Another Capacitor Thread (and an apology).

[Deang]

The thread on the RF-7 ii in 2-Channel (which was locked), prompted some emails that warranted response. I'm tired of the emails so I decided to start this thread.

One of the questions that didn't get answered in the thread is "why I wouldn't be doing work for them anymore". Well, mostly due to lack of interest. If no one is much interested then I lose interest too, much like what happened with the charge coupled networks. I'm not as pushy as everyone thinks, and if there is no demand, I'm not going to wear myself out creating it. The only loser here is you guys. :-)

I strongly resented the "snake oil" comment, but I get it. I used to think it was snake oil too - which is why I took the challenge from an old forum member and did my own crossovers. I turned on the system and sat down, expecting to hear no change whatsoever -- and was happily preparing to report as much to the forum. The result was that I ended up doing a lot of my first networks labor free, just so people could hear what I was hearing. It didn't turn into a business until Deb told me I was an idiot for not charging for the work.

I'm comfortable with what I believe. I did live demos at most of the early Klipsch "gatherings" (both in small settings and in large). I once made a 10 hour drive to Arkansas to win over a room full of skeptics. Is there ANYONE left that remembers what happened in Arkansas? How about Indianapolis, where I buried a pair of rebuilt AAs. Those LaScalas sounded so bad that people were moving to the back of the room to get away from them. DBT, what horseshit.

I've done several "Roadshows" - the last one degenerated into a failed attempt at making an *** out of me. Sorry, but if you're using entry level capacitors, Charge Coupled Networks (battery biased) networks sound better than those that aren't. REAL audio engineers support the science behind it, and some of the best sounding loudspeakers available incorporate its use.

I've done everything possible on my part to substantiate my claims. I also have my listening rooms, where I've owned and modified Dahlquist DQ-10s, RF-7s, Cornwalls, Heresys, Klipschorns, Jubilees, and LaScalas. I've used cheap parts, expensive parts, and everything in between. I concluded years ago that many of you have severely damaged your hearing -- so go ahead and flip those BS buttons.

Why am I always the one that has to support these claims when the science is out there for anyone who's interested enough to look for it. If you don't believe the increased cost doesn't warrant investigation or purchase, that's fine - but don't presume to know what people are hearing or not hearing.

Okay, I'm done with the rant, sorry.

Before I go on, I'd like to apologize to everyone for the awful way I've conducted my business in the last year. In hindsight, I should have stopped building after I got sick, but it's hard to say "no". By the time I ended up with the busted up back, I had a pile of work to deal with. Then Deb got sick - and I either didn't have the time or hurt too bad to deal with it. I then hid from my email, for who wants to tell a customer that's already been waiting three months that's it's going to be four, five and probably six. I would have issued refunds but I had a pile of parts, and profits went towards medical bills. I didn't always do a good job with shipping either. The whole thing just got away from me, and I'm sorry I didn't push harder. I will say that everything that left the bench was nicely built, and with the exception of the one (now corrected) design flaw - actually worked. :-) I'm sorry to all who had to deal with my personal issues. I debated on whether or not to say anything, but ended up deciding an apology to the forum was necessary. I'll probably remove this paragraph after a couple of days - I'll only eat crow or stand in open humiliation for so long.

Okay, to the cap thing. We have about fifty really good threads on this, and most people are really just plain sick of reading and talking about it, I sure know I am. So I figured, why not some simple cut and paste stuff for the new people. I'm only going to post a few things, because I really think that is all that is needed. Data is from those who are well educated and credentialed. If there are any doubts about this, you can search them out with the search engine of your choice.

So on with it:

Capacitors cannot sound the same because they do not measure the same. Someone cannot in one sentence say, "they sound warmer because their ESR is higher", and then in another say, "One cannot hear a difference because their isn't any -- it's placebo." This is contradictory and you can't have it both ways.

Paul Klipsch specifically called out the use of "oil filled capacitors" in his crossovers. Low ESR was important to him, and it may just be that for that period in history, oil filled capacitors had the lowest ESR -- we don't know. What we do know is the following, and old school engineers preferred oil filled capacitors for the following reasons: I apologize, but I can't remember where it came from, but I do know it was from a reputable source.

* Suppression of arcing to a higher voltage than air

* Improved cooling of local heat spots due to circulation of the fluid

* Improved insulation between the contact electrodes, having a higher dielectric constant than air

* Elimination of bubbles within the paper or film, or between electrodes, thus avoiding sporadic arcing and variation in characteristics

* In specific high or low pressure deployments, oils were preferred due to being less compressible (almost not at all) compared to air. Compression or rarefaction would unpredictably change the distance between, and thus capacitance between, the electrodes.

There is a not so subtle difference in sound between axial wound dry types and oil filled. Al suspects that the oil might also provide a form of damping, but was not convinced of its contribution to the difference that people were "supposedly" hearing.

All I know is that what I hear sounds subjectively better, and I'm not alone. I have other things related to the paper in oil thing, but I'm stopping here.

