I was not referring to the B226, which I am sure is well-engineered, but to the whole system.Willi Studer said:
With only sighted anecdote to go on we have no way of knowing. Certainly my experience is that inexperienced people cannot be relied upon to do what they said they would do (or what they have been instructed to do), and then reliably report on the outcome.
'Re-capping' is an operation which is generally avoided by those who could do it reliably, because they know enough to know that it is not worth doing except when the original caps are faulty. Every time you heat up a PCB there is the risk of damage to it and nearby components, so do it as little as possible i.e. for repairs only.KanedaK said:
I decided to recap because while it was fully functional, the sound I was getting was very disappointing, rough in the lower treble, with no real extention, and a general "dirtyness". Plus Frako caps are known to short when they god bad; here we are talking 30 years old Frako caps. In the end, while it's true just swapping an old cap for a new one isn't a "solve it all" solution and I did have some headache with the choice of caps, I'm happy with the result as it sounds now much better than it used to. My preamp is also quite "old" but it sounds great so I don't see any need of recapping, indeed 🙂
This is it! I finally found the perfect combination for the big PSU caps.
Nichicon KW on all rails was slow, ponderous, with no dynamics, if pelsantly smooth.
With United Chemicon SXE, dynamics and punch were back, and it was altogether much better, but the sound was rather harsh and in-ur-face.
I now tried United Chemicon SXE for the digital rails, and Nichicon KW for +12v and -15v analog rails.
This is wonderful! All harshness is gone, treble is more extended and detailed, medium is smooth like velvet, but speed, dynamics and punch are still there.
Finally totally happy. Alleluia!
Nichicon KW on all rails was slow, ponderous, with no dynamics, if pelsantly smooth.
With United Chemicon SXE, dynamics and punch were back, and it was altogether much better, but the sound was rather harsh and in-ur-face.
I now tried United Chemicon SXE for the digital rails, and Nichicon KW for +12v and -15v analog rails.
This is wonderful! All harshness is gone, treble is more extended and detailed, medium is smooth like velvet, but speed, dynamics and punch are still there.
Finally totally happy. Alleluia!
Someone who doesn't understand electronics will never understand how funny this sounds to someone who understands electronics. The converse is probably true too.
I'm sure Krell, Accuphase, Shindo Labs, (you name it) just put whatever caps they can fit as long as they're electronically correct then.
The difference is there, it's obvious, and "understanding electronics" has little to do here IMHO. There's more to audio than volts and amperes, otherwise all amplifiers with a similar layout would sound the same, and let's not even talk about cables.
It seems also logical to me that a digital circuit might have different optimal power caps requirements than a analogic circuit.
I only have my ears to trust in this case, but while I have no experience in electronics, I do trust my ears, being in this hobby for more than 20 years.
But ok, just my two cents. No offense.
Thanks! Interesting reading! I'm still hesitating tho. I've changed all electrolytics, except the regulators output caps. I have some Elna silmic II here with correct values; I've tried swapping three 47uF caps with three Silmic iI same value and it had made the sound noticeably more peaky, so I put the old caps back (well it's all in the thread already). Maybe I'll try to change just the two 22uF that are after the two regulators for the +12v and -15v rails feeding the opamps.
Once audio journalists acquired sufficient technical skills to be able to use a screwdriver to remove amplifier covers it became necessary for expensive 'brand' amplifier makers to use expensive 'brand' components. This phenomenon does not occur in any other branch of electronics: your security and health (and much of your entertainment) are maintained by ordinary components simply providing "volts and amperes" in much more demanding circuit roles than audio.KanedaK said:
There's trial and error approach that works sometimes...as it did in your case.
Large ripple-filtering capacitors can make a lot of difference in perceived colour of the sound. It seems that Elna specifies third harmonic distortion to be very low for Silmic II, and even lower for Silmic Super Gold, albeit not really stating what and how they performed the measurements exactly... this is just an example; an alternative to Nichicon...
I use Elna Silmic Super Gold, typical value being 3,300uF / 50V . It "sounds" much better that plain Silmic II of the same value and voltage rating. But these are only (very) good for mains ripple attenuation jobs.
