Tube DIY Asylum

Do It Yourself (DIY) paradise for tube and SET project builders.

Return to Tube DIY Asylum

Message Sort: Post Order or Asylum Reverse Threaded

Modifying capacitor leads

50.80.146.114
Posted on September 13, 2016 at 07:25:16
banpuku
Audiophile

Posts: 1008
Joined: January 19, 2006
 Per suggestions from drlowmu (aka Jeff Medwin), I modified my capacitor leads on my 4.7uF ClarityCap MR series. I snipped the leads on the capacitor to about 1/4" to 3/8" in length. Then, I soldered together 2 x 16 gauge stranded copper wire with cloth exterior. Finally, the 2 x 16 gauge copper wire was carefully soldered to the capacitor lead stubs.

Maybe its just me, but dynamics just soared with the modified caps. Tonal balance did not change, but lifelike dynamics and transients made me feel as though a piano might just be in my listening room. I am not quite there yet, but the piano finally had dimension and more weight. Key strikes were very lifelike.

So, as of now I am a believer in modifying the leads on capacitors. Yes, I will try to modify my transformers and maybe even resistor leads.

 

Hide full thread outline!
    ...
RE: Modifying capacitor leads, posted on September 13, 2016 at 07:53:11
Tre'
Industry Professional

Posts: 17292
Location: So. Cal.
Joined: February 9, 2002
 Where in the circuit is this cap?

Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"

 

RE: Modifying capacitor leads, posted on September 13, 2016 at 08:02:52
banpuku
Audiophile

Posts: 1008
Joined: January 19, 2006
 This is the grid stopper cap on the 6C6 driver tube. See the attached schematic which calls for a 2.8uF cap, but it currently has the 4.7uF cap with the modified leads.



 

It's only a psycho-acoustic emotional response, posted on September 13, 2016 at 10:16:57
Triode_Kingdom
Audiophile

Posts: 10037
Location: Central Texas
Joined: September 24, 2006
 That's not a "grid stopper" cap; it's a screen bypass. If there were any factual benefit to this, commercial manufacturers would have done it years ago.

 

RE: It's only a psycho-acoustic emotional response, posted on September 13, 2016 at 12:40:07
FenderLover
 But, even if it is a "placebo effect"... as long as the patient (or listener, in this case) feels the positive effect --- all should be okay?

In medicine, we see this all the time. A patient is screaming he has excruciating pain. He is given a pain med. He immediately feels better. Not only that, but his once high BP (while in pain) instantly drops to normal.

Now, pharmaceutics data shows that the pain med takes 15-20 minutes to dissolve and another 30 minutes to 1 hour to reach therapeutic levels in the blood. But, as long as the patient feel better --- 10 seconds after taking the med --- everyone is fine with it. No one is going to say, "It's impossible for the med to work that fast."

Just a thought...

8^)

 

RE: It's only a psycho-acoustic emotional response, posted on September 13, 2016 at 13:16:21
Tre'
Industry Professional

Posts: 17292
Location: So. Cal.
Joined: February 9, 2002
 "Now, pharmaceutics data shows that the pain med takes 15-20 minutes to dissolve and another 30 minutes to 1 hour to reach therapeutic levels in the blood"

Does a patient's BP go back up and does he start complaining of pain immediately once this is explained to him?

Tre'



Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"

 

Not usually..., posted on September 13, 2016 at 13:29:53
FenderLover
 As most RNs will be happy the patient is not complaining and his BP is within normal limits. The physiology of how it is impossible that the med is working, is not explained. For whatever reason, the med is "working."

There are patients that are on chronic pain meds. Say, one tablet every 3 hours as needed for pain. Some of these patients will sleep all day. EXCEPT, the 3 hour period when the med is due. They wake up exactly at or just before each med can be given. In bad pain.

They are given the med and can be sound asleep in less than a few minutes. There is no physiological reason that their internal timers are so precise and that the meds work so quickly --- except the mental aspect.

