Maybe we are not so crazy

Dan Banquer · « **Reply #20 on:** 23 Apr 2007, 05:04 pm »

Quote from: bpape on 23 Apr 2007, 04:52 pm

... and I'm sure those oil caps will measure a lot worse than the teflons or the other films so they can't be any good - have you no ears?

Pretty amazing that I hear the same changes in my preamp with oilers as the output caps as you do. I wonder how we explain that away as placebo effect. Do we all react to the placebo the same way

Bryan

O.K. Maybe you could take the time and do some measurements and see how it applies to the circuit it is in. Your circuit may "prefer" more series inductance, it also may alter frequency response and transient response. Note: this is the Lab forum, and whenever possible many of us prefer measurements to learn more about how things work, or how things don't work.
d.b.

bpape · « **Reply #21 on:** 23 Apr 2007, 05:06 pm »

So the fact that using them as input caps in an amplifier and output caps in a tube preamp yields the same subjective impression doesn't strike you as odd if it's all placebo and measurements? You really think that those 2 different uses in 2 very different designs just happen to 'prefer' the same 'bad' things?

Bryan

Dan Banquer · « **Reply #22 on:** 23 Apr 2007, 05:11 pm »

Please feel free to post measurements when you have them, I'll be very interested.
d.b.

robert1325 · « **Reply #23 on:** 23 Apr 2007, 05:22 pm »

I'm not going to measure them, they where both 2uF that's enough for me

The Obbligatoos seem more musical and warm sounding like tube amps....

bpape · « **Reply #24 on:** 23 Apr 2007, 05:25 pm »

A clever way to avoid answering the questions...

Bryan

Dan Banquer · « **Reply #25 on:** 23 Apr 2007, 05:33 pm »

Quote from: bpape on 23 Apr 2007, 05:25 pm

A clever way to avoid answering the questions...

Bryan

Absolutely not!
If anything, measurements that I outlined earlier may well help to explain the "phenomena"
that you say you are hearing.
If you don't understand the nature of the measurement then ask a question or two. Who knows, an objective measurement may tell you a lot you did not know before.
Then again maybe you are not interested and prefer to disrupt those who are.
d.b.

bpape · « **Reply #26 on:** 23 Apr 2007, 05:44 pm »

I do not have a way to accurately measure those kinds of minute differences. Nor do I really care to. You said specs were the same so they should sound the same. I'm GIVING you that I think that the oilers will measure worse. You respond that a particular piece may like it.

Now, given the fact that MANY (2 in this thread) people have used the oilers in very different applications, in different circuits, etc. and describe the differences in similar terms after actually listening to them (novel concept I know) you ignore a response to my questions as to how that could be? Is the placebo the same for everyone in every circuit?

As for being disruptive, the only time I see you in threads is to quash any discussion of anything subjective. That's being disruptive in my book. I DID ask you a couple of very pointed questions but I guess since they had nothing to do with specs and measurements, you either choose not to or consider it beneath yourself to answer them - hence my comment about a clever way not to answer.

I have 2 identical preamps - one with oil output caps and the other with the standard Mundorfs. I'll guarantee you that the difference in sound between them is not subtle - and is the same difference as described by their use in the input side of a T amp circuit by another AC member. You really couldn't get much more different in terms of circuit. Still no answers?

Bryan

Dan Banquer · « **Reply #27 on:** 23 Apr 2007, 05:49 pm »

"I do not have a way to accurately measure those kinds of minute differences. Nor do I really care to. You said specs were the same so they should sound the same. I'm GIVING you that I think that the oilers will measure worse. You respond that a particular piece may like it. "

Than you really haven't contributed anything but your opinion.
d.b.

robert1325 · « **Reply #28 on:** 23 Apr 2007, 06:05 pm »

Just like tube amps have distortions but often sound more musical/ real than SS amps to most people.

I'm not technical enough to be talking in here

Daryl · « **Reply #29 on:** 23 Apr 2007, 06:33 pm »

Quote from: robert1325 on 23 Apr 2007, 06:05 pm

Just like tube amps have distortions but often sound more musical/ real than SS amps to most people.

I'm not technical enough to be talking in here

You may not be technical enough but you raise a good point.

Many errors in signal production can sound better rather than worse depending upon who is judging and the particulars of the situation.

A producer/recording engineer might choose to include such artifacts in the sound of their recordings (one of my newer Bob Dylan albums is done that way).

The reproduction chain should be designed to reproduce as exactly as possible while turning a blind eye to the possibility that you could spruce things up by doing this or that.

Wayne1 · « **Reply #30 on:** 23 Apr 2007, 06:57 pm »

Here are some links to articles written by Walt Jung in the 80's regarding measuring/choosing capacitors for audio use.

http://waltjung.org/PDFs/Picking_Capacitors_1.pdf

http://waltjung.org/PDFs/Picking_Capacitors_1.pdf

http://waltjung.org/PDFs/A_RealTime_Signal_Test_For_Capacitor_Quality.pdf

Scott F. · « **Reply #31 on:** 23 Apr 2007, 07:42 pm »

Quote from: Daryl on 23 Apr 2007, 03:23 pm

I'm reading your post and looking at your avatar.....

