.1uf bypass testing and the 1801C

laserman · « **Reply #20 on:** 16 Jul 2007, 09:02 pm »

Dave, any further news to report about the 1801Cs?

Danny Richie · « **Reply #21 on:** 16 Jul 2007, 09:46 pm »

Quote

Yes. The hold for the past 4 weeks has been availability of the .1uf Sonicap Platinum capacitors. Jeff has been sold-out, but more should arrive in the next 1-2 weeks. I needed more capacitors to complete a fully assembled pair of 1801C speakers

Bummer. I have had stock on them all the while Sonic Craft was out of stock on them. I am low now on that value but still have them in stock.

David Ellis · « **Reply #22 on:** 17 Jul 2007, 01:40 am »

I wasn't in a hurry, but do appreciate the offer.

Jeff now has a good resupply of the .1uf Platinum and I have some in my workshop.

Dave

richny · « **Reply #23 on:** 9 Sep 2007, 01:41 am »

I am redoing my 1801b's with new cabinets (I got my hands on some great figured cherry) and I am thinking of doing the sonicap platinum bypass of the woofer and tweeter caps. Has anyone tried this upgrade yet and can they share their results. I also am looking for confirmation that the right value for the cap is .1uf and not something lower. thanks.

David Ellis · « **Reply #24 on:** 9 Sep 2007, 02:40 am »

Danny Richie www.gr-research.com affirmed my comments regarding the use of the .1uf Platinum bypass capacitors in crossover circuits. He has used them many times with the same wonderful results. Hence, I am not the only guy who has tried this with positive results. I don't know who else is using them in loudspeaker filter circuits. It seems there are a few folks, but I don't recall the manufacturer names.

I am fairly certain there isn't anyone in the DIY speaker community that has a/b tested the .1uf Platinum bypass in the 1801b. I have only done this locally in a a/b test using Ralph's system. You would be the first gent to do this (potentially). Please do share your comments.

I did send an assortment of capacitors to Tony Gee for evaluation. Hopefully his comments will be forthcoming fairly soon.

The bugger in this modification is the cost of those caps. They are expensive. 5 years ago I would have never dreamed of spending about $28 for a .1uf capacitor for bypassing in a speaker. $28 remains a difficult "pill" to swallow, but these caps do perform surprisingly well.

I have a handful of these capacitors in my workshop. Alternately, they may be purchased from Jeff at www.soniccraft.com

And, where did you find the figured cherry veneer?

Dave

richny · « **Reply #25 on:** 10 Sep 2007, 10:37 am »

Thanks for the reply Dave. I probably wouldn't do this if I was not redoing the cabinets since I like the way the 1801b's sound. But given the opportunity and your comments on the potential benefit, I am considering it. I agree it is a little on the expensive side though.

I did my first set of cabinets in Red Oak as that was what I could get my hands on locally. They came out pretty good but I found that it takes some practice to get the veneering perfect and I came to want something with a little more interesting grain to look at. John@ diyspeakercabinets.com told me he had some nice cherry veneer on hand and he did the basic mdf boxes for me with the veneer (John did a great job by the way). I bought some really nice figured cherry on-line from a small wood shop for the baffle and I am doing the rest of the job (attaching the baffle, cutting the driver holes, finishing the cabinets, etc.). I hope to have something that looks as good as it sounds at the end of all this project. I'll keep you posted on what I eventually decide to do.

doug s. · « **Reply #26 on:** 10 Sep 2007, 03:14 pm »

Quote from: JoshK on 1 May 2007, 12:10 am

FWIW,

I have always read that bypass caps are best at 1/100'th the value for the least "spectral overlap". No idea, myself, as I've not tested this, so take it FWIW. The .1uf is closer to 1/100'th than 1/10th...maybe this is why he chose this value??

if this were the case, then why not go w/the 0.047uf caps? personally, i would like to hear a test w/the smaller caps - even the 0.01uf caps. two reasons. 1st, it yust seems to me, as a layperson, that smaller bypass caps would be better; second, they're cheaper.

doug s.