The brain plays such a strong influence on how we process our internal senses and external stimuli --- it can overcome science, at times.

8^)

 

RE: Not usually..., posted on September 13, 2016 at 14:03:16
Tre'
Industry Professional

Posts: 17292
Location: So. Cal.
Joined: February 9, 2002
 "The brain plays such a strong influence on how we process"... what we think we hear.

If a person is trying to really understand (and build) a music playback system that IS really properly reproducing the input signal...I would say they need to know what is and what is not "placebo effect".

That isn't going to happen if we just repeat "But, even if it is a "placebo effect"... as long as the patient (or listener, in this case) feels the positive effect --- all should be okay? "

Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"

 

True..., posted on September 13, 2016 at 14:05:57
FenderLover
 Problem is... it can be hard to separate the two.

8^)

 

RE: True..., posted on September 13, 2016 at 14:20:30
Tre'
Industry Professional

Posts: 17292
Location: So. Cal.
Joined: February 9, 2002
 Yes! It's very hard not to get fooled.

Even professional listeners have a hard time not being fooled.

This is why it's so important that good scientific method has to be followed before proclaiming that X is "better" than Z.

Otherwise the claimant could just be "fooling" himself (and by extension, trying to fool you and me) when there is, in fact, no actual basis for the claim to start with.

Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"

 

Amen, to that, posted on September 13, 2016 at 14:29:18
FenderLover
 Reproducibility is the word!

8^)

 

RE: Amen, to that, posted on September 13, 2016 at 14:49:08
Tre'
Industry Professional

Posts: 17292
Location: So. Cal.
Joined: February 9, 2002
 That's for sure.

Case in point, if there was a clear reason why changing the leads on the cap would make a big difference then OK, but the fact is a screen grid bypass cap merely holds the screed grid at AC ground.

There is no way mathematically that the tiny difference in the resistance, inductance, capacitance, dielectric absorption, etc.. between the stock lead wires and the new added lead wires would hold the screen grid enough closer to ground to make the claimed difference. "dynamics just soared with the modified caps"

In this case one would have to do a DBT. If a claimant and/or other listeners could show statistically significant results in a DBT then we would need to look for a different reason for the change.

In the mean time, expectation bias is more likely the cause of what is being "heard".

If someone secretly undid the change I don't believe the listener would notice that the system had lost the perceived added dynamics.

The listener would assume that the modified leads were still in place and the expectation would remain, so the perceived improvement would remain.

Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"

 

Great discussion, guys...., posted on September 13, 2016 at 17:49:17
Lew
Audiophile

Posts: 10911
Location: Bethesda, Maryland
Joined: December 11, 2000
 You've touched on a major question that is always worthy of consideration. One wonders if perhaps the OP replaced a 2.8uF capacitor, the value called for in the schematic, with the 4.7uF Clarity MR cap that he had modified, in which case, the improvement he heard could have been due more to increasing the value of the capacitor than to adding wire to the leads. I am sure he can answer that question.

I am a doctor, too, albeit a non-practicing one. Today I visited a dental surgeon who placed an implant in my lower jaw. During the procedure, he numbed me up very effectively, but of course the local anesthesia started to wear off by mid-afternoon, and I really began to suffer. Thereupon, I took a codeine tablet, which did nothing for me until at least 45 minutes had passed. Why don't doctors experience the placebo effect?

One huge placebo effect for audiophiles is brought to bear after one spends a great deal of money on a component or some other less obviously functional element of a system. There is a strong subconscious bias to favor that which is new or expensive. Just check out Tweaker's Asylum some time, for proof of that.

 

RE: Great discussion, guys...., posted on September 13, 2016 at 18:13:55
FenderLover
 You may not have felt relief for 45 min because you understand the kinetics. Which may or may not be a good thing, in the short term. But, best in the long run... Maybe.

