(Mods, truncated what I could, sorry it's still big...)
(@ThatSoundsGood; I'm pretty sure you mean 'definitely', not defiantly as in bold. This is an autocorrect for using 'definately' (sic), just in case that was unknown.)
Yes, there are differences; some subtle, and some obvious.
I've attempted to FR mic some differences, and never get anything substantial or easy to see unless the value is way off. I've done A/B/X where statistics shows that no difference can be acknowledged, despite that some non-believers or skeptics now do believe there are differences due to my efforts. However, some people that were open-minded to there being a difference are now solid in standings that there is no difference. I've had relatives and friends both state they had a preference as if they could tell.
I also agree that 'more resolving' drivers will yield a perceptible change. Of course, none of this follows standard pricing hierarchy. Some lesser costing drivers and caps can do what more expensive ones also achieve.
You want obvious tests? Okay-
I had an Airborne RT5002 running a high-pass of 4.7uF with a basic industrial polypropylene cap and a Zen cap (Northcreek), both of 4.7uF. Zens are NLA, and I don't have a manufacturer for the unbranded industrial cap. To opt for substitutions, I would wager it would be similar to a JB JFX cap vs a Jantzen Z-Superior/Z-Silver. I've used both, and feel they are close.
Another time I had an Usher 9845 2" mid-dome, and kept comparing the ASC X386 and Clarity SA capacitors in the high-pass. Sadly, this mid is NLA, but I feel the parts would contribute well to another application. The sound of the 2 parts was different. These were 20uF.
In both instances:
One had better detail/focus, the other had better soundstage. Neither was bad, nor better/worse, but a choice by the listener was required.
Wolf
Agreed. ThatSoundsGood was incorrect here.
I actually agree here as well. The cost is not the difference, the sound is. Yes, there is scientific basis for them to exist, or did you mean to insert a 'no' in there?
Different materials and processes should incur different results. Wax, teflon, 'styrene, oil usage, etc; all have different properties of operation.
Wolf
I was also a unknowing skeptic until I was 24 (43 now), and took a challenge of ABX in speaker wire. No problem, the cheaper stuff sounded better to me. But the fact that there even was a difference was a new concept to me at that age. I had no idea that this was even a 'thing' at that age. I was a totally impartial observer, as I had no knowledge of what I was even participating in. I was just asked to choose.
I followed that up with caps the next year. Bob Cordell conducted both set of routines. If I had not heard it myself, I would not even be in the same ballpark.
I do not believe everything that the charlatans throw out. A fool is easily parted with his money, especially in this industry.
Skepticism is one thing. Denial is another. Acceptance of incorrectness is a third.
It's not about veils or holographic whatever. It's about the music, what matters, and what does not. Is there a difference, or is there not. To me, this is not about money, cost, aesthetics, or street-cred. It's another avenue to explore and investigate, and come to my own conclusions all in the realm of a fun hobby.
So- have fun with it!
Wolf
I followed that up with caps the next year. Bob Cordell conducted both set of routines. If I had not heard it myself, I would not even be in the same ballpark.
I do not believe everything that the charlatans throw out. A fool is easily parted with his money, especially in this industry.
Skepticism is one thing. Denial is another. Acceptance of incorrectness is a third.
It's not about veils or holographic whatever. It's about the music, what matters, and what does not. Is there a difference, or is there not. To me, this is not about money, cost, aesthetics, or street-cred. It's another avenue to explore and investigate, and come to my own conclusions all in the realm of a fun hobby.
So- have fun with it!
Wolf
What I meant to say is the there is NO scientific basis for them to exist. Too late to go back and edit it, but here is the correction.
I think it would have been clearer what I meant if I'd said focus of the sounds within the sound stage, ie not whether they were panned into a certain place.
Thanks for that great Ethan Winer article (his book Audio Expert is wonderful). Seems my earlier total wild guess in post #30, at .01% distortion isn't far from his measurements.
But there is one thing possibly very misleading in his charts. He points out that below the freq where the test capacitors start "biting" into the signal, distortion rises. True. But remember, in a passive crossover you may be getting a little rise in distortion but it is at a point where the tweeter signal is cut to a small fraction of its output. In other words, the distortion may rise to .1% but that is .1% of a signal that is less hearable by say, 80%. Advocates of elite caps can do the math, I am sure.
B.
Last edited:
I’m not commenting to question your methods, so don’t take anything I write as personal or challenging. I think we’re all on the same side.
I have performed tests on $1 China film capacitors and $50 film boutique varieties. Among the results, the waterfall plots were identical, flawless settling. The harmonics resided below the test gear. My tests were nothing fancy, but drivers exhibit distortion that is much, much higher.
