Hi,



I have a question about the audiophile capacitor replacement. In normal
production boards, signal coupling capacitor normally using polar
electrolytic capacitors. In some higher grade models, bi-polar electrolytic
capacitors will be introduced. Some people will upgrade it will audio grade
capacitors such as oil caps, polypropylene caps. In my audio device, the
coupling caps are 100uF polar electrolytic caps. I am looking for Jensen
oil caps and it will be very expensive and the size is very big. Someone
suggests me I can replace with 20uF oil caps instead of huge big one. If it
is right, is there any rule of thumb to do the exchange calculation or any
theory behind the idea. It seems the capacitor values will be 5 times lower
than the original value and I am worry about the filter DC function. Thanks
a lot for any input for the information.

Eric ha escrito:

Hi,



I have a question about the audiophile capacitor replacement. In normal
production boards, signal coupling capacitor normally using polar
electrolytic capacitors. In some higher grade models, bi-polar electrolytic
capacitors will be introduced. Some people will upgrade it will audio grade
capacitors such as oil caps, polypropylene caps. In my audio device, the
coupling caps are 100uF polar electrolytic caps. I am looking for Jensen
oil caps and it will be very expensive and the size is very big. Someone
suggests me I can replace with 20uF oil caps instead of huge big one.

This all seems rather unscientific to me, with more than a whiff of
snake oil (dunno about capacitor oil!)
- since when can you reduce the capacitance to a fifth of the value of
the original and expect good perfomance?
What utter crap. You'd end up with a result as if the amp had aged 20
years and the caps had lost their capacitance. Use always the same
value as the original: 100uF, with same or slightly greater voltage
rating.

Unless there is a fault with the appliance, (often evidenced by hum,
motor boating or excessive hiss on the output) I'd say don't mess about
changing caps for the sake of it. You won't hear any perceptible
difference. There are people out there making a living by spreading
this nonsense about to the non-technical.

-B.

"b" wrote in message
ups.com...

Eric ha escrito:

Hi,



I have a question about the audiophile capacitor replacement. In normal
production boards, signal coupling capacitor normally using polar
electrolytic capacitors. In some higher grade models, bi-polar
electrolytic
capacitors will be introduced. Some people will upgrade it will audio
grade
capacitors such as oil caps, polypropylene caps. In my audio device, the
coupling caps are 100uF polar electrolytic caps. I am looking for Jensen
oil caps and it will be very expensive and the size is very big. Someone
suggests me I can replace with 20uF oil caps instead of huge big one.

This all seems rather unscientific to me, with more than a whiff of
snake oil (dunno about capacitor oil!)
- since when can you reduce the capacitance to a fifth of the value of
the original and expect good perfomance?
What utter crap. You'd end up with a result as if the amp had aged 20
years and the caps had lost their capacitance. Use always the same
value as the original: 100uF, with same or slightly greater voltage
rating.

Unless there is a fault with the appliance, (often evidenced by hum,
motor boating or excessive hiss on the output) I'd say don't mess about
changing caps for the sake of it. You won't hear any perceptible
difference. There are people out there making a living by spreading
this nonsense about to the non-technical.

-B.

Jensen copper foil / oiled paper caps as upgrade replacements, are usually
more associated with the lower values that you tend to find as coupling caps
in valve amplifiers. They are physically bigger than the bog standard
polyesters that you would normally find fitted, and are very expensive.
There is, however, a measurable improvement to be had by fitting them, but I
would have to question if the cost was warranted.

Their electrolytic caps are, IIRC, all high voltage types for valve amp
power supplies, so not appropriate for interstage coupling on semiconductor
amps. As they are high voltage caps, their physical size will be
correspondingly larger, so the only way to get the size back down, would be
to reduce the value. I agree with the other poster, that this would be a bad
move for the performance of the amp, and far from giving a performance
improvement, would likely result in a detrimental effect.

There may be a measurable difference to be had, by replacing conventional
interstage coupling electros with bipolar types, which are readily
available, and no bigger than conventional types, but I doubt that you would
be able to notice the difference in a real-world music playing situation.
Again, I would agree with the other poster that if it ain't broke, don't try
to fix it.If you want to know more about the subject, you could try the
people over on uk.rec.audio. I know for sure that there are a couple of
people there who have fitted Jensen caps to amps, and may be better able to
advise you.

Arfa

In article . com, "b" wrote:

Eric ha escrito:

Hi,



I have a question about the audiophile capacitor replacement. In normal
production boards, signal coupling capacitor normally using polar
electrolytic capacitors. In some higher grade models, bi-polar electrolytic
capacitors will be introduced. Some people will upgrade it will audio grade
capacitors such as oil caps, polypropylene caps. In my audio device, the
coupling caps are 100uF polar electrolytic caps. I am looking for Jensen
oil caps and it will be very expensive and the size is very big. Someone
suggests me I can replace with 20uF oil caps instead of huge big one.

This all seems rather unscientific to me, with more than a whiff of
snake oil (dunno about capacitor oil!)
- since when can you reduce the capacitance to a fifth of the value of
the original and expect good perfomance?
What utter crap. You'd end up with a result as if the amp had aged 20
years and the caps had lost their capacitance. Use always the same
value as the original: 100uF, with same or slightly greater voltage
rating.

Well 5 of them will work. Some people replace passive speaker
crossover components, but you have to watch ESR which can change requirments.
I have seen certain types of electrolytics dry up and cause severe frequency
response errors in coupling caps.

greg

Unless there is a fault with the appliance, (often evidenced by hum,
motor boating or excessive hiss on the output) I'd say don't mess about
changing caps for the sake of it. You won't hear any perceptible
difference. There are people out there making a living by spreading
this nonsense about to the non-technical.

-B.

Eric wrote:
I have a question about the audiophile capacitor replacement. In normal
production boards, signal coupling capacitor normally using polar
electrolytic capacitors. In some higher grade models, bi-polar electrolytic
capacitors will be introduced. Some people will upgrade it will audio grade
capacitors such as oil caps, polypropylene caps. In my audio device, the
coupling caps are 100uF polar electrolytic caps. I am looking for Jensen
oil caps and it will be very expensive and the size is very big. Someone
suggests me I can replace with 20uF oil caps instead of huge big one. If it
is right, is there any rule of thumb to do the exchange calculation or any
theory behind the idea. It seems the capacitor values will be 5 times lower
than the original value and I am worry about the filter DC function. Thanks
a lot for any input for the information.

In general, replacing coupling caps with smaller values would create
high-pass filters, so you will have less bass. Are you sure they really
are 100u?

--
Met vriendelijke groet,

Maarten Bakker.

I find some of this hard to believe. I guess a little bit of knowledge
really is dangerous.

If anyone around here other than me knows how to design a transistor
amplifier stage, they know the cap is critical to some extent. You
cannot make the input impedance really high, like you can with a tube
(valve) amp.When dealing with bipolars, almost any stage needs an
emitter resistor and maybe even some bootstrap. Based on the gain of
the transistor you can raise the input impedance, perhaps even use a
common collector stage in front.

The problem is for a low distortion audio stage you need to drive the
base with a smoothly changing current, not a solid voltage.

I have experimented too, I have made amps distort in a certain way, so
I could see it on a scope as well as hear it, so I am not a babe in the
woods here.

Now I say this, you make the input impedance and gain of the stage what
you want, then select a coupling capacitor that will pass effectively
down to like 10Hz. But when driving a tube (valve) or FET it doesn't
matter as much. On high input impedance devices of course you need a
resistor, in the case of a tube, from grid to ground as well as a
cathode resistor to provide negative bias. In the case of FETs, well
some of them are enhancement mode and don't need a source (cathode)
resistor. Still if you intend to couple capacitively, there must be a
resistor across it.

When the input impedance is really high, it makes sense not to shunt it
out with a low value resistor. All you need is enough mhos to keep the
leakage and a few other things out of the picture. The higher the value
resistor, the lower value capacitance needed. Reactance + Ohm's law,
simple.

On that note I will add, keeping the input impedance high is good for
good sound. No capacitor is perfect. The thing is, what is imperfect
about capacitors ? ESR and ESL. For the uninformed these are effective
series resistance and inductance. (or just not up on all the three
letter acronyms)

The impedance of a capacitor is the vector sum of it's actual reactance
(admittance) and ESR and for higher frequencies the ESL must be brought
into the equation. ESL can usually be ignored for audio frequencies,
except maybe in high power crossover capacitors (in speakers, I mean
passive crossovers)

No matter what the quality of the coupling cap, the higher the input
impedance that it is couplinjg to, the better the quality. This is
because the ESR and ESL become very minimal when a capacitor is feeding
a high impedance.

Also, I totally disagree with switching to bipolar caps in any
equipment, unless you have speakers so cheap that....nevermind that. To
explain:

Capacitors have several variables. Size, capacity, voltage rating,
ESR/ESL, longevity and cost. You shouldn't go lower in capacity and you
can't go lower in voltage. If you get smaller caps they are likely to
not have as low ESR and ESL ratings as the originals. If you get
bipolars they will be bigger or have higher ESR and ESL at any given
rating. That is unless they are made for current and if that is so they
will either be bigger physically, or very expensive.

If the OP can supply me with a schematic of the unit, I might be able
to come up with some good modifications. Wouldn't be the first time.
Pioneer and Realistic both made mistakes in the FM stereo decoder, that
was one I couldn't handle. The problem was inside the chip. All I could
do is throw in a couple resistors to reduce the distortion but that
resulted in a subdued high frequency response. See that's the other
thing, in transistors, you never put a capacitor across an analog
output unless it is ballasted, that is has a resistor in series with
it.

