More PIO Caps Installed ( Thanks thebes!)

[jimjimbo]

13 hours ago, captainbeefheart said:

I don't put much trust in perception due to how reality is a personal construct and differs from one individual to another.

Oh, OK.  You lost me there.

[geezin']

4 hours ago, jimjimbo said:

Oh, OK.  You lost me there.

I'm hearing that as "we each expect and hear the same thing differently." Kind of the Observer Effect/Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle in audio terms.

[OO1]

Yeah  awful  , R,,,PIO caps are ok for   basic power supplies ,microwaves,   AC motor run capacitors   HIFI speakers .......not so sure

[captainbeefheart]

On 4/9/2022 at 10:56 AM, jimjimbo said:

Oh, OK.  You lost me there.

 

It's not easy to admit that we are imperfect, I know many golden ears that think their hearing is infallible but once you start to study how we process and interpret the objective reality of the physical world around us you'll start to realize not to trust your brain, ears, eyes, scent etc... Here is a great video that scratches the surface but does an elegant job of explaining why each of our individual realities is a personal construct made up of very little actual real information from the physical world. In short we don't passively process information of the physical world around us, instead we actively construct our own reality from a small amount of the the real physical data.

 

 

[KT88]

3 hours ago, captainbeefheart said:

 

It's not easy to admit that we are imperfect, I know many golden ears that think their hearing is infallible but once you start to study how we process and interpret the objective reality of the physical world around us you'll start to realize not to trust your brain, ears, eyes, scent etc... Here is a great video that scratches the surface but does an elegant job of explaining why each of our individual realities is a personal construct made up of very little actual real information from the physical world. In short we don't passively process information of the physical world around us, instead we actively construct our own reality from a small amount of the the real physical data.

 

 

 

I would call the title of the video something else. The video is called: Why you can't trust your senses. Behind this title is a philosophy that suggests that there is an "objectivity" beyond our senses. I even believe that this question has not been reflected consciously by the author, but that naivety has led the pen.

 

Ok, reality exists also without us humans, but we can recognize "only our" reality by our senses. We can see this at examples like the James Webb telescope, which "translate" infrared into visible light so that we can make ourselves at all an image. But this only in the margin, because the question of this thread reaches deeper. Because even the translation of the James Webb telescope into our visible light must be interpreted by us while we perceive it. It goes even deeper, our senses like hear smell see etc. are already the result of a fabrication. It is not correct to think that we have "objective" instruments in our head like cameras, microphones etc..

 

Our senses are part of the fabrication of our perception. An example: Some people could never see, they were blind. After 25 years a top neurosurgeon could enable someone to see. But unfortunately the patient could not do anything with it. Spatiality, distance, meaning of objects...all that was not possible. The patient received only fragments of light that disturbed him. But even that does not get to the heart of the matter because one could think it is just learning which was missed. The core is that we create our world also through our senses. Because we are a collective we feel confirmed by the fellow men, thereby our world does not become more "objective" but we assure ourselves by the subjective consonance of our group of people.

 

I had the great fortune to study depth psychology at the University of Cologne in the 1980s. My professor was influenced by the psychoanalysis of Sigmund Freud but also by Gestalt psychology (which came to maturity in the USA because the top-class researchers were expelled and had to escape or they would  be killed by the Nazi terror), also holistic psychology was one of his influences and also phenomenology. All these wonderful developments happened between about 1900 and 1930. It was "the" awakening in psychology much like Albert Einstein's theory of relativity and Werner Heisenberg's quantum mechanics at the same time. Incidentally, many of these high-profile researchers were Jews, simply because Jews were a mainstay of our intellectual class. And now I am with Erwin Straus. He was a psychiatrist and a highly eloquent researcher. He was the co-founder of a neurological phenomenology. I googled, but one of his main works is unfortunately only available in German: "Vom Sinn der Sinne". in English „Sense of the Senses“, if my translation makes sense

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erwin_Straus

 

much more info but in German language.

 

https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erwin_W._Straus

 

Straus also had to escape from Nazi terror and he lived until 1975 in Kentucky.

