Tony - thank you so much for taking the time and trouble to do this comparison. It was a really unique opportunity with these two pre-amps to try it, I am very grateful that you siezed it. I'm also feeling a bit better about all of those Wima caps in my last restoration :-)
Audio grade electrolytic are being phased out of the market. I just placed a order with my parts supplier and all of the audio grade caps are obsolete and out of production. I was buying up remaining stock. We need to re-think about what we will use in the future to restore these old pieces of audio gear I have been experimenting with using solid polymer electrolytics in audio. They are great caps for power supply filtering & bypass but I want to try them in the audio path as well. But for right now I use film caps when ever possible. The design of the circuit plays into this big time. Some older designs rely on heavily on interstage blocking capacitors which, in my opinion, colours the sound depending on the capacitor chemistry and health. These older designs benefit the most from removing electrolytics and replacing them with film (or others). Newer designs have overcome the interstage capacitor dependency and are more immune from these changes. Thanks Tony for your excellent vid demonstrating the differences, Cheers
Video is TO LOONG! Good to see you! Polymers have a bad rep "soundwise" for one reason, or another, Audio Note Kaisei was portrayed as an alternative to Elna RFS2, but they must be made on the space station, as the prices are astronomical.
Pretty sweet thing to have two units to directly compare and having it controlled.. beautiful job. it's about time someone took the bull by the horns. Nice!
Excellent, Thanks for clearing up that old bug bear. I've done that experiment with Film on one channel and electros in the other channel of a single amp. I couldn't tell any difference, but my ears are old to. Thanks for all the great videos, I've learned a lot from watching them
Hey Tony, i just want to share my apreciation for your chanel. I learned electronics from you and started my hobby in electronics. I really apreciate all the work you put in this videos, after I started myself, I can relate to the amount of effort and I myself failed to keep up making videos. This only increased my apeciations for you. I still tinker in the lab, but the majority of my hobby is now reduced to taking part in your work on the chanel. Big thank you!
I'm surprised at the results. I expected more difference between them, mainly because the circuit was designed around 'lytics. Now whether one type sounds better than the other is where it becomes just someones opinion. I have read many times where somebody recapped an amp using wima's in the audio path, only to remove them and install lytic's because they did not like how it changed the sound. The amp I'm recapping now, only one channel & section at a time is getting new caps. This way if the sound changes, I can pin point what part, and swap it to get it where the sound is what I like. Great vid Tony, and perfect timing for me!
Wow..what a great experiment/educational video. I was thinking about doing this when I re-built my (circa 1975) Sony TA-2000f pre-amp. Using electro's on one ch and films on the other. But I ended up using films all around. Two interesting test that you DID NOT perform: 1) 30khz square wave test. Film caps should show "sharper" edges. 2) Low frequency test around -3db point of the line-amp. (typically around 18hz) Now this his hard to read and is best done an analog scope. But if you can study the waveform An "inferior cap" will show "bending" of the the low freq. sine wave right around the circuits -3db point where non-linearity in the response curve is at its peak. It's actually a low freq "distortion" measurement of the R/C network.
Very interesting comparison Tony. Never heard the one about the fly crap and pepper before! Just goes to show that if you're not careful you might learn something.
Love the compare.. and I do think it's "new" that matters..but great to have it compared for real. old and drying out has gotta be worse and new, litics or films when things are getting OLD ( i have done films with 4.7 and lower) and refreshed is needed. I'd use litic for larger values and non-audio path. Another great series Tony !