My Avatar? What in Gods name does that have to do with anything........ Oh, I get it....since I've got a goofy avatar that makes my point of view moot.

Would you take me more seriously if I used something a bit more scientific looking? Maybe something like this?

or maybe this one might be better suited since it looks like people might learn something....

....my apologies to you cat lovers out there.....well, maybe not

Quote from: Daryl on 23 Apr 2007, 03:23 pm

Mr. F. you stand before a mountain you haven't begun to climb yet you somehow feel you are qualified to comment.....
I learned about the Salem witch trials in school and I now see you on the stand giving your testimony.

.....feeling a little omnipotent are we? Don't worry, I won't blow your cover.

...and no Dan and Daryl, I'm not going to participate in this pissfest. We've all done this one too many times. We know what the eventual outcome will be. Me, I'm perfectly content to sit back and watch while other people poke each other in the eyes.

bpape · « **Reply #32 on:** 23 Apr 2007, 07:57 pm »

Quote

Than you really haven't contributed anything but your opinion.
d.b.

And neither have you. Your's is just different than mine. There are so many things in audio through the years that couldn't/shouldn't matter - but then we find out that we've missed something in the measurements - and things get better.

... and still no answers.

I've wasted enough time. Enjoy listening to your scope.

Bryan

Dan Banquer · « **Reply #33 on:** 23 Apr 2007, 08:07 pm »

I find it simply amazing that a few simple straight forward technical questions in a forum called Lab can provoke such reactions.
d.b.

Daryl · « **Reply #34 on:** 23 Apr 2007, 08:12 pm »

Quote from: Scott F. on 23 Apr 2007, 02:24 pm

Did you really just condone the use of aluminum electrolytics as coupling caps in audio gear
Have you lost your mind or have you been deaf from birth? .....good grief......

Yes I did,

Any capacitor type might be suitable for any level of fidelity.

For a componet to influence a circuit it must have signifigant apparent power (uncorrelated product of voltage and current).

That means signifigant voltage and current must be present for the componet to influence the circuit.

In the case of a coupling capacitor it's current is always the same as the load current.

However the relative voltage of the coupling capacitor is expressed by the ratio of the coupling capacitors impedance compared to the load impedance.

This shows that simply using more capacitance will reduce the influence of the coupling capacitor over the circuit.

It is like a voltage divider.

If a capacitor has a distortion level of 1% and it's impedance is 1/1000 of the load impedance then the distortion in the load due to the coupling capacitor will be 0.001%.

Also the distortion level of a capacitor changes.

Voltage swing modulates the capacitance of a capacitor and is the primary cause of distortion in a capacitor.

So as you reduce the influence of the capacitor you also reduce the voltage swing of the capacitor and thus lower it's distortion.

All together the reduction in distortion at the load due to the coupling capacitor will be far greater than the change in impedance ratio between the capacitor and load because not only is the influence of the capacitor going down but so is the distortion of the capacitor.

Daryl · « **Reply #35 on:** 23 Apr 2007, 08:45 pm »

If you are designing an E.Q. or crossover circuit you cannot dilute the capacitors influence over the circuit as the corner frequency for the filter is specified.

You have no choice but to use the best capacitor you can afford in terms of frequency response and distortion.

In manufacturers application notes for capacitors you will sometimes see it specified that they are or are not recommended for filters for this reason.

JohnR · « **Reply #36 on:** 23 Apr 2007, 08:57 pm »

Quote from: Daryl on 23 Apr 2007, 03:29 pm

Why is fight club closed?

Because I think it's better to ban people if they can't get along

avahifi · « **Reply #37 on:** 23 Apr 2007, 09:03 pm »

Then there might be the most important measurement of all, which seems to be ignored by too many here, namely the VALUE of the capacitor in question.

How many of you own a precision capacitor meter and use it to exactly match values when making capacitor changes? Most are 5 percent tolerance parts or worse, and a change without measurement can easily make a 10 percent change in value or more. This will absolutely change pole points and timing circuits enough to hear the difference, and not necessarily for the better. You also risk changing the phase gain characterises of the two channels, and if they do not tightly matched, imaging is screwed.

Not tracking variables is so easy to do, and makes the "my part sounds better than your part" a rather futile expression.

Regards,

Frank Van Alstine

Scott F. · « **Reply #38 on:** 23 Apr 2007, 09:16 pm »

Quote from: avahifi on 23 Apr 2007, 09:03 pm

How many of you own a precision capacitor meter and use it to exactly match values when making capacitor changes?

I do.....and I match resistors too. When I make a change, I always do it in pairs (left and right channel).

Yes it is a PITA and adds more cost (especially with expensive coupling and power supply caps (assuming dual mono construction)) but if you don't, just as you have mentioned, you can easily end up with a tonal imbalance between the channels. When you go through my parts bins, you'll find most all of my caps with their values hand written on them. Resistors, I have them matched and taped together and their values written on the tape.

....oh darn, I forgot to change my avatar...

JohnR · « **Reply #39 on:** 23 Apr 2007, 09:28 pm »

Hm, yes Scott... you better watch that post count too, getting kinda high

Frank: are you saying 10% difference in value in an application like coupling capacitors is audible?