Natural dielectrics (in caps and wire) like silk, paper and cotton sound more natural

Natural dielectrics like silk,paper or cotton sound more natural than say polyprop

  • YES!

    Votes: 16 13.0%

  • NO!

    Votes: 26 21.1%

  • This is a stupid poll

    Votes: 81 65.9%
  • Total voters
    123
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
#41
I don't agree G.K. No where else have I been presented with the idea that you could make a volume control out of a beaker of cat pee and two number 2 graphite pencils.

The mind boggles at the possibility of providing a commercial version.... surely a species capable of purchasing such an item is deserving of ....well at lease infamy!

Bud
 
#42
BudP said:
or
.......?
Bud
Click to expand...
It's a lot like the fictional "smug" from hybrid cars, except hybrid digital smug actually exists. There are no known bad effects except it is disliked by analog purists.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smug_Alert
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1900904&postcount=516
Some of us may have heard the (mostly untrue) rumors about hybrid cars emitting "smug". So, some research was done to see if hybrid digital audio amplifiers emit smug.

As it turns out, many of them do, in fact, emit smug, but it has nothing to do with the "smug" that is rumored to come from hybrid cars. The amount emitted varies greatly depending on design. Large ones usually emit more than small ones, but not always. Those with lower idle and standby energy use always emit more smug. Designs based on chips from well known companies including TI, Analog Devices, Cirrus Logic, and National Semiconductor usually emit more smug than those based on discrete components or chips from small companies. Operating frequency, however, has almost no effect.

The main effect of smug is to raise the perceived quality of the sound, sometimes to the extent that even the best pure digitals can't match. Those affected tend to be young and with at least some engineering knowledge. Environmentalists are most affected due to the very high efficiency offered by hybrid digital audio amplifiers.

Having said all this, I think I'll put together a TI hybrid digital amplifier so I can listen to Teresa Teng in hybrid digital quality. But I'll first have to have a sound card with a good analog output since that is what hybrids accept. Would a Sound Blaster Live! 24-bit work well enough or should I upgrade?
Click to expand...
I don't agree G.K. No where else have I been presented with the idea that you could make a volume control out of a beaker of cat pee and two number 2 graphite pencils.

The mind boggles at the possibility of providing a commercial version.... surely a species capable of purchasing such an item is deserving of ....well at lease infamy!

Bud
Click to expand...
I'm sure it would work with cat pee as well, but I have no idea of its effects on smug. Unfortunately, I do not have the resources to isolate the compounds in "SVF" ("Star VJJ Fluid") that remove smug. Not that I'm particularly interested in doing so since digital potentiometers are much smaller than a beaker of any liquid and don't spill, and I like the effects of smug. I'll stick to the digital and hybrid digital stuff that actually can be explained through theory.

New discoveries are interesting, though. By accident, I discovered that if I touch "the outlet area of the SVF source" while listening to a hybrid digital, the smug greatly *intensifies*! So, I have a theory that the sodium chloride solution I used as a reference has a neutral amount of smug and therefore has no effect, but SVF has very little smug so it leaches it out from the signal. The SVF source then has a surplus of smug, which explains the intense outburst on contact.
 
#43
I insist: There are better sounding capacitors than others. For example is widely understood that electrolytics are not the best choice of capacitors for the audio path.

But to state that capacitors made with "NATURAL" materials will "SOUND MORE NATURAL" is plainly absurd.
 
#44
But to state that capacitors made with "NATURAL" materials will "SOUND MORE NATURAL" is plainly absurd.
Click to expand...
No-one has stated that capacitors with natural materials will sound natural BECAUSE they use natural materials.

But rather. Has anyone ever noticed that capacitors or output transformers with natural materials HAPPEN to sound natural. That is very different from saying...they sound natural because they have been made with natural materials.

Just because a logical conclusion like "they sound natural because the are made from natural materials" cannot be made, does not mean it is not true. 😉
 
#47
Having read the main 'alternative' audiophile magazines on and off for about 35 years your description doesn't correspond at all with my experience. On the electronic side it's usually the opposite, reviewers will discuss circuits and general topology (badly) and only touch on materials in passing unless it's cabling.
I was joking about CAT. 🙂 (The Skagit is amazing)
 
#48
Materials??

