artifact, no grain
-ultimate deep soundstage. amazingly deep. almost endless
-super low noise floor
-dynamics are now thru the roof similar to live music. real bite and pop to stringed instruments
-transients are now thru the roof similar to live music. especially the pizzicato plucks.
100 hours
the improvements seemed to have settled and now there is no material change in sound. Thus, will be adding the new caps/resistors on the main board. So, to summarize
__
Adding the following products: Rike Audio caps, Kiwame Resistors, Vishay 2575 Nakek Resistors
127 total hours included Clarity and Rike cap burn-in time
- dynamics and transients off the charts good. piano key strike with yamamoto trio midnight sugar song #3
- purity and liquidity is improving
- super pure strings
- tonality is better, but still needs more body and warmth
- image stability has decreased. images moving around a bit
- electronic artifact is minimized, very clean, pure
200 total hours included Clarity and Rike cap burn-in time
- dynamics and transients off the charts good. piano key strike with
- with tonal purity and liquidity
- super pure strings
- tonality is great, lifelike. Fuller body and modest warmth. would not conclude that this is a warm sound, but rather neutral and lifelike.
- image stability is great. Piano is great.
Please see the attached grid which quantifies a) the original KT-550 components b) first 100 hours whereby only the PSU caps were upgraded to ClarityCap TC caps and c) next 102 hours whereby the signal path caps and resistors where upgraded to Rike Audio caps, Kiwame resistors and Charcroft Z-foil naked resistors. Also, I have included my random notes on how I perceived the sonic changes.
In the end, my system was completely transformed by upgrading to these boutique products. I whole heartedly recommend the ClarityCap TC and Rike Audio caps. These are first rate products and well worth the expense.
OK. Here are my random notes:
cap burn in
30 hours
-soft and mushy sound. too polite
-smooth, no edginess, no grain
-neutral tonality
-no dynamics, flat, lifeless
-limited transients, mid-fi
50 hours
-soft, still too polite
-smooth, no edginess, lack of electronic artifact
-neutral tonality, if not slightly tilted toward the upper end
-no edginess, lack of electronic artifact, no grain
-deeper soundstage
-lower noise floor
-dynamics improving, maybe more natural but still not 100% convinced
-transients improving, but ways to go. wondering if the prior perceived transients were just too much and electronic artifact coloration
75 hours
-softness has all but faded away and transformed into raw, shear power
-smooth yes, especially on piano, but still the rawness of live music
-neutral tonality, if not slightly tilted toward the upper end
-no edginess, lack of electronic artifact, no grain
-ultimate deep soundstage. amazingly deep. almost endless
-super low noise floor
-dynamics are now thru the roof similar to live music. real bite and pop to stringed instruments
-transients are now thru the roof similar to live music. especially the pizzicato plucks.
100 hours
the improvements seemed to have settled and now there is no material change in sound. Thus, will be adding the new caps/resistors on the main board. So, to summarize
__
Adding the following products: Rike Audio caps, Kiwame Resistors, Vishay 2575 Nakek Resistors
127 total hours included Clarity and Rike cap burn-in time
- dynamics and transients off the charts good. piano key strike with yamamoto trio midnight sugar song #3
- purity and liquidity is improving
- super pure strings
- tonality is better, but still needs more body and warmth
- image stability has decreased. images moving around a bit
- electronic artifact is minimized, very clean, pure
200 total hours included Clarity and Rike cap burn-in time
- dynamics and transients off the charts good. piano key strike with
- with tonal purity and liquidity
- super pure strings
- tonality is great, lifelike. Fuller body and modest warmth. would not conclude that this is a warm sound, but rather neutral and lifelike.
- image stability is great. Piano is great.
Attachments
Wow. Just wow. And here I was just using solens 'cause theyre cheap. And 'cause I like the colors black and grey.😕
I have found the one single best upgrade I have made to my amps was the addition of 18 year old Glenfiddich.....😀
Jokin' aside, well done sir. You have mountains more dedication than I.
I have found the one single best upgrade I have made to my amps was the addition of 18 year old Glenfiddich.....😀
Jokin' aside, well done sir. You have mountains more dedication than I.
I am not seeing any objective values. The ratings attached to the page are entirely subjective. There is nothing wrong with a subjective view, but it is open to interpretation, whereas math and scientific method are universally understood. Did you take any measurements to depict the changes in linear and non-linear domain behavior?
