Interesting capacitor shoot out

Check this out:

http://www.tempoelectric.com/caps.htm

Very interesting stuff. Vitamins Qs and Russian teflons get a somewhat grudging 'honorable' mention, lol. In other words these guys have money to burn and are 'cost no object' in their thinking. Some of us have to be more practical.:yes:

Cheers

Lar

Good stuff! :thmbsp:

Nice article with some very interesting results. Thanks.

No real measurements (with RMAA for example), no blind tests, $0.2 soup opera.

Impression is NOT and engineering or scientific test.

LinuxGuru said:

No real measurements (with RMAA for example), no blind tests, $0.2 soup opera.

Impression is NOT and engineering or scientific test.

Click to expand...

Ultimately, even when using the most sophisticated test gear, it is the ears and the brain that make the final subjective determination as to preference.

We listen to music, not pink noise or graphs. Although such engineering and scientific tools are invaluable as an adjunct they can never be a replacement for a final evaluation using the ears and the brain, as admittedly fallible as they are.

Cheers

Lar

before this gets launched to the Thinking Out Loud forum, I've heard a lot of assertions about the impression style listening test being the all mighty.

How is the ear only listening test qualified? I've heard responses such, as: "I know through my 40 years of listening" , etc. But if there's no proof of repeatability, then that test method is flawed. ...and double blind testing isn't used??

Why not? If your instrument (your ears) are so good, then you should welcome some sort of qualification and/or characterization. Subjective listening tests relying on sonic memory are flawed if there is no proof of consistency.

This isn't aimed at anyone in particular, I'm just tired of hearing assertions that can't backed up and paraded as truth.

If you know you hear the difference, that's fine. Are you willing to back it up with any valid qualification process? double- blind testing?

"How is the ear only listening test qualified?"

Wasn't at all what I was asserting: what I said was:

"such engineering and scientific tools are invaluable"

But at the end of the day we have to take the speaker components-finished speaker cabinets out of the anechoic chambers and have a listen.

Do you think that JBL markets their products fresh out of the test lab without first having a subjective listen to them? Nope.

Generally, people don't have anechoic listening rooms in their homes.

Cheers

Lar

There's a humblehomemadehifi cap shootout, another one on head-fi (or was it diyaudio?) and this one here. I'm not as surprised by the varying subjective impressions between these four different shoot-outs as I am by the cognitive dissonance I experience after thinking through the implications of their "findings".

"Et tu, bypass?"

At the end of the day, the only conclusion I can arrive at is that foil is the only consistent trait of a cap that both audiophiles and engineers agree upon.

Jon_Logan said:

before this gets launched to the Thinking Out Loud forum, I've heard a lot of assertions about the impression style listening test being the all mighty.

How is the ear only listening test qualified? I've heard responses such, as: "I know through my 40 years of listening" , etc. But if there's no proof of repeatability, then that test method is flawed. ...and double blind testing isn't used??
Why not? If your instrument (your ears) are so good, then you should welcome some sort of qualification and/or characterization. Subjective listening tests relying on sonic memory are flawed if there is no proof of consistency.
This isn't aimed at anyone in particular, I'm just tired of hearing assertions that can't backed up and paraded as truth.
If you know you hear the difference, that's fine. Are you willing to back it up with any valid qualification process? double- blind testing?

Click to expand...

Agree at 1000% :thmbsp:. There is nothing wrong to swap the tubes, caps, cables, whatever else, and listen resulting system. Tinkering and tweaking is a nice creative job, I am doing it myself, too.
However, when people do complete tests with measurement instruments (engineering part) AND double-blind (subjective), its one thing, its REAL testing.
Just listening - completely another, and this is NOT test. It can be called "impression at a glance". I do not try to slam anyone, I'd rather like things to be called by real names. If, for example, I enjoy the sound of NOS RCA 12AX7 preamp, I wouldn't say its better or worst then yours Telefunken, Sylvania, or Sovtek, I'd rather write "this is sonic signature most pleasant for my ears".
Returning to the content of the article pointed by [diamondsouled] - can their authors distinguish in blind tests aluminum from copper foil caps, or teflon from PIO? Leaving answer to anyone else...

