Vintage HiFi Audio Forum
Audio Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: bmwr75 on January 22, 2015, 08:01:53 PM
-
http://www.critesspeakers.com/frequently-asked-questions.html (http://www.critesspeakers.com/frequently-asked-questions.html)
Keep in mind Bob Crites is a speaker guy. Don't think what he says can automatically be extrapolated to electrical components used in amps, etc.
-
I agree with most of what he lays out here. Anders - which of his statements do you disagree with and why? Let's take capacitor break in. He believes it is not real. You disagree. Why?
-
Regarding burn in, I believe that there may be audible effects as the capacitor's dielectric material changes over time from being exposed to the electric field applied to the capacitor plates. I understand many will say there is no audible difference but there is a mechanism for change.
-
Another aspect that differentiates caps is microphonics.
Depending on the way a capacitor is manufactured and how tightly it is wrapped it can become slightly microphonic. Think about the varying pressures that a cap is exposed to inside of a speaker enclosure.
-
I say it because I hear it everytime !
-
rgpit is correct.
There are scientific reasons for the differences.
Just because you can't hear a difference that doesn't mean no one else can. You may just need to learn to hear the difference.
-
There was a thread awhile back about caps, it was suggested 200hrs and they'd be broken in. So I recapped a set of speakers. They immediately sounded different. However, since then they sound the same to me as they did after the recap. Is it possible the change is so subtle in that 1st 200hrs that it's impossible for the "unlearned ear" to hear it? I don't think my ears are sensitive enough or my memory strong enough to remember the sound differences.
-
We can probably all agree that expectation bias could make us believe there are changes? (or a small change may be amplified by it?)
Expectation bias: the tendency for experimenters to believe, certify, and publish data that agree with their expectations for the outcome of an experiment, and to disbelieve, discard, or downgrade the corresponding weightings for data that appear to conflict with those expectations.
Crites point - If we can measure the characteristics of a cap as capacitance and ESR, and both are within spec when new, what changed to make them sound different 200 hours later? And did the change move them out-of-spec? Anders - if your hearing os correct, and the capacitance and ESR remain the same, something else measurable and related to sound must have changed. What do you think that would be? Microphonics would strike me as making caps sound worse as it increases.
-
I am curious about inductors which are also part of the speaker's crossover circuit. If similar value inductors (mH, ESR or whatever) what difference air core vs solid core or other types? Burn in is an interesting and controversial subject for any component. I know that I have heard audible changes after performing a crossover upgrade. I don't profess to be an expert on critical listening but professional recording engineers are trained in critical listening.
-
The microphonics reference was not to related to burn in. Just brought it up to show there are aspects to caps that aren't always spec'd out. There's more to it than just the initial capacitance, breakdown voltage' and ESR.
Here is a link to the Wima capacitor technical site. Lots of good info. http://www.wima.com/EN/technicalinformation.htm (http://www.wima.com/EN/technicalinformation.htm)
Quote from their website regarding film cap stability .. "Environmental influences such as heat, high humidity and strong mechanical vibrations can, over a longer period of time, due to ageing, lead to an irreversible change in the capacitance value." *This tells me that it is possible for changes to occur during usage (i.e. burn-in)
-
Carl
There are a lot of mechanical forces generated when the electromagnetic field changes in a coil which is why a speaker cone moves, a motor turns, or a solenoid actuates. I would think that in a given inductor, if the windings are not solidly wound and can vibrate due to magnetic fields or just mechanical resonance there could be audible artifacts.
Also ferrite and iron cores will saturate when the field strength is too high from applying high currents. The benefit of using cores other than air is that you can achieve higher inductances with less wire which also yields a lower DCR.
-
Take a look at this and tell me all caps sound the same.
http://www.humblehomemadehifi.com/Cap.html (http://www.humblehomemadehifi.com/Cap.html)
-
I reject expectation bias and I keep an open mind and open ears.