 

I am pleased that after many decades of fighting this kind of psychology, something like a rediscovery is gradually taking place.  It is a perpetual battle between a "measurable" psychology that considers itself progressive but is stuck in the 19th century and a modern psychology that started over 120 years ago. It starts with what understanding of our psyche is defined in the first place. But this is going very far now. If anyone is interested, I'll write more about it. 
To take the curve back, our hobby scratches at so many interesting points of subjective reality. But not only Hifi resp. listening  is subjective:)

 

 

 

[captainbeefheart]

17 minutes ago, KT88 said:

To take the curve back, our hobby scratches at so many interesting points of subjective reality. But not only Hifi resp. listening  is subjective:)

 

 

Blind testing is necessary to get any sort of reliable data sets because of cognitive bias. A nice example was in the video I posted where they played an audio clip and asks what it says; Brainstorm? or Green needle? Having the information ahead of time, say only green needle in your mind creates a bias towards you hearing green needle. But if you give a second person prior information of Brainstorm they will have a cognitive bias to only hear that. Put the these two guys on the internet and they will argue to death with each other about what the audio recording is saying.

 

As an objective engineer I only trust math and precision equipment to determine there is indeed a difference between two signals and the degree to which they are different. The degree of difference can make certain arguments subjective even if we know that we measured a difference, typically very small measured differences are most likely not audible. That's why I don't trust my ears with measured small differences and if we have to do a listening test it must always be done blindly so there is no bias.

 

Take the coupling capacitor argument in amplifiers. I have measured many different types of coupling capacitors and the only differences found were very small, typically noise is the biggest difference I have seen but still approaching -100db. Although I have a very small noise difference confirmed by measurement I know the level is in most amplifier gain structures as not audible but still the subjective arguments never end about people swearing up and down they hear a huge difference. At this point we move toward blind testing to see if there is merit to people actually being able to hear these very small measured differences. I have yet to see a blind test where someone can repeatably pick a specific capacitor out by ear only. This proves to me how powerful the human mind is in constructing a false reality by perceiving a "huge difference" in the sound of coupling capacitors. I know there will be people chiming in and telling me I have no idea what I am talking about and that coupling capacitors all have their unique sound and that my ears or system just isn't resolving enough to notice....... Basically the same old arguments but when push comes to shove nobody has proven their ear is capable of what they claim when presented with a blind test. No matter what you present to them about our perception or measured data they refuse to believe that their ears can be deceived by their brains. Basically if a null test shows zero difference, there is no difference yet people will still argue this is not true; "we don't know what to measure". Yet the null test has been a proven test in many industries to easily compare two signals against one another and have direct evidence of an electrical difference or lack there of.

 

[KT88]

21 minutes ago, captainbeefheart said:

 

Blind testing is necessary to get any sort of reliable data sets because of cognitive bias. A nice example was in the video I posted where they played an audio clip and asks what it says; Brainstorm? or Green needle? Having the information ahead of time, say only green needle in your mind creates a bias towards you hearing green needle. But if you give a second person prior information of Brainstorm they will have a cognitive bias to only hear that. Put the these two guys on the internet and they will argue to death with each other about what the audio recording is saying.

 

As an objective engineer I only trust math and precision equipment to determine there is indeed a difference between two signals and the degree to which they are different. The degree of difference can make certain arguments subjective even if we know that we measured a difference, typically very small measured differences are most likely not audible. That's why I don't trust my ears with measured small differences and if we have to do a listening test it must always be done blindly so there is no bias.

 

Take the coupling capacitor argument in amplifiers. I have measured many different types of coupling capacitors and the only differences found were very small, typically noise is the biggest difference I have seen but still approaching -100db. Although I have a very small noise difference confirmed by measurement I know the level is in most amplifier gain structures as not audible but still the subjective arguments never end about people swearing up and down they hear a huge difference. At this point we move toward blind testing to see if there is merit to people actually being able to hear these very small measured differences. I have yet to see a blind test where someone can repeatably pick a specific capacitor out by ear only. This proves to me how powerful the human mind is in constructing a false reality by perceiving a "huge difference" in the sound of coupling capacitors. I know there will be people chiming in and telling me I have no idea what I am talking about and that coupling capacitors all have their unique sound and that my ears or system just isn't resolving enough to notice....... Basically the same old arguments but when push comes to shove nobody has proven their ear is capable of what they claim when presented with a blind test. No matter what you present to them about our perception or measured data they refuse to believe that their ears can be deceived by their brains. Basically if a null test shows zero difference, there is no difference yet people will still argue this is not true; "we don't know what to measure". Yet the null test has been a proven test in many industries to easily compare two signals against one another and have direct evidence of an electrical difference or lack there of.

