I have noticed that the dielectric on the typical 50-63v electrolytic has the most stable and consistent winding, and probably the lowest distortion, but who knows. I have also played with combining several of the 22uf myself to gain decent results since I have a large quantity here.
After playing around you get the impression that digital is merely higher speed analog, nothing else. And with the devices we are working with, it’s not even that much higher.
Sumotan, reading about what you have done makes me want to try the low esr solid polymer filter caps now.
Numbers are great ways to justify the obvious to those that need it I guess. Is critical at work, not as much with hobby stuff.
After playing around you get the impression that digital is merely higher speed analog, nothing else. And with the devices we are working with, it’s not even that much higher.
Sumotan, reading about what you have done makes me want to try the low esr solid polymer filter caps now.
Numbers are great ways to justify the obvious to those that need it I guess. Is critical at work, not as much with hobby stuff.
I would like to have a proper audio analyzer someday however, am not against any testing or anything, just haven’t had a real need for anything like that so far.
Maybe when I’m older and my ears aren’t what they used to be, like the old guy who finally gets the corvette just to drive slowly.
Maybe when I’m older and my ears aren’t what they used to be, like the old guy who finally gets the corvette just to drive slowly.
Too bad that we’re living so far apart Julf for not you’ll be the first person that I’ll in invite to do blind AB testing. Placebo or not let others be the judge. I don’t dispice experts Julf, I adore them cause at times I just wish that I had as much knowledge as they do. Im not trying to re invent the wheel, merely telling everyone that tires of the same diameter, width but with different aspect ratio behaves & drive differently. This forum is diy & it is for the builders to test, learn & discover for themselves. Are my findings true or false & is it placebo, I don’t give a damn cause it works on my set up & it gets me the results that Im after.
Cheers
Cheers
Indeed! Do remind me, where are you based? I do travel a fair bit.
Likewise - albeit I tend to prefer ABX, as most of the time what I am interested in is not preference, but verifying if there is an audible difference or not.
And I don't think anyone who really knows car design would disagree. The problem is people who claim that painting white sidewalls on the tires makes the car go faster.
i would hope all of us are experts in the Pythagorean Theorem. Is that all it takes?
Sounds like you are conflating expert with scientist or engineer.
The word has had its meaning inflated, or deflated, considering your point of view. You give the impression that one cannot approach knowing without the prerequisite of formal education which is completely absurd. Formal education is more an accelerated education. Someone picks what they think is important for you know within a certain specified length of time. This can give folks a head start but where one ends up depends on the individual. Too many folks I have come in contact with turned their brains off after being "awarded" a diploma. Some can become obsessive on their own special area and infer, to themselves, that this ability has given them perfect insight into how everything else works. And even better than that, should be able to dictate how things must be done. Luckily we reserve the right to synthesize our own models of how things work. A model that changes frequently as more is learned from others and discovered in practice.
It is more than just "accelerated". It can teach you intellectual tools and methods that you probably would never realize you needed if you were self-educated.
Pretty close to Singapore - haven't been there in a while, but might have something coming up.
No (but I do have a fair bit of friends in that industry). These days I am in IoT and Internet governance - but Singapore is a popular location for international conferences.
You have confused science and maths.
2+2 = 4 is maths and fits your apparent need for "hard truths"
Science on the other hand is devoid of "hard truths" but posits explanations (hypothesis) that can never be absolutely proved.
Science is all about uncertainty.
Is your opinion that the shannon-nyquist sampling theorem is just maths, not science?
So if we absolutely prove something, it ceases to be science?
It's not because one can't measure a difference it doesn't exist. EE has too often the temptation to use the word "biased" or "placebo" just because the usual measurements like THD, noise floor, riple rejection for instance don't show significative difference despite ears are finding enough good difference (or bad in the same scale of measurements).
There is an inteluctual shortcut imho with the concept of quantity on which measurement concept is made. It's like if a good food was only measured by its too high or too low salt & pepper quantity. My comparison is a little abusive but it is to illustrate the fact measurements could not be enough. It could be if all the parameters of good sound reproduction were known.
They aren't but EE are defending their prerogatives but indeed we know despite a common cursus a same shematic will not sound the same with two enginers. I agree with Sumotan pdf about that and also Phase : take two caps of the same model with just different close voltage (16V or 25V for example) : it don't sound the same.
Maybe it can be measured, but I'm not aware of a design rule which talk about how to choose that but the usual ones : cost, distorsion, ESR, ESL, inductance : it's not enough and it seems the fastest solution with so much parameters is hearing test cathching them as a whole, because the goal is also the final perception. And that's what say to us the word "Science" : if you can repeat the experiment with the same results then it's predictable. I said experiment and not measurement as measurement is just one of the tools. And I think this is where Pase and Sumotan are as the scientists open minds : eperiments can reproduce the facts but we can not yet know how to prove by measurement untill we are able to in a next future. I would say EE have the constraint of their frame and it's normal as industry needs consistant result and prediction (one call that quality and it all relie on the previous of quantity... notice the short-cut : so indeed it explains the number of brands and the need of blind tests... when it comes to an other shortcut between quantity of quality and quantity of monney : damn a subjectiv problem of Sapiens ego which has nothing to see with math... as the fact an enginer has a "natural" tendancy to believe he can master all... and indeed thay are paid for that.