I really enjoy what you’re doing here, Tony. Firstly, this is absolutely not meant to be an argumentative comment. I see you took into account that if you refurbished both preamps with the exact same parts, even with very tight tolerances, those small differences add up. I work at a shop repairing / upgrading / modifying guitars and amps. Even 2 amps with consecutive serial numbers sound slightly different due to those tolerances adding up and not being the exact same. They can show the exact same thing on the scope, but then sound different. Also, have you tried adding bypass film caps 1/100th the value of the electrolytics to see if there’s a difference at all? I know this is mostly just for entertainment and experimentation, so I hope you don’t think I’m complaining, but rather asking a serious questions. Thanks so much! 👍🔊😊🎶
Thank you, Tony! I have been posting multiple measurements of the e-capped audio circuits vs film for years, just to attract an enormous amount of aggression upon myself. I gave up eventually.
amazing work, thank you. the approach w/ subtracting signals is foolproof... some argue measurements can't really encompass the complexity of our hearing, but subtracting the actual signals and being left w/ *actual* silence, well we can't interpret silence other than being silent :) ps: it's impressive how quiet those pre-amps are.
Great experiment. Glad you did this. Unfortunately this is an old argument between techs and audiophiles. You can measure with all the availability, and it won’t stack to actual listening with both speakers and amplifier able to pick up a lot of detail. Manufacturers admit they can’t measure what the human ear can interpret to the brain. I myself am going to use electrolytic as long as I can get them if that’s what the engineers used.
Agree with what you're saying about listening through speakers, although 'Manufacturers admit they can’t measure what the human ear can interpret to the brain' - I do wonder if a fair bit of this is down to peoples brain interpreting differences that aren't necessarily scientifically there when they 'upgrade' certian components, or buy $1000 speaker cables - there's not really a difference there other than your brains expectations. Not that there's anything wrong with that - those upgrades feed the audiophiles hobby, and someone happy with a hobby is a good thing.
here's something that's barely mentioned in discussions on the topic you mentioned: by the age most ppl can afford 'proper' hifi gear, their hearing is *not* even close to what the papers use as standards... (add to that the fact that the vast majority of listeners have no 'listening training' but that's a bit besides the point) in this particular case, the output of the caps is practically identical. the actual signals that ultimately reach the ear are subtracted and there is nothing left. no amount of hearing + hearing training can extract information from silence, there is nothing to interpret... ps: there's nothing wrong w/ following manuals, it's my preferred method too... that being said, i find 'audiophile arguments' esoteric in nature :)
Uh NO, we can measure everything related to sound reproduction in minute detail. The numbers do predict what we will hear. I get so tired of the fallacy repeated over and over that the human ear can hear things we cannot measure. That's an old wife's tale and used by the snake oil salesmen to defend the crap they sell to the gullible. Now here's something to think about, by moving your head just an inch or more during a listening test with speakers, you will change the frequency and phase response going to your ears. It doesn't take much to make quite a large difference so making comparisons that way is not productive.
@@duroxkilo What gets me are the audiophile magazines and online reviewers that are in their 60s and a lot pushing 80 claiming their hearing is just as good as when they were younger. They are full of BS. Most can't hear past 10kHz yet make silly claims about high frequency detail for some piece of gear.
@@davidlong1786 Agree about moving your head, play a 1000hz test tone, and move around in your best listening spot. It's crazy how the sound changes, even disappears in some spots.
Hi Tony, nice, scientific comparison. I did not hear you mentioning that electrolytics need a DC polarising voltage the right way round to function properly over time (maybe you said so)
Awesome undertaking - must have been costly too! This must be a first on youtube or at least one of the few such videos on capacitor audio performance. It has to be the only such experiment (that I know of at least) of the comparison of two identical circuits with different components. The sophisticated equipment used to extend the breadth of the experiment is an extra plus. It's been so many years since Cyril Bateman's series of articles and praise is also due for resurfacing them.
My personal Engineering Experience with audio fixing. Electrolytic Caps you should always use low ESR caps, because high frequencies can heat up the caps. It also extends the life of the Cap. As far as audio coupling caps I would always use ceramic ones if possible. In the old day they just did not have ceramic caps in high values like they do now, so you had to use a film cap. As far as noise in a circuit where possible I would always use ceramic caps.
Tony, great great work. I would suggest that to start you should take only one output, run it into both channels of your comparator circuit to show how close the tests come out when looking at exactly the same signal.
