 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
In Reply to: Re: black gates in parallel posted by Robert Karl Stonjek on December 21, 2001 at 13:02:41:
I've always thought of the power supply as part of the signal source (indirectly). When a large transient comes along, the power supply must deliver quickly. So that is where the shunt polypropylene capacitor comes in.Which of course has nothing to do with ESR.
se
Follow Ups:
I couldn't find an ESR spec for the polypropylene I use, so I wouldn't count on a shunt polypropylene cap to lower ESR as Eddy says.I was thinking of overall power supply performance and the use of smaller caps. Some claim that using many smaller caps gives a 'faster', more transient (in the ability to deliver current at higher frequencies) response. If that is the only criteria, then a shunt polypropylene cap may work better.
Kind Regards,
Robert Karl Stonjek
I couldn't find an ESR spec for the polypropylene I use, so I wouldn't count on a shunt polypropylene cap to lower ESR as Eddy says.Typically any film cap will have much lower ESR than an electrolytic.
I was thinking of overall power supply performance and the use of smaller caps. Some claim that using many smaller caps gives a 'faster', more transient (in the ability to deliver current at higher frequencies) response. If that is the only criteria, then a shunt polypropylene cap may work better.
Being able to deliver sufficient current at higher frequencies and how quickly that current can be delivered are two different things. How quickly that current can be delivered will depend on energy storage, not resistance. With regard to power supply caps the energy storage in question is inductance (ESL).
I only brought this up because there's still a rather common misconception out there that resistance has an effect on how quickly current can be delivered and the main thrust of the thread was relating to ESR rather than ESL.
se
Yes that makes sense to me. I think I also read somewhere that shunting a resevoir cap like this can actually increase its expected lifetime.
Yes that makes sense to me. I think I also read somewhere that shunting a resevoir cap like this can actually increase its expected lifetime.Mmmm. Dunno why that would be the case. At least if you're just talking about small value bypasses. Now, breaking up the reservoir capacitance across a number of parallel caps can increase lifetime as ripple current is spread out across more capacitors and the internal temperature of each individual cap is lowered versus using a single capacitor of the same total value. And pretty much whenever you can reduce heat you increase lifetime. Why do you think Eskimos live so long? :)
se
But to get back to my original point with regards black gates. Do you think there would be any point in using three 1000 caps rather than one higher value? Would each cap have a lower ESL, and therefore be able to deliver faster current? And how would the lower ESR affect the sound?
But to get back to my original point with regards black gates. Do you think there would be any point in using three 1000 caps rather than one higher value? Would each cap have a lower ESL, and therefore be able to deliver faster current? And how would the lower ESR affect the sound?ESL is largely determined by the lead spacing of the capacitor so if you're comparing capacitors with the same lead spacings, their ESL will be roughly the same regardless of value. Therefore paralleling them will reduce ESL over what you would get with just a single capacitor. And this can be a good thing.
As for ESR, personally I haven't found it, in and of itself, to have any effect and don't give it any particular consideration.
se
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