Really the problem with these recievers was partly over modulation by
the FM stations, but this IM and THC was coming from the earlier
generations of PLL stereo demod chips. Although the signal wasn't
really over modulated, it was more than the engineers expected. The
result was that it sounded great on classical and some other types of
music, but on hard rock it was almost intolerable. Especially on
material that was REALLY in stereo, I mean had alot of seperation.

If anyone really wants to improve sound quality, let's face it, as long
as the amp has less than 1% THD and IM, get away from it. No speaker is
that good. Wonder why there is no THD or IM ratings on speakers ? You
would shreik.

My speakers are actually among the very very few rated for THD. The
rating is 0.7% at 1 watt 1Khz sine wave. And that is a fantastic rating
for a speaker. At 10 watts it is probably up there close to double
digit, but that is ALL speakers. They used to say that what comes out
of a speaker is only as good as what goes into it, and that is
absolutely true. But setting sights on the real problems is better than
wasting a ****load of money on things that will not solve the problem.

I paid $400 for these BAs, they were ten years old and I paid MSRP for
them, why ? Because I heard them. They rival Dahlquists and Cantons,
other really good speakers of the days of yore. Big names do not even
approach the sound quality of certain speakers. Pioneer, Bose, even
Technics alothough their electronics used to be pretty good. Macintosh.
Macintosh for _____ sakes !, not even close. Macintosh may have made
some of the finest electronics in the world for audio, but they did not
really excel in speakers IMO.

The only Mac I ever had was a Stereotech 1200, their first reciever.
Little known, but I have it still even though it fried out. I had some
Mac copies of their monoblock tube amps, but that is not the same.
Later they came out with the Mac 4100, their first "official" reciever.
Was nice too, cost alot too. But the brochure had the lid off, and you
could see ALOT of similarity to the Stereotech 1200. ALOT. I mean it
used the very same power amps, with darlington outputs in the SJ series
from Motorola. Nice smooth gain curve on those SJ series outputs, very
smooth for a darlington.

Anyway, I say this to all, if you want better sound, 90% of the time
you need to look at speakers and speaker placement. Amps are pretty
much how they are if designed properly. If they're any good at all you
won't hear a difference. Of course they can put better tone controls on
one and make it sound better in a certain environment. But the speaker
makes the most difference.

JURB

"Eric" wrote in message
...

I have a question about the audiophile capacitor replacement.

The term, "audiophile capacitor" is a red flag.






--

Arfa Daily wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote in message
Arfa Daily wrote:

Jensen copper foil / oiled paper caps as upgrade replacements, are
usually
more associated with the lower values that you tend to find as coupling
caps
in valve amplifiers. They are physically bigger than the bog standard
polyesters that you would normally find fitted, and are very expensive.
There is, however, a measurable improvement to be had by fitting them

What measureable improvement ?

Have you measured it ?

Graham

Hi Graham

I haven't personally measured any changes, but I have been assured by more
than one genuine expert in the field,

What's a genuine expert ?


that an improvement in the dynamic
response and overall flatness of the response curve of a high end - and
we're talking 1200 quid monoblocks here - *is* both audible and measurable.

And I were to tell you that they are complete knobs ?


I know what you're saying - or implying at least - and under normal
circumstances, having been in this business for 35 years and having seen and
looked into virtually every snake oil claim that there is out there, I too
would be skeptical. However, knowing the credentials of the people who have
made these claims, I have no reason to doubt them. I don't know whether you
have ever been over on uk rec audio, but there are some furious debates that
get going over claims about audible differences on cables,

Yes, they're quite barking mad and one of the guys who makes some of the most
extravagant claims has utter rubbish for his 'system'.


and it always
comes down to measurable characteristics in the end, so that is why I am
prepared to accept what has been said with regard to these caps, in this
situation, by these people.

I genuinely believe that measurements with the appropriate equipment *have*
been made, and a difference *has* been seen.

By whom ?


At the end of the day, Jensen
are a reputable company, and have been around for a very long time selling
very high quality caps. Whilst I appreciate that this is not a
recommendation for any claims per se, by the same token, in my experience,
snake oil sellers tend not to last too long, before their claims are
discredited ...

Not in the audio business !


Be assured that unless I was pretty confident of what I was saying, I
wouldn't actually say it on here, and potentially mislead someone that may
be of lesser ability or experience than me. However, all of this has no
relevance to the OP's original question, which I answered with what I
believe to be an honest opinion, which is that attempting to replace
electrolytic interstage coupling caps, with bipolars, will not result in any
audible improvement to his equipment.

Biploars will make it worse actually.

Have you ever measured any capacitors?

I have.

Graham

GregS wrote:

I have seen certain types of electrolytics dry up

That'll be because they were poorly specified originally.

Graham

wrote:

Eric wrote:
I have a question about the audiophile capacitor replacement. In normal
production boards, signal coupling capacitor normally using polar
electrolytic capacitors. In some higher grade models, bi-polar electrolytic
capacitors will be introduced. Some people will upgrade it will audio grade
capacitors such as oil caps, polypropylene caps. In my audio device, the
coupling caps are 100uF polar electrolytic caps. I am looking for Jensen
oil caps and it will be very expensive and the size is very big. Someone
suggests me I can replace with 20uF oil caps instead of huge big one. If it
is right, is there any rule of thumb to do the exchange calculation or any
theory behind the idea. It seems the capacitor values will be 5 times lower
than the original value and I am worry about the filter DC function. Thanks
a lot for any input for the information.

In general, replacing coupling caps with smaller values would create
high-pass filters, so you will have less bass. Are you sure they really
are 100u?

For an output coupling cap it's very likely.

That's what I use myself for output coupling and it's pretty much standard in
pro-audio.

There's a reason for it that's nothing to do with -3dB points btw.

Graham

wrote:

I find some of this hard to believe. I guess a little bit of knowledge
really is dangerous.

If anyone around here other than me knows how to design a transistor
amplifier stage, they know the cap is critical to some extent.

Ignorant, arrogant self-obsessed fool.

Graham

"Eeyore" wrote in message
...


Arfa Daily wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote in message
Arfa Daily wrote:

Jensen copper foil / oiled paper caps as upgrade replacements, are
usually
more associated with the lower values that you tend to find as
coupling
caps
in valve amplifiers. They are physically bigger than the bog standard
polyesters that you would normally find fitted, and are very
expensive.
There is, however, a measurable improvement to be had by fitting them

What measureable improvement ?

Have you measured it ?

Graham

Hi Graham

I haven't personally measured any changes, but I have been assured by
more
than one genuine expert in the field,

What's a genuine expert ?

Dictionary opinion :-
ex·pert /n., v. '?ksp?rt; adj. '?ksp?rt, ?k'sp?rt/ Pronunciation Key -
Show Spelled Pronunciation[n., v. ek-spurt; adj. ek-spurt, ik-spurt]
Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
-noun 1. a person who has special skill or knowledge in some particular
field; specialist; authority: a language expert.


My opinion :-
Someone who has successfully made a subject his life's work, and whose
pronouncements are accepted as valued by more people who have an
understanding of a subject, than rejected - hence my qualification of
"genuine" rather than the unsubstantiated opinions that are put forward by
someone who only *claims* themselves to be an expert.


that an improvement in the dynamic
response and overall flatness of the response curve of a high end - and
we're talking 1200 quid monoblocks here - *is* both audible and
measurable.

And I were to tell you that they are complete knobs ?


Then I would have to tell you that that is a very jaded view, just your
opinion, and not really sustainable. And to be honest, not the sort of input
that I've come to expect from you, whose views I normally respect.


I know what you're saying - or implying at least - and under normal
circumstances, having been in this business for 35 years and having seen
and
looked into virtually every snake oil claim that there is out there, I
too
would be skeptical. However, knowing the credentials of the people who
have
made these claims, I have no reason to doubt them. I don't know whether
you
have ever been over on uk rec audio, but there are some furious debates
that
get going over claims about audible differences on cables,

Yes, they're quite barking mad and one of the guys who makes some of the
most
extravagant claims has utter rubbish for his 'system'.


*Some* are quite barking, I would agree, but that does no preclude the fact
that there are one or two on there who are respected figures in the field,
and whose opinions I would consider to have more value than my 'broader
understanding' ones, which are based on many years of repairing the stuff,
rather than designing, modifying and speccing it ...



and it always
comes down to measurable characteristics in the end, so that is why I am
prepared to accept what has been said with regard to these caps, in this
situation, by these people.

I genuinely believe that measurements with the appropriate equipment
*have*
been made, and a difference *has* been seen.

By whom ?

Errr ... By the people doing the measuring ??



At the end of the day, Jensen
are a reputable company, and have been around for a very long time
selling
very high quality caps. Whilst I appreciate that this is not a
recommendation for any claims per se, by the same token, in my
experience,
snake oil sellers tend not to last too long, before their claims are
discredited ...

Not in the audio business !


Yes, in *all* businesses.


Be assured that unless I was pretty confident of what I was saying, I
wouldn't actually say it on here, and potentially mislead someone that
may
be of lesser ability or experience than me. However, all of this has no
relevance to the OP's original question, which I answered with what I
believe to be an honest opinion, which is that attempting to replace
electrolytic interstage coupling caps, with bipolars, will not result in
any
audible improvement to his equipment.


Biploars will make it worse actually.

So I have to ask, and this is a genuine question, as you clearly believe
that you, unlike the people on uk rec audio, are an expert, in what way will
they make it worse, and why ? And if it is demonstrably the case, why do the
likes of Musical Fidelity use them as interstage couplers as a matter of
course in their high end preamps, and why do they get used as the C element
in better quality crossovers ?

