In that case, could we, humble mortal worms have the honour of being illuminated (and perhaps blinded) by the ineffable light of your superior knowledge of the subject?
I do not need to possess an advanced degree in biology to know that **** stinks
I also do not have to "prove" anything to anyone
I know if I stare directly at the Sun the results will not be pleasant, same as touching the proverbial hot stove
I wish audio forums would stay on track - letting the truly knowledgeable people talk about things technical (and answer those questions knowledgeably) and the end users (consumers) talk of the subjective and anecdotal things they do and don't like about their equipment and recordings
Quoting obscure individual's "opinions" and "findings" does not mean anything useful, nor does it add any meaning to your own nonsense statements based on nothing but opinion and herd mentality
The listing of the caps as such (1-2-3-4....) in reference to some silly "pecking" order inquiry was nothing but utter rubbish
If you really are interested in knowing something useful regarding capacitors and the many types I would suggest a good TEXT BOOK - NOT asking out of thin air questions at an audio forum, good as it may be, where it is a guarantee you will have regurgitated all of the myths and nonsense the web keeps alive and constantly creates and perpetuates
Last edited:
Polyphenylene sulfide capacitors (PPS) are still missing from the list. You don't often see them as through-hole capacitors, but you can get them as SMDs. They are somewhere in between polypropylene and PET (a.k.a. polyester, MKT, MKS) on Bateman's list.
The better capacitors have measurably lower distortion and lower dielectric absorption and audiophiles usually like them better. Still, when used as a simple AC coupling capacitor, even a metallized MKT capacitor has extremely low distortion and the difference in step response between an RC high-pass with an ideal capacitor and with an MKT capacitor is negligible compared to the difference between an RC high-pass with an ideal capacitor and no high-pass at all. For that reason I've always been a bit skeptical about claims about differences in sound between different capacitor types. Still, as polypropylene capacitors are not extremely expensive, why not use good capacitors?
Slightly off-topic: unlike film capacitors and class 1 ceramic capacitors, class 2 ceramic capacitors are really grossly non-linear.
The better capacitors have measurably lower distortion and lower dielectric absorption and audiophiles usually like them better. Still, when used as a simple AC coupling capacitor, even a metallized MKT capacitor has extremely low distortion and the difference in step response between an RC high-pass with an ideal capacitor and with an MKT capacitor is negligible compared to the difference between an RC high-pass with an ideal capacitor and no high-pass at all. For that reason I've always been a bit skeptical about claims about differences in sound between different capacitor types. Still, as polypropylene capacitors are not extremely expensive, why not use good capacitors?
Slightly off-topic: unlike film capacitors and class 1 ceramic capacitors, class 2 ceramic capacitors are really grossly non-linear.
I am generally not asking the questions, I try to answer them as accurately and rigorously as possible, precisely to dissipate myths, and also equally worthless "hand-waving attitudes"....
Some examples:
paralleling film caps with electrolytic caps
Oldies but goodies!!!
Non-linearity of polar caps arrangements
Yet another E-cap meter
Power-oriented cap-meter
Paper-in-Oil Capacitors
etc, etc.
Strangely, (<-irony) most good text books end up ranking caps in pretty much that order. I know something about active filters, so I've done a lot of reading. Take pretty much any book that is non-theoretical (e.g. real circuits with real capacitors discussed) and you will find that Dielectric absorption (DA) is important and yes, that pecking order pretty much fits how "ideal" a capacitor is. Cyril Bateman did a bunch of tests and found out what other EEs found previously, the closer to ideal a capacitor is, the better our precision circuits work. So not really a surprise and not really strange.
Dielectric absorption - Wikipedia
I think where you are correct, though, is that audio manufacturers have gone way beyond physical properties and have started marketing capacitors as somehow magical, so, yes, there does seem to be an attempt to fool people into buying based on non-scientific criteria.
Because some folks might think he has a point!
Cyril Bateman spent his entire career making capacitors. My limited correspondence with him left me to believe he was not only an expert but a true gentleman.
So I get a bit uneasy when some ignorant person casts aspersions about him and his work.
MCSmith - you know next to nothing and yet dismiss the learned opinion of others. I agree with Lumbars listing from my own listening. Cryril Batemens articles are first rate research as is this classic paper by Walt Jung and Richard Marsh. Thier article from 1980 indicates how far behind the times your limited knowledge and comments are.
Picking Capacitors - Walter G. Jung and Richard Marsh
Picking Capacitors - Walter G. Jung and Richard Marsh
Last edited:
Some people get worked up about minor differences in capacitor behaviour, irrelevant to most circuit applications, or believe that a particular type of capacitor is "best" for audio (whatever the way it is used in a circuit). Others believe that all capacitors are the same so it doesn't matter what you use. Both are wrong, yet both can be found eagerly propagating their views online.
This is an ancient thread, but I'm a new member.
I'm a 57 yr old EE and cut my teeth on tubes in the Navy and from messing with my Fender Deluxe Reverb amp (a hand me down from my brother.)
I'd like to add something of value to the 14 yr old thread.
For bypass purposes and feedback caps to prevent parasitic oscillation, the nasty old ceramic capacitor should always be in the ckt.
e.g. a 10uf to 100uf electrolytics on the B+ voltages on the P/S filter board/block or "filter" block (okay, it's technically an LPF, but it's just a bunch of bypass caps where the resistor values are for voltage drop to get the desired t B+.) If you can hear a difference in your amp from "tuning" the 'lytic bypass caps, then by all means do it.