 

RE: Great discussion, guys...., posted on September 13, 2016 at 18:32:01
Tre'
Industry Professional

Posts: 17292
Location: So. Cal.
Joined: February 9, 2002
 "See the attached schematic which calls for a 2.8uF cap, but it currently has the 4.7uF cap with the modified leads."

I kind of missed that. That is to say, it didn't dawn on me that banpuka might have meant that he replaced a 2.8uf cap with a modified 4.7uf cap.

That might explain a lot.

Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"

 

RE: Great discussion, guys...., posted on September 13, 2016 at 18:40:56
Tre'
Industry Professional

Posts: 17292
Location: So. Cal.
Joined: February 9, 2002
 To bring this back to audio, if the goal is to advance the audio reproduction state of the art.....it's always a good thing to not be influenced by anything but actual physical reality.

I think we are all in agreement that that is hard to do because we are all so easily fooled when it comes to what we see and hear. It's built into our brains to work that way.

All the more reason to be cautious.

Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"

 

Agreed, Fender... Indeed... The Lippincott Manual of Nursing states..., posted on September 13, 2016 at 19:06:42
Cleantimestream
Audiophile

Posts: 7550
Location: Kentucky
Joined: June 30, 2005
 "the planned therapeutic effect will be greater if the nurse believes the placebo efficacious as well"

Psychosomatic or not ... that is powerful stuff.
The Mind has No Firewall~ U.S. Army War College.

 

"we are all so easily fooled"...., posted on September 13, 2016 at 19:23:38
Steve O
Audiophile

Posts: 12357
Location: SE MI
Joined: September 6, 2001
 ...We certainly are. Even Richard Feynman realized this and made a big deal of it. This is partly why great claims must be independently reproducible by parties not directly involved with the "discovery". Not a frequent occurance in tweak audio.

 

RE: "we are all so easily fooled"...., posted on September 13, 2016 at 19:47:50
FenderLover
 This is why reproducing results under controlled conditions is so important. Ideally, with error factors included.

Subjective views are hard to quantify, but they play a role in audio. Just look at all the adjectives used to describe what you hear. Most are subjective, not objective or quantifiable. I'd say this is impossible to completely eliminate.

 

we all know caps change {usually lower} impedance... there it is..., posted on September 13, 2016 at 20:52:43
Cleantimestream
Audiophile

Posts: 7550
Location: Kentucky
Joined: June 30, 2005
 Driven by an AC supply, a capacitor will only accumulate a limited amount of charge before the potential difference changes sign and the charge dissipates. The higher the frequency, the less charge will accumulate and the smaller the opposition to the current, therefore; higher frequencies MAY improve with a larger value capacitor in that position.
The Mind has No Firewall~ U.S. Army War College.

 

"I'd say this is impossible to completely eliminate"..., posted on September 13, 2016 at 21:07:16
Steve O
Audiophile

Posts: 12357
Location: SE MI
Joined: September 6, 2001
 ...that may be so for now but we shouldn't stop trying.

 

Compared to what?, posted on September 14, 2016 at 07:15:51
Lew
Audiophile

Posts: 10911
Location: Bethesda, Maryland
Joined: December 11, 2000
 Dear Banpuku, I don't know if you've read the further discussion toward the end of this string, but I wondered whether you are comparing the originally specified 2.8uF capacitor, of whatever type, to the modified 4.7uF Clarity MR, or whether you have compared the very same 4.7uF Clarity capacitor, with vs without the modified leads. Since you are an experienced guy, I would tend to assume that the latter case holds true, but can you confirm? Thanks.

 

RE: Compared to what?, posted on September 14, 2016 at 07:18:22
banpuku
Audiophile

Posts: 1008
Joined: January 19, 2006
 This is to confirm that I compared the 4.7uF Clarity MR to the very same 4.7uF Clarity MR with new leads. I still contend that I hear much better dynamics across the board. I am happy with the tweak and may try it in other places as time permits. Hope this helps.