Have you ever measured any capacitors?

I have.


Graham


Of course I have measured capacitors, but for the characteristics that are
important for repair purposes, not esoteric values that have an impact on
design of the surrounding circuitry. I follow a rule that has served me well
in the repair business for 35 years, and that is always replace like for
like, and wherever possible, use either a manufacturer supplied component,
or one from the same stable, so I do not normally need to start mesuring odd
characteristics for speccing replacements for faulty components.

I hear what you are saying on all this, but really Graham, you are beginning
to sound like one of those from that other group, who is barking. In the
end, I gave the OP for this thread, what I believed was an honest and valued
opinion. Clearly, you think otherwise, and if you are making claim to being
whatever counts for you as a *true* expert in the field, then I bow to your
superior knowledge. We have had some good exchanges and have given what I
consider to be good joint advice in the past, and I have no desire to fall
out with you over this one, so that's all am going to say on the matter, and
unless anything else appears in this thread that requires me personally to
answer, then I now bow out of it ...

Arfa

Arfa Daily wrote:

What's a genuine expert ?


Dictionary opinion :-
ex·pert /n., v. '?ksp?rt; adj. '?ksp?rt, ?k'sp?rt/ Pronunciation Key -
Show Spelled Pronunciation[n., v. ek-spurt; adj. ek-spurt, ik-spurt]
Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
-noun 1. a person who has special skill or knowledge in some particular
field; specialist; authority: a language expert.


My opinion :-
Someone who has successfully made a subject his life's work, and whose
pronouncements are accepted as valued by more people who have an
understanding of a subject, than rejected - hence my qualification of
"genuine" rather than the unsubstantiated opinions that are put forward by
someone who only *claims* themselves to be an expert.


that an improvement in the dynamic
response and overall flatness of the response curve of a high end - and
we're talking 1200 quid monoblocks here - *is* both audible and
measurable.

And I were to tell you that they are complete knobs ?



Then I would have to tell you that that is a very jaded view, just your
opinion, and not really sustainable. And to be honest, not the sort of input
that I've come to expect from you, whose views I normally respect.


I know what you're saying - or implying at least - and under normal
circumstances, having been in this business for 35 years and having seen
and
looked into virtually every snake oil claim that there is out there, I
too
would be skeptical. However, knowing the credentials of the people who
have
made these claims, I have no reason to doubt them. I don't know whether
you
have ever been over on uk rec audio, but there are some furious debates
that
get going over claims about audible differences on cables,

Yes, they're quite barking mad and one of the guys who makes some of the
most
extravagant claims has utter rubbish for his 'system'.



*Some* are quite barking, I would agree, but that does no preclude the fact
that there are one or two on there who are respected figures in the field,
and whose opinions I would consider to have more value than my 'broader
understanding' ones, which are based on many years of repairing the stuff,
rather than designing, modifying and speccing it ...



and it always
comes down to measurable characteristics in the end, so that is why I am
prepared to accept what has been said with regard to these caps, in this
situation, by these people.

I genuinely believe that measurements with the appropriate equipment
*have*
been made, and a difference *has* been seen.

By whom ?


Errr ... By the people doing the measuring ??



At the end of the day, Jensen
are a reputable company, and have been around for a very long time
selling
very high quality caps. Whilst I appreciate that this is not a
recommendation for any claims per se, by the same token, in my
experience,
snake oil sellers tend not to last too long, before their claims are
discredited ...

Not in the audio business !



Yes, in *all* businesses.


Be assured that unless I was pretty confident of what I was saying, I
wouldn't actually say it on here, and potentially mislead someone that
may
be of lesser ability or experience than me. However, all of this has no
relevance to the OP's original question, which I answered with what I
believe to be an honest opinion, which is that attempting to replace
electrolytic interstage coupling caps, with bipolars, will not result in
any
audible improvement to his equipment.


Biploars will make it worse actually.


So I have to ask, and this is a genuine question, as you clearly believe
that you, unlike the people on uk rec audio, are an expert, in what way will
they make it worse, and why ? And if it is demonstrably the case, why do the
likes of Musical Fidelity use them as interstage couplers as a matter of
course in their high end preamps, and why do they get used as the C element
in better quality crossovers ?


Have you ever measured any capacitors?

I have.

Graham


Of course I have measured capacitors, but for the characteristics that are
important for repair purposes, not esoteric values that have an impact on
design of the surrounding circuitry.


What the Hell is a "esoteric value"? How does one measure "esoteric
values"? Is there a "esoteric value" meter?

I am sure you own a good cap checker. If you do, it probably measures
capacity, leakage, ESR, and breakdown.

If your trying to quantify some other test, then somebody needs to
explain it or it is snake oil. Now, if someone is sweeping a cap
from 20 to 50K with a audio signal and measuring variations in ESR
or such and can show a "VALID" difference, then that is a quantifiable
test. If that is what they are doing, then the test needs to be stated
with test conditions and type of equipment used.

There are cheaper electrolytics these days as i am sure you know.
Especially the little surface mount guys that have the 1/2 life of
a mouse being chased by a hawk. ANd then the infamous "we stole the
wrong cap formula" fiasco of a while back. So i am not totally against
the "defective cap" theory.


And how do you quantify the final result? Just saying it sounds
"warmer"? Unless its something you can measure on test gear, how do
you prove it? Only a qualified golden ear may apply? And how much of a
difference is it? Is the response smoother? less noise? lower THD?
Less phase variation?


You want to find some real HI-fi experts go down to aus.hi-fi.

Like politics, audio has its "spin doctors" that can convince gullible
people of anything. I imagine some people are still putting green magic
marker on there CD's and swearing they sound better.

Unfortunately, audio is going in the wrong direction. It used to be
the industry fought for another .1% drop in THD. Now we have lossy
formats such as MP3 whose sonic purity is questionable at best.
And cheap home theater receivers where 1 or 2% THD is the norm these
days. I call it the "dumbing down" of our ears. And don't forget the
disposable gear that's so cheap its not fixable. Its the beginning of
the end of the consumer electronics repair industry as we know it.




Bob



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Bob Urz" wrote in message
...


Arfa Daily wrote:

What's a genuine expert ?


Dictionary opinion :-
ex·pert /n., v. '?ksp?rt; adj. '?ksp?rt, ?k'sp?rt/ Pronunciation
Key -
Show Spelled Pronunciation[n., v. ek-spurt; adj. ek-spurt, ik-spurt]
Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
-noun 1. a person who has special skill or knowledge in some particular
field; specialist; authority: a language expert.


My opinion :-
Someone who has successfully made a subject his life's work, and whose
pronouncements are accepted as valued by more people who have an
understanding of a subject, than rejected - hence my qualification of
"genuine" rather than the unsubstantiated opinions that are put forward
by
someone who only *claims* themselves to be an expert.


that an improvement in the dynamic
response and overall flatness of the response curve of a high end - and
we're talking 1200 quid monoblocks here - *is* both audible and
measurable.

And I were to tell you that they are complete knobs ?



Then I would have to tell you that that is a very jaded view, just your
opinion, and not really sustainable. And to be honest, not the sort of
input
that I've come to expect from you, whose views I normally respect.


I know what you're saying - or implying at least - and under normal
circumstances, having been in this business for 35 years and having seen
and
looked into virtually every snake oil claim that there is out there, I
too
would be skeptical. However, knowing the credentials of the people who
have
made these claims, I have no reason to doubt them. I don't know whether
you
have ever been over on uk rec audio, but there are some furious debates
that
get going over claims about audible differences on cables,

Yes, they're quite barking mad and one of the guys who makes some of the
most
extravagant claims has utter rubbish for his 'system'.



*Some* are quite barking, I would agree, but that does no preclude the
fact
that there are one or two on there who are respected figures in the
field,
and whose opinions I would consider to have more value than my 'broader
understanding' ones, which are based on many years of repairing the
stuff,
rather than designing, modifying and speccing it ...



and it always
comes down to measurable characteristics in the end, so that is why I am
prepared to accept what has been said with regard to these caps, in this
situation, by these people.

I genuinely believe that measurements with the appropriate equipment
*have*
been made, and a difference *has* been seen.

By whom ?


Errr ... By the people doing the measuring ??



At the end of the day, Jensen
are a reputable company, and have been around for a very long time
selling
very high quality caps. Whilst I appreciate that this is not a
recommendation for any claims per se, by the same token, in my
experience,
snake oil sellers tend not to last too long, before their claims are
discredited ...

Not in the audio business !



Yes, in *all* businesses.


Be assured that unless I was pretty confident of what I was saying, I
wouldn't actually say it on here, and potentially mislead someone that
may
be of lesser ability or experience than me. However, all of this has no
relevance to the OP's original question, which I answered with what I
believe to be an honest opinion, which is that attempting to replace
electrolytic interstage coupling caps, with bipolars, will not result in
any
audible improvement to his equipment.


Biploars will make it worse actually.


So I have to ask, and this is a genuine question, as you clearly believe
that you, unlike the people on uk rec audio, are an expert, in what way
will
they make it worse, and why ? And if it is demonstrably the case, why do
the
likes of Musical Fidelity use them as interstage couplers as a matter of
course in their high end preamps, and why do they get used as the C
element
in better quality crossovers ?


Have you ever measured any capacitors?

I have.

Graham


Of course I have measured capacitors, but for the characteristics that
are
important for repair purposes, not esoteric values that have an impact on
design of the surrounding circuitry.


What the Hell is a "esoteric value"? How does one measure "esoteric
values"? Is there a "esoteric value" meter?


