Another Capacitor Thread (and an apology).

[muel]

 

 

... 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.

 

I'm just saying there is a whole lot we don't know about each other, our systems, setups, music, listening habits, whatever...  to make judgments about the cognitive processes of each other.

[Guest David H]

 _{Capacitors again!}

 

_{I don't hear major differences in capacitors however, I can measure it - therefore I know there is some difference.}

 

_{That said, I don't use boutique capacitors in my builds, but I have nothing against someone who builds with them or chooses to use them.} 

 

_{Dean, I didn't know you were having trouble's. Hope things are better. We all go through rough patches from time to time.} 

 

_{A wise man once said forgive and forget. I have already forgotten what we last disagreed about hope you can forgive as well.}

 

_Dave

[Schu]

10 times better? No. 20 times better? No. 50 times better? No.

For what it's worth... I would be more than happy with merely twice as good!

[Deang]

You all have fun - I'm ducking for cover!!

I've often regretted that whole mess Dave, and I'm sorry I put you in the middle of it. I should have just burned the bridge and kept my mouth shut. If you say it's all good, then it's all good.

[Wolfbane]

 

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. 

 

 

If you live long enough you screw things up (sometimes royally). It happens eventually to virtually all of us. The above catharsis is what you do only (at least in my experience) after considerable inner reflection.

 

Been there, done that.

Edited October 4, 2015 by Wolfbane

[Deang]

Schu, it's not degrees or percentages of "good" or "bad". It's the addition or increase of an attribute, or the removal of something that shouldn't be there, like distortion. If a part adds some spatiality to the presentation, then it's not really possible to translate that into a percentage of "good". I can say that something is brighter than I like it, but that's about it.

Where are the detractors who have had any first hand experience with any of these parts or the builds that use them? We are confronted with a situation where those who haven't heard, are telling those who have -- what is and isn't possible.

It doesn't seem to matter how much data I present or in what form I present it - minds are made up. It really is best just to leave well enough alone. No one is going to change anyone's mind here.

If things work out, maybe I can do a Jensen Roadshow next summer. By that time, my son will either be building or we'll be shutdown, because I really don't have the time for this anymore -- at least not in full blown style like before. I was supposed to collaborate with John Warren on a project, and that still interests me -- so maybe just a handful of networks a year with a Jubilee build thrown in for good measure.

[Frzninvt]

I have been on this forum a long time and I was an early adopter of some of DeanG's crossover creations.  I think the custom AudioCap Theta Super AA or is it a DHA-2 in my center La Scala is one of his first and is probably 8-10 years old now and still rocking.  I would have never proceeded to outfit my speakers with them if there was not a discernable difference in performance.  There absolutely is!  If you cannot hear the difference perhaps a trip to the audiologist is in order.  

 

Popbumper (Chris) created an amazing replacement network for the Academy using custom made PCB's and top notch components I loved what it did for the Academy I once had.  It is the creativity and resolve of some of our fellow members to further improve upon Paul Klipsch's designs that makes our systems better.

 

To all the naysayers until you have heard a set of any of his network designs in comparison to a stock AA, AB, AK, B or E you don't know jack.  

 

Thank you Dean for perserveering, please keep doing what you do.

[Marvel]

I built my own DHA-2 networks, designed by John Albright for his brother. Dean helped me with those, got most of the parts and shipped them to me. My build quality is pathetic, but they are a simple, superb crossover. It was really outside of what Dean was working on, but that the way he rolls. I was in on his crossover roadshow, and that was/is a work of art and science, visually and audibly.

Both crossovers made my LS sing! I hated to sell them, and to be honest, it's only in their absence that I fully understand how great they were.

I've spent enough time with Dean, on the phone and in person to know how totally honest he is, and the struggles he's been going through. He's as close as any brother, and I only wish we were closer together so I could help him work through all this.

Bruce

[Guest thesloth]

Well I need to get some coffee in me before I can give a proper response but this is a good topic.

 

Deang we don't know each other but you sound like a stand up guy. I hope things get better for you. I really am not into arguing about this stuff, I apologize for losing my cool in the last thread. I just get angy when my opinion gets dusted under the rug. I mean people tell other people what to spend their money on here all the time, but still I really didn't mean any harm so sorry. It won't be brought up again by me.

