Mouser's listing 2,198 ceramic caps between 10uF and 330uF. Looks like your luck's in 😀
MLCCs | Mouser
Wow!
The capacitor model MUST contain some nonlinear element. We can clearly see it from measurements. The model based on linear elements only is WRONG.
The capacitor model MUST contain some nonlinear element. We can clearly see it from measurements. The model based on linear elements only is WRONG.
Wasn't saying capacotors could be modeled accurately with only linear elements. Not disputing non-linearity in capacitors. I was referring only to the DA portion of the model.
se
But that residual would be the nonlinear component, at least if we are reasonably sure it is not the limitation of the modelling accuracy.
Jan
Fitting over a range of amplitudes could uncover a change in R's and C's with current/voltage which could be fit to a non-linear function for each component. BTW SPICE has no problem with polynomial descriptions for R and C.
https://www.cadence.com/rl/Resources/application_notes/nonlinear_capacitor_model_appnote.pdf
Last edited:
There is still a lot of nonsense. but now words like 'quantum' are used 🙂
"Quantum" is old hat. Now it's "nano."
se
Wasn't saying capacitors could be modeled accurately with only linear elements. Not disputing non-linearity in capacitors. I was referring only to the DA portion of the model.
se
OK, then the question would follow: if the non-linearity is not caused by the DA, what other 'parts' of the capacitor could then cause it? Except for the dielectricum, there's the electrodes, the wires, what else. What do we know about those in regard to nonlinearity?
Vacuphile brought up air condensors from vintage radio's. Do they show nonlinearity?
Jan
Last edited:
OK, then the question would follow: if the non-linearity is not caused by the DA, what other 'parts' of the capacitor could then cause it? Except for the dielectricum, there's the electrodes, the wires, what else. What do we know about those in regard to nonlinearity?
Not a question that particularly interests me actually.
This whole thing began when Richard claimed it was DA that was responsible for the capacitor distortion he said he had measured. He stated this unequivocally, and just as unequivocally said that the DA models needed to be revisited to include this non-linearly.
He was asked just how he was able to isolate DA as being the culprit, given that DA was quite accurately modeled using linear elements. And that is what led to this train wreck.
My point has simply been that DA isn't this hugely frightening audiophile Bogey Man that it's been made into by Richard, John and others over the years.
se
Time someone channeled dark matter into audio...
The Lessloss Blackbody sort of comes close. 😀
se
...was asked just how he was able to isolate DA as being the culprit, given that DA was quite accurately modeled using linear elements.
se
Well sure, but given that we DO have cap distortion, I'm surprised you're not curious to know where it comes from. That might help us to select the right cap for a specific purpose.
But hey, it's not my beef either.
Jan
Well sure, but given that we DO have cap distortion, I'm surprised you're not curious to know where it comes from.
Dielectric polarizability (the origin of dielectric constant) is not perfectly linear.
The Lessloss Blackbody sort of comes close. 😀
se
If it works as advertised it would kill wifi, mobile phones and remote controls! Stunningly detailed description of nothing on the website though.
Well sure, but given that we DO have cap distortion, I'm surprised you're not curious to know where it comes from. That might help us to select the right cap for a specific purpose.
I'll wait for the article in Linear Audio. 😀
se
"Quantum" is old hat. Now it's "nano."
se
Go and watch the esotheric/homeopathic scene, there is *Quantum* en vogue!
Nano is bad, think Nanobots!😉
If it works as advertised it would kill wifi, mobile phones and remote controls! Stunningly detailed description of nothing on the website though.
You noticed that too, eh? 😛
se
Go and watch the esotheric/homeopathic scene, there is *Quantum* en vogue!
Nano is bad, think Nanobots!😉
Yeah, but in audio, nano is good. That's the latest buzzword being sprinkled on the Bybee cat turds.
EDIT: Wow. "Turds" isn't on the nanny list. Cool! 😀
se
Its hard to find something new. Last night, i had an idea to explain some phenomenas i observed. Googeling about it, it appears some obscure scientist had already had the same, some decades ago, and called-it "Theory of Relativity ".
I'll wait for the article in Linear Audio. 😀
se
Why not write it yourself 🙂
Source, please. It is interesting.Dielectric polarizability (the origin of dielectric constant) is not perfectly linear.
I saw it on the internet it must be true.
What is the benefit of tubes?
Tubes introduce warm-sounding even order harmonic distortion that is pleasing to the ears. This is why most audiophiles prefer the sound of tubes over solid state counterparts. The other benefit is the distortion acts like a natural limiter. This tends to reduce ear fatigue.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
- Home
- Member Areas
- The Lounge
- John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part II