Oh dear ! Clearly, English is your native language, but it would seem that
there are some words that you just haven't come across ... Do they not have
dictionaries wherever you are ? I actually agree with most of what you have
said, and I never implied that I believed in golden ears, or anything else
in the same vein. All I said, that seems to have created the rather
vitriolic response from Graham, was that I genuinely believed that there
were measurable differences in the performance of "audio grade" caps over
bog standard types, and that there were people out there who had made those
tests. The reference to "esoteric values" is a tongue in cheek allusion to
the 'snake oil experts' who will present complex-sounding measurements that
are actually ********. For your further education ...

es·o·ter·ic /??s?'t?r?k/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled
Pronunciation[es-uh-ter-ik] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
-adjective 1. understood by or meant for only the select few who have
special knowledge or interest; recondite: poetry full of esoteric allusions.
2. belonging to the select few.
3. private; secret; confidential.
4. (of a philosophical doctrine or the like) intended to be revealed
only to the initiates of a group: the esoteric doctrines of Pythagoras.


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

[Origin: 1645-55; Gk esoterikós inner, equiv. to ester(os) inner
+ -ikos -ic]

-Related forms
es·o·ter·i·cal·ly, adverb


-Synonyms 1. abstruse, arcane, cryptic, enigmatic.
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc.
2006.
American Heritage Dictionary - Cite This Source es·o·ter·ic (es'?-ter'ik)
Pronunciation Key
adj.
1..
1.. Intended for or understood by only a particular group: an
esoteric cult. See Synonyms at mysterious.
2.. Of or relating to that which is known by a restricted number
of people.
3.. Confined to a small group: esoteric interests.
4.. Not publicly disclosed; confidential.
2..
1.. Confined to a small group: esoteric interests.
2.. Not publicly disclosed; confidential.


[Greek esoterikos, from esotero, comparative of eso, within; see en in
Indo-European roots.]

es'o·ter'i·cal·ly adv.

(Download Now or Buy the Book) The American Heritage® Dictionary of the
English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
WordNet - Cite This Source esoteric

adjective
confined to and understandable by only an enlightened inner circle; "a
compilation of esoteric philosophical theories" [ant: exoteric]

Arfa d;~}

"Bob Urz" wrote in message
...

What the Hell is a "esoteric value"? How does one measure "esoteric
values"? Is there a "esoteric value" meter?

Sure. It's called an E-Meter and your local Scientology Centre has them.







--

In article UvNrh.163569$YV4.66232@edtnps89, "Homer J Simpson" wrote:

"Bob Urz" wrote in message
...

What the Hell is a "esoteric value"? How does one measure "esoteric
values"? Is there a "esoteric value" meter?

Sure. It's called an E-Meter and your local Scientology Centre has them.

One parameter that might be considered esoteric, is delectric absorbtion.
This will affect capacitance, but can be measured out. it can
affect DC circuits, or ac circuits with a dc bias. Better caps have low DA.
Electrolytics are really bad in this respect. DA also causes frequency
dependant cap values.

greg

GregS wrote:

In article UvNrh.163569$YV4.66232@edtnps89, "Homer J Simpson" wrote:

"Bob Urz" wrote in message
...

What the Hell is a "esoteric value"? How does one measure "esoteric
values"? Is there a "esoteric value" meter?

Sure. It's called an E-Meter and your local Scientology Centre has them.


Dam, that's got me jumping on the sofa!



One parameter that might be considered esoteric, is delectric absorbtion. This will affect
capacitance, but can be measured out. it can affect DC circuits, or ac circuits with a dc
bias. Better caps have low DA. Electrolytics are really bad in this respect. DA also causes
frequency dependant cap values.

greg

Now were cooking on gas. Define what can make a difference.
Frequency dependent values. Now, you have to define a standard
repeatable test to quantify the results. Other wise its smoke and mirrors again. Is there a
Audio standard that i know about how to do this? not really. So pick a arbitrary test set up
and call it fact? To do this, you would need to define frequency range. drive and load
impedance. and what deviation from standard parameters constitute an audible difference. I
suppose its not beyond the realm of possibility (if you define the above test and criteria) to
select caps like how you match vacuum tubes for characteristics.

A few interesting links on the subject:

http://www.audience-av.com/on_capaci...c_material.htm

http://www.national.com/rap/Applicat...570,28,00.html

Bob


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Arfa Daily wrote:

"Bob Urz" wrote in message
...


Arfa Daily wrote:

What's a genuine expert ?


Dictionary opinion :-
ex·pert /n., v. '?ksp?rt; adj. '?ksp?rt, ?k'sp?rt/ Pronunciation
Key -
Show Spelled Pronunciation[n., v. ek-spurt; adj. ek-spurt, ik-spurt]
Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
-noun 1. a person who has special skill or knowledge in some particular
field; specialist; authority: a language expert.


My opinion :-
Someone who has successfully made a subject his life's work, and whose
pronouncements are accepted as valued by more people who have an
understanding of a subject, than rejected - hence my qualification of
"genuine" rather than the unsubstantiated opinions that are put forward
by
someone who only *claims* themselves to be an expert.


that an improvement in the dynamic
response and overall flatness of the response curve of a high end - and
we're talking 1200 quid monoblocks here - *is* both audible and
measurable.

And I were to tell you that they are complete knobs ?



Then I would have to tell you that that is a very jaded view, just your
opinion, and not really sustainable. And to be honest, not the sort of
input
that I've come to expect from you, whose views I normally respect.


I know what you're saying - or implying at least - and under normal
circumstances, having been in this business for 35 years and having seen
and
looked into virtually every snake oil claim that there is out there, I
too
would be skeptical. However, knowing the credentials of the people who
have
made these claims, I have no reason to doubt them. I don't know whether
you
have ever been over on uk rec audio, but there are some furious debates
that
get going over claims about audible differences on cables,

Yes, they're quite barking mad and one of the guys who makes some of the
most
extravagant claims has utter rubbish for his 'system'.



*Some* are quite barking, I would agree, but that does no preclude the
fact
that there are one or two on there who are respected figures in the
field,
and whose opinions I would consider to have more value than my 'broader
understanding' ones, which are based on many years of repairing the
stuff,
rather than designing, modifying and speccing it ...



and it always
comes down to measurable characteristics in the end, so that is why I am
prepared to accept what has been said with regard to these caps, in this
situation, by these people.

I genuinely believe that measurements with the appropriate equipment
*have*
been made, and a difference *has* been seen.

By whom ?


Errr ... By the people doing the measuring ??



At the end of the day, Jensen
are a reputable company, and have been around for a very long time
selling
very high quality caps. Whilst I appreciate that this is not a
recommendation for any claims per se, by the same token, in my
experience,
snake oil sellers tend not to last too long, before their claims are
discredited ...

Not in the audio business !



Yes, in *all* businesses.


Be assured that unless I was pretty confident of what I was saying, I
wouldn't actually say it on here, and potentially mislead someone that
may
be of lesser ability or experience than me. However, all of this has no
relevance to the OP's original question, which I answered with what I
believe to be an honest opinion, which is that attempting to replace
electrolytic interstage coupling caps, with bipolars, will not result in
any
audible improvement to his equipment.


Biploars will make it worse actually.


So I have to ask, and this is a genuine question, as you clearly believe
that you, unlike the people on uk rec audio, are an expert, in what way
will
they make it worse, and why ? And if it is demonstrably the case, why do
the
likes of Musical Fidelity use them as interstage couplers as a matter of
course in their high end preamps, and why do they get used as the C
element
in better quality crossovers ?


Have you ever measured any capacitors?

I have.

Graham


Of course I have measured capacitors, but for the characteristics that
are
important for repair purposes, not esoteric values that have an impact on
design of the surrounding circuitry.


What the Hell is a "esoteric value"? How does one measure "esoteric
values"? Is there a "esoteric value" meter?


Oh dear ! Clearly, English is your native language, but it would seem that
there are some words that you just haven't come across ... Do they not have
dictionaries wherever you are ? I actually agree with most of what you have
said, and I never implied that I believed in golden ears, or anything else
in the same vein. All I said, that seems to have created the rather
vitriolic response from Graham, was that I genuinely believed that there
were measurable differences in the performance of "audio grade" caps over
bog standard types, and that there were people out there who had made those
tests. The reference to "esoteric values" is a tongue in cheek allusion to
the 'snake oil experts' who will present complex-sounding measurements that
are actually ********. For your further education ...

es·o·ter·ic /??s?'t?r?k/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled
Pronunciation[es-uh-ter-ik] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
-adjective 1. understood by or meant for only the select few who have
special knowledge or interest; recondite: poetry full of esoteric allusions.
2. belonging to the select few.
3. private; secret; confidential.
4. (of a philosophical doctrine or the like) intended to be revealed
only to the initiates of a group: the esoteric doctrines of Pythagoras.

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

[Origin: 1645-55; Gk esoterikós inner, equiv. to ester(os) inner
+ -ikos -ic]

-Related forms
es·o·ter·i·cal·ly, adverb

-Synonyms 1. abstruse, arcane, cryptic, enigmatic.
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc.
2006.
American Heritage Dictionary - Cite This Source es·o·ter·ic (es'?-ter'ik)
Pronunciation Key
adj.
1..
1.. Intended for or understood by only a particular group: an
esoteric cult. See Synonyms at mysterious.
2.. Of or relating to that which is known by a restricted number
of people.
3.. Confined to a small group: esoteric interests.
4.. Not publicly disclosed; confidential.
2..
1.. Confined to a small group: esoteric interests.
2.. Not publicly disclosed; confidential.