 

 

Okay back to capacitors. A capacitor isn't a perfect capacitor. Anyone whom wants to make an accurate model of one and how it will function in a given circuit needs to model it's intrinsic parameters as well. I never said that people WON'T hear a difference, my argument is that you can achieve the sound you like for a lot less money than boutique caps. For a short example we can use the "harshness" situation. I find a lot of people are sensitive to higher frequencies, perhaps the increased esr in a particular capacitor is rolling off the highs. Say cap X that costs $200 sounds great in a crossover, better than cap Y because it is "warmer", my point is you don't have to spend a lot as long as you know what to look for, a cap with a high esr. Again just a very vague situation. 

 

With that said I would rather discuss dielectrics. Choosing the correct capacitor for the job is very fundamental and very important. So yes changing from a cheapo bipolar electrolytic to a good polyproylene will make a change for the better in most situations. So again I never said people don't hear a difference, I am not the guy saying "a cap is a cap and that's it!". I just feel you can get there much cheaper by knowing what is causing the sound change. Not all caps are equal but after a certain price point it's diminishing returns for sure. If you can hear a difference it should be measurable. I can live with, "these caps have lower distortion". But how much lower in distortion is brand X which costs $200 a cap compared to brand Y which costs $10? Is it half? Well that's a lot right? Not at .01% compared to .005%, no  it's really not a lot. And still I doubt it's half.

 

A couple years ago this battery bias thing came up so someone with much better test equipment than I wanted to see what was going on. The distortion is so far down it's to the point of just the instruments showing there is no crossover distortion, or any that you can hear or measure in a bipolar capacitor. I believe the cap was a bipolar electrolytic from RadioShack, I know blaspemy Please if anyone wants to explain the science behind this concept or link me to the papers I would like to read up. I don't claim to know everything and so I want to learn as much as possible. But I do have serious doubts to the merits of battery bias. I mean we are talking about sinusoidal waveforms which by nature have to cross the zero point somewhere, why does it matter where? Why would changing the DC offset change anything from an AC standpoint. I am willing to drive if someone could properly A/B the battery bias thing. I mean side by side identical amps, speakers, cables, and sources. Maybe my ears can hear it maybe they can't. I guess I am not really saying yay or nay I am just a little skeptical is all.

 

I will close by saying choosing the right capacitor is very important and can make a big difference, I am just not a fan of "boutique" components and is why I never use them.

 

I did an experiment with a friend and his Heresy's. He always has to have the best and he has the money to do it. He wanted the very best capacitors and told me money is no object. I put in bipolar electrolytics that cost me about $.30ea. I gave him a bill of $400. He absolutely loved them. After a few days I gave him his money back and put some Sonicaps in. After a couple weeks he had me put the electrolytics back in. My guess, the original crossover points was dependent on the higher esr of the oil caps so the electrolytics were a better fit for the application. For a test maybe I should put the Sonicaps back in but with a bunch of 1 ohm resistors in parallel, in series with the cap that way you can dial in the right amount of esr by lifting legs of the resistors one by one.

 

 

Lets keep this one on the tracks.

Edited October 4, 2015 by thesloth

[Jim Naseum]

Blind Listening Selection.

That's it. I never hear of anyone here employing the simplest method there is for you to pick what's best for you. New capacitor? New jitterbug? New DAC? Is it worth another $50? Another $500? Another $5000? Just do a blind taste test.

Yes, it requires a co conspirator to help, but that can't be too hard to manage, can it? It's the simplest way to eliminate expectation bias. Everyone has EB. In fact, if you didn't have expectation bias, you wouldn't be able to function in normal everyday life. When you sit in a chair, without first testing it for strength and soundness, you are employing expectation bias. We all use it, we all have it. Blind listening eliminates it.

Individual taste varies widely. Just look at the art people have on their walls! Notice how wildly different it is from yours?! Likewise, we don't all have the same sonic taste. Forums often proceed under the false premise that we are each seeking the same sound, because words are very poor at communicating sound character.

Were not hearing anything here in the course of the argument. We're TALKING ABOUT HEARING! Which is roughly as useful as talking about sex.

The Deang dude is saying capacitors have sonic personality when he listens to them. If someone is interested in sonic personality all they have to do is try it using a blind taste test. What's the big deal? If you have no interest, don't bother.

Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk

[jimjimbo]

That would be way too easy, and probably expose what some don't want.

[Wolfbane]

Blind Listening Selection.

That's it. I never hear of anyone here employing the simplest method there is for you to pick what's best for you. New capacitor? New jitterbug? New DAC? Is it worth another $50? Another $500? Another $5000? Just do a blind taste test.

 

 

As an incrementalist, I do this with every actual change/update of my audio system. When a couple of tin eared women out of the three living in the house as my lab rats. Started doing this with vacuum tube changes to power amps, pre-amp, etc. If they, after being subjected to intense hours of involuntary listening comment that I done something that they can both hear and like that they didn't hear previously I know I've got a subject vote of approval. On the other hand, all things being equal, if they say 'shut that god-damn noise off!', it is time to rethink my latest change. 'Turn it down' is generally an expression of no real notice around hear.

 

Wb 

[mike stehr]

 

 

I did an experiment with a friend and his Heresy's. He always has to have the best and he has the money to do it. He wanted the very best capacitors and told me money is no object. I put in bipolar electrolytics that cost me about $.30ea. I gave him a bill of $400. He absolutely loved them. After a few days I gave him his money back and put some Sonicaps in. After a couple weeks he had me put the electrolytics back in. My guess, the original crossover points was dependent on the higher esr of the oil caps so the electrolytics were a better fit for the application. For a test maybe I should put the Sonicaps back in but with a bunch of 1 ohm resistors in parallel, in series with the cap that way you can dial in the right amount of esr by lifting legs of the resistors one by one.

 

 

I agree with the higher ESR theory. The 'lytics may be creating a more laid back presentation as compared to the Sonicaps.

 

Instead of using Sonicaps and subbing resistors for the ESR test, maybe double up on the capacitance of the 30 cent NP 'lytics, find a 9 volt battery and holder, some resistors of the proper value and try battery bias with the Heresy networks.

Leave one network with the original network with the NP electrolytics, and the other with battery bias. Have you and your friend listen to them and swap back and forth with the balance pot, to listen for discernible differences. If the effects of stereo mess up the test audition, set up both speakers to one side, and use a switch to swap between each speaker.

 

Now in theory, using common non-polar electrolytics, in a battery biased network, should have audible differences over a network using the same NP 'lytics that is not battery biased.

It should sound different. Better? Who knows...

[Deang]

@Sloth, a much better/balanced response, thanks.

I tried the resistor thing, it doesn't sound the same. We have to go slow here because there are two different things going on -- because what is applicable to paper and oils, is not applicable to film and foils. Bob would tell me that it's all revolves around ESR, and to a great degree it does. When he says that a PIO cap sounds "warmer" because it has higher ESR, he's right, but the higher ESR doesn't explain everything. I also build with film and foils, which have very low ESR. However, the sound is not bright and irritating, why is that? Same with the wax impregnated Jupiters, the ESR is pretty low, but where is the brightness? Though their ESR numbers are quite different, all of these parts share a clean and inherently relaxed/smooth quality not exhibited by the inexpensive metallized variety, which typically have low ESR numbers

The films still need additional attenuation just like their metallized counterparts do, but they exhibit no glare -- so you can run them on the stock settings (taps) without inflicting pain, but it doesn't sound balanced.

Dennis Kleitsch (DJK) says its DA, everyone else says it placebo. I'm going with Dennis on this one. "Placebo" is a cheap out that doesn't fit.

What is a "boutique capacitor"? Ever price a Vishay axial wound film and tin foil -- it ain't pretty.

Battery biased network: In the time it took you to set up the test, you could have built a charge coupled network and listened to it - about $40. I have problem with a test when it tells me I'm not hearing anything that I know I'm hearing. Granted, it's not a jaw dropping improvement, but it is an improvement, and it doesn't cost much. It certainly costs more if I do the labor, but I wasn't gouging anyone -- I think I was charging $100 per board plus parts. Listening is at least as important as testing, wouldn't you say?

I'm a proponent of testing, even when I know the numbers are going to work against me. People are people, and so I just go on the assumption that if I can hear it, then they can probably hear it too. So, if most everyone can hear it, then what is the test really showing? We are either testing the wrong thing, or we put it down to placebo. Seems most everything people notice is put down to placebo, which is clearly ridiculous -- something is wrong.