 

 

This is a very relevant psychological phenomenon. When two different pieces of information are mixed, it is almost impossible for most people to perceive only one of the two pieces of information uninfluenced by the other. If someone doesn't know if they are hearing different coupling consulters in comparison, or better said, if they don't know which one is which, then they won't be able to make a significant distinction. But if before the listening test the subject is told that coupling capacitor A is a Wima MKP for 1.30 USD (which is good enough for Mcintosh gear) and coupling capacitor B is an oiled capacitor with paper which was created by Japanese virgins at full moon and costs 800 USD per piece then it will be difficult to filter out this information during the listening test.

By the way, the same effect would occur if the Wima cap was not labeled as such, but if the subject was told: Now listen to a capacitor that has proven itself in Mcintosh amps, which are known to be among the best in the world.

[TubesGlo]

11 hours ago, captainbeefheart said:

 

Blind testing is necessary to get any sort of reliable data sets because of cognitive bias. A nice example was in the video I posted where they played an audio clip and asks what it says; Brainstorm? or Green needle? Having the information ahead of time, say only green needle in your mind creates a bias towards you hearing green needle. But if you give a second person prior information of Brainstorm they will have a cognitive bias to only hear that. Put the these two guys on the internet and they will argue to death with each other about what the audio recording is saying.

 

As an objective engineer I only trust math and precision equipment to determine there is indeed a difference between two signals and the degree to which they are different. The degree of difference can make certain arguments subjective even if we know that we measured a difference, typically very small measured differences are most likely not audible. That's why I don't trust my ears with measured small differences and if we have to do a listening test it must always be done blindly so there is no bias.

 

Take the coupling capacitor argument in amplifiers. I have measured many different types of coupling capacitors and the only differences found were very small, typically noise is the biggest difference I have seen but still approaching -100db. Although I have a very small noise difference confirmed by measurement I know the level is in most amplifier gain structures as not audible but still the subjective arguments never end about people swearing up and down they hear a huge difference. At this point we move toward blind testing to see if there is merit to people actually being able to hear these very small measured differences. I have yet to see a blind test where someone can repeatably pick a specific capacitor out by ear only. This proves to me how powerful the human mind is in constructing a false reality by perceiving a "huge difference" in the sound of coupling capacitors. I know there will be people chiming in and telling me I have no idea what I am talking about and that coupling capacitors all have their unique sound and that my ears or system just isn't resolving enough to notice....... Basically the same old arguments but when push comes to shove nobody has proven their ear is capable of what they claim when presented with a blind test. No matter what you present to them about our perception or measured data they refuse to believe that their ears can be deceived by their brains. Basically if a null test shows zero difference, there is no difference yet people will still argue this is not true; "we don't know what to measure". Yet the null test has been a proven test in many industries to easily compare two signals against one another and have direct evidence of an electrical difference or lack there of.

 

I agree 100%. When electrical components such as capacitors, resistors etc. are designed and manufactured to meet a specific value, that component alone should not influence the sound of an amplifier per se.  Output coupling caps in my tube preamp have had subtle but notable effect on sound. The PIO crossover caps certainly had a notable effect. When all resistors on my tube amp driver board were updated from old carbon comps to metal films there was certainly a change and not actually for the better. Yes the amp was quieter but it became somewhat sterile, cold almost too clean in an unnatural way. When I replaced them with high quality Takman carbon films I found what I wanted , a more pleasant top end and smoother overall with excellent detail. 

When components meet spec such as interconnects, speaker cables and power cables, here is where in the audiophile world of boutique offerings things get silly. I use homemade interconnects and speaker cables using Mogami wire, power cables are standard issue. My power is from clean, dedicated circuits. A very lucrative industry exists because some believe that 10,000 dollar speaker cables offer an improvement and they hear the difference and can afford them. I'm just not in that camp. I read the Audiogon forum occasionally just for a good laugh. Lifting cables off the floor improves sound and you heard that improvement? Really?

[henry4841]

I'm with Captain. It has always been amazing for me the discussion about capacitors that goes on in this forum. Two thin plates separated by some type of material. Every time someone mentions purchasing some old speakers many chime in saying the caps need replacing when in reality most are just fine. That being said I do believe I can perceive subtle differences in some capacitors especially in the high frequencies. Probably more to do with the amount of high frequency roll off especially when it comes to horns that tend to be bright. Most in the electronic field will pick a good quality capacitor at the best price.  The engineers at Klipsch are using the old tried and true polyester capacitors over the more modern polypropylene in their products and many are praising them now on this forum. One would think the engineers know more then a layman. That is the sensible ones. 