[Greek esoterikos, from esotero, comparative of eso, within; see en in
Indo-European roots.]

es'o·ter'i·cal·ly adv.

(Download Now or Buy the Book) The American Heritage® Dictionary of the
English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
WordNet - Cite This Source esoteric

adjective
confined to and understandable by only an enlightened inner circle; "a
compilation of esoteric philosophical theories" [ant: exoteric]

Arfa d;~}

Ok, you have a dictionary definition of esoteric. You have so called experts telling
you what esoteric is. What are there qualifications?
I don't recall seeing any engineering school classes on esoteric.
What makes these guys so much smarter than everyone else?
And why is so much of the stuff Voodoo science it seems?
And VERY costly to boot?

Like i said before, test caps with a standard, quantifiable test of
some sort. and put the charts with it to show in black and what
what the differences are. And under what conditions, loads and voltage ratings.
Anybody can tell or sell you anything. that does
not make it true or better. There are still people selling magnets
that go on automotive fuel lines that claim give you
better mileage. After all these years! PT Barnum was right.

I am not against better quality components of any nature.
But i want to see the proof. Being in the service industry for
years, i am all for the best bang for the buck. These days its
a matter of survival in the service industry. In the quest for
that, i have been on both the good and bad end of component
sourcing. Sometimes you just need to find out for yourself.

Bob


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Eric:
When you get done with this expensive waste of money.... please contact me
so I can sell you very expensive oxygen free, biradially wound copper
speaker wires and interconnect cables with gold connectors...about $10 per
foot...... and while you are at it you should consider a $1500 or more,
power line conditioner so that your equipment gets cleaned up power so it
can produce much "improved" sound.
Daniel Sofie
Electronics Supply & Repair
- - - - - - - - -



"Eric" wrote in message
...
Hi,



I have a question about the audiophile capacitor replacement. In normal
production boards, signal coupling capacitor normally using polar
electrolytic capacitors. In some higher grade models, bi-polar
electrolytic
capacitors will be introduced. Some people will upgrade it will audio
grade
capacitors such as oil caps, polypropylene caps. In my audio device, the
coupling caps are 100uF polar electrolytic caps. I am looking for Jensen
oil caps and it will be very expensive and the size is very big. Someone
suggests me I can replace with 20uF oil caps instead of huge big one. If
it
is right, is there any rule of thumb to do the exchange calculation or any
theory behind the idea. It seems the capacitor values will be 5 times
lower
than the original value and I am worry about the filter DC function.
Thanks
a lot for any input for the information.

What the Hell is a "esoteric value"? How does one measure "esoteric
values"? Is there a "esoteric value" meter?


Oh dear ! Clearly, English is your native language, but it would seem
that
there are some words that you just haven't come across ... Do they not
have
dictionaries wherever you are ? I actually agree with most of what you
have
said, and I never implied that I believed in golden ears, or anything
else
in the same vein. All I said, that seems to have created the rather
vitriolic response from Graham, was that I genuinely believed that there
were measurable differences in the performance of "audio grade" caps over
bog standard types, and that there were people out there who had made
those
tests. The reference to "esoteric values" is a tongue in cheek allusion
to
the 'snake oil experts' who will present complex-sounding measurements
that
are actually ********. For your further education ...

es·o·ter·ic /??s?'t?r?k/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled
Pronunciation[es-uh-ter-ik] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
-adjective 1. understood by or meant for only the select few who have
special knowledge or interest; recondite: poetry full of esoteric
allusions.
2. belonging to the select few.
3. private; secret; confidential.
4. (of a philosophical doctrine or the like) intended to be
revealed
only to the initiates of a group: the esoteric doctrines of Pythagoras.

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

[Origin: 1645-55; Gk esoterikós inner, equiv. to ester(os) inner
+ -ikos -ic]

-Related forms
es·o·ter·i·cal·ly, adverb

-Synonyms 1. abstruse, arcane, cryptic, enigmatic.
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House,
Inc.
2006.
American Heritage Dictionary - Cite This Source es·o·ter·ic
(es'?-ter'ik)
Pronunciation Key
adj.
1..
1.. Intended for or understood by only a particular group: an
esoteric cult. See Synonyms at mysterious.
2.. Of or relating to that which is known by a restricted
number
of people.
3.. Confined to a small group: esoteric interests.
4.. Not publicly disclosed; confidential.
2..
1.. Confined to a small group: esoteric interests.
2.. Not publicly disclosed; confidential.

[Greek esoterikos, from esotero, comparative of eso, within; see en
in
Indo-European roots.]

es'o·ter'i·cal·ly adv.

(Download Now or Buy the Book) The American Heritage® Dictionary of the
English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
WordNet - Cite This Source esoteric

adjective
confined to and understandable by only an enlightened inner circle;
"a
compilation of esoteric philosophical theories" [ant: exoteric]

Arfa d;~}

Ok, you have a dictionary definition of esoteric. You have so called
experts telling
you what esoteric is. What are there qualifications?
I don't recall seeing any engineering school classes on esoteric.
What makes these guys so much smarter than everyone else?
And why is so much of the stuff Voodoo science it seems?
And VERY costly to boot?

Like i said before, test caps with a standard, quantifiable test of
some sort. and put the charts with it to show in black and what
what the differences are. And under what conditions, loads and voltage
ratings.
Anybody can tell or sell you anything. that does
not make it true or better. There are still people selling magnets
that go on automotive fuel lines that claim give you
better mileage. After all these years! PT Barnum was right.

I am not against better quality components of any nature.
But i want to see the proof. Being in the service industry for
years, i am all for the best bang for the buck. These days its
a matter of survival in the service industry. In the quest for
that, i have been on both the good and bad end of component
sourcing. Sometimes you just need to find out for yourself.

Bob

Hey Bob

You're missing the point, old boy. " Esoteric " is what *defines* these
people as snake oil experts. We all know that the basic parameters for
measurement of a capacitor are primarily its capacitance and its ESR, and
secondarily, its leakage and inherent inductance. Its the nonsense such as
the " back-peddling quantum electron mobility count factor " and the "
sliding scalar blisticon enhancement constant " ( and no, neither of these
are real ) which are the sorts of 'esoteric' measurements that I am
referring to. The snake oil 'experts' talk amongst themselves in their
private clubs, as though such measurements are real, and just not understood
by what they consider to be the masses. Read the dictionary definition of
the word again, and see that I am just using it to take the ****, not to
make any *real* point ...

Arfa

Arfa Daily wrote:


What the Hell is a "esoteric value"? How does one measure "esoteric
values"? Is there a "esoteric value" meter?


Oh dear ! Clearly, English is your native language, but it would seem
that
there are some words that you just haven't come across ... Do they not
have
dictionaries wherever you are ? I actually agree with most of what you
have
said, and I never implied that I believed in golden ears, or anything
else
in the same vein. All I said, that seems to have created the rather
vitriolic response from Graham, was that I genuinely believed that there
were measurable differences in the performance of "audio grade" caps over
bog standard types, and that there were people out there who had made
those
tests. The reference to "esoteric values" is a tongue in cheek allusion
to
the 'snake oil experts' who will present complex-sounding measurements
that
are actually ********. For your further education ...

es·o·ter·ic /??s?'t?r?k/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled
Pronunciation[es-uh-ter-ik] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
-adjective 1. understood by or meant for only the select few who have
special knowledge or interest; recondite: poetry full of esoteric
allusions.
2. belonging to the select few.
3. private; secret; confidential.
4. (of a philosophical doctrine or the like) intended to be
revealed
only to the initiates of a group: the esoteric doctrines of Pythagoras.

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

[Origin: 1645-55; Gk esoterikós inner, equiv. to ester(os) inner
+ -ikos -ic]

-Related forms
es·o·ter·i·cal·ly, adverb

-Synonyms 1. abstruse, arcane, cryptic, enigmatic.
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House,
Inc.
2006.
American Heritage Dictionary - Cite This Source es·o·ter·ic
(es'?-ter'ik)
Pronunciation Key
adj.
1..
1.. Intended for or understood by only a particular group: an
esoteric cult. See Synonyms at mysterious.
2.. Of or relating to that which is known by a restricted
number
of people.
3.. Confined to a small group: esoteric interests.
4.. Not publicly disclosed; confidential.
2..
1.. Confined to a small group: esoteric interests.
2.. Not publicly disclosed; confidential.

[Greek esoterikos, from esotero, comparative of eso, within; see en
in
Indo-European roots.]

es'o·ter'i·cal·ly adv.

(Download Now or Buy the Book) The American Heritage® Dictionary of the
English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
WordNet - Cite This Source esoteric

adjective
confined to and understandable by only an enlightened inner circle;
"a
compilation of esoteric philosophical theories" [ant: exoteric]

Arfa d;~}

Ok, you have a dictionary definition of esoteric. You have so called
experts telling
you what esoteric is. What are there qualifications?
I don't recall seeing any engineering school classes on esoteric.
What makes these guys so much smarter than everyone else?
And why is so much of the stuff Voodoo science it seems?
And VERY costly to boot?

Like i said before, test caps with a standard, quantifiable test of
some sort. and put the charts with it to show in black and what
what the differences are. And under what conditions, loads and voltage
ratings.
Anybody can tell or sell you anything. that does
not make it true or better. There are still people selling magnets
that go on automotive fuel lines that claim give you
better mileage. After all these years! PT Barnum was right.

I am not against better quality components of any nature.
But i want to see the proof. Being in the service industry for
years, i am all for the best bang for the buck. These days its
a matter of survival in the service industry. In the quest for
that, i have been on both the good and bad end of component
sourcing. Sometimes you just need to find out for yourself.

