Jump to content
The Klipsch Audio Community
Sign in to follow this  
lucky5115

Cap Question

Recommended Posts

Just now, mach-1 said:

Then ask a question and get a reasonable response,  it is all for fun in the Klipsch Forum. ;)

Thought I did, and didn't.  Never mind.  Not worth it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, jimjimbo said:

And a cute little doily too.....

You don't like my wife's doileys?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, mach-1 said:

Sorry to OP lucky5115, moderators should not show booze bottles,  that have no connections to capacitor guestions.:mellow:

 

Back to "on topic"

 

35540606726_ecf48c53bc_b.jpg

33425252101_09e9e8da02_b.jpg

28118354203_984847585c_b.jpg

12213745395_7d910e32a7_b.jpg

 

Talk about a complete waste of a couple thousand dollars...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, mach-1 said:

Sorry to OP lucky5115, moderators should not show booze bottles,  that have no connections to capacitor guestions.:mellow:

I'll keep my booze bottles to myself then.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Schu said:

 

Back to "on topic"

 

35540606726_ecf48c53bc_b.jpg

33425252101_09e9e8da02_b.jpg

28118354203_984847585c_b.jpg

12213745395_7d910e32a7_b.jpg

 

Talk about a complete waste of a couple thousand dollars...

Purdy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

w

 

 

On 1/7/2018 at 7:54 PM, Schu said:

 

Back to "on topic"   So these look like nice components with unusual connection termination. Yes aND a HAM radio operator the connections fail.35540606726_ecf48c53bc_b.jpg

33425252101_09e9e8da02_b.jpg

28118354203_984847585c_b.jpg

12213745395_7d910e32a7_b.jpg

 

Talk about a complete waste of a couple thousand dollars...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, jimjimbo said:

Thought I did, and didn't.  Never mind.  Not worth it.

I guess I missed the question -- what did you ask Jim?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jjptkd said:

This is one of the topics that I personally have a hard time with, kind of like speaker wire and power cables etc. I understand cheap crap is junk but there has to be a limit to type of materials used, quality of materials and manufacturing ability right? Do different brand caps of the same value and equal quality really sound different if so why? 

No, it's not like speaker wire and power cables.

 

It's just an unfortunate fact of life that higher quality products typically cost more than lower quality ones. However, it's also true that there are exceptions to the general rule, and it's also true that some things are just grossly overpriced - for example: a 2uF/800Vdc Mundorf Supreme costs about $20, while a 2uF/200Vdc PPT Theta costs about the same. The latter is film and tin foil, while the former is not. The Theta is the better part -- unless you need the higher working voltage. To build a pair Type AA's with Thetas -- will run about $200. I'm sorry, but I just don't consider $200 to be budget breaking number.

 

Different brand capacitors of the same value and equal quality sound marginally different from one another, not necessarily better than one another.

 

BTW, the Mundorf stuff is interesting. They do stand out compared to Dayton, Jantzen Crosscap, etc. The only thing that makes them different is the very high working voltage and the fact they are non-inductive (because of how they are wound).

 

All I'm saying is that in the high pass, a film and foil sounds cleaner to me than metalized.

 

Jupiter is also a film and foil, but has great damping properties -- and is also considered a fully protected capacitor. So yeah, you're going to pay a premium for that..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/4/2018 at 8:44 AM, Deang said:

Even the simple A/B comparison is flawed, because the ears aren't the only thing involved here, but also the brain -- we need time to process what we're hearing.

You can factor that out in a crossover comparison.   Just do it double blind, left vs. right comparison, swap L and R speakers to rule out a "corner preference" after that, double blind them in pairs, A and B. 

 

The key to all of this is you tell them upfront that they may be listening to same crossover in both speakers, or different ones.  You ask if they hear a difference, if so, do they have a preference. 

 

Lastly, and this is the most critical thing, how much would you be willing to pay for that difference, if anything.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The critical thing is... how much does the difference cost, not how much you are willing to pay for it.

The user doesn't set the price... you're either willing to pay the difference or you are not.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have said it on many ocassions 

When building crossovers the best approach is a “ Wholistic Approach “ 

 

All components need to work in unison with each other 

The end result is what  “you are pleased with “ 

 

Not everyone listens to music correctly 

Not everyone is as pedantic as another person 

Not everyone can pick up tiny subtleties in audio changes when different components are used 

And lastly many items in the audio components in your system can influence the end result 

 

My background is in working for musicians, tuning instruments ready to go. So that tells you “I’m Not Tone Deaf 👂” 

Not sure if I can compare myself as a Golden Ear 👂 But I know what I like and am willing to spend to achieve my goal in my personal HiFi system 