I propose a test that I think can satisfy everyone. It can be tailored to suit the evaluation of capacitor changes in speakers, or signal coupling capacitor in electronics.
Using the single channel or stereo line-in of an audio interface or computer sound card, connect the leads in parallel with the driver of interest (you will want a voltage divider of a few hundred to a few kOhms) and record familiar music playing before and after the capacitor change. You can also do this at the output of audio devices, or even power amplifiers. The recorded audio can be compared immediately to identify what differences do exist, or do not exist.
I should know better but here goes anyways! There are so many things I’ve beeen able to hear in audio that others just don’t seem sensitive to, I’m not saying others can’t hear and only my ‘golden ears’ can….. it’s more a sensitivity to differences.
Many of the things I do hear differences in are explained away as impossible or vivid imagination but over the last few years I did a deep dive into possibilities of why,when,how etc. and how much one spends is not really relative at all, it’s more like fitting proper materials for each scenario…….the devil is in the details sort of thing.
I’m thinking there might be a bit more to it than just closing the door on subjective observations because we can’t put a label on something at the moment.
I’m thinking in 100 yrs (or maybe less) people will look back on these conversations and say man we shouldn’t have been so close minded.
Many of the things I do hear differences in are explained away as impossible or vivid imagination but over the last few years I did a deep dive into possibilities of why,when,how etc. and how much one spends is not really relative at all, it’s more like fitting proper materials for each scenario…….the devil is in the details sort of thing.
I’m thinking there might be a bit more to it than just closing the door on subjective observations because we can’t put a label on something at the moment.
I’m thinking in 100 yrs (or maybe less) people will look back on these conversations and say man we shouldn’t have been so close minded.
What in the world do you mean by a capacitor "settling more quickly"? There is no "settling" of a capacitor. It is something that you have made up with no basis.
And the idea that electrons move faster and more accurately through a better capacitor is so absurd that it reveals your complete lack of understanding of capacitors and electronics in general.
You are pretending to understand things that you really don't.
Mountainman, you say "I should know better but here goes anyways! There are so many things I’ve beeen able to hear in audio that others just don’t seem sensitive to, I’m not saying others can’t hear and only my ‘golden ears’ can….. it’s more a sensitivity to differences. " You seem to be clear-eyed about how others might judge your assertions of superiority, however shrouded in modest disclaimers.
Well, have you ever gone to the trouble of verifying your great confidence? Seems to me, if you are insightful enough to recognize that many will think you are an unrepentant egotist, wouldn't it make sense for you to assure yourself that your perceptions show up in A-B blind tests on your own gear?
Even for people like jazzman, I wonder if he can blindly A-B demonstrate, say a 3 dB EQ added to 3kHz? While he claims sensitivity to very subtle spatial perceptions, can he demonstrate better than 50% correct judgments about a boost of 3 dB? Or can you be very perceptive about space and not perceptive about tone?
(Can't predict if 3 dB is much of a challenge or not, but somebody could make a test recording with say, 50 samples of the same music snippet, half with the boost and half without and make it available.... and keep the test-key secret... with folks able to send their answers (on an Excel column or tab-separated) to a new gmail box for scoring.)
Well, have you ever gone to the trouble of verifying your great confidence? Seems to me, if you are insightful enough to recognize that many will think you are an unrepentant egotist, wouldn't it make sense for you to assure yourself that your perceptions show up in A-B blind tests on your own gear?
Even for people like jazzman, I wonder if he can blindly A-B demonstrate, say a 3 dB EQ added to 3kHz? While he claims sensitivity to very subtle spatial perceptions, can he demonstrate better than 50% correct judgments about a boost of 3 dB? Or can you be very perceptive about space and not perceptive about tone?
(Can't predict if 3 dB is much of a challenge or not, but somebody could make a test recording with say, 50 samples of the same music snippet, half with the boost and half without and make it available.... and keep the test-key secret... with folks able to send their answers (on an Excel column or tab-separated) to a new gmail box for scoring.)
Last edited:
If you have the time, give my test method from a few posts above a try.
It’s a real listening test that can provide an excellent environment for evaluation. It allows the use of headphones to remove the influence of the room acoustics and supports visual and even subtractive comparison of the waveforms. No expensive test equipment is needed, just two 1/4 Watt resistors (or four if the recordings will be in stereo) and the cable to a recording device. The before-and-after can be compared in seconds, or instantly in an audio editing program like the free version of Adobe Audition. I first started testing like this over a decade ago as an extra step in evaluating amplifiers while they were driving real loads vs an ideal load.
Note: class-D and bridged amplifiers will require a special wiring scheme and cannot connect to a recording device’s common terminal.