[KT88]

How about a power supply cable test…

 

 

And another one

 

 

[captainbeefheart]

Oh god not another power cable discussion🤦‍♂️ 

 

6 hours ago, TubesGlo said:

When all resistors on my tube amp driver board were updated from old carbon comps to metal films there was certainly a change and not actually for the better. Yes the amp was quieter but it became somewhat sterile, cold almost too clean in an unnatural way.

 

This phenomena is easily measured and explained. Looking at the datasheet of a resistor you will notice a spec called voltage coefficient, typically measured in ppm or 10^-6.

 

What this means is the resistance value changes depending upon how much voltage is across the resistor, this makes the resistor nonlinear. For applications where there are large signal swings across the resistor, typically plate loads especially phase inverter plate loads the resistors will add distortion, since it's nonlinear you get even harmonics predominantly second order which is harmonious (octave above fundamental). So this isn't like power cables, it is real and can be measured and explained quite easily. Not once have I measured a difference at the output of a device I swapped power cables to something "reference". That's why you never see power cable companies show before and after output measurements of equipment showing things like distortion, bandwidth, and noise differences, because there isn't any.

[captainbeefheart]

3 hours ago, KT88 said:

How about a power supply cable test…

 

 

Amir at ASR does a great job at objective testing and covers just about everything. So what did he find? Every claim by audioquest is a complete bust.

[KT88]

5 hours ago, captainbeefheart said:

Oh god not another power cable discussion🤦‍♂️ 

 

 

This phenomena is easily measured and explained. Looking at the datasheet of a resistor you will notice a spec called voltage coefficient, typically measured in ppm or 10^-6.

 

What this means is the resistance value changes depending upon how much voltage is across the resistor, this makes the resistor nonlinear. For applications where there are large signal swings across the resistor, typically plate loads especially phase inverter plate loads the resistors will add distortion, since it's nonlinear you get even harmonics predominantly second order which is harmonious (octave above fundamental). So this isn't like power cables, it is real and can be measured and explained quite easily. Not once have I measured a difference at the output of a device I swapped power cables to something "reference". That's why you never see power cable companies show before and after output measurements of equipment showing things like distortion, bandwidth, and noise differences, because there isn't any.

 

To be sure if I have understood this correctly. Does this mean that a carbon film resistor is more linear? The industry nowadays likes to use metal film resistors because they have constant values over long periods of time and can be produced within tight tolerances. I know from the guitar amp scene that metal film resistors are very unpopular because of their sound characteristics. I am currently listening to old English Quad 34/306 amps. They are from the 80's and have carbon film resistors and they sound very very good...as transistor amps.

[captainbeefheart]

1 hour ago, KT88 said:

 

To be sure if I have understood this correctly. Does this mean that a carbon film resistor is more linear? The industry nowadays likes to use metal film resistors because they have constant values over long periods of time and can be produced within tight tolerances. I know from the guitar amp scene that metal film resistors are very unpopular because of their sound characteristics. I am currently listening to old English Quad 34/306 amps. They are from the 80's and have carbon film resistors and they sound very very good...as transistor amps.

 

The most linear (lowest voltage coefficient) are metal film resistors followed by carbon film resistors and the most nonlinear are Carbon Composition. You can get high quality carbon composition resistors that although they do have a higher noise figure are just fine for audio related things where you want some color. It's when the old carbon composition resistors start to fail and internally arc, this is that static popping noise in the back ground similar to the sound of bacon sizzling  in a fry pan. When I make guitar amps I use carbon composition for for certain areas to add the coloration, I have even done this for hifi where people want the vintage colored vibe. It's really subtle but it's there. Some of these guitar amps are open loop and extremely high gain and not once have I had audible noise from using carbon comp, yes the noise figure is higher compared to film types but it's barely measurable and good enough for government work. There are applications where I won't use them like phono stages because the goal is very low noise so metal films are best there, plus they are more accurate.

[KT88]

Thanks CBH. Here's another recent link to Amir where he exposes some other silly nonsense.

 

 

[KT88]

23 minutes ago, captainbeefheart said:

 

The most linear (lowest voltage coefficient) are metal film resistors followed by carbon film resistors and the most nonlinear are Carbon Composition. You can get high quality carbon composition resistors that although they do have a higher noise figure are just fine for audio related things where you want some color. It's when the old carbon composition resistors start to fail and internally arc, this is that static popping noise in the back ground similar to the sound of bacon sizzling  in a fry pan. When I make guitar amps I use carbon composition for for certain areas to add the coloration, I have even done this for hifi where people want the vintage colored vibe. It's really subtle but it's there. Some of these guitar amps are open loop and extremely high gain and not once have I had audible noise from using carbon comp, yes the noise figure is higher compared to film types but it's barely measurable and good enough for government work. There are applications where I won't use them like phono stages because the goal is very low noise so metal films are best there, plus they are more accurate.