I know the sound signature I want and have recently achieved that goal ( its taken many many years ) 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I think you would have to pick out some stand out delicate passages that the listener was very familiar with. Also a really fast playback and switching for someone to sit down and tell the difference.  10 or 15 seconds and its hard to distinguish anything with my brain anyhow.  I have had 5 different networks in my LaScala's and a few for my K's and A/B'd  all of them as well as listen to them for a week or so and then do a swap out. I have had Audyns, Audiocap Thetas, Sonicaps a couple more lessors and finally some Jupiter Flats. The differences are there on the top end without doubt.  However, the better the room with dampening and panels make it possible and/or easier at least for me.  If my room still had a untreated wood floor, pictures everywhere and no dampening panels for the walls and ceiling, I likely couldn't hear anything other than echo's and reverb like it use to be.

 

As far a price goes, IMO, you either have to be seriously set in your ways with one speaker model or near the end with a Belle, LS or K to spend the coin on that last little bit of refinement.  IMO, its a must as horns are so revealing and its so easy to change any signature with them.  You pay extra for a proper, clean active EQ with a decent bench numbers, so why not spend extra for some truly decent caps on a good old Analog network?  We all should chase the minute things because its what the company itself does, only we can chase the benefits without a world to market the benefit/cost ratio to, yet only by our smile and our pocketbook.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Schu said:

The critical thing is... how much does the difference cost, not how much you are willing to pay for it.

The user doesn't set the price... you're either willing to pay the difference or you are not.

The "user" is the consumer, they most certainly do set the demand at a given price.

 

It depends on what you are trying to determine.  If you are a manufacturer it  is critical to know where a consumer is willing to pay more because a dollar difference in cost can have a $4, 8 or 10 increase in retail price.  

 

I think @Deang would agree that while you can spend even more on caps than what Jupiters cost, there is a point of diminishing returns that don't justify the marginal cost.

 

If you are a consumer you do your own listening, or not, to make up your own mind as to what you can, or cannot perceive, if it is an improvement, and if so is cost difference justified.

 

First there has to be a difference,  then a preference, and if there is a preference, are they willing to pay for that preference.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Max2 said:

 

I think you would have to pick out some stand out delicate passages that the listener was very familiar with. Also a really fast playback and switching for someone to sit down and tell the difference.  10 or 15 seconds and its hard to distinguish anything with my brain anyhow.  I have had 5 different networks in my LaScala's and a few for my K's and A/B'd  all of them as well as listen to them for a week or so and then do a swap out. I have had Audyns, Audiocap Thetas, Sonicaps a couple more lessors and finally some Jupiter Flats. The differences are there on the top end without doubt.  However, the better the room with dampening and panels make it possible and/or easier at least for me.  If my room still had a untreated wood floor, pictures everywhere and no dampening panels for the walls and ceiling, I likely couldn't hear anything other than echo's and reverb like it use to be.

 

As far a price goes, IMO, you either have to be seriously set in your ways with one speaker model or near the end with a Belle, LS or K to spend the coin on that last little bit of refinement.  IMO, its a must as horns are so revealing and its so easy to change any signature with them.  You pay extra for a proper, clean active EQ with a decent bench numbers, so why not spend extra for some truly decent caps on a good old Analog network?  We all should chase the minute things because its what the company itself does, only we can chase the benefits without a world to market the benefit/cost ratio to, yet only by our smile and our pocketbook.

 

You let the listener determine what they want to sample, you have to eliminate music preference.  You give me  the left/right AB control and determine how they want to listen and flip back and forth.

 

You also make them do some very limited listening and selections with pink noise.  You can deve5lope validity Scales using pink noise thrown in at some point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Max2 said:

We all should chase the minute things because its what the company itself does, only we can chase the benefits without a world to market the benefit/cost ratio to, yet only by our smile and our pocketbook.

 

I think that sums up the entire exercise. 

 

Well said.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DBT demonstrated that a $200 Pioneer receiver was indistinguishable from a pair of $4000 Mark Levinson Monoblocks. The testing method is flawed - the ear/brain mechanism just doesn't work that way. Flipping switches to "prove" that a $2 junk cap sounds the same as a $20 film and foil is a waste of time. 

 

And yeah, I have my limits too. I'd really like to try some Teflon capacitors, but I still have a mortgage to pay. 

 

I also work on 1911s, which means I also have to deal with people who think metal injected molded parts are just as good as forged or barstock, which is ridiculous. In this case, there is no perceived difference until the part fails and renders the firearm useless. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dwilawyer said:

The "user" is the consumer, they most certainly do set the demand at a given price.