Last edited:
A crossover is designed to distribute the frequencies, and the roll offs are calculated based on the different drivers in the box.
By changing capacitor values, you will affect the performance.
Capacitors are basically electronic dampers / energy stores, nobody at the factory is making one just for you, they are made in millions of units at a time. And you will be aware that speakers are but a fraction of the overall numbers used.
If you can hear the same value capacitors affecting the sound, just by changing brand or composition, good for you, most of us can't. So be happy that you have a unique ability.
My advice is that if the caps are within spec, use the equalizer, do not waste your time, money and energy on changing capacitors.
Not only frequency I think the relative energy is also changed, so you can over drive the tweeter, which will then not function as intended...you just shot yourself in the foot by doing that.
By changing capacitor values, you will affect the performance.
Capacitors are basically electronic dampers / energy stores, nobody at the factory is making one just for you, they are made in millions of units at a time. And you will be aware that speakers are but a fraction of the overall numbers used.
If you can hear the same value capacitors affecting the sound, just by changing brand or composition, good for you, most of us can't. So be happy that you have a unique ability.
My advice is that if the caps are within spec, use the equalizer, do not waste your time, money and energy on changing capacitors.
Not only frequency I think the relative energy is also changed, so you can over drive the tweeter, which will then not function as intended...you just shot yourself in the foot by doing that.
Last edited:
kouiky, I believe that is called generational testing or something similar.
@ Naresh, +1 on the EQ.
The current dismissive trend might be the result of the overly permissive trend some years back. In any case, the mechanisms of capacitors are well known. Consider DF, DA, ESL, nonlinearity and microphonics.
@ Naresh, +1 on the EQ.
I’ll have to read some on it. I never pursued the history, or if others had practiced it previously. My thoughts are such, that this type of AB testing costs almost nothing and could benefit people from any position.AllenB said:
I have no opinion on the audibility of passive components. I think that before people spend sums on a full set of boutique parts it would be worthwhile for them to try the test on a tweeter, midrange, or parallel woofer crossover and observe the results.
I stand corrected on how the capacitor works. I definitely misspoke about that, but I stand by the statement that it's pretty easy to hear the difference. Have you not ever re-capped a speaker or electronic device and heard the difference? I've never spent the time to measure it but it can be really different.
When I say "settling" I am referring to the discharge when the signal flows through. Film and foil capacitors, as opposed to electrolytic capacitors in a passive crossover help to give a more accurate representation of recording and it is my understanding that some of this has to do with how fast it discharges. Again, I'm not sure how to measure this, but hearing the difference can be pretty easy a lot of the time. And I could be wrong about the physics because that is not my expertise, but I know what I'm hearing and there is a clear difference a lot of the time.
There's no doubt that I'm not an expert about capacitors, but going from cheap electrolytic caps to film or foil caps makes a difference. Have you not ever done this and heard the difference? I'm honestly asking. Do one speaker with some nice caps and then A/B them. Sure, maybe it's not worth the money to a lot of people, but I can certainly hear the difference.
I've also re-capped several recording studio consoles and the difference there can be staggering. Some of that can be that the caps are no longer near their rated value, but it's not all because of that.
Last edited by a moderator:
Tom Danley has a number of posts on the subject, called 'generation loss'. E.g.:
Tom Danley said:
I listen to some hifi music and find it congenial.
My daugher-in-law listens to the same system and is distressed.
She has been diagnosed with hyperacusis. I have measured the peak at 8kHz.
We are listening to the same objectively measurable system.
Her disability is severe but it could well be marginal.
I doubt even she could hear a capacitor but I've discovered now that subjective perceptual assessments can differ and I believe the best ABX tests may try to take hearing differences into account. (eg. whether 8kHz is excited perhaps, capacitors excluded!)
My daugher-in-law listens to the same system and is distressed.
She has been diagnosed with hyperacusis. I have measured the peak at 8kHz.
We are listening to the same objectively measurable system.
Her disability is severe but it could well be marginal.
I doubt even she could hear a capacitor but I've discovered now that subjective perceptual assessments can differ and I believe the best ABX tests may try to take hearing differences into account. (eg. whether 8kHz is excited perhaps, capacitors excluded!)
That's highly probable if you consider our sensitivity to the temporal responses that help us identify auditory sound objects and interaural time differences for example.
Ben, ego has nothing to do with it, you ought to try freeing your mind sometime.
Pavel did some testing awhile back with several different preamps the results were surprising to many including pavel.
Kouiky, I cannot do headphones……I’ve never been able to get a natural feel even from a good setup.
Pavel did some testing awhile back with several different preamps the results were surprising to many including pavel.
Kouiky, I cannot do headphones……I’ve never been able to get a natural feel even from a good setup.