On the beginning of what you wrote in that last paragraph; I agree with Bob that the early paper in oils and the later Mylar in oils had higher ESR numbers than what we find in them now- where the dielectric is breaking down and they're going resistive. Where we disagree is how low those original ESR numbers were. I just don't believe those numbers were as low as what you can find now. IOWs, what constitutes a low ESR number back then, would be considered somewhat high by today's standards. There is also the DA component, and whatever effect the oil has. So, instead of replacing capacitors with capacitors that the loudspeaker wasn't originally designed or voiced with, why not use what Paul Klipsch called out for? Most metallized varieties bring the top too far forward, and sometimes have a grainy quality. Electrolytics take us to the other extreme, with no HF energy and a lack of detail. I use film and foils and charge coupled approaches because they can get you close, and sound nice. When I use a good paper in oil like a Jensen or a wax impregnated Jupiter -- I think that's about as close as you can get to what Paul Klipsch originally heard. How does one achieve "factory spec" while not using the type capacitors the factory used? An apology to Bob for that one, but he already knows how I feel about this. Now Bob has one very old capacitor that has some really low ESR numbers. He believes it's indicative of what most of the old capacitors measured like when new, while I think the thing is just an aberration in manufacturing. I mean, it's just one capacitor out of the hundreds he has tested, so I'm not buying it. OTOH, that doesn't mean he's wrong either. I mean, I'm not sure he's ever been wrong about anything, but I honestly think I have him on this one. Maybe. :-)

The old Heritage stuff that everyone loves were loaded with either paper in oil or polyester in oil capacitors -- and this is the sound that everyone is chasing. I know this because of the feedback I get. When they moved to the dry, axial wound and oval capacitors -- everything took a noticeable step back in sound quality.

I see that the thread is taking a DBT turn. Like I said the other day, this is the process that showed no discernible difference between a Pioneer receiver and a pair of Mark Levinson Monoblocks. It's utterly amazing what people can't tell the difference between.

Mark Deneen allowed me to continue to use his examination and conclusion regarding DBT. I have a dedicated page for it on my website.

http://www.aletheiaaudio.com/Double-Blind-Testing.html

I will probably lock this thread after everyone gets their opinions solidified. I see no point in kicking a dead horse or risk having this thread interpreted as an advertisement.

Edited October 4, 2015 by Deang

[mike stehr]

When I use a good paper in oil like a Jensen or a wax impregnated Jupiter -- I think that's about as close as you can get to what Paul Klipsch originally heard

 

Probably a little closer. Didn't Klipsch source oil caps from Military surplus, then tested and weened out the bad ones?

 

I think there is a bit more refinement in the build quality of the Jupiter capacitors with regard to the application of audio, as in regard to a Aerovox oil cap. IMO, of course...

[Deang]

Yes, they did do that.

I have to agree with all of that.

[Guest thesloth]

I have an issue with the battery bias mod maybe someone can help me understand. The explanations I find say that "biasing" the capacitor is effectively keeping the dielectric materials dipoles from going into relaxation by keeping them aligned. This sort of thinking assumes that keeping one plate more positive than the other cancels out all other alternating fields? If so the capacitor wouldn't pass any other frequencies through it. These alternating fields are still going to be present in the dielectric, no?

 

A battery can create a frequency but it's like a square wave, straight up and straigh down. Frequency is equal to a number of events divided by the change in time. A sine wave has angular velocity, 2*pi*f

[Guest thesloth]

Another thing with the battery bias mod is that since you are using two capacitors in series the esr sums; i.e. It is increased. Maybe this accounts for more of the sound change than anything else.

 

Looks like the evidence is pointing to people's ears like the extra esr or rolled off highs.

[derrickdj1]

I am just eating popcorn and sipping soda and enjoying the action.

[Nismo]

I am just eating popcorn and sipping soda and enjoying the action.

 

That and the flame baiting signature. Kinda loses all credibility at that point.

 

--------

 

As an original owner of RF-7's... I've long thought about sending them to Dean for an update. But I'd have to buy a used/replacement pair of 7's for the interim. Or do something really crazy & pick up a pair of LS.