Are you saying there are no measurable differences between the component parts (caps, wire, resistors...) that go into audio designs? Or that once integrated into the designs, all DACs, preamps, amps, etc. measure the same? Not following you...
Surely. I am saying that "component" sound per si does not exist in a measurable way. There is no measurement that can explain the differences between the performance of good quality resistors of the same value in audio. The same way for most capacitors. If you replace all the film capacitors of a decent preamplifier with Teflon ones costing 100 times more the measured specification will be the same. If you have good direct evidence of the opposite please refer it.
You will find many different specifications in these components but straight people will tell you that within the audio bandwidth they are not technically relevant. Expensive components in industry pay mostly for long time reliability, stability, reproducibility (consistency) and tolerances, things that do not affect immediate audio performance. But sometimes they must have "magic" properties in sound, because in reality they sound very different.
Actually, you can. There are plenty of amps, preamps, DACs, analog sources, passive crossover networks, etc. that measure relatively high levels of noise and distortion, and compared to the clarity and precision of well-designed active sources playing good digital files, I can hear the difference as well. I'm confident those differences, shown in measurements, could also be easily identified in blind listening tests. Upgraded caps? I wouldn't bet on that being heard, even by trained listeners. Is it possible? Sure. But I'll bet it would have to be an upgrade from one of those really bad caps you referred to above.
Tim
Surely. I am saying that "component" sound per si does not exist in a measurable way. There is no measurement that can explain the differences between the performance of good quality resistors of the same value in audio. The same way for most capacitors. If you replace all the film capacitors of a decent preamplifier with Teflon ones costing 100 times more the measured specification will be the same. If you have good direct evidence of the opposite please refer it.
Don't misunderstand, I'm not saying there is a measurable difference between good quality, properly spec'd caps. But I'm not saying there is an audible difference, either.
You will find many different specifications in these components but straight people will tell you that within the audio bandwidth they are not technically relevant. Expensive components in industry pay mostly for long time reliability, stability, reproducibility (consistency) and tolerances, things that do not affect immediate audio performance. But sometimes they must have "magic" properties in sound, because in reality they sound very different.
I didn't say they were "bad" components, I said they had measurably high noise and distortion relative to well-designed active systems, and that I can not only see it in the specs, I can hear the difference. Start with magnetic cartridges and turntables, continue through nearly any preamp, amp or analog output stage with tubes in it, pass through the many grossly underpowered audiophile systems and finish with passive crossovers. There's no need to point fingers at individual components when there are entire categories of audio products to refer to. Now, with all of that said, you may like the sound of these technologies better, and if you do, enjoy. But they measure different and sound different.
Don't misunderstand, I'm not saying there is a measurable difference between good quality, properly spec'd caps. But I'm not saying there is an audible difference, either.
I do not have and I have explained before why there are not such things and probably they will not exist. The few existing blind listening tests are carried in informal environments by audio enthusiasts who do not have the financial resources to carry truly scientific blind tests or pretend to win Nobel prizes. But I have changed capacitors in many amplifiers in the past. The most memorable change I did myself was putting teflon Vcaps in Atmasphere MA2s amplifiers, and just for fun replacing them later with very cheap chinese poliester capacitors to listen for the difference. Surely our attorneys told us to report that we all knew that the large difference in sound was only due to Placebo effect ...
I didn't say they were "bad" components, I said they had measurably high noise and distortion relative to well-designed active systems, and that I can not only see it in the specs, I can hear the difference. Start with magnetic cartridges and turntables, continue through nearly any preamp, amp or analog output stage with tubes in it, pass through the many grossly underpowered audiophile systems and finish with passive crossovers. There's no need to point fingers at individual components when there are entire categories of audio products to refer to. Now, with all of that said, you may like the sound of these technologies better, and if you do, enjoy. But they measure different and sound different.
Tim
Although this argumentation is completely out of the scope of the component issue, I find curious that the poor passive crossovers get mixed in the lot. What horrendous crimes are they guilty of?
I think a discussion on different resistors and not capacitors is more apt in a tone control thread. They are the principal components in all eqs anyway aren't they?
As far as caps go, I'm a believer. The differences between two caps of the same value (at least in my experience, used as coupling caps) can be downright obvious. As usual, as Steve says, different doesn't always mean better, higher cost is no guarantee. I've been told by my friends that build amplifiers that the circuit has a lot to do with it, especially where in the circuit they are used. Welcome to the mysterious world of voicing! Coupling caps seem to be the place generally believed to make the most audible differences. Most readings found on cap shoot outs use them in this position.
I think a discussion on different resistors and not capacitors is more apt in a tone control thread. They are the principal components in all eqs anyway aren't they?
As far as caps go, I'm a believer. The differences between two caps of the same value (at least in my experience, used as coupling caps) can be downright obvious. As usual, as Steve says, different doesn't always mean better, higher cost is no guarantee. I've been told by my friends that build amplifiers that the circuit has a lot to do with it, especially where in the circuit they are used. Welcome to the mysterious world of voicing! Coupling caps seem to be the place generally believed to make the most audible differences. Most readings found on cap shoot outs use them in this position.