David Ellis · « **Reply #27 on:** 11 Sep 2007, 01:34 am »

Quote

if this were the case, then why not go w/the 0.047uf caps?

Because the guy most interested in positive results (i.e. the guy selling them

) tried smaller and larger bypass caps in loudspeaker filter circuits and told me the .1 works the best.

In theory and practice a 1/10 ratio for bypassing seems very common, but for some reason that I don't understand, the .1uf works. I have seen the .1uf used in a fair amount of source gear too and this is even further from the 1/10th cascade ration.

Gentlemen, I must admit that I am very surprised by this and it causes me pain to spend serious money on a .1uf capacitor. Further, I truly don't have a valid theoretical explanation for theoretical explanation for this. Sure, I have some guesses, but these guesses would be like throwing darts with a blindfold.

Quote

second, they're cheaper.

I share this sentiment and did subject Ralph to various capacitors with the identities concealed. The other caps were all covered with masking tape to cover their labels. The other caps were all cheaper. Unfortunately, Ralph chose the most expensive capacitor

. So, it is what it is. I heard it too. I really wish that I could change the reality of this, but don't know how this could be possible. Unfortunately, the good stuff just happens to also be very expensive.

However, the testing was done with very competent source gear. My source gear is darn good, and Ralph's source gear is a scosh better. I have not done a test with any consumer grade source gear because spending @$180 on loudspeaker bypass capacitors for use with such source gear is a very unwise purchase - IMO.

Quote

I'll keep you posted on what I eventually decide to do.

Groovy,

Dave

Danny Richie · « **Reply #28 on:** 11 Sep 2007, 01:53 am »

Okay, maybe a bit of an explanation...

The by-pass cap is effective for a couple of reasons. One of which is the dissipation rate. The smaller the cap value the faster the discharge rate, and since the smaller cap is helping to discharge the storage of the larger one then one would think the smaller the better.

However, the larger the value the more information in the actually audible range can pass through it. Thus the top end may be more dominated by the by-pass cap in giving it a cleaner and clearer over all sound.

So it is a bit of a balance of a couple of things.

A .1uF has been my personal favorite value for by-pass caps used in loudspeakers especially in the tweeter circuit, and the best I have heard thus far have been the more expensive Sonicap Platinum's.

DSK · « **Reply #29 on:** 11 Sep 2007, 10:30 am »

Danny/Dave/others who have tried ....

How would you compare the scale of improvement between ...
a) upgrading speaker crossovers with the Sonicap Platinums bypasses; and
b) upgrading pre-amp input or output caps with Sonicap Platinums?

Obviously it will vary somewhat from case to case so I'm not after an exact ratio of difference ... just a general comparison like "about the same", "a) is a little more obvious", or "b) is a little more obvious". Thanks.

David Ellis · « **Reply #30 on:** 12 Sep 2007, 02:46 am »

I have swapped/upgraded coupling capacitors in every decent piece of source gear that I own. IME, the subjective impact of a good capacitor in source gear is 3-5 times more profound than when used behind the tweeter in a loudspeaker. This is simply because the tweeter capacitors only pass the high frequencies. In a source gear coupling circuit the capacitor passes everything. I am sure Danny has puttered with source gear too, but am not certain of his opinion regarding the relative impact of better capacitors in various parts of a system.

I would also like to comment that my experience and comments are not based solely on the Sonicap Platinum. The Sonicap Platinum is one of several "better" capacitors that I have used.