Ya, I mean it all sounds like those "boutique" parts sound like crap when they are new and it takes 100 (nice round number) hrs. for them to normalize and operate correctly. ???
Sure, it's like dry-aged beef. Gets better with time🙄
And of course it costs more.... Which means it MUST be better.
And of course it costs more.... Which means it MUST be better.
I am deeply skeptical of such claims. While it is true that tubes require a certain period of time to settle down after putting them in service, I have my doubts as to this "burn in" for parts like capacitors and resistors. What is the exact mechanism here? If it's necessary to burn them in, then why wasn't this done before they went out the door?
I also had a look at the prices for the items mentioned here, and the prices for those ClarityCaps are obscene. Polypropylene capacitors are good performers for audio, but you can get the same polyprop capacitors for a helluvalot less. For power supplies, if you want to go that route, motor run polyprop capacitors are a good deal less pri$ey.
You don't need to fork over $2.25 for carbon film resistors either (Kiwame)
More obscene prices for a decidedly inferior product that doesn't include protection from atmospheric moisture, dirt, and possible damage.
Aural memory is notoriously fickle, and makes comparisons like these over a number of hours highly suspect. There are lots of other factors that can come into play here. Did you listen to the same program material all that time? Sit in exactly the same spacial relation with the speeks? Even small variations can induce significant changes as to the sound. That's an experiment I did myself with the speaker boxes I use with the computer. Even moving slightly affected the apparent sound stage, the stereo imaging, and detail. Such differences can be erroneously ascribed to those "magical" cables when you got up and changed them, and your position with respect to the speeks.
Being that the KT-550 is a heavily NFB amp, there should be little effect that passive components can have on the performance. That's why we use NFB: to make circuit performance less dependent on the components used.
I also had a look at the prices for the items mentioned here, and the prices for those ClarityCaps are obscene. Polypropylene capacitors are good performers for audio, but you can get the same polyprop capacitors for a helluvalot less. For power supplies, if you want to go that route, motor run polyprop capacitors are a good deal less pri$ey.
You don't need to fork over $2.25 for carbon film resistors either (Kiwame)
More obscene prices for a decidedly inferior product that doesn't include protection from atmospheric moisture, dirt, and possible damage.
Aural memory is notoriously fickle, and makes comparisons like these over a number of hours highly suspect. There are lots of other factors that can come into play here. Did you listen to the same program material all that time? Sit in exactly the same spacial relation with the speeks? Even small variations can induce significant changes as to the sound. That's an experiment I did myself with the speaker boxes I use with the computer. Even moving slightly affected the apparent sound stage, the stereo imaging, and detail. Such differences can be erroneously ascribed to those "magical" cables when you got up and changed them, and your position with respect to the speeks.
Being that the KT-550 is a heavily NFB amp, there should be little effect that passive components can have on the performance. That's why we use NFB: to make circuit performance less dependent on the components used.
I like how some of your specific ratings have gotten worse over time. I have experienced that, burn in where things have gotten worse. Including some boutique parts eventually sounding very poor in my system, but is some cases that same part ends up sounding good in another position, but initially that is very disappointing expenditure. Anyway good for you for taking the time to test this out. I've lately been experimenting with dielectrics on wire, and have even found if there is a dielectric even r=1cm normal to the wire it can affect the sound. Which has me thinking those stupid blocks that elevate cables off the floor work to increase the distance from conductor to dielectric (floor) and do have an effect. Another effect seems to be the actual resonant qualities of materials seem to come through the sound. I've found dielectric to mostly affect detail where as the resonant qualities of a material seem to affect tone... more so, think teflon caps vs pio caps. Anyway, with burn in I think we are dealing with a molecular phenomena. Perhaps polarizing molecules, hardening/softening materials due to heat and expansion/contraction of the materials wearing and stretching, perhaps off-gassing causing a change in dielectric constants, or settling of oil to one side in a pio cap (Rike), maybe even magnetization setting in and effecting currents, oxidization's due to currents, there is allot going on that takes time.
It's because of reviews that people will pay more for pretty painted boutique carbon composition resistors, where superior film resistors that cost less would actually introduce less noise. Vishay products have been transformed from 20 cent components into parts that are now sold in glossy online stores with colorful photos and the use of words like "warm", "midrange bloom", "aire", "open", "flowering presentation" and comparisons to food products or vintage wines. That Lynn Olson page is a dangerous read. He seems stuck in a deeply entrenched train of thought that people only measure harmonic distortion and that he's uncovered something new. This is not the case at all. It only takes an evening to read that "allow me to state the obvious" rant mixed with bias and misrepresented data centered around a narrow context to set someone on the trail to wasting their nest egg on platinum-gold fuses and alien hybrid power cords.