I have a test for you Tony. i just recap my deck technics M270X and i could'n find any audio grade caps in 0.33uf and 0.68uf, so i put some Nichicon UVR & UPW caps in. I know the old caps are (now) panasonic MA serie, so i check the rimpel current for even or above of the MA-serie. The rest is a combination of rubycon and panasonic FR. Really, it sound great.
Very intersting , thanks ...........;besides I am not alone to percieve a sonic/ musical difference listening even to different film and foil capacitors of the same value, same with electrolytics . Some electronics and systems do not respond or even so slightly sonicaly different to this , even if they measure to perfection ...........those are the amplifiers I do not use for top musical reproduction , they may sound good as they are and clean but not so revealing and connect to the music , more like perfect sound lacking qualities only fouind in the very best amplifiers and systems. .
This is such a great job. if I had to pick one of these it would be the one with the electrolytics. (did you hide the audio file while making this). Thank you for such great original videos. Mike
Tony you touched on being generous with the value of electrolytic coupling caps.this agrees with tests that Douglas self reported on in book small signal amp design that electro cap reasonably well performance as long as the ac voltage drop across the cap is kept low when used as a coupling cap.so larger than minimum for -3db point is good idea if using electrolytic caps for ac coupling. .
I replaced the 4.7uF bipolar caps at the output of my Marantz 2250B tone board with film caps. The films caps had less than 1/10th the ESR and I swear it made a huge improvement in sound.
Awesome video, thanks for putting in the time to do it. I definitely would have expected to see some difference with the pink noise but here we are. The only question I have now is, do you notice any difference in sound signature between the two amps when you listen to music?
Neat experiment! Quick question: Do you think that varying the load on the output of the preamps (ie the input impedance of the next stage) might reveal more difference between the film and electrolytic caps?
One note on this experiment: whatever the performance outcome, there is always the longevity and robustness aspect that needs to be taken into consideration too when choosing a component. The component must be up to the task under the given conditions that one designs for.
Thanks for taking the time and effort to do this Tony. I’ve been concerned about this. I did 7 units in rapid succession using a lot of film caps. I feel better now. I’ve seen a lot of 10uf polarized electrolytic caps in the audio path. Are you suggesting that these could be replaced with lower value film caps because they have the same capacitance in both directions? I’ve been squeezing 10uf films in where I can. Thanks!
interesting comparison. If a person goes back to the landmark Richard Marsh cap testing done in the mid to late 1980s, they originally had problems measuring the difference. Would have been interesting to do a A vs. B listening comparison too. Maybe that is part 2 for this. Today in high end audio can't think of one manufacturer that uses electrolytic coupling caps (polarized or bipolar) over film caps.
thanks for doing the test, I agree good design has superior results it is what makes it good design. The result for me is I am not going to be so worried that I do not have the exact replacement cap and can use good film caps. I wonder if the reason for question at all has anything to do with the original cost and inbuilt tolerances of the older components
Almost everyone and most manufacturers use Wima polycaps.............in the end the sound gets a POLY-propylene sound ( = to much of the same sonic signature )............lean and clean...........somewhat flat sounding and kind ofa more lifeless polyproplyne type of sound. Personaly I use them sparingly and I use the less as possible any caps in any circuit for music reproction .....If so I prefer FOIL capacitors .........and in a a PRE-amp of quality only ONE in the signal path ..... For regular repair and design i prefer polystyrene instead of polypropylene...better thighs and less coloration.........as used ever since in most SS phono RIAA amplifiers. In ost commercial amplifiers the choice of capacitors doesn't make big difference as showed in this video...........as soon as correctioncircuits and NFB is used difference will be neutralized ....as the same happens to the music they produce...........on the testbank those amplifiers measure up to perfection but not soundwize even if they measure quite the same.......