Dave

richny · « **Reply #31 on:** 16 Oct 2007, 11:35 pm »

Well, I went ahead and did the by-pass caps as I built new cabinets for my 1801b's. As Dave recommended, I used the sonicap platinum's (.1uf) and by-passed all 3 caps on the tweeter and the woofer. I did one speaker at a time so I could do a side by side comparison. The difference with the added caps was an audible improvement but I would say it was not overwhelming. Both presentations were very good. With the by-pass caps, the presentation was a bit more up front like moving up a few rows in a concert hall from the middle to closer to the front. Overall clarity was slightly better with the caps particularly on average recordings. (On very good recordings it was hard to hear the difference). On some songs I perceived the lower clarity of the speaker without the caps as a slightly smeared sound by comparison. Without the caps the presentation was also a little "darker" if that makes sense. I asked my wife for her opinion without sharing mine. After listening for a very short session, she come to the same conclusion as I, indicating the speaker with the by-pass caps was "clearer".
Overall, I judged the speaker with the by-pass caps as more musical and enjoyable for my tastes and I decided to keep the caps in the one and upgrade the second to match. My equipment is not high end and that should be taken into consideration. I listened to a variety of CD's on a Marantz SA8260 feeding a passive preamp (FT Audio "Little Wonder") and a PS Audio HCA-2 power amp. With this grade of equipment, I would say that the overall improvement is probably not worth the time and cost to upgrade a finished speaker. I used the vampire wire in the 1801b crossover and some high quality stuffing so my speakers are done for now.

David Ellis · « **Reply #32 on:** 17 Oct 2007, 05:13 pm »

Thanks very much for your comments and performing this experiment! I fully agree with your sentiments and believe your comments are completely accurate. The Platinum caps do make the speaker sound better, but they are not a value-oriented option.

Hugh Dean and I discussed the Sonicap Platinum at length. We both find it very painful to spend so much money on these capacitors. However, we both agree they provide a perceptible positive impact that cannot be found using other conventional methods. Seeking that last "ounce" of quality necessitates the Sonicap Platinum.

rez · « **Reply #33 on:** 24 Oct 2007, 02:10 am »

Hi Dave,
I have the sonicap plantinums in hand and will shortly be performing the "surgery"

. Before actually connecting the wires I was wondering if there are there any issues with fixing the bypass caps directly to the main caps using something like a silicon caulking or are the bypass caps better mounted directly to the crossover board with the silicon?
Thanks,
rez

Bill Baker · « **Reply #34 on:** 24 Oct 2007, 03:16 am »

Quote

Danny/Dave/others who have tried ....

How would you compare the scale of improvement between ...
a) upgrading speaker crossovers with the Sonicap Platinums bypasses; and
b) upgrading pre-amp input or output caps with Sonicap Platinums?

As most AC'ers know, I am very fond of Teflon capacitors and they can be beneficial in many different products. As Danny mentioned previously, you would want a minimum value of .10uF and for the reasons he mentions in his post, larger values are still justified. In addition to what Danny mentioned, the larger the value, the more frequency range it passes resulting in more of the Teflon characteristic that is realized.

Also keep in mind that Teflon takes MUCH longer to show it's potential that standard film caps. For those who evaluate them after only a few hours have not yet even scratched the surface of what is to come. In fact, you will have to put up with some so-so performance for quite some time. If you don't have a minimum of 200 hours on them, your evaluation is irrelevant.

In preamp, amplifier, CD analog output..........upgrading to the SoniCap Platinums may or may not be a noticeable enhancement. This will depend on the system's ability to bring forth the potential these caps can provide. If your system is capable, the Platinums will perform. Just don't bypass your coupling caps as it is not the same result as bypassing x-over pieces.

I will also add that the Platinum is among the best capacitor available for bypassing power supply filter caps.

There are many that do not believe in esoteric capacitors. The only argument I can agree with is that they are expensive but sonically they do things I am not able to obtain from 'standard' pieces. Whether or not you can justify it can only be determined by your own ears but give them at least the benefit of the doubt and ample burn-in time before coming to conclusions.