Just to show I'm not adverse to in lab testing here's a link to some great technical info on caps:

http://www.reliablecapacitors.com/pickcap.htm

I take it all with a grain of salt ( both technical and impression testing ), remember cold fusion?

I used to take my little David by Visonic speakers and hide them out in my empty ESS AMT-1A speaker cabinets. People would listen and say: " wow these sound great!!", then I'd pull the speaker grill off and show them this little black metal speaker inside the ESSs and invariably their jaws would drop. Reminds me I need to get those Davids up and running again.

Cheers

Lar

If we took out the word, 'cap', and inserted the word, "wine", it would have the same effect on me. That is, like any wine, there will be many opinions and I'll will listen to anyone's opinion. I've been to many wine tastings and they can be fun, too, if they're run in the right way.

For me, I like my capacitors reliable and stable in value, thank you.

Cheers,

David

good read. unfortunately these guys spent in caps more than i spent on some of my McIntosh gear. the only day i'll ever see any of those esoteric caps is when i find them in a junk bin at a hamfest!

This capacitor debate crops up all of the time and never goes anywhere positive. All it does is make enemies. Therefore, I keep to myself...

kvflyer said:

This capacitor debate crops up all of the time and never goes anywhere positive. All it does is sell capacitors.

Click to expand...

Fixed your post.

LinuxGuru said:

Impression is NOT and engineering or scientific test.

Click to expand...

When it comes to audio gear, the only test that matters is how you think it sounds.

Engineering and scientific testing are certainly not without fault, engineers have sworn by their designs the day before catastrophic failure, and oddly had they looked at the huge cracks in the dam instead of listening to their slide rules, peoples lives would have been saved.

Brinkman said:

Fixed your post.

Click to expand...

Thanks, I didn't want to go quite that far even though I totally agree...

great read! really interesting.

over the years, i had learned to only believe in BLIND test results that were done by reputable experts with no ties with manufacturers. i guess that's almost impossible.....:scratch2: even when that's the case, each person testing has his/her own preferred taste. that's why one should always somewhat reply on testing gear measurements. so, for me, i just spend what i can on such components and feel comfortable with it. some of you may throw rocks at me for saying this, but to me, spending hundreds of dollars on a single capacitor is for those with six figure checking account balance and nothing better to spend their greens on.

I noticed that Sonicaps weren't on the list anywhere. I guess I like the Lamborghini Gallardo well enough, but not enough to pay more for a car than I paid for my home. To me it all boils down to what I like, not what somebody else likes or tells me I should like. There is also a limit to what I will spend on my hobby.

Interesting capacitor shoot out

Click to expand...

/Col. Potter voice: "Horse-hockey!"

Make your own decisions about what is good and bad. Damned if I'd rely on someone else to feed me meaningless audiofool terms about what some part is supposed to sound like.

I thought it was a fantastic read! I've been a long fan of tube rolling and always here people say things like "how can you hold a serious multi listening session, your audio memory is too short". WHATEVER!

What they did with those caps was like tube rolling. I personally have a great audio memory regardless what others feel and I think there are many others out there that do as well. I also think experience plays a roll, BIGTIME! With years of careful listening you become used to more acute sound changes. Like how drums should sound, how the vocals should be presented, little tinks like fingers moving around on a guitar and small differences you might not have heard before becoming used to careful listening.

Another point. Before I ever started tube rolling I read countless reviews on specific tubes like the 6922 and 12ax7 series. If a professional said a tube was warmer but lacking detail, rolled off up top, and so on he was generally right on! There were a few examples when I felt a tube was worse or better than reviewed but it really gave a good idea. The specific ones that were suppose to be harsh and lacking tended to be just that. I feel these cap tests are like those, maybe not your ears, but a series of professionals that at least throw you a bone and get you in the ballpark of the best bunch.

Thanks.