-
Here is a link to the Wima capacitor technical site. Lots of good info. http://www.wima.com/EN/technicalinformation.htm (http://www.wima.com/EN/technicalinformation.htm)
Quote from their website regarding film cap stability .. "Environmental influences such as heat, high humidity and strong mechanical vibrations can, over a longer period of time, due to ageing, lead to an irreversible change in the capacitance value." *This tells me that it is possible for changes to occur during usage (i.e. burn-in)
A change in value is easily measured, though.
-
Take a look at this and tell me all caps sound the same.
http://www.humblehomemadehifi.com/Cap.html (http://www.humblehomemadehifi.com/Cap.html)
I missed where anyone said that all caps sound the same.
-
I reject expectation bias and I keep an open mind and open ears.
Not to be argumentative, but I've seen expectation bias far too many times (not related to burn-in, though) to reject it out of hand.
-
Crites saying cap burn in is not real is a hoot especially when the guy that makes the caps he uses knows there is. If you want a detailed explanation as to why caps burn in, ask Jeff at Sonicap, but be sure you have at least an hour to talk with him. Part of what I recall has to do with material forming amd something about holes. Frankly, I don't care why I just know they do from many years of personal experience.
They immediately sounded different. However, since then they sound the same to me as they did after the recap. Is it possible the change is so subtle in that 1st 200hrs that it's impossible for the "unlearned ear" to hear it?
What caps did you use?
We can probably all agree that expectation bias could make us believe there are changes?
I strongly disagree.
-
Just to be clear, F1, are you stating that there is no such of a thing as expectation bias?
-
Show me someone with expectation bias and I'll show you someone that lacks self confidence.
-
Reading through his comments again. That he thinks all caps sound the same, that cables don't burn in and his comments about bypass caps gives me pause. Bypassing electrolytic caps does help, but bypassing film/foil caps results in annoying artifacts. However, in either case it is clearly audible, so for him to say he can't hear it leads me to wonder if his hearing isn't completely shot.
-
I don't see where he says that all caps sound the same.
-
So expectation bias is real.
-
There was a thread awhile back about caps, it was suggested 200hrs and they'd be broken in. So I recapped a set of speakers. They immediately sounded different. However, since then they sound the same to me as they did after the recap. Is it possible the change is so subtle in that 1st 200hrs that it's impossible for the "unlearned ear" to hear it? I don't think my ears are sensitive enough or my memory strong enough to remember the sound differences.
It is quite possible. I learned this when I re-capped my M-500. I re-capped it, took it home, and turned it on. It sounded like shit in my opinion. The next morning, I put a playlist on, and left. I came home and it sounded a little better. For the next couple days, I did the same thing to burn it in, and it was a very big, clear difference. If you continuously listen throughout the burn-in, you probably won't hear it as well as if you only take a listen every once in a while. By the time the caps were burnt in, I was hearing harmonies that I had never heard before in songs that I've heard a thousand times.
Reading through his comments again. That he thinks all caps sound the same, that cables don't burn in and his comments about bypass caps gives me pause. Bypassing electrolytic caps does help, but bypassing film/foil caps results in annoying artifacts. However, in either case it is clearly audible, so for him to say he can't hear it leads me to wonder if his hearing isn't completely shot.
I was thinking the same thing. If he's not hearing it, then there's definitely something up with his hearing.
-
I don't see where he says that all caps sound the same.
He doesn't say they sound the same; he says that the sound doesn't change the more they break-in. It's the very first thing on the link at the top of the thread.
"Q: Do components have a break-in time?
A: Some do and some don't. Capacitors would be a definite NO. Let's look at this one a bit."
-
So expectation bias is real.
ROTFL
-
So expectation bias is real.
For you it seems to be. For me, no.
-
I don't see where he says that all caps sound the same.
Here you go....
Q: Do different capacitors sound differently?
A: Good caps all sound the same.
-
He put a qualifier there. He didn't say all caps sound the same, he said all GOOD caps sound the same. He fails to define what a good cap is.
-
So expectation bias is real.
For you it seems to be. For me, no.
I've played the same file for people twice and told them that one was done with a different dither algorithm and they would swear that the one sounded better.
In my experience, the people who most vehemently deny expectation bias end up being the ones most susceptible to it. They are the vaccine deniers of the audio world.
-
He put a qualifier there. He didn't say all caps sound the same, he said all GOOD caps sound the same. He fails to define what a good cap is.
Not all good caps sound the same though. Not by a long shot. Maybe he knows the truth, but denies it to prevent sounding like an audiophile snob :P
-
But if it doesn't sound good, then it is not good. Right?
-
But if it doesn't sound good, then it is not good. Right?
correct... unless it sounds good and only lasts a year... then it's still bad.
-
Sometimes a good sounding cap will sound bad because it makes other problems more apparent.
When I said I reject expectation bias its because I'm fully aware of it and I don't want it to interfere with my judgement of what I'm hearing.
Years ago I was well known in the audio world for having ears and being able to hear differences when others couldn't.
-
So expectation bias is real.
For you it seems to be. For me, no.
I've played the same file for people twice and told them that one was done with a different dither algorithm and they would swear that the one sounded better.
In my experience, the people who most vehemently deny expectation bias end up being the ones most susceptible to it. They are the vaccine deniers of the audio world.
I would call that deception and that you're a liar making you worthless of my time.
-
Sometimes a good sounding cap will sound bad because it makes other problems more apparent.
When I said I reject expectation bias its because I'm fully aware of it and I don't want it to interfere with my judgement of what I'm hearing.
Years ago I was well known in the audio world for having ears and being able to hear differences when others couldn't.
Let me take a moment here to correct Anders last line there: "Years ago I was well known in the audio world for having golden ears, and being able to hear differences when others couldn't."
This was true.
I like that he has ears too. Just sayin.
-
So expectation bias is real.
For you it seems to be. For me, no.
I've played the same file for people twice and told them that one was done with a different dither algorithm and they would swear that the one sounded better.
In my experience, the people who most vehemently deny expectation bias end up being the ones most susceptible to it. They are the vaccine deniers of the audio world.
I would call that deception and that you're a liar making you worthless of my time.
Not a lie, per se, but an experiment. No different than BDT or or other comparative listening experiments. No more a lie than giving half the patients a drug and the other half a placebo.
Your reaction tells me that you would fear such a thing as it may reveal that your expectation bias is indeed real.
-
I recently bought two preamps to test against each other and then keep whichever sounded better. I ordered one of them from Audio Advisor, and while talking to the salesman and explaining what I was doing, he strongly advised that I refrain from testing the two preamps back to back, that each pre would need a few days connected to the cables for the cables to "settle in". I ignored the advise - there is no logic behind it (what exactly takes 48 hours to settle? who won the Nobel prize for discovering the cable-settling effect?). I think that kind of thinking represents the audiophile "fringe of pseudo-scientific madness".
On the other hand, historically I have not placed much value on cables. In fact for a while I thought fancy interconnects were useless - wire is wire, copper is copper. Then a couple of years ago I bought a VPI turntable from SteveWVU, and he threw in an Audioquest Jaguar RCA cable and said to me "this cable sounds horrible, see for yourself”. I had trouble believing it, but every time I have used that cable since I found it rolled off the highs. It could have been expectation bias, but then I loaned the cable to Rev without describing the weakness; he used it for a few months and also came to the conclusion that the cable “sounded bad”. Then last week JimPittsburgh loaned me 4 interconnects claiming they sounded different/better. At least two of those 4 distinctly improved my ability to detect instruments in a recording. One of the two “better” cables is a cheap, long (maybe 5 feet) interconnect that Jim also can’t understand why but it sounds really good. So now I am in the camp that cables can make a difference. Expensive cables can sound bad and inexpensive ones good, price does not automatically guarantee anything.
The capacitor debate may be similar. I have changed a lot of caps, and noticed huge improvements when doing so to vintage equipment, but you would expect that, as the caps you are replacing are old and most probably out of spec [the Paccom caps in old Carver and similar vintage equipment are particularly bad!]. My experience improving the sound of newer speakers by replacing stock caps with more expensive capacitors, however, is so-so. I can sometimes notice a difference, but most of the time not so much. Could be a matter of "learning to listen", as Anders puts it, but that rings subjective to me. I tend to side with the Crite camp in that a cap that measures the desired capacitance and has low ESR should optimize the sound relative to what the circuit was designed to do, whether it was manufactured by Panasonic or Sonicap. That is just my gut sense, in no way am I intending to offend those that believe otherwise (I am sure they are trusting their gut too) - just posing my point of view. Could be that there are additional measurements that need to be considered - distortion introduced by caps made one way vs another, etc. Good discussion in any case!
-
Good post, Pepe.
Just for the sake of clarity, I am not saying that every difference in sound is due to expectation bias. If I thought everything sounded the same, I would have stopped with the first thing I ever bought. I am just saying that it is one very real factor and I've seen it in action too many times to believe otherwise.
-
Could just simply be a communist plot to overthrow our government!
OBG: you don't keep anything long enough to break in! LOL
-
Well stated Pepe.
My guess is some of the debaters in this thread have forgotten Crites comments were in the context of speaker crossover capacitors and cannot be extrapolated to caps used the various parts of an amp, preamp or sources.
-
I've recapped many speakers and believe the point of diminishing returns on capacitor cost is quickly reached. My go-to cap for crossovers is the Dayton Audio polypropylene cap (5% tolerance). They are reasonably priced and good enough for my ears.
On the other hand, I am willing to plop down bigger bucks for some caps used in certain amp locations. For example, I paid $25 each for copper foil caps to use as coupling caps in a Pilot SA-232 amp.
http://www.angela.com/angelacopperfoilpaperinoil022uf630vdccapacitor-2.aspx (http://www.angela.com/angelacopperfoilpaperinoil022uf630vdccapacitor-2.aspx)
-
I once took home the entire line of Cardas Interconnect cables (RCA) and was surprised to find that the cheapest ones sounded best.They were still expensive but I recommended them to everyone. They were the 300B. As the cables got more expensive they were thicker and the sound became thicker as if the cables were over damped. This may not be real science but this is my belief. As electrons pass through the wire it excites the wire causing small vibrations and the plastic coating on the wire acts to dampen these vibrations but not perfectly so you get different sound qualities. Just like in capacitors where the plastic material dampens resonances or vibrations.
-
I probably shouldn't say this but it shocks me when I hear someone say there's no difference between good amp and cables and capacitors.
I've heard it many many many times and its been said over and over again in Audio magazines like Stereophile and The Absolute sound.
Are people ignoring this fact or don't they care or do they just not know ?
-
I probably shouldn't say this but it shocks me when I hear someone say there's no difference between good amp and cables and capacitors.
I've heard it many many many times and its been said over and over again in Audio magazines like Stereophile and The Absolute sound.
Are people ignoring this fact or don't they care or do they just not know ?
It is an interesting phenomenon and one that seems to occur mostly with audio related things. One thing for sure, it's not based in any form of logic as differences are present in everything else in life.
-
It's refreshing to hear you say that F1nut.
-
I get a chuckle out of the contingent that insists ABX tests are the benchmark for determining differences in audio as I'm always reminded of that infamous ABX test, which resulted in a pair of Futterman OTL monoblocks sounding the same as a $200 Japanese receiver. That contingent clings to that test as if it was the Bible when in reality it proves how utterly worthless that type of test truly is as it relates to audio.
Then there's the specs are the only thing that matters folks. Now, I think we all agree that specs/measurements are necessary and important. However, they are far from the bottom line. It's not unusual to have something that measures well, but sounds like crap or on the other hand measures poorly, but sounds really good.
-
The only spec that matters is shipping weight.
-
Then there's the specs are the only thing that matters folks. Now, I think we all agree that specs/measurements are necessary and important. However, they are far from the bottom line. It's not unusual to have something that measures well, but sounds like crap or on the other hand measures poorly, but sounds really good.
Agree
-
The only spec that matters is shipping weight.
:laugh:
-
I probably shouldn't say this but it shocks me when I hear someone say there's no difference between good amp and cables and capacitors.
I've heard it many many many times and its been said over and over again in Audio magazines like Stereophile and The Absolute sound.
Are people ignoring this fact or don't they care or do they just not know ?
It is an interesting phenomenon and one that seems to occur mostly with audio related things. One thing for sure, it's not based in any form of logic as differences are present in everything else in life.
I trust then that you would never buy a generic drug?
-
STaL
Is this a contest? Is it necessary to have a winner here? it seems to me as though you are being argumentative and questioning others veracity as opposed to allowing others to opine. Maybe it's just me?
Ron
-
If you wanna go there, there have been differences in many generic drugs. I should qualify this a bit. The active ingredients are the same, but other things like fillers have in the past been different and have caused food allergies, for example, in some cases.
-
STAL being argumentative? Say it ain't so....
(http://brokeassstuart.com/wp-content/pictsnShit/2014/02/sarcasm_font.jpg)
-
I can't read his posts because he's on my BOZO list, first one.
-
STaL
Is this a contest?
Ron;
A contest would require not only a winner and a loser, but it would require someone to actually be on a team. I'm not on any team here. I'm not sold on one particular viewpoint in this conversation. I am trying to turn over every stone and reach an informed conclusion.
That said, when one "team" tries to persuade me with little more than "because my ears are better that yours", it certainly does fall flat. I want someone to give me a reason that things which measure the same and in fact sound the same to most people are not the same. Instead of reasons, I get multiple insults, and then get told that I'm the instigator. Odd.
-
"In Internet slang, a troll, is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people,[1] by posting inflammatory,[2] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[3] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.[4]"
-
Let's keep it to a friendly debate. We've all experimented with caps, cables, tubes, tweeks etc.
Its a great deal of fun...no need to slam anyone.
Good thing were not talking about transformers :D Which, by the way, is my favorite passive component....part inductor, part capacitor, part resistor but mostly transformer.
-
Ohhh boy. I once compared output transformers in a tube amp and there's a big difference.
A lot of feedback is required to make up for transformer problems.
-
I'm no expert in transformers but I've owned (and still own some) but my favorite is the ElectraPrint, followed by vintage API, and Hammond. I have a import clone of a vintage Neve design which sucks..never heard the real Neve.
These are all interstage, coupling, or input transformers. Never rolled output trannies. My decware set has Edcor which are extremely inexpensive but sound far better than their price point.
No one is allowed to bring up capacitors for a month :police:
-
Maybe it's time to put this thread to bed. Let's compare toilet paper. My ass prefers Charmin Ultra soft. YAMV. (your ass may vary)
-
I like Kingman's sig: IN REALITY IT ONLY MATTERS WHAT IT SOUNDS LIKE TO YOU!!!!!
And another quote from a Deep Purple song: It's not the kill, it's the thrill of the chase.
We all have different ears and different ways of getting where we "think" we'll be the happiest. Remember when people thought they could grow mice by leaving a wet towel in hay? That was the recipe. When things are unknown or not understood it takes a long time to apply science and logic and omit emotion. I believe electrons just aren't truly understood, yet. All the opinions here are good data for a semi noob like me, when the emotional charge is grounded (pun intended). It's all still a good bit of voodoo to me, but maybe someday all the info here settles in the right part of brain and helps out. For now I try and enjoy my recap job and pay attention to see if things change.
-
Closing this thread as PBJ pointed out, it's gone way way off track.