Though used for the crossover in the Dahlquist DQ10 speakers rather than in the electronics such as an amp or preamp, we all found out early on, over 33 years ago that caps most definitely can have an affect on sound.
I'm not at all surprised Rich. My speakers are factory modded with V-Cap Teflons as per my specifications. I don't use this as an example though because unlike comparing my modded LSA Standard Integrated which were mundorf'ed (just M-Caps not the fancy stuff) against the bone stock Auricap'ed one, I never A/B'ed them with the unmodified model in the same place, with the same equipment.
In the case of the LSAs, the change in just two itsy bitsy caps was as easy to tell apart as changing input tubes. Again as usual, some preferred the stock and some preferred the mundorf'ed.
I'm not at all surprised Rich. My speakers are factory modded with V-Cap Teflons as per my specifications. I don't use this as an example though because unlike comparing my modded LSA Standard Integrated which were mundorf'ed (just M-Caps not the fancy stuff) against the bone stock Auricap'ed one, I never A/B'ed them with the unmodified model in the same place, with the same equipment.
In the case of the LSAs, the change in just two itsy bitsy caps was as easy to tell apart as changing input tubes. Again as usual, some preferred the stock and some preferred the mundorf'ed.
And by the way the change in caps was either done by the factory or factory authorized by Dahlquist for those that already owned the speakers. This also went along with the mirror imaging of the speakers as well.
Mine were later totally rebuilt with all new drivers, crossovers, bi-wired, etc. We had removed the super tweeter, installed Dynaudio soft dome tweeters and soft dome midrange (both in the Dynaudio Auto drivers since they stopped selling their audio drivers) put an open backed Peerless driver, proprietary woofer. Each driver was wired directly to the speaker terminals and its own crossover with 12 gauge Van den Hull silver plated copper wire with Teflon jackets. The crossovers were broken up so the upper three drivers went to one set of terminals and the woofer to the other set of terminals and its crossover. They sounded better than any Dahlquists that I ever heard and I only finally took them out of the system when they were replaced with my present OMA New Yorker prototype horns last August.
I'm not at all surprised Rich. My speakers are factory modded with V-Cap Teflons as per my specifications. I don't use this as an example though because unlike comparing my modded LSA Standard Integrated which were mundorf'ed (just M-Caps not the fancy stuff) against the bone stock Auricap'ed one, I never A/B'ed them with the unmodified model in the same place, with the same equipment.
In the case of the LSAs, the change in just two itsy bitsy caps was as easy to tell apart as changing input tubes. Again as usual, some preferred the stock and some preferred the mundorf'ed.
Jack,
How do the M-Caps compare with the Auricaps in the LSA? BTW, I recently heard great things about the Mundorf silver-oil and I am considering them to my VTLs
Not quite. I think it is possible, but if it's audible, I'd bet it's measurable.
I do not have and I have explained before why there are not such things and probably they will not exist. The few existing blind listening tests are carried in informal environments by audio enthusiasts who do not have the financial resources to carry truly scientific blind tests or pretend to win Nobel prizes. But I have changed capacitors in many amplifiers in the past. The most memorable change I did myself was putting teflon Vcaps in Atmasphere MA2s amplifiers, and just for fun replacing them later with very cheap chinese poliester capacitors to listen for the difference. Surely our attorneys told us to report that we all knew that the large difference in sound was only due to Placebo effect ...
They're relevant in that they are nests of the very parts that are the raw material of the upgrader's art. Horrendous crimes? Not so horrendous when very carefully designed and grossly over amplified, but their distortions and inefficiencies are well-documented. Google is your friend. And upgrading the caps in a preamp and amp, then sending the resulting signal to the morass of caps, resistors, inefficiency and inconsistency that is the passive crossover (which seldom seems to make it into these tweaking discussions) strikes me as a bit strange. Like obsessively purifying your water before running it through a rusty pipe. The other thing that is relevant is the distortions of passive crossovers can very easily be measured, so I have to wonder why the benefits of upgraded components of the same type in an amplifier cannot.
Yes, this is true to a certain extent, but microstrip, we have all (ie audio designers and tech's etc...........NOT MANUFACTURER MARKETING DEPARTMENTS!) moved on to much more sophisticated spectrum and multi tone input measurements....you might need to catch up with the times from a technical standpoint...you are talking 15 years ago atleast! Measurements reveal accuracy....we can measure activity of an electron cloud, we can certainly measure and do some dinky simple boring audio signals for accuracy to what they looked like when generated!
And I challenge anyone to tell me that their ears are better at discerning differences than my measuring techniques or instruments (or the ones I might easily rent for a week or two). And THD and IMD are just for starters, as spectrum analysis under multi tone inputs or even music will reveal FAR more than anyone can hear and at FAR lower levels.
Sorry, thats just the facts.
Modern measurments do not miss stuff (lump it all together into single tone tests, etc.) that simple thd and imd did.