Wow, that's new information for me, polarised caps only being half value in reverse polarity. I never learned that on any college course, nor have I seen mention of it in what I've read. I wonder if the difference between the capacitors would show up more with dynamic waveforms more like music, rather than steady signals.
It's actually quite a bit less than half the capacitance in reverse polarity. The max voltage is also a small fraction of the max voltage in forward polarity.
@@xraytonyb Not that there should be any but a polarised at least will block DC. We have all seen many polarised caps die / go short or loose value but regarding film caps, I think most of us seem to be under the impression that they never degrade unless having suffered moisture ingress. Are there any good videos about the degradation of film caps and the difference is say sound after replacing older film caps in older audio equipment?
@@xraytonyb So when calculating circuit capacitor values for electrolytics, there should be large correction factors built into the formulas. Why do we not normally see this?
Good quality Film caps can last many many decades and not change values all that much, good quality electrolytic caps change values much sooner. Film is almost always more expensive all things being equal.
Ok, good tests with Pink Noise. Did you do a total harmonic distortion & intermodulation distortion tests? What about driving the preamp into clipping? Consider the life expectancy of Film vs Electrolytic capacitors? After you do the other tests mentioned above, I could then tend to agree that there is hardly any noticeable audio difference.
I have replaced and upgraded the capacitor on an AU20000. The sound characteristics and tonal qualities have changed a lot, and I'm not sure whether the change is an improvement or not.
Electrolytics need time to form. The sound will change once you get some time on them and they settle in. Once they form they should be stable for decades. Of course an old stereo that has been stuffed in a closet for years may have to reform again. Older leaky capacitors can change the bias on transistors and change the sound. (leaking DC)
Guess it all boils down to the SRF of the specific type of capacitors. What would be interesting if you do those tests with different types of capacitors in parallel, typical one order apart in size. I know in the RF-lab, we always referred to some app note describing these things when introducing junior engineers to good design-principles, but I cannot remember the details, think it might have been an app. note from R&S of if it was in one of Dr. Rohde’s books. For audiophiles, sorry, cannot comment, but at least, in the RF world and EMI-world, there is sense in using capacitors in parallel. You can demonstrate it quite well on a VNA.
Better to damp components and circuits...........and protect them from magnetic induction ...........everything is microphonic and capture RF...........even transistors are microphonic ..... Use a stetoscope to listen to filtercaps .........
Yeah but how does it sound? There's going to be a difference in sound?? you should do a sound test. What about harmonics your test doesn't show harmonics
This is my opinion based on my experience. Electrolytics have only one place in audio and that is in the power supply. The film caps are for the audio path. This may or may not be your way, but it is better than having any electrolytic capacitors anywhere but the power supply. The audio path is or should be exclusive to film capacitors. Poo pooing this is fruitless. Safety caps are ceramic. That was true earlier and it’s still tried and true now. Like the song says, you go your way and I’ll go my way. That’s why we have choices in recapping.
Film caps are going to have a lower ESR and faster rise time, but at slow audio frequencies would that be relevant? Would there be enough difference to cause a phase shift to become something audible? Can you be more specific? Just saying that a subjective opinion of A is better than B does not help us to understand why. Please explain the benefits, thanks
@@zulumax1 I've restored a humble Yamaha c450 amp, to use for background music in my audiorepairshop. Used mainly the standard electrolitics, like in the original design, and used good quality too. The amp is fed with a decent recordplayer, and also a very good sounding highend cd player. Also decent loudspeakers and diy cables are used with high quality crossoverparts in the speakers. This combination sounded very good, and i used it for about six months. A year ago i decided to swap all electrolitics in the signalpath for filmcaps. For experimentel purposes, and my curiousity. I didn't expect much of a difference, but boy i was wrong! There is a profound difference in resolution, transparancy, speed and decay of notes. Also the soundstage improved quite a bit, and i was very, very pleasantly surprised. This was easy noticeable, no need for audiophile ears. Kickdrum attacs (much faster), aucoustic guitar, piano decay, you name it. I noticed no downsides in the sound. Example, the number riders on the storm. Everyone knows that song. It has so many small and tiny details in the first part. It's like hearing new things in something very, very familiar now. Very enjoyable. But Tony is right about the design of a circuit, and the designers who are taking into account the difference in parts. But things like speed, decay and soundstaging are not things you can measure, only hear when using a reveiling system without great bottlenecks. Every piece of the chain has to be of equal quality. Otherwise the difference is less easy to spot.