 

I am looking to swap resistors relevant in the signal path in my C22CE and MC275 Mk4 for carbon composite or carbon film resistors. Even if the devices are then no longer original. But to be honest I can hear the difference, even if it might be more noisy. Are there scientific measurements why carbon sounds better than metal? Even if metal is "better" in the studies? It reminds of the capacitors topic.

[captainbeefheart]

11 minutes ago, KT88 said:

 

I am looking to swap resistors relevant in the signal path in my C22CE and MC275 Mk4 for carbon composite or carbon film resistors. Even if the devices are then no longer original. But to be honest I can hear the difference, even if it might be more noisy. Are there scientific measurements why carbon sounds better than metal? Even if metal is "better" in the studies? It reminds of the capacitors topic.

 

Yes you like the extra harmonic distortion most likely, it's relatively benign being second harmonic dominant but it will add "warmth" to the signal, especially simple music like vocals, piano, etc.. 

 

Amir is dead on with power re-generator. Every point he makes is exactly what I try and tell people, us engineers already design power supplies knowing the wall power is dirty and inconsistent so there is absolutely no need for these devices unless you like wasting money. Amir is correct, most of the time high powered amplifiers will actually get worse performance with these things, other than that it doesn't change a lick of a well designed piece of equipment's output.

 

Paul from PS Audio is such a snake oil salesman and blatantly lies through his teeth on every video he produces. Just another talking head that doesn't know anything except lie to people for profit. Glad Amir is calling out is BS, just like Ethan does.

[Curious_George]

22 minutes ago, KT88 said:

 

I am looking to swap resistors relevant in the signal path in my C22CE and MC275 Mk4 for carbon composite or carbon film resistors. Even if the devices are then no longer original. But to be honest I can hear the difference, even if it might be more noisy. Are there scientific measurements why carbon sounds better than metal? Even if metal is "better" in the studies? It reminds of the capacitors topic.

These carbon films are popular and well made. Supposedly they are as quiet as metal films which kind of makes you wonder if there is an audible noise difference. I have used standard ole carbon films in solid state amp rebuilds and can get 95dB signal to noise unweighted noise figures. Typically, the active components have more noise than the resistors unless you use a carbon comp in the wrong place. 

SPR-12666.pdf

[KT88]

6 hours ago, Curious_George said:

These carbon films are popular and well made. Supposedly they are as quiet as metal films which kind of makes you wonder if there is an audible noise difference. I have used standard ole carbon films in solid state amp rebuilds and can get 95dB signal to noise unweighted noise figures. Typically, the active components have more noise than the resistors unless you use a carbon comp in the wrong place. 

SPR-12666.pdf 233.46 kB · 4 downloads

Thank you for the tip, George. Because I did not know which ones I had ordered another KOA type with my last order from Mouser only two weeks ago. But I need only a few pieces (4 for 2 channels) to change from the built in voltage to other values to get the input sensitivity from 0,35V to 1,25V of an power amp. It is such a Quad 306 and all the resistors inside are originally carbon film types. Because of this I also ordered KOA CF types. I hope they will work and what is the difference to those SPR types?

 

https://eu.mouser.com/datasheet/2/219/CF-6922.pdf

 

 

[Curious_George]

5 hours ago, KT88 said:

Thank you for the tip, George. Because I did not know which ones I had ordered another KOA type with my last order from Mouser only two weeks ago. But I need only a few pieces (4 for 2 channels) to change from the built in voltage to other values to get the input sensitivity from 0,35V to 1,25V of an power amp. It is such a Quad 306 and all the resistors inside are originally carbon film types. Because of this I also ordered KOA CF types. I hope they will work and what is the difference to those SPR types?

 

https://eu.mouser.com/datasheet/2/219/CF-6922.pdf

 

 

The two carbon film series are similar. The SPR type come in wattages from 0.25W to 5W. They are classified as power series resistors due to their features. The tube amps guys use them, especially the 1W to 3W values. The CF should work fine for your application. 
 

Apparently, a lot of Japanese DIYers like the KOA SPR series. I’ve seen a few images of Japanese builds using SPR’s.