Next up,

Films sound better than metallized types:

Required reading;

http://www.vishay.com/docs/26033/gentechinfofilm.pdf

Metallized types are "self healing", an attribute that may not be desirable in crossovers - especially in those supporting highly efficient loudspeaker designs.

Bob Stout was tied into the industry and knew quite a bit about capacitors. He eventually became the sole contributor on the old LDSG Site for passive components.

I pulled his original comments from here:

http://marc.info/?l=basslist&m=101836144300969&w=2

Bob Stout/capacitors

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]

List: basslist

Subject: RE: Capacitors

From: Bob Stout <rbs () snippets ! org>

Date: 2002-04-09 14:09:11

[Download message RAW]

On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Clark Judson P wrote:

> What do you mean by "superior" and "better"?

Primarily, lower noise. Capacitor noise is generally caused by flaws in the dielectric or poor terminations. The reason film and foil is "better" than metallized foil is one of metallized film's special "features". You will hear vendors speak of metallized foil as self-clearing. All this means is that if there's a pinhole in the film, a temporary arc will vaporize the metal around the pinhole. This is great for long term viability, but bad for noise since each time this happens, it adds noise.

Also, most don't tell you that this only happens when the leakage current through the pinhole is adequate to heat the metallization to the point of vaporization. As noted, this is primarily a factor in l polypropylene, since of all the popular high-stability dielectrics, it's the softest and therefore most likely to have pinholes as received from the film vendor, and/or develop pinholes during winding.

Another advantage to film and foil is lower ESR since the bulk resistance of the foil is lower than that of the film metallization. I expect this could play a role in any sort of capacitor-induced distortion, since as ESR decreases, the closer the cap approaches a perfect model. Whether the amounts of distortion potentially resulting from this would be audible or not is open to debate. Noise, OTOH, is clearly measurable and therefore, presumably, audible as well.

Finally, in any discussion of passive audio components, one consideration that can't be ignored is the dynamic range of the signals involved. This is why only better quality dielectrics are really suitable since their small signal and large signal characteristics track better than, e.g., NP electrolytics or even Mylar. (This difference can also introduce measurable amounts of distortion.) This is also significant in noise...

Since each pinhole may not be cleared by the first spike to come along, until it gets cleared, noise will be added to the signal. This becomes significant when you consider the 10-20 dB dynamic range of typical audio program material. IOW, those 100 Watt peaks may not come often enough to clear the pinholes since the average power is closer to 1 Watt. (This is also why non-inductive wirewound resistors are better in crossovers than film or bulk metal types.) This does, however, support the contention that metallized film may sound better after "burn-in". For film and foil, the potential advantages to burning them in become debatable.

Finally, I should add the audibility of all these is open to discussion and would only be a potential issue when the rest of the parts used in the design are of sufficient quality. For most purposes, metallized film caps are OK, even in the signal path. This does bring up one last issue, though... Noise and distortion are still noise and distortion even when they're not in series with the signal. Outside the direct signal path is less critical, yes, but their effects are still there in parallel with the drivers and/or other components.

P.S. Does this sound like it's a preview of the new passive component section I plan to add to the LDSG? ;-)

-------------------------------------------------------------

MicroFirm: Down to the C in chips...

Home of the SNIPPETS archives and the

DIY Loudspeaker Driver Selection Guide (LDSG):

http://www.snippets.org/

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]

Edited October 3, 2015 by Deang

[Schu]

Bravo!

I want to be next in line... and I don't even have any speakers to put them in as yet.

[Deang]

I believe someone had asked the question, "if the Dayton's sound so good for the money, why bother with the more expensive capacitors?" - or something to that effect.The answer is simple; film and foils sound quite a bit better, and good ones can be found for much, much less than the Mundorfs in that RF-7ii project. However, many want the oil, and I can't say that I blame them. If I would have thought it practical to do so, I would have suggested the Jensens. OTOH, I think Josh was looking to try something different. Why not? It may be an expensive, overpriced product, but like I said before, that doesn't detract from its performance -- people absolutely rave about these things.

I once had a conversation with Mark Blanchard, who at the time was running the Engineering side of things for the consumer division of Klipsch. Mark holds several patents, mostly for his work with the development of the headphones. Mark told me that capacitors with higher voltage ratings have more linear behavior. He quickly took me into areas I knew nothing about, but his statement stuck with me. The Mundorfs are 1000Vdc, and I'm sure this contributes to their higher cost.

Edited October 3, 2015 by Deang

[wvu80]

Before I go on, I'd like to apologize to everyone for the awful way I've conducted my business in the last year. In hindsight,...(respectful Snip, I just wanted to reference this part of the post)

 

FYI I don't have a dog in this fight.  I've never done business with DeanG, I'm not sure I've even heard upgraded networks.

 

I just wanted to say on a personal level Dean, that honesty and transparency go a long way in my world, and I appreciate what you wrote, and the way you wrote it.  I would do business with you any day of the week, and twice on Sunday.