A .1 uF ceramic bypass cap at each individual tube/valve, right at the B+ pin to the nearest ground is a good thing.
The knock on ceramics is that their capacitance value of ceramics significantly varies significantly with temperature. Who cares? It's a bypass cap.
The other knock is that the low ESR (which is a good thing for bypass caps) create resonant peaks and troughs. These happen up in the MHz ranges.
I simulate all my circuits in Micro Cap and I'm careful to have proper models for the components. I always do the individual stages separately and finish with the entire system which can make for long simulations.
I should do a simulation of a P/S and model the B+ lines with the 'lytics separated from the ceramic with the series inductance and resistance and parallel to the ceramic cap at the tube socket.
My bet is on the ceramic bypass at the tube socket B+ (leaving the "filter" caps right where they are.) That being said, it probably won't sound any different. These bypass caps are useful when things age in the system and create AF noise on the rails.
JMO
I'm a 57 yr old EE and cut my teeth on tubes in the Navy and from messing with my Fender Deluxe Reverb amp (a hand me down from my brother.)
I'd like to add something of value to the 14 yr old thread.
For bypass purposes and feedback caps to prevent parasitic oscillation, the nasty old ceramic capacitor should always be in the ckt.
e.g. a 10uf to 100uf electrolytics on the B+ voltages on the P/S filter board/block or "filter" block (okay, it's technically an LPF, but it's just a bunch of bypass caps where the resistor values are for voltage drop to get the desired t B+.) If you can hear a difference in your amp from "tuning" the 'lytic bypass caps, then by all means do it.
A .1 uF ceramic bypass cap at each individual tube/valve, right at the B+ pin to the nearest ground is a good thing.
The knock on ceramics is that their capacitance value of ceramics significantly varies significantly with temperature. Who cares? It's a bypass cap.
The other knock is that the low ESR (which is a good thing for bypass caps) create resonant peaks and troughs. These happen up in the MHz ranges.
I simulate all my circuits in Micro Cap and I'm careful to have proper models for the components. I always do the individual stages separately and finish with the entire system which can make for long simulations.
I should do a simulation of a P/S and model the B+ lines with the 'lytics separated from the ceramic with the series inductance and resistance and parallel to the ceramic cap at the tube socket.
My bet is on the ceramic bypass at the tube socket B+ (leaving the "filter" caps right where they are.) That being said, it probably won't sound any different. These bypass caps are useful when things age in the system and create AF noise on the rails.
JMO
Polypropylene has lower dielectric absorption than polyester has. This would be important for an integrator, but not as important for an audio coupling cap.
Yes, dielectric absorption is kind of like hysteresis in a magnet. The cap with higher DA will hold more residual charge. If there are no instantaneous changes, then there are no worries.
That being said, it has no (or insignificant) harmonic effects but could affect the musical onsets and offsets (attack and decay). The funny thing is that with these amps, things in an electronic system that are considered to be "bad" often sound good.
Which cap sounds better as a coupler? I don't know. I do know that I wouldn't use a cheap ceramic cap as a coupling cap. They're great decoupling caps though.
That being said, it has no (or insignificant) harmonic effects but could affect the musical onsets and offsets (attack and decay). The funny thing is that with these amps, things in an electronic system that are considered to be "bad" often sound good.
Which cap sounds better as a coupler? I don't know. I do know that I wouldn't use a cheap ceramic cap as a coupling cap. They're great decoupling caps though.
Welcome aboard, and thanks for your contribution. We will look forward to more of it in the future.
I don't this changes much over the years.
Just for reference: Capacitance and Capacitors | Analog Devices
What is interesting is the appearance of caps like Auricap XO - when you read the small print it's a bi-polar electrolytic but people swear by them too. All depends I suspect on your circuit and the capacitor in font of you.
To be DA simply means you get noise on the signal.
Just for reference: Capacitance and Capacitors | Analog Devices
What is interesting is the appearance of caps like Auricap XO - when you read the small print it's a bi-polar electrolytic but people swear by them too. All depends I suspect on your circuit and the capacitor in font of you.
To be DA simply means you get noise on the signal.
Guitar Tone Capacitors, part 1: Evaluating Material Types - YouTube
This is interesting Wiki article:
Film capacitor - Wikipedia
This is interesting Wiki article:
Film capacitor - Wikipedia
Last edited:
Not mentioned on the list are polyolefin film capacitors recommended as polycarbonate capacitor replacement:
Isotactic polypropylene is a polyolefin with a helical structure involving at least 50 percent crystallinity [1]. This spiral structure results in a crystallized polymer of lower density than polyethylene. Polypropylene is a stereoregular polymer which is almost 100 percent isotactic in capacitor film applications [2]. Biaxial orientation of polypropylene film overcomes the tendency of polypropylene to fibrilate when oriented and is a major reason for use of such films in capacitors
Isotactic polypropylene is a polyolefin with a helical structure involving at least 50 percent crystallinity [1]. This spiral structure results in a crystallized polymer of lower density than polyethylene. Polypropylene is a stereoregular polymer which is almost 100 percent isotactic in capacitor film applications [2]. Biaxial orientation of polypropylene film overcomes the tendency of polypropylene to fibrilate when oriented and is a major reason for use of such films in capacitors