@@zulumax1, poo pooing a part for an upgrade in performance is laughable. There are such things as beyond question. The characteristics of the part demand scrutiny. Same capacitive value, possibly higher voltage rating and definitely higher temp rating. These effect longevity. Sonic, Jantsen, mylec, there are many brands but specialty caps open up resolution by having higher rise times and having or contributing to lowering the noise floor which opens up the sound. Some caps are more prone to smearing due to slower rise time characteristics. Sonic improvement is accomplished when the listener is happy. That is what matters. Just because a capacitor is rated the same, does not mean it will sound the same. Products, on the most part, are speced at a price point. This makes them subject to adequate performance given their quality. The signal path is a place given to varying frequencies and levels of operation, dynamic contrast. It makes sense to use parts that will allow that signal to be as least affected as possible. An electrolytic as a type is best suited to power supplies as it can handle swings well and in sufficient quantity will allow higher current capability, especially in power amps. The key to power supplies is being able to handle peaks without fatigue. There are brands like Nichicon which make audio grade capacitors. Can’t kick them, but the sonic benefit based upon ear checks and happy people that have a familiar friend in their gear and choose the high road to audio. Finding parts that deliver happy listeners, that matters. Whether this answers your question enough, that’s your call. This is a philosophy and a discipline. I can’t make others see what I hear. Their own ears are their guides. Happy people make the world go around.
Do a new test: check which terminal of the film capacitor has the aluminum film is the outer terminal, as Mr Carlson's shows here -> ruclips.net/video/BnR_DLd1PDI/видео.html , then in Your circuit change the orientation of the capacitor, and also put some adhesive aluminum tape on the outside of the capacitor (shielding the body) and connect that alu tape to ground. Now repeat all the tests again and see if have 50-60hz hum with this "shielding" and with this new orientation 😉👌
It won't make any difference with these types of film caps. Some of the mylar caps (like those yellow ones and the orange drop types) used in tube gear will show a small difference, but it is very small, compared to the old paper/foil caps. I did a video on this where I installed the caps in an AM tube radio in both directions and was unable to see/measure any difference in SNR. Check it out when you get a chance.
Tony - thank you so much for taking the time and trouble to do this comparison. It was a really unique opportunity with these two pre-amps to try it, I am very grateful that you siezed it. I'm also feeling a bit better about all of those Wima caps in my last restoration :-)
Audio grade electrolytic are being phased out of the market. I just placed a order with my parts supplier and all of the audio grade caps are obsolete and out of production.
I was buying up remaining stock. We need to re-think about what we will use in the future to restore these old pieces of audio gear
I have been experimenting with using solid polymer electrolytics in audio. They are great caps for power supply filtering & bypass but I want to try them in the audio path as well. But for right now I use film caps when ever possible.
The design of the circuit plays into this big time. Some older designs rely on heavily on interstage blocking capacitors which, in my opinion, colours the sound depending on the capacitor chemistry and health. These older designs benefit the most from removing electrolytics and replacing them with film (or others).
Newer designs have overcome the interstage capacitor dependency and are more immune from these changes.
Thanks Tony for your excellent vid demonstrating the differences, Cheers
They will always be available, but you are going to have to pay the piper a good penny for them.
Video is TO LOONG! Good to see you! Polymers have a bad rep "soundwise" for one reason, or another, Audio Note Kaisei was portrayed as an alternative to Elna RFS2, but they must be made on the space station, as the prices are astronomical.
