[NOS Valves]

Umm, I hope you don't think all those caps are being used in the same place.

In my testing setup with different gear, there are mainly 3 different places that require different capacitor values.

 Well that would be just as confusing for the end result. For a proper analysis all the possible variables should be limited as much as possible. In other words the exact same value caps, used in the exact same location, in the exact same gear with no other system changes involved source to speakers from the first cap to the last. Like I said I commend you for your efforts but in reality the setup is completely flawed.   

[Jon L]

Umm, I hope you don't think all those caps are being used in the same place.

In my testing setup with different gear, there are mainly 3 different places that require different capacitor values.

 Well that would be just as confusing for the end result. For a proper analysis all the possible variables should be limited as much as possible. In other words the exact same value caps, used in the exact same location, in the exact same gear with no other system changes involved source to speakers from the first cap to the last. Like I said I commend you for your efforts but in reality the setup is completely flawed.   

Boy, that sure is glass-half-empty.  I do compare the caps in exact same position with same variables.  However, that limits the usefulness of your findings to only that exact same position in that exact setup. 

Therefore, whenever possible and available, I try to compare different sizes of the same caps in different positions in different gear with different uF requirements and function.  I semi-literally have tons of capacitors, of which only a small fraction is shown in the photo you're talking about.

This helps to confirm and contrast my initial findings and can be very illuminating.  Obviously, this method cannot be all-encompassing or "perfect," but I do not believe it's possible to come up with a perfect method that everyone will agree on.  Of course, everyone is perfectly welcome and encouraged to do their own experiments and add to the experience pool, which cannot help but be subjective sound impressions.   

[NOS Valves]

 I'm not all together sure we are dealing with a glass that has anything in it at all

 

[JoshK]

I'm not all together sure we are dealing with a glass that has anything in it at all

 

I think your missing the

I do compare the caps in exact same position with same variables.

You seem like you want to hastily throw out his subjective results.  Do you have an axe?

[jrebman]

Josh,

Yes, Mr. O. always has an axe handy, and showing up here with only a half dozen posts to his name and already swinging it should give you some idea of where things are headed.

[hotroady]

I'm really enjoying your efforts and this thread, Jon. Can't wait for your impression of Amp copper foil.

[Jon L]

Can't wait for your impression of Amp copper foil.

Me, too!  The AmpOhm copper is hooked up to my burn-in device as we speak 

[Cruzer]

Can't wait for your impression of Amp copper foil.

Me, too!  The AmpOhm copper is hooked up to my burn-in device as we speak 

Great thread, THX Jon L...

Maybe is this the way to "dress up" K-72 capacitor..
With hot wax..

http://www.rhsdesign.com/celebrityreplicas/pdf/RHSReplicaCaps.pdf

For cap housing you can cut a piece of a wooden broomstick of suitable diameter and drill a hole in it.. aa

[Jon L]

AmpOhm Copper Foil Paper-In-Oil Capacitor



The AmpOhm line of oil capacitors has been a great find for current-production, modern, oil capacitors that sound excellent at reasonable prices.  The build quality is quite superb for the prices, and there have been no long-term-listening surprises or letdowns, either. 

So when the copper foil version of the AmpOhm PIO's became available, I had to give it a good listen and compare to the other versions.  After the obligatory burn-in period, I directly compared the copper version with the tin foil version, changing back-and-forth. 

I would say the difference in character between copper and tin is larger than between tin and aluminum, yet all three versions share similar presentations, which is no doubt due to the exactly identical construction except for the foil material.  All share a well-balanced clarity with great detail resolution, at least for PIO's, and above all, music is well-served.  This does not make it any easier to describe precisely how the copper and tin sound different, but I do have a few observations.

With the copper, there is a little more attention-grabbing presence or copper-glow, mainly in the midrange, which can be described as slightly rounder yet with a fraction more detailing of the texture.  Both female and male voices step forward half a step closer while the high and low frequencies remain similar to the tin foil version.  This "mien," if you will, is mildly reminiscent of the Jensen copper PIO, yet the AmpOhm copper seems to have better clarity and extension at both ends of the spectrum.   

However, it is difficult to say whether the copper version is conclusively "better" than the other versions because they are sufficiently different that one can work better than the other in a given system configuration.  While the tin foil version is a little less attention-grabbing, in certain situations, it's slightly more self-effacing demeanor may go a long way.  Fortunately, all these versions are well-priced that one can try them all and choose the most synergistic part for his musical tastes.

[hotroady]

Cool! been waiting for your review. Midrange  is where I'd want to a little more presence.

[AudioCap]

Excellent posting - and I very happy to hear that all three foil types have specific pros and cons. Makes for a more interesting world 

[muralman1]

I have been on the sidelines here, reading with interest. It is obvious to me, people will choose capacitors for a sound that they are aiming for. I know people who have piled on Black Gate caps, and very expensive foil in oil caps into their DACs. They are looking for romance. Their music is warm, musical, and precious.