In addition to playing with mains ripple-attenuating capacitors, you should do a bit of a reading to find-out how to attenuate the noise at other places around the PCB. Try Googling the "decoupling digital circuits"... you'll learn how to choose the exact type and value of smd capacitor that will work wonders in attenuating power supply rail noise near fast-switching digital IC's, for a given application. Pending, of course, that the ground plane is executed correctly, and is in itself, of very low noise design.
Good luck,
Nick
Audio reproduction is basic analogue and digital electronics, nothing special, just electronics....
Of course in that 20 years you could have learned some electronics and also the fact that ears cant be trusted... perception plays to many games.
And a lot of testing, measuring, collecting data etc. to make sure the design works and works at all extremes... In most hobbies people do try to learn about what they are doing, audio seems to be different, lots of playing about then waxing lyrical about the improvements😕
Achtung an engineer can not be as lyrical than a musician...🙂
There is also an other factor maybe : the design can be reliable on a technical way on scope but may sounding BAD. The eyes should not be trusted better than ears in the final result but if it's able to give the reccording engineer work.
One must accept than the brain interpret the result and that side is not mastered by the electronic engineers (most of them). And they can't or know all the factors to be measured to make a musical device (most of them again... Did you listen to the first Soekris : a catastroph !). So adding or supress some coloration can give more real result but less pretty on the scope. It seems clear to me most of the audio technician don't listen acoustical music but just already amplified and mixed music ! Some do and it is not by chance their stuff sounds better...
I wisch One can make a all in one stuff from the source to the speaker amp to master all and see if the result can be even better! And not talking of the speaker which gives the main différences...
Too simple thought certainly, but most of the dacs sounds bad because just made with scopes and not extensive expensive earing tests. In big mass markett company, the engineer are unluckily a commodity and the quality is costing too much (that's doesn't mean engineers have no idea to increase the results... unfornatully this "little" difference increase often the price by ten to hundred when you buy the final product). If some review writters learned the screw driver, the companies also learned to lipstick for the view what is Inside (as said already) and buy ads in these same reviews.... The eye is stronger than the ear... not always for the better !
There is also an other factor maybe : the design can be reliable on a technical way on scope but may sounding BAD. The eyes should not be trusted better than ears in the final result but if it's able to give the reccording engineer work.
One must accept than the brain interpret the result and that side is not mastered by the electronic engineers (most of them). And they can't or know all the factors to be measured to make a musical device (most of them again... Did you listen to the first Soekris : a catastroph !). So adding or supress some coloration can give more real result but less pretty on the scope. It seems clear to me most of the audio technician don't listen acoustical music but just already amplified and mixed music ! Some do and it is not by chance their stuff sounds better...
I wisch One can make a all in one stuff from the source to the speaker amp to master all and see if the result can be even better! And not talking of the speaker which gives the main différences...
Too simple thought certainly, but most of the dacs sounds bad because just made with scopes and not extensive expensive earing tests. In big mass markett company, the engineer are unluckily a commodity and the quality is costing too much (that's doesn't mean engineers have no idea to increase the results... unfornatully this "little" difference increase often the price by ten to hundred when you buy the final product). If some review writters learned the screw driver, the companies also learned to lipstick for the view what is Inside (as said already) and buy ads in these same reviews.... The eye is stronger than the ear... not always for the better !
Last edited:
Eldam, the musician makes the music, the engineer designs the equipment that records, mixes and replays the music, there is no correlation, we just want to reproduce the music with the uttermost fidelity...
I don not subscribe to your view (as we know) and from many years of working in electronics know that measurements are critical, so are properly performed listening tests done in a controlled and scientific way. But this view that good sounding gear can be built by ear alone is nonsense, same with boutique audio and cables, so many myths and untruths have built up over the years that in my opinion (and the views your read regarding some aspects of audio) that are doing the hobby of sound reproduction a big disservice and open it up to ridicule and scorn...
The eye is the primary site and will ALWAYS override the ear, hence sighted listening is flawed when trying to identify changes in sound...
When I take a photo or play a tune (badly on my bass!!!) I am in a different mode than when I am designing a circuit board...
I have to forgive you though as you are a Gong fan and French😀
I don not subscribe to your view (as we know) and from many years of working in electronics know that measurements are critical, so are properly performed listening tests done in a controlled and scientific way. But this view that good sounding gear can be built by ear alone is nonsense, same with boutique audio and cables, so many myths and untruths have built up over the years that in my opinion (and the views your read regarding some aspects of audio) that are doing the hobby of sound reproduction a big disservice and open it up to ridicule and scorn...
The eye is the primary site and will ALWAYS override the ear, hence sighted listening is flawed when trying to identify changes in sound...
When I take a photo or play a tune (badly on my bass!!!) I am in a different mode than when I am designing a circuit board...
I have to forgive you though as you are a Gong fan and French😀
There is no correlation with hifi stuffs and reproducing music ? Ah !😀 ... if we continue your thought in rethoric you will say soon that is better to have a real deaf engineer to be sure the stuff is good... you know like in formula one, the blind engineers whom setups the cars, makes better chronos than the pilot 😎..... Nah I was not so parodic in my post my buddy Marce !🙂
I never said all the things you describe as I never say measurement are not critical ! I just say many engineer just look at the measurements and it's not enough ! Science has Nothing to see in this discussion, engineers are not scientifics, some scientifics can be engineers.
I never say stuffs should be designed at ears (only)???? Ears are here to control if the final result is good is what I wrote as this is the goal of the stuff, and too many times the engineers become deaf by self satisfaction even if we know there are specifications. If I would be parodic I could say the side of the brain which design and the one which listen is not the same. But with more humility I should say the technicians don't controll all the parameters! Many believe they perfectly control the things with a so called "scientific" way... term is hackneyed and is often writed like some invoque God with religion to stop the discussion ! I made enough epistemology to know it ! If it was so simple DACS should cost 50 euros and all engineers could make good one, this is not the case, this is quite the opposite ! That's why tweaking exist, like ketchup it can make a bad hot dog more tasty, and it doesn't mean engineers don't know, again there are spécifications, marketing, etc !
I find your judgement on me and what you pretend I think a little hard😛, but I forgive you also as you like Gong and you are English...🙂
and you sucess to understand at minima my Shakespeare (like Britney ?) way of writting your language 😀... which is not an easy task !
I never said all the things you describe as I never say measurement are not critical ! I just say many engineer just look at the measurements and it's not enough ! Science has Nothing to see in this discussion, engineers are not scientifics, some scientifics can be engineers.
I never say stuffs should be designed at ears (only)???? Ears are here to control if the final result is good is what I wrote as this is the goal of the stuff, and too many times the engineers become deaf by self satisfaction even if we know there are specifications. If I would be parodic I could say the side of the brain which design and the one which listen is not the same. But with more humility I should say the technicians don't controll all the parameters! Many believe they perfectly control the things with a so called "scientific" way... term is hackneyed and is often writed like some invoque God with religion to stop the discussion ! I made enough epistemology to know it ! If it was so simple DACS should cost 50 euros and all engineers could make good one, this is not the case, this is quite the opposite ! That's why tweaking exist, like ketchup it can make a bad hot dog more tasty, and it doesn't mean engineers don't know, again there are spécifications, marketing, etc !
I find your judgement on me and what you pretend I think a little hard😛, but I forgive you also as you like Gong and you are English...🙂
and you sucess to understand at minima my Shakespeare (like Britney ?) way of writting your language 😀... which is not an easy task !
Last edited:
Ahh, the "objectivists" 🙂 I really can't believe "boutique cables" are still considered a myth by some. It is true that prices are often outrageous, I'm the first to say, but cables DO "sound" different. Using different cable looms, I can make my system tilt from slightly dark to very bright, and that is with cables that are still widely affordable and reasonably priced.
Changing from one cap to another brought differences of the same magnitude, differences that were clearly audible and descriptible ("it's more fluid now, it was more harsh and agressive before") by a non-audiophile friend who is not aware of what changes I've made, and whose brains cannot be "expecting" something.
I agree some audiophile products really edge on voodoo magic and snake oil but capacitors and cables, I mean, come on...
- Status
- Not open for further replies.