Pat

 

RE: we all know caps change {usually lower} impedance... there it is..., posted on September 14, 2016 at 07:24:13
Tre'
Industry Professional

Posts: 17292
Location: So. Cal.
Joined: February 9, 2002
 Yes, the reactance of a larger cap is lower than the reactance of a smaller cap.

In this application that would make a better connection to ground at all frequencies (not just the higher frequencies) for the screen grid.

If it is the case that the OP replaced a 2.8uf cap with a 4.7uf cap and then reported that he heard a difference, then that would be completely understandable.

On the other hand if the original poster had already changed (at a previous time) the 2.8uf for a 4.7uf (or built the amp with a 4.7uf to start with) and is not reporting on that change in sound but is reporting on a change in sound having do to with the modified leads on the 4.7uf, he might be fooling himself (through expectation bias or whatever) and some proof of a real change in the sound will need to be proven through a DBT or a better explanation of the science involved.

Update; in the post linked below the OP has confirmed that he is indeed reporting that the perceived change in sound was between a 4.7uf without the leads modified and the same 4.7uf cap with the leads modified.

Tre'


Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"

 

4.7mfd cap, posted on September 14, 2016 at 07:51:42
FenderLover
 Is there a reason you went to this cap? Versus the OEM 2.8mfd one.


Thanks!

 

That is why good trials must be double-blinded,..., posted on September 14, 2016 at 08:02:27
Lew
Audiophile

Posts: 10911
Location: Bethesda, Maryland
Joined: December 11, 2000
 so neither the investigator nor the subject knows which is placebo and which is the good stuff. (I don't wish to dredge up the old arguments on the subject of double-blind testing of audio equipment. It's a good idea, if practical, but it is not usually practical.) I'm just pointing out that the concept has an important place in scientific methods.

 

Thx, posted on September 14, 2016 at 08:04:10
Lew
Audiophile

Posts: 10911
Location: Bethesda, Maryland
Joined: December 11, 2000
 nt

 

RE: 4.7mfd cap, posted on September 14, 2016 at 08:42:36
banpuku
Audiophile

Posts: 1008
Joined: January 19, 2006
 To be honest, the amp came with a 2.2uF cap that was not a super high quality part. Call me crazy, but I believe in the so called "high quality audiophile" caps. I did not have a 2.2uF cap on hand. I only had a 4.7uF. So, I went with the 4.7uF and liked the sound. Now that I have changed the leads, it is definitely staying in the circuit; at least for now ;-)

Now, what will be interesting is the coupling cap in the circuit. It is a 0.47uF. I have 3 very nice caps to choose from: Jupiter Copper Foil, Russian K40Y and Duelund Cast PIO. I am currently using the Jupiter Copper Foil. Very very nice cap. Well balanced, very good dynamics, very quiet, black background. I will try the K40Y and Duelund and report back to AA. Should be a fun experience.

 

How do you know that?, posted on September 14, 2016 at 09:34:25
gusser
Audiophile

Posts: 3649
Location: So. California
Joined: September 6, 2006
 "To be honest, the amp came with a 2.2uF cap that was not a super high quality part."

In your electronics experience, What makes the old 2.2uf cap not a quality part?

In the circuit application, that of a screen grid bypass capacitor, what level of capacitor quality do we need? I mean what is the cap doing in the circuit so we can choose an appropriate capacitor technology.

Have you compared the engineering specifications of these "high quality" audiophile caps and parts to the standard commercial versions?

 

RE: How do you know that?, posted on September 14, 2016 at 10:37:27
Triode_Kingdom
Audiophile

Posts: 10037
Location: Central Texas
Joined: September 24, 2006
 The real problem here is that there's no mention of those things that we know are required for a valid A-B test. Lacking that, these claims are really no different than a thousand other things people think they experience, when in fact they're merely being fooled by their own humanity. Do you know, almost every time I wash and wax my Vette, it gets faster. Sometimes it doesn't get faster, but it idles more smoothly. Or the transmission shifts more crisply. Or the AC blows colder. Ad infinitum...