Curious that no one seems to wonder about the intrinsic or extrinsic properties of the active components in their respective amplifying devices... to wit... what is the degeneracy level of the p or n doping profile in the junctions... does a tanalum grid sound better than a tungsten grid... do carbon filaments sound more "natural" than tungsten.... schottky barriers better (or worse) than field effect... that sort of thing

Enquiring minds might want to know.... after all, the active devices must have some sort of influence on the sound, no? Maybe even more than all this musing about passive stuff....😉
 
#49
rdf said:
Having read the main 'alternative' audiophile magazines on and off for about 35 years your description doesn't correspond at all with my experience.
Click to expand...

Perhaps so in the "alternative' ones, but the stuff found on the local London Drugs bookshelf is where I glean (I refuse to pay that kind of money for what amounts to 7/8 advertising).

Planet10's "library" has some nice ones though.


rdf said:
On the electronic side it's usually the opposite, reviewers will discuss circuits and general topology (badly) and only touch on materials in passing unless it's cabling.
Click to expand...

That's just it, they ain't tech's, so they more often than not know squat about what they are talking about, circuit wise 🙄


rdf said:
I was joking about CAT. 🙂 (The Skagit is amazing)
Click to expand...

Hehehe, I know. But Chilliwack did just practically eliminate their clearing budget, so I wish I had one 🙁

Cheers!
 
#50
Glen, if you can make it to France in November, I'll have a little box with me at the European Triode Festival that you'll enjoy playing with. It allows comparisons of audio-fashionista capacitors and resistors to cheap-and-cheezy Radio Shack electrolytics and carbon films. And there's a built-in method of listening to the differences blind. Should be loads of fun and make me even more unpopular.
 
#51
SY said:
Glen, if you can make it to France in November, I'll have a little box with me at the European Triode Festival that you'll enjoy playing with. It allows comparisons of audio-fashionista capacitors and resistors to cheap-and-cheezy Radio Shack electrolytics and carbon films. And there's a built-in method of listening to the differences blind. Should be loads of fun and make me even more unpopular.
Click to expand...


That's an enticing invitation, but I can't see myself getting OS any time soon.
I guess you could have some fun giving away the boutique capacitors in the blind test by tapping them with a screwdriver.



jlsem said:
Gee, Glen. I'm sorry.
Click to expand...


🙄
John, you know, I almost updated to a Miss Ballbricker avatar, just for you.

Now weren't we talking about capacitors?


"Here we have another bunch of lies - or perhaps half truths is a better description. There are differences between capacitors, but they are not (generally) audible - despite the claims. I have seen reference to dielectric losses, the "sound" of polyester is supposedly inferior to that of polystyrene, and on and on. The stupid part is that all these are true - at radio frequencies - at audible frequencies it is very hard or impossible to measure any difference (or hear a difference, using even a simple blind test).

At the frequencies you and I can hear, there is no audible or measurable difference between most capacitors, unless the equipment builder has done something monumentally idiotic, such as reverse bias an electrolytic. This is (fortunately) rare."
 
#53
That's end of November, beginning of December.

The local beer is pretty awful, but there's a place that Pete Millett took me to downtown that has an amazing selection. Ginger Man.

Back on topic, I may have run into a killer plastic dielectric. Not used commercially yet. I'm trying to gather more info before I let the cat out of the bag.
 
#54
Hi,

So, this turned into a beer thread?

Here's my contribution to you barbarians: Ever heard of la Caracole, Saint-Fuellien??
No, you don't.
Nevermind, it's only beer............

Talk about things you know about or just shut up, please.

I could add to that list but it won't make you any wiser.

You don't know nothing about wines nor beer either so shut up.**

As a matter of fact you don't know much about dielectrics and how they'd affect sound either.

However, I do applaud both Bas Horneman for raising the topic and BudP for having the courage to respond.

So, what sets natural dielectrics apart from chemical ones?

Cheers, (how appropriate) 😉

** Harsh reply, I know. Dura lex, sed lex.
 
#55
Who's is the longest? (or perhaps, more importantly, who's is the shortest?).
 

Attachments

  • sp.jpg
    sp.jpg
    8.9 KB · Views: 189
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom