[Rclark]

the plot thickens!

[Mitsuman]

I have my own unsophisticated ideas of what's happening, but really I don't know. I've broken in so far Dayton, Sonicap Gen II, ClarityCap MR, and now Jupiter Beeswax and Mundorf Silver in Oil. Each one has been different.

 The Dayton/Sonicap Gen II combo in my monitors had a very mild break in, but it was noticeable. The ClarityCap MR's in my amp seemed to have little to no break in behaviour, it was ready to go (really like these caps!), but the Jupiter Beeswax/Mundorf SiO combo in my planars is very very much the rollercoaster experience I'd read about. Some have told me to expect 4-700 hours before final settling.

 What's going on here? What's the physical process?

Enjoy! 

http://sound.westhost.com/articles/capacitors.htm

[Ethan Winer]

Nobody has an explanation that will satisfy an audiophile and an engineer simultaneously.

Ain't that the truth. Audiophiles (should) understand that the gear they love is designed by engineers. So why reject engineering explanations?

http://sound.westhost.com/articles/capacitors.htm

Most excellent.

--Ethan

[Æ]

Has anyone ever thought of contacting a capacitor company directly and communicating with one of their engineers? Someone who is really familiar with the manufacturing and testing of capacitors.

[timind]

Enjoy! 

http://sound.westhost.com/articles/capacitors.htm

Now that was an interesting/informative read.

[Chromisdesigns]

Now that was an interesting/informative read.

Yep -- great article.  Nowhere does it mention burn-in...unless I missed it completely.

[Chromisdesigns]

Inform me then. <big snip> If you have a parallel circuit of resistors a proportional amount of current will travel through each resistor based on the resistance value, but the most current will travel down the lowest resistance path. It's ohm's law.

Yes, of course, Ohms's law applies, but NOT because electrons have "memory" and "know" where the least resistant path lies!  Instead, it's more along these lines:  more current can flow through the lowest resistance per unit time , so it does.  Any given electron "knows" nothing about the overall resistor network, it's just happenstance where it winds up.  The probablility of an electron passing through a given leg of the resistor network can be calculated, but the path of any given electron is impossible to calculate.  Total electron (and thus current) flow through the network can be calculated -- which IS Ohm's law.

This is, of course, the classical model. 

However, according to quantum theory, we can actually know even less about "individual" electrons than represented above, because their waveforms are smeared out across the entire network along with the waveforms of all the other electrons, until someone/something makes a measurement and "collapses" the quantum system.  Many actual physical devices take advantage of these quantum effects -- one of the most common is a tunnel diode.  "Tunneling" is a purely quantum process.

There is absolutely no evidence of "electron memory" in either classical or quantum theories.

**Edited** I guess I should also mention that the "conventional" or "intuitive" model of current flow being discrete electrons flowing through a conductor is inaccurate, as well.  Current flow is more realistically modeled as energy transfered through the electromagnetic field within a conductor, and individual electrons (to the extent you can even talk about them that way) do not "move through the conductor" at any significant speed (even in a DC circuit), rather they transfer electromagnetic energy to free electrons in the conductor, and so on.  You can look up "electron drift" for more information, if you wish.

[Æ]

the plot thickens!

May your Bees wax capacitors melt. May a swarm of Bees take up residence in your amplifier.

[Æ]

Ain't that the truth. Audiophiles (should) understand that the gear they love is designed by engineers. So why reject engineering explanations?

Most excellent.

--Ethan

Wow, I didn't know you posted here. So how is Poppy Crum. . . .

[Niteshade]

An interesting fact:

Contrary to the subject of this thread, we burn electronics in to make sure components do not significantly change over a period of time.

Interesting fact: Many solid capacitors have self healing capabilities similar to electrolytic capacitors. That means materials can migrate. It's a basic fact, not up for dispute.

This migration can improve performance by reducing internal losses. However, the capacitor, if working properly, WILL stay within its value.

Someone already mentioned plate forming and that reduces internal loss. The reduction of internal resistance will improve the capacitor's performance.

Something else not to be forgotten: Fresh capacitors should require little, if anything in terms of plate forming or healing. Some migration will most likely take place due to internal charges. We'll let the critics determine whether these changes can modify sonic properties.

[Steve]

1) First off, there is disagreement between engineers. And many on both sides have conflicts of interest working for, or being  manufacturers themselves.

2) One should be asking physicists and chemists since they are
more knowledgeable on the subject of molecular changes, both metal and dielectric insulation. However, listening tests in research do show sonic changes.

3) Temperature cycles of components will change capacitor's values over time as well.

So what evidence would be credible to some. Well of course none. So is this string about science or has it turned into something else?

4) There are other recent strings in the wastebin using the same old arguments as last week, so nothing is accomplished.   

Lastly, the link/article is worthless. Notice all the assumptions,  mentions only two variables as all that is needed, leaving out medical science. No data or information is posted, just the "results". It certainly would not even be considered by medical science. One cannot leave out whole branches of science and call it science.

May I suggest this string to the wastebin?

Cheers.

[Mitsuman]

1) First off, there is disagreement between engineers. And many on both sides have conflicts of interest, either manufacturers or industry.

2) You should be asking physicists and chemists since they are
 more knowledgeable on the subject of molecular changes. However, listening tests in research do show sonic changes as well as changes in DA and its affects.

3) Some of the same who complain on other forums have been caught falsifying data/graphs, altering a test/study to discredit it in order to push their agenda since they could not refute the measurements, and attacking competitors of friend's companies. Refer back to point 1, conflicts of interest.

So what evidence would be credible to these gentlemen. Well of course none. So the string is not about science, but manipulating public opinion for other reasons. 

4) There are other recent strings in the wastebin, with the same participants, using the same arguements used last week. So what is the motive to constantly start these strings?

To sum up, we have those who have not performed any research yet claim to be experts, cannot even discuss the subject in the correct fields of science, and yet claim they know the science while while we are crooks.

Looks like time for the waste bin JohnR.

Cheers.

Steve, I don't know who got your knickers in a twist, but this seems to be a productive thread to me. I don't see any evil intent, I see people trying to help someone understand a little about capacitors. Your comments, however, seem the same to me in every thread that I've seen. You appear to be the one with an agenda. Please, this is not an ad hominem attack at all, just my observations. I'm sure you're a very nice fellow in person, that runs a respectable business. I just can't help but notice you seem to beat the same drum alot.

Cheers,

Craig

[sts9fan]

Most of us know where this is going.  Play nice.

[MaxCast]

Steve, what does that have to do with the thread???  Don't even bother answering.




I doubt anyone can prove anything on the subject but let's just state your case/understanding/beliefs as to what is going on and have an interesting thread.  No need to go back and forth.  State your case once.   

[Steve]

Mit, because the "science" they learned from others cannot be trusted if the source has doctored data/agenda. That is not science.

I have performed an interesing experiment to demonstrate just how  slight changes in the capacitor, whether capacitance change or other internal changes cause a change in perceived sound.

I connected a .68 ohm resistor between the crossover and tweeter.  I then connected a 1k potentiometer across the .68 ohm resistor as shown.



I then set the pot to 165 ohms and then 255 ohms. The 0,68 ohm resistor was changed from .6772 ohms to .6782 ohms. 

The change in sound was noticeable. Just heating and cooling cycles over an extended time will cause a capacitor value to change, let alone molecular changes.

Cheers.


 

[*Scotty*]

Over twenty years ago a good friend of mine was in the business of selling capacitors to both the OEM market and DIYers. His OEM customers were some of the major players in the tube sector of the marketplace and they desired good sounding coupling capacitors. In order to meet this demand he worked closely with the Reliable Capacitor Co.
 There was no magic involved in what he was doing just many sessions of trial and error testing.
As a rule capacitors with lower dielectric constants sounded better.  In order to lower the ESR of his metalized caps he had RelCap run the film as slow as possible during the metalization sputtering process, just short of the melting point of the plastic film.  This produced the thickest layer of deposited metal possible on the film. This reduces speed at which capacitors can be produced by a fair amount and increased the cost of the caps.
 At the time he was paying for both the materials in the caps and the time it took on the machines to build them. In order to make a cap with more consistent winding tension and tighter wound layers the speed at which the caps were wound was also reduced which meant slower production again. For some reason when caps of equivalent values were compared the long skinny caps sounded better than the shorter larger diameter caps.
 Obviously the changes he had Reliable Capacitors make in their production processes were based completely on how the capacitors sounded in listening tests.
I know that he made production decisions on feedback from his OEM customers but I don't know what kind of breakin time was put on them.
Scotty

 

[Æ]

Over twenty years ago a good friend of mine was in the business of selling capacitors to both the OEM market and DIYers. His OEM customers were some of the major players in the tube sector of the marketplace and they desired good sounding coupling capacitors. In order to meet this demand he worked closely with the Reliable Capacitor Co.
 There was no magic involved in what he was doing just many sessions of trial and error testing.
As a rule capacitors with lower dielectric constants sounded better.  In order to lower the ESR of his metalized caps he had RelCap run the film as slow as possible during the metalization sputtering process, just short of the melting point of the plastic film.  This produced the thickest layer of deposited metal possible on the film. This reduces speed at which capacitors can be produced by a fair amount and increased the cost of the caps.
 At the time he was paying for both the materials in the caps and the time it took on the machines to build them. In order to make a cap with more consistent winding tension and tighter wound layers the speed at which the caps were wound was also reduced which meant slower production again. For some reason when caps of equivalent values were compared the long skinny caps sounded better than the shorter larger diameter caps.
 Obviously the changes he had Reliable Capacitors make in their production processes were based completely on how the capacitors sounded in listening tests.
I know that he made production decisions on feedback from his OEM customers but I don't know what kind of breakin time was put on them.
Scotty

Now that is an answer I personally like and an answer I can believe in. It all makes good sense too, a verifiable mechanical production process. Still though it doesn't answer the OPs original question.

[Steve]

Check post #34 for at least one explanation. The change was less than 0.15%. And less than that would have been noticeable. A capacitor in a component will change more than that over a period of time, let alone multiple capacitors.

Hope this helps.

[Æ]

Check post #34 for at least one explanation. The change was less than 0.2%. A capacitor in a component will change more than that over a period of time, let alone multiple capacitors.

Hope this helps.

Sorry, #34 was of no help WHAT SO EVER. This thread is about capacitors, reply #34 was about resistors.
Of course component values change with use, because of changing temperature. Hopefully you know what positive and/or negative temperature coefficients are.
Are you familiar with superconductors? Has to be real cold for it to happen.

[Steve]

Sorry, #34 was of no help WHAT SO EVER. This thread is about capacitors, reply #34 was about resistors.
Of course component values change with use, because of changing temperature. Hopefully you know what positive and/or negative temperature coefficients are.

Ah, you are thinking coefficient of resistors/resistance.
Yes, I know all about coefficients. I have assisted college students and worked in a college lab setting besides other duties.

Capacitors also change value due to expansion/contraction, thus temperture sensitive.

We are concerned with percentage change, no matter what the cause. The experiment demonstrates how little change is necessary to perceive a change in sound.

Cheers.