Last edited:
The OP's post is neither detailed, nor objective. This is the report of someone re-evaluating his amplifier and getting re-acquainted with (or again getting used to) it's sonic properties, after his expectation bias led him to believe components are rubbish before 'break-in'.
Wow you guys really pile on this guy.
While I agree that this test is not objective, I appreciate the effort in trying to describe his opinion.
I like the one guy who discredits the OP using words like, "I am deeply skeptical", "I have doubts", then goes on to explain how he subjectivly tested his speakers.
(I laughed because actually moving your seating position does have an affect on sound, yet he calls it magical.)
Miles, if you can remember changes from slight adjustments in seating position, then why couldn't the OP remember slight cap changes, does he not have special powers like you? Is he crazy?
Perhaps you can kindly instruct him on how to perform objective testing.
I would assume it is extremely easy for the experts here to prove with empirical testing that capacitor break in is inaudible and a fallacy.
I also have a hard time believing that passive components do not have an effect on performance.
The good news is according to you guys, is that I can now just use ceramics and electrolytic because they don't effect the sound anymore. 😉
Essentially you guys are fighting snake oil with religion,(unproven beliefs) rather then science.
While I agree that this test is not objective, I appreciate the effort in trying to describe his opinion.
I like the one guy who discredits the OP using words like, "I am deeply skeptical", "I have doubts", then goes on to explain how he subjectivly tested his speakers.
(I laughed because actually moving your seating position does have an affect on sound, yet he calls it magical.)
Miles, if you can remember changes from slight adjustments in seating position, then why couldn't the OP remember slight cap changes, does he not have special powers like you? Is he crazy?
Perhaps you can kindly instruct him on how to perform objective testing.
I would assume it is extremely easy for the experts here to prove with empirical testing that capacitor break in is inaudible and a fallacy.
I also have a hard time believing that passive components do not have an effect on performance.
The good news is according to you guys, is that I can now just use ceramics and electrolytic because they don't effect the sound anymore. 😉
Essentially you guys are fighting snake oil with religion,(unproven beliefs) rather then science.
Don´t know where you did look for prices, but for example
a Clarity Cap ESA Range polypropylene 2.2uF 630Vdc is € 9.98 (hificollective.co.uk)
and a comparable polypropylene from Cornell Dubilier at Mouser is € 9.81.
Not much of a difference. The ESA range has low microphonics and
is excellent for speaker crossovers.
And no, they don´t need "break in". ;-)
Of course , there are standard ways of making objective measurements from subjective impressions. There is even a British Standard that describes the method. It has been used successfully to assess the audible effects of various digital encoding/decoding schemes.
Cheers
Ian
That's me being objective 😛
Your missing the point. No one is claiming passive components don't have an impact on tonal characteristics. They do. Better yet, they do so in a measurable fashion. For a crude example, replacing crappy high value low wattage resistors with proper metal film alternatives can lower a noise floor dramatically. Both passive, both resistors, yet measurably different.
The OP however is claiming his music reproduction goes from below avarage at best (mushy, flat, lifeless, mid-fi) to audiophile heaven (tonal purity, lifelike, warmth, stability) in the course of 200 hours with the EXACT same components. Overpriced components I might add, sold as audiograde and/or audiophile to promote them in a superior fashion, yet electrically the same as components a tenth of theirs costs. And he makes these claims by means of entirely subjective terms like liquidity, purity, stability, etc. which can mean totally different things to different people and hold no real value to quantify the actual musical reproduction.
And then he makes the mistake to claim his findings are objective too...
Where are the noise floor, damping factor, output impedance, line- and/or load regulation, harmonic distortion, frequency response, etc. Those are measurable, quantified, objective results.
Last edited:
He could start with some component value change data.
If the signal caps drifted from .05uf to .1uf then that would be a tremendous change, totally unacceptable from a quality control, reliablity expectation. It would be a 100% change in value and the component would be defective, even though it still works. Even if that happened a person wouldn't be able to detect the difference with any kind of certainty, much less make a claim it created a new and superdupper audiophile high quality improvement. If a resistor changed enough to throw off the voltages from the design figures, it would be defective, too. Not something you would want to design for by using a component value higher or lower in the build than on the paper design, then expecting the component to drift to the design value.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.