Bob

Hey Bob

You're missing the point, old boy. " Esoteric " is what *defines* these
people as snake oil experts. We all know that the basic parameters for
measurement of a capacitor are primarily its capacitance and its ESR, and
secondarily, its leakage and inherent inductance. Its the nonsense such as
the " back-peddling quantum electron mobility count factor " and the "
sliding scalar blisticon enhancement constant " ( and no, neither of these
are real ) which are the sorts of 'esoteric' measurements that I am
referring to. The snake oil 'experts' talk amongst themselves in their
private clubs, as though such measurements are real, and just not understood
by what they consider to be the masses. Read the dictionary definition of
the word again, and see that I am just using it to take the ****, not to
make any *real* point ...

Arfa

Ok, i guess i have been sniffing too many solder fumes this week.

Bob


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Sophie, haven't you been paying attention? Oxygen free wire is passe. All
good audiophiles know that it makes no difference whether you use OF copper
or not, since the best sound comes from bare copper oxidized on the surface
by the urine of virgin ferrets that have been raised listening to Bach's
Tocata and Fuge in D minor. Of course, some say that Dr. Pepper works as
well. The oxide slows the conduction to allow the slower electrons to
arrive in phase with the ones that would otherwise travel faster.

Leonard

"Sofie" wrote in message
...
Eric:
When you get done with this expensive waste of money.... please contact me
so I can sell you very expensive oxygen free, biradially wound copper
speaker wires and interconnect cables with gold connectors...about $10 per
foot...... and while you are at it you should consider a $1500 or more,
power line conditioner so that your equipment gets cleaned up power so it
can produce much "improved" sound.
Daniel Sofie
Electronics Supply & Repair


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.
It has removed 21845 spam emails to date.
Paying users do not have this message in their emails.
Try SPAMfighter for free now!

"Leonard Caillouet" wrote in message
...

Sophie, haven't you been paying attention? Oxygen free wire is passe.
All good audiophiles know that it makes no difference whether you use OF
copper or not, since the best sound comes from bare copper oxidized on the
surface by the urine of virgin ferrets that have been raised listening to
Bach's Tocata and Fuge in D minor. Of course, some say that Dr. Pepper
works as well. The oxide slows the conduction to allow the slower
electrons to arrive in phase with the ones that would otherwise travel
faster.

Actually all you need to do is store it under a titanium pyramid between one
full moon and the next.








--

"BOB Urz" "sound"@(remove) inetnebr.com wrote in message
...


Arfa Daily wrote:


What the Hell is a "esoteric value"? How does one measure "esoteric
values"? Is there a "esoteric value" meter?


Oh dear ! Clearly, English is your native language, but it would seem
that
there are some words that you just haven't come across ... Do they not
have
dictionaries wherever you are ? I actually agree with most of what you
have
said, and I never implied that I believed in golden ears, or anything
else
in the same vein. All I said, that seems to have created the rather
vitriolic response from Graham, was that I genuinely believed that
there
were measurable differences in the performance of "audio grade" caps
over
bog standard types, and that there were people out there who had made
those
tests. The reference to "esoteric values" is a tongue in cheek
allusion
to
the 'snake oil experts' who will present complex-sounding measurements
that
are actually ********. For your further education ...

es·o·ter·ic /??s?'t?r?k/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled
Pronunciation[es-uh-ter-ik] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
-adjective 1. understood by or meant for only the select few who have
special knowledge or interest; recondite: poetry full of esoteric
allusions.
2. belonging to the select few.
3. private; secret; confidential.
4. (of a philosophical doctrine or the like) intended to be
revealed
only to the initiates of a group: the esoteric doctrines of
Pythagoras.

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

[Origin: 1645-55; Gk esoterikós inner, equiv. to ester(os) inner
+ -ikos -ic]

-Related forms
es·o·ter·i·cal·ly, adverb

-Synonyms 1. abstruse, arcane, cryptic, enigmatic.
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House,
Inc.
2006.
American Heritage Dictionary - Cite This Source es·o·ter·ic
(es'?-ter'ik)
Pronunciation Key
adj.
1..
1.. Intended for or understood by only a particular group:
an
esoteric cult. See Synonyms at mysterious.
2.. Of or relating to that which is known by a restricted
number
of people.
3.. Confined to a small group: esoteric interests.
4.. Not publicly disclosed; confidential.
2..
1.. Confined to a small group: esoteric interests.
2.. Not publicly disclosed; confidential.

[Greek esoterikos, from esotero, comparative of eso, within; see
en
in
Indo-European roots.]

es'o·ter'i·cal·ly adv.

(Download Now or Buy the Book) The American Heritage® Dictionary of
the
English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
WordNet - Cite This Source esoteric

adjective
confined to and understandable by only an enlightened inner
circle;
"a
compilation of esoteric philosophical theories" [ant: exoteric]

Arfa d;~}

Ok, you have a dictionary definition of esoteric. You have so called
experts telling
you what esoteric is. What are there qualifications?
I don't recall seeing any engineering school classes on esoteric.
What makes these guys so much smarter than everyone else?
And why is so much of the stuff Voodoo science it seems?
And VERY costly to boot?

Like i said before, test caps with a standard, quantifiable test of
some sort. and put the charts with it to show in black and what
what the differences are. And under what conditions, loads and voltage
ratings.
Anybody can tell or sell you anything. that does
not make it true or better. There are still people selling magnets
that go on automotive fuel lines that claim give you
better mileage. After all these years! PT Barnum was right.

I am not against better quality components of any nature.
But i want to see the proof. Being in the service industry for
years, i am all for the best bang for the buck. These days its
a matter of survival in the service industry. In the quest for
that, i have been on both the good and bad end of component
sourcing. Sometimes you just need to find out for yourself.

Bob

Hey Bob

You're missing the point, old boy. " Esoteric " is what *defines* these
people as snake oil experts. We all know that the basic parameters for
measurement of a capacitor are primarily its capacitance and its ESR, and
secondarily, its leakage and inherent inductance. Its the nonsense such
as
the " back-peddling quantum electron mobility count factor " and the "
sliding scalar blisticon enhancement constant " ( and no, neither of
these
are real ) which are the sorts of 'esoteric' measurements that I am
referring to. The snake oil 'experts' talk amongst themselves in their
private clubs, as though such measurements are real, and just not
understood
by what they consider to be the masses. Read the dictionary definition of
the word again, and see that I am just using it to take the ****, not to
make any *real* point ...

Arfa

Ok, i guess i have been sniffing too many solder fumes this week.

Bob


Ha !! Don't start me on solder fumes, Bob ! I've written magazine articles
on that one ... d;~}

Arfa

Arfa Daily wrote:

All I said, that seems to have created the rather
vitriolic response from Graham, was that I genuinely believed that there
were measurable differences in the performance of "audio grade" caps over
bog standard types, and that there were people out there who had made those
tests.

You have to be joking !

It's done on the basis of the 'audiophool religion'.

It is worth pointing out that certain ceramic dielectrics have known non-linearities
and these should be avoided in audio circuits and electrolytic caps have to be used
intelligently with regard to their limitations.


Graham

GregS wrote:

"Homer J Simpson" wrote:
"Bob Urz" wrote in message

What the Hell is a "esoteric value"? How does one measure "esoteric
values"? Is there a "esoteric value" meter?

Sure. It's called an E-Meter and your local Scientology Centre has them.

One parameter that might be considered esoteric, is delectric absorbtion.
This will affect capacitance, but can be measured out. it can
affect DC circuits, or ac circuits with a dc bias. Better caps have low DA.
Electrolytics are really bad in this respect. DA also causes frequency
dependant cap values.

DA hasn't been shown to be non-linear though and it's a very small effect with most caps.

With electrolytics used as coupling caps you can effectively avoid the issue by using large
values.

Graham

"Eeyore" wrote in message
...


Arfa Daily wrote:

All I said, that seems to have created the rather
vitriolic response from Graham, was that I genuinely believed that there
were measurable differences in the performance of "audio grade" caps over
bog standard types, and that there were people out there who had made
those
tests.

You have to be joking !

It's done on the basis of the 'audiophool religion'.

It is worth pointing out that certain ceramic dielectrics have known
non-linearities
and these should be avoided in audio circuits and electrolytic caps have
to be used
intelligently with regard to their limitations.


Graham


So isn't that just what I am saying ? I really don't know quite where you
are coming from on this one Graham. You seem to be delibarately trying to
twist what I have clearly been saying, and trying to make me out to look
like some gullible amateur. And no, I am not joking. Are you honestly saying
that you believe there are no measurable differences in ANY parameters
between a mass produced tupp'ny cap, and a precision-made type specifically
made for a purpose ? Do you think that the military are fools for specifying
"military grade" components over bog standards ? Are the avionics industry
gullible prats for specifying the highest quality components in airborne
equipment ? No, of course they're not, and neither are the manufacturers of
high grade audio equipment over mass producers like Sony and company.

So lets get it clear once and for all. ALL I am saying is that I believe
that there ARE measurable differences between different quality examples of
what are fundamentally the same animal. I believe this, because I have been
told that it's so by people that I personally consider to be reputable
experts in their field, and by 40 years worth of reading electronics
technical publications. If a piece of equipment has been designed to produce
minimum distortion with a component of a particular value and specification,
then the more accurately that component approaches that specification, the
closer the designer will come to his goal. It is a fact of life that
designers' specifications are compromised by their companies' accounts and
marketing departments, and lower grade components will be substituted to
meet the demands of these people. Of course, this will make little
alteration to the overall performance, and I doubt that most people would be
able to hear the minuscule difference, but that doesn't mean that it isn't
actually there, and couldn't be removed by putting in a component with a
better specification, which is where the likes of Jensen come in.