David Ellis · « **Reply #35 on:** 24 Oct 2007, 04:27 am »

Quote

Hi Dave,
I have the sonicap platinum's in hand and will shortly be performing the "surgery" . Before actually connecting the wires I was wondering if there are there any issues with fixing the bypass caps directly to the main caps using something like a silicon caulking or are the bypass caps better mounted directly to the crossover board with the silicon?
Thanks,
rez

It doesn't really matter what the bypass capacitors are attached to, but they should be attached to something. Most folks seem to attach the bypass to the primary capacitor and I generally practice this method. I find that GE Pure Silicone works quite well for making a decent connection with plastic capacitors. Liquid Nails is okay, but after a few years the Liquid Nails gets fairly stiff. The GE Silicone remains quite flexible and pliable. It will withstand some shock and maintain good adhesion.

And, thanks for responding to the query regarding bypass capacitors in source gear Bill. I do have something to add regarding the break-in time for the Teflon Caps. I do agree there is something that happens after a significant break-in, but I find a reasonably positive impact after initial installation. Black Gate capacitors in source gear are very different. In my opinion, Black Gate's sound murky and bad after initial installation. These really do require significant break-in to sound better decent.

And... I still haven't emotionally adapted to the impact of these capacitors and their cost. It remains traumatic for me

. I suppose I am into the Bargaining stage, but it's still difficult

. These capacitors really shouldn't sound so good

. And I never imagined being willing to spend so much $$ on a .1uf capacitor

.

Dave

rez · « **Reply #36 on:** 13 Nov 2007, 04:41 pm »

Hi again Dave,
I also thought that it might be a good idea to tone down the tweeter just a hair while I have the crossovers out for the bypass - my listening room is fairly reflective and the tweeters seem just a bit bright in this context. I looked through your crossover notes but can't seem to find the recommended make of resistors. I'm planning to use the 2db down option (8 ohms in series and 12.5 ohms in parallel) - which resistors and vendor do you recommend?
Thanks
Roman

Bill Baker · « **Reply #37 on:** 13 Nov 2007, 05:15 pm »

Hello Roman, If I might suggest a resistor type..... I would go with the 12 watt Mills non-inductive pieces. They will probably run you about $3-$4 each but this seems to be a minimal investment for such a nice speaker.

Quote

Most folks seem to attach the bypass to the primary capacitor and I generally practice this method.

I agree one this one. If you are gong to be using only one bypass capacitor and working with a design larger than a 1st order, bypass the first capacitor in the signal. Another thing I beleive in is installing them so that you can use the shortest possible lead length.

David Ellis · « **Reply #38 on:** 13 Nov 2007, 08:36 pm »

Roman,

When bypassing with the Sonicap Platinum I don't find the desire to reduce the tweeter spl just a scosh via resistors. I found bypassing with the Sonicap Platinum had an all-positive impact when used around all of the capacitors in the 1801. There was more information, and it was all good information.

However, when bypassing with the Sonicap Gen 2, I found a positive impact just behind the tweeter (I don't know why), but no impact in the shunt woofer circuit. Also, the results were generally positive, but had a slight downside. An audible disconnect happened between the tweeter and the woofer. The tweeter sounded slightly more forward. So, in this case, reducing the tweeter spl will be helpful. It will reduce the presence of the tweeter slightly.

In the 1801, either the Mills MRA 5 or MRA 12 resistors will work just dandy. www.soniccraft.com has both flavors. I haven't done a good a/b comparison, but think the MRA 5 might sound better in my speakers. The MRA 5 is smaller and should be less inductive.

Most folks have an 8, 15 resistor combination. This is likely true for you also. So, you will need to order some 12.5ohm resistors for the parallel component immediately behind the tweeter.

Dave

rez · « **Reply #39 on:** 13 Nov 2007, 11:29 pm »

Thanks Dave, I will definitely try the sonicap platinums on their own first and see how that sounds before tinkering with the resistors.

Also, thanks Bill for your thoughts on the other options.
Roman