I want neutral realism. Trumpets must blare. Rim shots must punctuate. Voices must be naked. Using a lower grade DAC than my companions, I found the replacement of old school diodes for much more expressive diodes gave me what I wanted. 

The same goes for my amp. For bypass caps, all the advice I had been getting was go for the Mundorfs. I tried those. They were pretty sounding. Others said the V-Caps have stole the day. I tried those. They were jack booted in their delivery. On a whim, I tried the Sonicap Platinum caps. They stayed. The resultant sound is dynamic, highly resolving, and accurate. What they do that foil in oil can't is provide that concise attack in percussion that underscores the movement in most music.

[Jon L]

Jupiter Beewax Paper HT Capacitor



While I have always liked the Juper Beewax capacitor?s sonics, the original version?s construction quality left a lot to be desired, especially its reported weakness in hot environments.  It really did feel like a candlestick wrapped in paper and was not recommended to be used near hot tubes or resistors; however, its presentation was very pleasing and non-artificial, devoid of any plasticky signature or hype. 

Fortunately, the Jupiter capacitor has been redesigned using a reinforced and improved beeswax paper as well as a non-drip casing rated for higher operating temperatures.  The older version was not recommended for temperature greater than 110 F, but the new version is reported safe up to 176 F.  In addition, all the new versions come with solid-silver leadout wires terminating the aluminum foil, whereas the older version came with either copper or silver wires.  It really appears to be a completely new design, as one can see from the picture below of the old and new design in the same uF/voltage value.



The big question is, were they able to reduce the size and reinforce the construction, yet not lose any of the sonic charm of the original?  I?m happy to report ?yes? to that question along with some other observations.  The old and new sound very, very similar, so much so it?s splitting hairs.  Both still have a warm, dense, natural midrange with a lot of nice texturing and richness that?s not distant or cool.  While not super-defined like teflons, the bass has that woody, unforced roundness many people seek for acoustic bass, and the overall gestalt builds the music from ground (bass) up.  While those who love the treble presentation of teflons and polystyrenes may complain the Jupiter is not as sparkly and obviously airy, there is still a lot of treble information and detail present, especially up to mid-treble.  Poor recordings that?s simply intolerable can find a measure of forgiveness with the Jupiter.     

Is there any sonic difference with the new version?  Well, it?s nothing to write home about, but the new version may have a touch smoother low-treble/upper-mids while the old version may be slightly more lively.  While I do believe this smoother presentation in the upper-mids of the new version is due to more high treble extension, I would hesitate to bet any significant amount of money on anyone being able tell them apart reliably.  Another confounding factor is that the old version I have has copper leadouts while the new ones all come with silver.  It's possible this alone could account for some of the perceived difference.   

I have written before about how bypassing the old Jupiter with ERO KP1832 Polypropylene film and foil capacitor improves the hall ambience and air, and this still holds true for the new version.  Listening closer this time, the improved upper harmonics also seems to make the bass appear tighter, which seems counter-intuitive but easily demonstrable by covering one?s tweeters and observing subjective loss of bass tightness.  At any rate, Jupiter plus a good film and foil bypass remains one of my favorites for those who want a natural, earthy sound combined with detail. 

[AudioCap]

Jon,
Do you have any plans for comparative test of the Jupiters and the Ampohm Paper-in-wax caps?
Matt

[jeffdavison]

Ampohm now kaput???

JD

[AudioCap]

It would seem so - Ampohm's machinery has been taken out of their factory and sold on.
Rather a sad day....

[Jon L]

It would seem so - Ampohm's machinery has been taken out of their factory and sold on.
Rather a sad day....

OHH, NOOO! 

If true, get'em while you can!

[kris_oslo]

Has anyone heard the ClarityCap MR's ? Will they do justice as a pure coupling cap in a NOS dac?

Some users here say the MR is a really really good cap.

At this very moment I use Jupiter Beeswax 1uf, and they are realistic, but they do sound a little muddy and dark.

K

[Jon L]

Has anyone heard the ClarityCap MR's ? Will they do justice as a pure coupling cap in a NOS dac?

Some users here say the MR is a really really good cap.

At this very moment I use Jupiter Beeswax 1uf, and they are realistic, but they do sound a little muddy and dark.

K

My capacitor budget currently does not allow for MR's and Duelunds, but I would bypass that 1 uF Jupiter with 0.1 uF film cap before seeking something else..

[face]

Has anyone heard the ClarityCap MR's ? Will they do justice as a pure coupling cap in a NOS dac?

Some users here say the MR is a really really good cap.

At this very moment I use Jupiter Beeswax 1uf, and they are realistic, but they do sound a little muddy and dark.

K

My capacitor budget currently does not allow for MR's and Duelunds, but I would bypass that 1 uF Jupiter with 0.1 uF film cap before seeking something else..

If it did, you'd forget all about the rest of the silly caps mentioned here.