I wouldn't dispute for one minute that changes to the interstage coupling
electrolytics in a semiconductor amp, would result in any kind of
improvement that anyone could hear, and I doubt that a change to the
polyester or whatever interstage couplers in a valve amp would either, but
here, I would concede that with the high impedances involved, accuracy of
value and dielectric leakages *might* just make enough of a difference to
hear in SOME circumstances, particularly to someone who has a 'musical
ear' - and no, I'm not going to start getting into that one ...

Yes, there are a lot of 'audiophools' out there who are prepared to be
misled by the snake oil merchants, but I really don't think that you should
close your mind to the possibility that there are others out there besides
yourself, who do not fall into that category. Just because you believe that
you can't hear any difference so there mustn't be one, does not necessarily
make it so, and by closing your mind to it, you make yourself just as bad as
the others who are equally convinced the other way.

All I have stated is a belief that, like in every other walk of life, there
are differences in component quality that have a measurable impact on their
parameters. It's a BELIEF based on the reasons I have given. If you can show
me that a standards lab or whatever, have done tests, and have published
results that refute that there IS any difference, then I will happily accept
that. I really don't care whether any such differences that there MAY be,
result in anything that anyone believes they can hear. This is not the point
at issue, and hasn't been since we all told the OP that he would be ****ing
in the wind by bothering to replace his caps.

Arfa

Arfa Daily wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote in message
Arfa Daily wrote:

All I said, that seems to have created the rather
vitriolic response from Graham, was that I genuinely believed that there
were measurable differences in the performance of "audio grade" caps over
bog standard types, and that there were people out there who had made
those tests.

You have to be joking !

It's done on the basis of the 'audiophool religion'.

It is worth pointing out that certain ceramic dielectrics have known
non-linearities
and these should be avoided in audio circuits and electrolytic caps have
to be used intelligently with regard to their limitations.

So isn't that just what I am saying ?

No. You don't appear to be aware of what the audiophools are claiming.

Besides, only a completely incompetent beginner would use Hi and medium K
ceramic dielectrics in audio signal circuits.


I really don't know quite where you
are coming from on this one Graham. You seem to be delibarately trying to
twist what I have clearly been saying, and trying to make me out to look
like some gullible amateur. And no, I am not joking. Are you honestly saying
that you believe there are no measurable differences in ANY parameters
between a mass produced tupp'ny cap, and a precision-made type specifically
made for a purpose ?

Precision makes no difference at all.


Do you think that the military are fools for specifying
"military grade" components over bog standards ?

For audio ? Yes. COMPLETELY.

And the audiophool stuff isn't even 'MIL spec' anyway.


Are the avionics industry
gullible prats for specifying the highest quality components in airborne
equipment ? No, of course they're not, and neither are the manufacturers of
high grade audio equipment over mass producers like Sony and company.

Their only interest is in aspects such as temperature range and long-term
failure rate.

More recently, COTS ( commercial off the shelf ) products have become popular
for aerospace often with *better* performance, which shows the lie about Mil
spec.


So lets get it clear once and for all. ALL I am saying is that I believe
that there ARE measurable differences between different quality examples of
what are fundamentally the same animal.

Quality ? Next to none and certainly nothing audible.


I believe this, because I have been
told that it's so by people that I personally consider to be reputable
experts in their field, and by 40 years worth of reading electronics
technical publications.

I think you're misunderstanding what you've read. I know of no audio
professional who believes in capacitor substitution where the orignal was
adequately specified. Certainly not for reasons of audibility.


If a piece of equipment has been designed to produce
minimum distortion with a component of a particular value and specification,
then the more accurately that component approaches that specification, the
closer the designer will come to his goal.

Show me a capacitor that distorts will you ? ( other than those I've mentioned
already ).

snip remainder of rant

Graham

Arfa Daily wrote:

I wouldn't dispute for one minute that changes to the interstage coupling
electrolytics in a semiconductor amp, would result in any kind of
improvement that anyone could hear

Are you saying that electrolytics are or aren't audible ? I can't figure that
one.

Graham

"Eeyore" wrote in message
...


Arfa Daily wrote:

I wouldn't dispute for one minute that changes to the interstage coupling
electrolytics in a semiconductor amp, would result in any kind of
improvement that anyone could hear

Are you saying that electrolytics are or aren't audible ? I can't figure
that
one.

Graham


Think what you like pal, I've grown utterly tired now of this thread, and
your tedious replies ...

Arfa

Arfa Daily wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote
Arfa Daily wrote:

I wouldn't dispute for one minute that changes to the interstage coupling
electrolytics in a semiconductor amp, would result in any kind of
improvement that anyone could hear

Are you saying that electrolytics are or aren't audible ? I can't figure
that one.


Think what you like pal, I've grown utterly tired now of this thread, and
your tedious replies ...

Show me a capacitor ( other than those I've mentioned ) that distorts will you !

You sound very gullible to me.

Graham

"Eeyore" wrote in message
...


Arfa Daily wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote
Arfa Daily wrote:

I wouldn't dispute for one minute that changes to the interstage
coupling
electrolytics in a semiconductor amp, would result in any kind of
improvement that anyone could hear

Are you saying that electrolytics are or aren't audible ? I can't
figure
that one.


Think what you like pal, I've grown utterly tired now of this thread, and
your tedious replies ...

Show me a capacitor ( other than those I've mentioned ) that distorts will
you !

You sound very gullible to me.

Graham

Please don't descend into trying to trade insults. As I said, believe what
you like.

Arfa

Arfa Daily wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote in message
Arfa Daily wrote:
"Eeyore" wrote
Arfa Daily wrote:

I wouldn't dispute for one minute that changes to the interstage
coupling
electrolytics in a semiconductor amp, would result in any kind of
improvement that anyone could hear

Are you saying that electrolytics are or aren't audible ? I can't
figure that one.

Think what you like pal, I've grown utterly tired now of this thread, and
your tedious replies ...

Show me a capacitor ( other than those I've mentioned ) that distorts will
you !

You sound very gullible to me.

Please don't descend into trying to trade insults. As I said, believe what
you like.

It's not a question of believing. That's what the audiophools do.

I've actually gone to the trouble of measuring ! With Audio Precision test gear
that has a generator residual THD of 0.0007% ( -103dB ).

Not a single film capacitor of any type I've checked has any distortion
whatever. Nor would I expect any from first principles.

What's your experience in the matter ?

Graham

"Eeyore" wrote in message
...


Arfa Daily wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote in message
Arfa Daily wrote:
"Eeyore" wrote
Arfa Daily wrote:

I wouldn't dispute for one minute that changes to the interstage
coupling
electrolytics in a semiconductor amp, would result in any kind of
improvement that anyone could hear

Are you saying that electrolytics are or aren't audible ? I can't
figure that one.

Think what you like pal, I've grown utterly tired now of this thread,
and
your tedious replies ...

Show me a capacitor ( other than those I've mentioned ) that distorts
will
you !

You sound very gullible to me.

Please don't descend into trying to trade insults. As I said, believe
what
you like.

It's not a question of believing. That's what the audiophools do.

I've actually gone to the trouble of measuring ! With Audio Precision test
gear
that has a generator residual THD of 0.0007% ( -103dB ).

Not a single film capacitor of any type I've checked has any distortion
whatever. Nor would I expect any from first principles.

What's your experience in the matter ?

Graham


Did I actually say that any capacitor per se had distortion ? The problem is
that you have such a bee in your bonnet about this relatively minor point,
that you are either not listening to what I am saying or deliberately
misconstruing it in order to continue with this senseless lambasting.

Clearly there must be differences between different constructions of caps
from different manufacturers, otherwise, there wouldn't be different types
with the same value and voltage rating, and different price tags. You
wouldn't for instance use a cheapo cap intended for decoupling purposes, as
the timing element in an oscillator. If you wanted it to last, you wouldn't
use a bog standard cheapo electrolytic in a switch mode power supply. But
there's my point. Manufacturers do - not because the designer wanted them
to, but because cost dictated it. This results in inferior performance of
the power supply over what the designer initially intended, and ultimate
failure.

You may also be getting confused over what I am treating as 'distortion'. I
am including anything that not only makes a piece of equipment deviate from
the ideal, but also from what the designer intended. If *any* substituted
component on cost grounds causes any deviation from what the designer
originally measured on his development model with the components he used and
specified, then this under my definition, is distortion. It need not
necessarily result in mishaping of the output waveform in any way that would
normally be considered as distortion, which may or may not be audible, but
could include unwanted phase shifts or gain non-linearities.

You're right. I don't spend my time measuring caps with high precision
generators - it's not my job. I leave such things to people like you, and
read about it later. I make judgements based on what I read, and who wrote
it. That makes me neither gullible, nor any kind of 'phool' - audio or
otherwise. Enough time has now been wasted on this. I have made my position
quite clear in as many different ways as I know how, and since no one else
has joined in with you to have a pop at me, I can only assume that they
understand what I am saying, and don't disagree strongly enough to find it
worth bothering. Considering some of the stuff you have come back with, I
think you have a cheek snipping " rest of rant ". I associate ranting with
the nonsense that goes on over on uk rec audio with this sort of thing.
Perhaps you should concentrate your efforts over there, where you must feel
much more at home ...

Arfa

Arfa Daily wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote in message
Arfa Daily wrote:
"Eeyore" wrote in message
Arfa Daily wrote:
"Eeyore" wrote
Arfa Daily wrote:

I wouldn't dispute for one minute that changes to the interstage
coupling
electrolytics in a semiconductor amp, would result in any kind of
improvement that anyone could hear

Are you saying that electrolytics are or aren't audible ? I can't
figure that one.