It is just that simple. But let me make it pefectly clear, measurements reveal accuracy to the original signal, that is not what a whole lot of audiophiles really want....they want tone controls of some sort.
"Audio is what you hear, not what you see." on the oscilloscope.
I won't argue your point about measurements as I find that true. My tech always tells me it should sound great after measuring a upgrade I have requested. After 40 years though I still think my ears are the final arbiter,but I think we all feel that way,even though we need to measure for ratification.
Yes, this is true to a certain extent, but microstrip, we have all (ie audio designers and tech's etc...........NOT MANUFACTURER MARKETING DEPARTMENTS!) moved on to much more sophisticated spectrum and multi tone input measurements....you might need to catch up with the times from a technical standpoint...you are talking 15 years ago atleast! Measurements reveal accuracy....we can measure activity of an electron cloud, we can certainly measure and do some dinky simple boring audio signals for accuracy to what they looked like when generated!
And I challenge anyone to tell me that their ears are better at discerning differences than my measuring techniques or instruments (or the ones I might easily rent for a week or two). And THD and IMD are just for starters, as spectrum analysis under multi tone inputs or even music will reveal FAR more than anyone can hear and at FAR lower levels.
Sorry, thats just the facts.
Modern measurments do not miss stuff (lump it all together into single tone tests, etc.) that simple thd and imd did.
It is just that simple. But let me make it pefectly clear, measurements reveal accuracy to the original signal, that is not what a whole lot of audiophiles really want....they want tone controls of some sort.
Tom,
I have used the same arguments that you present in a previous post in another thread - we know manufacturers have proprietary measurements they use during development. But we all know that secrecy reins in this field - and you seem to be an example of it. Unless these measurements are fully released, discussed and accepted by the audio community they can not be considered outside the small group that developed them. I am also guilty of it - I have had nice and interesting meetings (and meals ) with manufacturers, sometimes discussing these matters, but I will not release in public domain their private opinions and findings.
Most people seem to forget that to be useful for consumers measurement should correlate with something in a causal way. If you generate one hundred plots of one thousand measurements each and are not able to synthesize this information in a reasonable number of parameters the value will be very limited.
BTW, any DIY type person can build his own Atomic Force Microscope to see the atom positions in a structure using the Tunnel Effect . But if he really wants to know in depth how it works he must go through the Schrödinger equation and quantum mechanics - it can take longer than building the device. Surely manufacturers - and you - know a lot more than us about audio, but if we can not benefit from it because of our ignorance, it is of no use for us.
As a final note, are you prepared to tell us what measurement you would use to distinguish a Mundorf output coupling capacitor from a Vcap?
Jack,
How do the M-Caps compare with the Auricaps in the LSA? BTW, I recently heard great things about the Mundorf silver-oil and I am considering them to my VTLs
My friend, you really want to give me a hard time! You know I'll have to resort to audiophile jargon here. How about something you might latch on to much easier instead?
The difference between the mundorf and auricap to me in tube speak is Mundorf is to a Mullard what Auricap is to a Siemens. V-caps are Telefunkens.
My friend, you really want to give me a hard time! You know I'll have to resort to audiophile jargon here. How about something you might latch on to much easier instead?
The difference between the mundorf and auricap to me in tube speak is Mundorf is to a Mullard what Auricap is to a Siemens. V-caps are Telefunkens.
Too often simple discussion on Audio takes all the air of a meeting of the Quantum Physics Association. We throw Shroedinger and quantum states here and there ..to finally state in the most grand fashion that we can't measure it all. Which begs the question: If Differences between Cap A and Cap B is consistent .. How did their manufacturers arrived at such differences ... PLease don't tell me "By not measuring" !!????!!
I have no problem accepting that a given cap in a circuit may alter how it sounds .. This has to be measurable if said alteration is consistent ... To me it is simple. If a person want to convince her or himself of the contrary .. I can't change their opinions .. The facts remains that whatever we hear can be measured .. I tend to think that we haven't measured it all but I would say differences must be measurable else they can't be perceived ...
I am with Tomelex here ..
(...)
I have no problem accepting that a given cap in a circuit may alter how it sounds .. This has to be measurable if said alteration is consistent ... To me it is simple. If a person want to convince her or himself of the contrary .. I can't change their opinions .. The facts remains that whatever we hear can be measured .. I tend to think that we haven't measured it all but I would say differences must be measurable else they can't be perceived ...
I am with Tomelex here ..
IMHO every one is with Tomelex here - even Peter Walker said it in the 60's . Niels Bohr (apologies, I can not remember a better quotation from someone who is not connected with Quantum Mechanics ) ) said "Nothing exists until it is measured." My question is just "please show the existing measurements or tell exactly what and how you measure, and your interpretation of these data ". With numbers, error bars, Hz, dB , %, whichever is needed.
I am sure that it is possible to measure these differences - my point is that audio is still not doing it properly.
Congratulations! I have some direct experience, and/or read of others opinions, of all these brands of tubes, capacitors and ampliifers, and easily see the systematic lines you are subjectively associating with the sound types.
Your little comparison is much better than a thousand words, or even a picture ).