I'm not sure at the end Julf, Phase, Sumotan disagree. The two last just use experience: they spent time about experimenting with passive parts and have some open conclusions while enginers spent more time on measurement as a reliable basis. Same goal.
IMHO a good brand should have both of these people in their staff.
There is an inteluctual shortcut imho with the concept of quantity on which measurement concept is made. It's like if a good food was only measured by its too high or too low salt & pepper quantity. My comparison is a little abusive but it is to illustrate the fact measurements could not be enough. It could be if all the parameters of good sound reproduction were known.
They aren't but EE are defending their prerogatives but indeed we know despite a common cursus a same shematic will not sound the same with two enginers. I agree with Sumotan pdf about that and also Phase : take two caps of the same model with just different close voltage (16V or 25V for example) : it don't sound the same.
Maybe it can be measured, but I'm not aware of a design rule which talk about how to choose that but the usual ones : cost, distorsion, ESR, ESL, inductance : it's not enough and it seems the fastest solution with so much parameters is hearing test cathching them as a whole, because the goal is also the final perception. And that's what say to us the word "Science" : if you can repeat the experiment with the same results then it's predictable. I said experiment and not measurement as measurement is just one of the tools. And I think this is where Pase and Sumotan are as the scientists open minds : eperiments can reproduce the facts but we can not yet know how to prove by measurement untill we are able to in a next future. I would say EE have the constraint of their frame and it's normal as industry needs consistant result and prediction (one call that quality and it all relie on the previous of quantity... notice the short-cut : so indeed it explains the number of brands and the need of blind tests... when it comes to an other shortcut between quantity of quality and quantity of monney : damn a subjectiv problem of Sapiens ego which has nothing to see with math... as the fact an enginer has a "natural" tendancy to believe he can master all... and indeed thay are paid for that.
I'm not sure at the end Julf, Phase, Sumotan disagree. The two last just use experience: they spent time about experimenting with passive parts and have some open conclusions while enginers spent more time on measurement as a reliable basis. Same goal.
IMHO a good brand should have both of these people in their staff.
Last edited:
No, we have the temptation to use the words "biased" or "placebo" when people who report they can hear a difference in uncontrolled sighted listening then can't tell the difference in a controlled, double-blind test.
Do we?
Even if you can repeat an experiment, the reason might still not be what you think it is...
"We" sounds like corporatism, I'm sure you use controlled abx, but many uses uncontrolled abx then talk about "bias".
You do, just because the two people will not uses the same parts and also choices in the toolbox they learn, I resume this by the word layout. Of course there are rules but there are trade offs as well. And oh... indeed just change few passive parts and a design can sounds good or bad... while usual measurements don't show significativ differences.
third point... oh no, not the dead cat again
I'm sure you agree with Phase & Sumotan about passive parts, it's just that it's the last line of yours targets when designing... you like music, no ?
You do, just because the two people will not uses the same parts and also choices in the toolbox they learn, I resume this by the word layout. Of course there are rules but there are trade offs as well. And oh... indeed just change few passive parts and a design can sounds good or bad... while usual measurements don't show significativ differences.
third point... oh no, not the dead cat again
I'm sure you agree with Phase & Sumotan about passive parts, it's just that it's the last line of yours targets when designing
... you like music, no ?
Last edited:
I understand that that is what you believe, but do we have any actual evidence to support your view?
you like music, no ?
Of course, but I also understand the difference between personal preference and accurate, transparent reproduction of sound - any sound.
Wow thank you for the compliment Diyiggy, I wasn't expecting this. This is the issue at hand & why I stop posting my findings. We all listen differently & have different preferences. This debate can go on forever. Pls excuse me for saying this, talk like farting is easy does not require much effort. Crux of it is we just have to try or test & judge for ourselves, it may & it may not sound good but reality of it is what ever component we use it has it's own signature which many a times don't show up in test equipment. Btw I have a box of over 200 pcs of e caps that I've tried & tested during my SdTrans, dac & amp build. To those that I've tested I dare tell you the sound signature that they've got. To know what I've discovered & learned, the speakers has got to be high resolution to begin with. There's another proponent of such experiments,
Eldam we both always exchange notes on our findings & experiments.
Let me open another can of worms to share, for SS or op amps that requires +- supplies to function, a slightly higher value PS cap on the negative rail will improve the overall sound. Hard to shallow, pls go try
Cheers
Eldam we both always exchange notes on our findings & experiments.
Let me open another can of worms to share, for SS or op amps that requires +- supplies to function, a slightly higher value PS cap on the negative rail will improve the overall sound. Hard to shallow, pls go try
Cheers