 

Washing car., posted on September 14, 2016 at 10:46:05
FenderLover
 Hey! When I clean the windshield, my car feels not only faster... but like it has a bigger interior!

Odd how the brain works.

 

When I wash my car,..., posted on September 14, 2016 at 11:00:21
Lew
Audiophile

Posts: 10911
Location: Bethesda, Maryland
Joined: December 11, 2000
 it actually seems to look better.

 

Gee, I have nothing to contribute that will bring more light on the subject, just heat-nT, posted on September 14, 2016 at 12:47:41
Cleantimestream
Audiophile

Posts: 7550
Location: Kentucky
Joined: June 30, 2005
 !
The Mind has No Firewall~ U.S. Army War College.

 

Last time I washed MY car...., posted on September 16, 2016 at 15:07:14
bcowen
Audiophile

Posts: 1076
Location: North Carolina
Joined: December 19, 2015
 ...Bush was still in office (IIRC).

I've found that 140 mph or higher in a heavy rain will cause a violent enough atomization of the rain drops to clean off most dirt. Not so much for bugs, but the sun will bake them off usually within a couple years. :)

 

RE: That is why good trials must be double-blinded,..., posted on September 21, 2016 at 03:42:35
PakProtector
Audiophile

Posts: 12360
Joined: May 14, 2002
 LOL...while it would be useful, to go and get two sets of output Iron, and power/filter iron just so I can build two identical amps and double blind test some resistor/capacitor/grid choke... It is rather impractical.

This impracticality gives rise to placebo-ists who claim one must use 4.3 runs of some specific colour and manufacturer wire between the 100kOhm plate load and the 12AX7's plate in order to get a properly 'efficient transfer' of musical energy so a 2A3 can put out power that sounds like it is coming from an amp with two orders of magnitude more power.

One test I like involves leaving the system alone for a bit, and then come back and listen. And have other folks drop in for a listen. Dropping in on a system 'cold' will give you the, 'it needs work', or, 'I like it much' response...:)
cheers,
Douglas

Friend, I would not hurt thee for the world...but thou art standing where I am about to shoot.

 

RE: That is why good trials must be double-blinded,..., posted on September 26, 2016 at 11:44:21
Lew
Audiophile

Posts: 10911
Location: Bethesda, Maryland
Joined: December 11, 2000
 What I do is to listen to the system with the new device for at least several weeks and then go back to the "before" condition for several more weeks. And ideally, you (or I) should go back to the new device, to see if you (or I) still love it so much or so little. But in practice, I am lazy. Seat of the pants rules. Which is why I am loathe to trumpet my conclusions. My data are usually bad. Thus I sometimes marvel at the degree of certainty about anything, often seen here.

 

RE: That is why good trials must be double-blinded,..., posted on September 27, 2016 at 04:05:22
PakProtector
Audiophile

Posts: 12360
Joined: May 14, 2002
 I have observed a lot of 'bad' data myself. I have seen a few good results, and my most certain confirmation comes from other sets of ears, preferably on an absolutely 'cold' basis...either they like it or not.

I'll try and stick to building what I like to listen to...:) The basis of a good amp has always started with good engineering.
cheers,
Douglas
Friend, I would not hurt thee for the world...but thou art standing where I am about to shoot.

 

RE: "we are all so easily fooled"...., posted on September 27, 2016 at 04:09:01
PakProtector
Audiophile

Posts: 12360
Joined: May 14, 2002
 Yah...Feynman was indeed on to something...:)
cheers,
Douglas

Friend, I would not hurt thee for the world...but thou art standing where I am about to shoot.

 

Page processed in 0.038 seconds.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]