Think what you like pal, I've grown utterly tired now of this thread,
and your tedious replies ...

Show me a capacitor ( other than those I've mentioned ) that distorts
will you !

You sound very gullible to me.

Please don't descend into trying to trade insults. As I said, believe
what you like.

It's not a question of believing. That's what the audiophools do.

I've actually gone to the trouble of measuring ! With Audio Precision test
gear that has a generator residual THD of 0.0007% ( -103dB ).

Not a single film capacitor of any type I've checked has any distortion
whatever. Nor would I expect any from first principles.

What's your experience in the matter ?


Did I actually say that any capacitor per se had distortion ?

You suggested so.


The problem is
that you have such a bee in your bonnet about this relatively minor point,
that you are either not listening to what I am saying or deliberately
misconstruing it in order to continue with this senseless lambasting.

Clearly there must be differences between different constructions of caps
from different manufacturers, otherwise, there wouldn't be different types
with the same value and voltage rating, and different price tags.

What's that got to do with it ?

The only real thing of concern is the dielectric and whether the plates are
metallised or foil ( for high current applications ) with a resultant effect on
ESR.

Some winding techniques reduce parasitic inductance but this isn't an issue at
audio frequencies.


You
wouldn't for instance use a cheapo cap intended for decoupling purposes, as
the timing element in an oscillator.

Define 'cheapo cap'. You might get a shock about the prices I pay for parts for
products in volume manufacture btw !


If you wanted it to last, you wouldn't
use a bog standard cheapo electrolytic in a switch mode power supply. But
there's my point.

Define 'cheapo cap again ! SMPSs require low ESR caps in the output filters -
it's nothing to do with being cheap or not. That's what's *needed*.


Manufacturers do - not because the designer wanted them
to, but because cost dictated it. This results in inferior performance of
the power supply over what the designer initially intended, and ultimate
failure.

Inferior ? If parts with the correct specs are used the only concern between
makes in this application is usually lifetime.


You may also be getting confused over what I am treating as 'distortion'. I
am including anything that not only makes a piece of equipment deviate from
the ideal, but also from what the designer intended. If *any* substituted
component on cost grounds causes any deviation from what the designer
originally measured on his development model with the components he used and
specified, then this under my definition, is distortion. It need not
necessarily result in mishaping of the output waveform in any way that would
normally be considered as distortion, which may or may not be audible, but
could include unwanted phase shifts or gain non-linearities.

Phase shifts are related to the *value* of a capacitor. All have a tolerance on
them regardless of price.

WTF is a 'gain non-linearity' in your book btw ? Why would a capacitor cause it
?

Graham

"Eeyore" wrote in message
...


Arfa Daily wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote in message
Arfa Daily wrote:
"Eeyore" wrote in message
Arfa Daily wrote:
"Eeyore" wrote
Arfa Daily wrote:

I wouldn't dispute for one minute that changes to the interstage
coupling
electrolytics in a semiconductor amp, would result in any kind
of
improvement that anyone could hear

Are you saying that electrolytics are or aren't audible ? I can't
figure that one.

Think what you like pal, I've grown utterly tired now of this
thread,
and your tedious replies ...

Show me a capacitor ( other than those I've mentioned ) that
distorts
will you !

You sound very gullible to me.

Please don't descend into trying to trade insults. As I said, believe
what you like.

It's not a question of believing. That's what the audiophools do.

I've actually gone to the trouble of measuring ! With Audio Precision
test
gear that has a generator residual THD of 0.0007% ( -103dB ).

Not a single film capacitor of any type I've checked has any distortion
whatever. Nor would I expect any from first principles.

What's your experience in the matter ?


Did I actually say that any capacitor per se had distortion ?

You suggested so.


Only in your head ...


The problem is
that you have such a bee in your bonnet about this relatively minor
point,
that you are either not listening to what I am saying or deliberately
misconstruing it in order to continue with this senseless lambasting.

Clearly there must be differences between different constructions of caps
from different manufacturers, otherwise, there wouldn't be different
types
with the same value and voltage rating, and different price tags.

What's that got to do with it ?

If you *really can't see, then you must be dumber than you appear.


The only real thing of concern is the dielectric and whether the plates
are
metallised or foil ( for high current applications ) with a resultant
effect on
ESR.

Some winding techniques reduce parasitic inductance but this isn't an
issue at
audio frequencies.


You
wouldn't for instance use a cheapo cap intended for decoupling purposes,
as
the timing element in an oscillator.

Define 'cheapo cap'. You might get a shock about the prices I pay for
parts for
products in volume manufacture btw !


Oh please ! Are you going out of your way to be obtuse ? Do you *really*
think that the word 'cheapo' refers just to price ? Where have you been all
of your life ? Head down over a precision signal generator with point 36
noughts seven THD perhaps ?


If you wanted it to last, you wouldn't
use a bog standard cheapo electrolytic in a switch mode power supply. But
there's my point.

Define 'cheapo cap again ! SMPSs require low ESR caps in the output
filters -
it's nothing to do with being cheap or not. That's what's *needed*.


But it is !! A good grade high temperature low ESR electrolytic costs more
than a cheapo ( see above ) bog standard electrolytic. Nobody, least of all
me, would dispute that a low ESR cap is NEEDED, but trust me, I repair
stacks of these things every week - it is not what you actually FIND in
them. If manufacturers can buy good quality low ESR caps for the same price
as the poor quality crap that they do fit, why wouldn't they ? How do the
manufacturers of low quality electrolytics stay in business when according
to you, everyone can buy a superior product for the same money ?

Manufacturers do - not because the designer wanted them
to, but because cost dictated it. This results in inferior performance of
the power supply over what the designer initially intended, and ultimate
failure.

Inferior ? If parts with the correct specs are used the only concern
between
makes in this application is usually lifetime.


Of the correct NOMINAL specs. Anyway, if all parts are as good as each
other, irrespective of price, as you seem to be implying, why is lifetime
suddenly an issue ?


You may also be getting confused over what I am treating as 'distortion'.
I
am including anything that not only makes a piece of equipment deviate
from
the ideal, but also from what the designer intended. If *any* substituted
component on cost grounds causes any deviation from what the designer
originally measured on his development model with the components he used
and
specified, then this under my definition, is distortion. It need not
necessarily result in mishaping of the output waveform in any way that
would
normally be considered as distortion, which may or may not be audible,
but
could include unwanted phase shifts or gain non-linearities.

Phase shifts are related to the *value* of a capacitor. All have a
tolerance on
them regardless of price.

They do, but some have a tighter tolerance spec than others, and you pay
more for that. A 1% cap is going to bring a design closer in performance to
what the designer intended, than a 20% one might, if at the edge of its
spread. The cumulative effect of wide tolerance components - not just caps -
in an item, may cause its performance to deviate quite substantially from
that which the designer intended, but never-the-less keep its performance
within what the manufacturer's marketing people consider acceptable for the
product. No matter what you say or believe, the market is so competitive
that equipment is built down to a price, and that sometimes includes using
inferior quality components.

WTF is a 'gain non-linearity' in your book btw ? Why would a capacitor
cause it
?

Language, language. I haven't sworn at you now, have I, no matter how much
I've wanted to ...
The designer of an amp will want it to have a flat gain across its whole
intended bandwidth. Various factors such as interstage coupling design, will
try to influence this, and the designer will try to mitigate it with his
choice of component values and types. When you see the gain / bandwith curve
for any amplifier plotted, it is never a totally smooth line. It's a fact of
life. Where tone control networks are fitted, these are highly dependant on
the values of capacitor fitted, to produce a flat characteristic at the
control midpoint. Any deviation from the designer's calculated values, will
result in unintended lifts or drops in the curve at particular frequencies.


Graham

Anyway, I don't want to discuss it any more. I actually have a life. If it
makes you happy,
you're right. I'm wrong. The whole of my working life has been for nothing.
Clearly I've understood nothing of electronics over the whole 40 years I've
been involved with it. My english must also be really poor, since you have
such trouble understanding it. I am a **** for having beliefs, no matter how
well founded they might be, and any advice I have ever given to anyone,
should be disregarded and treated as wrong. Oh how I wish that I had your
vast intellect, and eloquent manner. I could have been such a success ...

OK now ?

Arfa

Just for sport, try this from Maxim ...

http://www.maxim-ic.com/appnotes.cfm/an_pk/3171

Arfa

"Arfa Daily" wrote in message
...
Just for sport, try this from Maxim ...

http://www.maxim-ic.com/appnotes.cfm/an_pk/3171

Arfa

Here's another ...

http://members.aol.com/sbench102/caps.html

Arfa

"Arfa Daily" wrote in message
...

"Arfa Daily" wrote in message
...
Just for sport, try this from Maxim ...

http://www.maxim-ic.com/appnotes.cfm/an_pk/3171

Arfa

Here's another ...

http://members.aol.com/sbench102/caps.html

Arfa

No comments then ? How strange ...

Arfa

Arfa Daily wrote:

"Arfa Daily" wrote in message
...

"Arfa Daily" wrote in message
...
Just for sport, try this from Maxim ...

http://www.maxim-ic.com/appnotes.cfm/an_pk/3171

Arfa

Here's another ...

http://members.aol.com/sbench102/caps.html

Arfa

No comments then ? How strange ...

Arfa

Oh, I hadn't sptted those posts 'til just now.

I'm well aware of that site. The method employed is quite flawed. I'll post a
link to a thread in rec.audio.tubes where I discussed it at length.

Graham