 

It depends on what you are trying to determine.  If you are a manufacturer it  is critical to know where a consumer is willing to pay more because a dollar difference in cost can have a $4, 8 or 10 increase in retail price.  

 

I think @Deang would agree that while you can spend even more on caps than what Jupiters cost, there is a point of diminishing returns that don't justify the marginal cost.

 

If you are a consumer you do your own listening, or not, to make up your own mind as to what you can, or cannot perceive, if it is an improvement, and if so is cost difference justified.

 

First there has to be a difference,  then a preference, and if there is a preference, are they willing to pay for that preference.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I would agree and I should also mention that Dean built the best three networks I ever tried and all my speakers still have his product, except my center channel which I have never altered and very rarely use.   Dean probably remembers, but he once said in an email to me that the few top end  caps consists of "different flavors,"  most all are good, just different. I think that nailed it from my testing of just a few. Its good to have smart people around that you can trust when dealing with something quite obscured and varied ear by ear. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Deang said:

DBT demonstrated that a $200 Pioneer receiver was indistinguishable from a pair of $4000 Mark Levinson Monoblocks. The testing method is flawed - the ear/brain mechanism just doesn't work that way. Flipping switches to "prove" that a $2 junk cap sounds the same as a $20 film and foil is a waste of time. 

 

And yeah, I have my limits too. I'd really like to try some Teflon capacitors, but I still have a mortgage to pay. 

 

I also work on 1911s, which means I also have to deal with people who think metal injected molded parts are just as good as forged or barstock, which is ridiculous. In this case, there is no perceived difference until the part fails and renders the firearm useless. 

You are referencing the famous Stereo Review test from 30 years ago conducted by an audio skeptic, David Clark.  Your close on the equipment, Pioneer receiver, Marl Levinson ML-11, about 2,000, but it was $12,000 Futterman Monoblocks!  

 

People could tell differences, and they could have preferences.  People often miss out on what Clark's point was in all of this:  your money is better spent on speakers and source (higher level turntable and cartridge). 

 

Everything else in the chain, phono, preamp, cartridge, tonearm was top of the line.  Most people can't even remember the speakers used, only that a Pioneer receiver beat a 12,000 pair of Monoblocks.  

 

There is a marked difference in DBT an audio component (like an amp) and a pair of speakers.  

 

There is scientific validity, if done right, on DBT of speakers, across a number of peer reviewed journals.  

 

I agree that it is nigh on impossible to come up with a valid way of ABing a component like an amp.  I think Clark's method was flawed.  Two amps were compared at a time, but listeners were told 3.  The 3rd they were asked to name when in fact is was either A or Buddhist they had already heard.

 

But you can conduct speaker test where people can listen and select their preference, which is capable of being duplicated over and over.  You can compare groups of people, like audio reviewers with high school students.  People in the US with people in Japan.

 

One of 100 examples

 

http://seanolive.blogspot.com/2012/11/behind-harmans-testing-lab.html

 

From there you can try and determine what common objective data is shared by the "preferred" speakers.  Harmon Int'l has concluded it is flat frequency response.  They claim they have a correlation of .86 as to what people will predictably prefer.

 

 

Above video two online audio guys picked the cheapest of 4 speakers as sounding best (which were Harman), and one of them ranked a set of Polk speakers worst (which he owned). 

 

It may very well in fact be the case that differences in capacitors in a network are of the "minute" sort of difference that are not capable of being accurately A/B tested.  I don't know.

 

You can most certainly tell the difference between speakers in DBT, can express a preference, and it some cases, that will even save you money.

 

If it sounds good to the buyer, they are happy, and perfectly ok with paying more for caps of their choice, who cares?

 

Of course that goes both ways.  If it isn't worth the price, or if they can't tell the difference, or even prefer Jensen, or PIO, or Sprague, etc., who cares?

 

If it were me, I would suggest that people are just unsure, build one speaker with El Cheepo brand, and one set of with expensive Brand de jour and let em decide for themselves.  If they love brand de Jour they can just order another set.  If they don't like the de Jour they can sell them in Garage Sale and not be out the full amount.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO, providing the testing is all double blind, you can validly look at both two speakers and two kinds of comparisons.    With 2-way ANOVA (there are better ways now, but they weren't teaching them when I was in graduate school) you can look at the effect of variable A, "which speaker is playing" and the separate effect of variable B, "type of comparison (instantaneous v.s protracted listening)"  and the interaction of variables A and B.  A, B, and AXB would all be tested for significance.    An example of interaction would be, "with instantaneous comparisons, speaker 1 got higher scores, but with protracted listening, speaker 2 was more highly rated."

 

This can be done with people randomly assigned to groups, or with repeated trials with one individual (who might be trying to select a speaker to buy).  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...