 

You're OK in my book. 

Edited October 3, 2015 by wvu80

[jimjimbo]

I believe someone had asked the question, "if the Dayton's sound so good for the money, why bother with the more expensive capacitors?" - or something to that effect.The answer is simple; film and foils sound quite a bit better.

10 times better? No. 20 times better? No. 50 times better? No. This, is the real simple answer… People hear what they want to hear based on their expectations around how much money they have spent. Even you in the last part of your post admit that these are expensive and "overpriced" parts. Now come on, that's the real bullshit. And do you actually have the nerve to say that all of "our" hearing is trashed? Please. I can feel the flames lapping at my toes already…

[wstrickland1]

Hey Jim the work you did on my crossovers was peachy.

[Deang]

Lol. I didn't say everyone's hearing was trashed, I said many. It was a bit tongue in cheek too.

You can't put a quantitjve measure on this stuff. If you can't do it with amplifiers or Blu-ray players, then you sure can't do it with capacitors. However, the quality of the passive components play a significant role in the voicing of the product -- especially loudspeakers. Like I said, I've proved this many times, publicly and privately. Please don't make the mistake of dismissing everything else I said because of a few comments that get you hot under the collar.

[rebuy]

He's a Brain--It's great to have a straight-up guy to deal with that really knows his stuff.

[wvu80]

Redacted: Thanks for the great info, Dean.  Keep up the good work, I'll keep reading. 

Edited October 5, 2015 by wvu80

[Deang]

"People hear what they want to hear based on their expectations around how much money they have spent."

While that might often be the case, it isn't always the the case. In my personal example I went in with no expectations, I thought the whole thing was BS. I started as a skeptic and ended up starting a business.

Film and foils are smoother and more open sounding than their metallized counterparts. Oil and wax impregnated capacitors add a relaxed element, and though I hate this word - "lush" always comes to mind.

[Deang]

Dave, not bad -- interesting.

I didn't start this thread to argue, just to answer some questions because my email box was filling up again. It's a never ending cycle, and it's just easier to do it this way.

Like I said in the other thread, criticism doesn't bother me anymore. OTOH, personal attacks do -- and I think repeat offenders should be banned.

Edited October 3, 2015 by Deang

[rebuy]

I had seen your website before but I did not know that it was you that ran that business.

The work that you do is amazing and the crossovers are beautiful.

[Deang]

I appreciate that, as well as Dave's earlier statement.

[wvu80]

Redacted:  

Edited October 5, 2015 by wvu80

[derrickdj1]

Dean, a public apology is hard.  This speaks to your character and the forum is lucky to have your contributions.  As for capacitors and the network, your work is excellent and thanks for showing me some of them when I purchased an amp from you.  I have not heard them in the RF 7 or 7II's.  One day I may consider some but, the cost has to be in line with the value of the speakers.

[Deang]

I paid $2200 for my RF-7s, which was the full retail price. You guys are picking them up used now at great savings, which is great, but that doesn't mean I'm going to start giving my labor away. Some pay more for cables and/or interconnects than I charge for the crossover work - and I will tell you without question, that the improvement is more than what some are getting with amplifier change outs. I don't think holding back a few hundred is a good reason keep oneself trapped in mediocrity. The RF-7 is an awesome speaker, but it has some issues.

[Jay L]

I'll just say if passive parts have an influence on the final product, then why use them at all? Put on the birthday suit, make all speakers fully active. 

[muel]

...  One day I may consider some but, the cost has to be in line with the value of the speakers.

as I read this it occurs to me that I spent as much on my crossovers as I did my speakers more than once.  I don't like spending that much but I am quite happy with the results and have no regrets.  The most expensive crossovers I ever had were not my favorite although they were quite good.  I just have to go with what makes my ears happy!   

 

I'm glad there are people like Dean and others around here who can offer some science.  I don't claim to offer much science unless it is something I actually know first hand.  I stick to my own experience and try to explain as clearly as possible my experience with different equipment or configurations.  To those who might say that I hear what I want to hear I say that while I agree that expectation bias can occur, it is unlikely for you to recognize that is happening to someone across the Internet when your only knowledge of them and what they are experiencing is what has been communicated on these forum pages.  

[jimjimbo]

... One day I may consider some but, the cost has to be in line with the value of the speakers.

To those who might say that I hear what I want to hear I say that while I agree that expectation bias can occur, it is unlikely for you to recognize that is happening to someone across the Internet when your only knowledge of them and what they are experiencing is what has been communicated on these forum pages.

Well, sorry, to me, that makes absolutely no sense at all. First, you agree that it can occur, and then you say that it is unlikely for me to recognize that… I don't get it…i'm not talking about you, or anyone specifically. It was just a general comment. I'm going to move on from this thread because now it's becoming just a little bit chippy, and I could say a lot more, however I won't, because I'm going to take the high road on this. Edited October 4, 2015 by jimjimbo

[Marvel]

and I could say a lot more, however I won't, because I'm going to take the high road on this.

That's nice