Pretty sweet thing to have two units to directly compare and having it controlled.. beautiful job. it's about time someone took the bull by the horns. Nice!
Excellent, Thanks for clearing up that old bug bear. I've done that experiment with Film on one channel and electros in the other channel of a single amp. I couldn't tell any difference, but my ears are old to. Thanks for all the great videos, I've learned a lot from watching them
Hey Tony, i just want to share my apreciation for your chanel. I learned electronics from you and started my hobby in electronics. I really apreciate all the work you put in this videos, after I started myself, I can relate to the amount of effort and I myself failed to keep up making videos. This only increased my apeciations for you. I still tinker in the lab, but the majority of my hobby is now reduced to taking part in your work on the chanel. Big thank you!
Awesome video, even for a relative novice. Easily understood, solid logical approach. Keep em coming!
I'm surprised at the results. I expected more difference between them, mainly because the circuit was designed around 'lytics. Now whether one type sounds better than the other is where it becomes just someones opinion. I have read many times where somebody recapped an amp using wima's in the audio path, only to remove them and install lytic's because they did not like how it changed the sound.
The amp I'm recapping now, only one channel & section at a time is getting new caps. This way if the sound changes, I can pin point what part, and swap it to get it where the sound is what I like.
Great vid Tony, and perfect timing for me!
5:26 - I saw another RUclipsr replace a 'run cap' with a polarized electrolytic. Instant boom w/confetti! :)
This is easily one of my favorite channels. Thank you for doing this!!
My Favourite. Tony is a top Man as we say in UK.
Greetings, fantastic video, thank you very much.
Wow..what a great experiment/educational video.
I was thinking about doing this when I re-built my (circa 1975) Sony TA-2000f pre-amp.
Using electro's on one ch and films on the other. But I ended up using films all around.
Two interesting test that you DID NOT perform:
1) 30khz square wave test. Film caps should show "sharper" edges.
2) Low frequency test around -3db point of the line-amp. (typically around 18hz)
Now this his hard to read and is best done an analog scope. But if you can study the waveform
An "inferior cap" will show "bending" of the the low freq. sine wave right around the circuits -3db point where non-linearity
in the response curve is at its peak. It's actually a low freq "distortion" measurement of the R/C network.
Point well taken. Thanks for your pursuit of "why".
Not boring, just very interesting
Very interesting comparison Tony. Never heard the one about the fly crap and pepper before! Just goes to show that if you're not careful you might learn something.
Thats good news because I prefer the flavor of film caps anyways. Give one a lick. 😜
Love the compare.. and I do think it's "new" that matters..but great to have it compared for real. old and drying out has gotta be worse and new, litics or films when things are getting OLD ( i have done films with 4.7 and lower) and refreshed is needed. I'd use litic for larger values and non-audio path. Another great series Tony !
I really enjoy what you’re doing here, Tony.
Firstly, this is absolutely not meant to be an argumentative comment. I see you took into account that if you refurbished both preamps with the exact same parts, even with very tight tolerances, those small differences add up. I work at a shop repairing / upgrading / modifying guitars and amps. Even 2 amps with consecutive serial numbers sound slightly different due to those tolerances adding up and not being the exact same. They can show the exact same thing on the scope, but then sound different.
Also, have you tried adding bypass film caps 1/100th the value of the electrolytics to see if there’s a difference at all?
I know this is mostly just for entertainment and experimentation, so I hope you don’t think I’m complaining, but rather asking a serious questions.
Thanks so much! 👍🔊😊🎶
How about testing with a square wave signal in the time-domain?
Neat experiment!! Thanks for posting. New sub here your sx1250 videos helped a lot with my own restoration project so thanks a lot for that.
Thanks Tony😊
Surprised me. Thanks!
Thank you, Tony! I have been posting multiple measurements of the e-capped audio circuits vs film for years, just to attract an enormous amount of aggression upon myself. I gave up eventually.
amazing work, thank you.
the approach w/ subtracting signals is foolproof...
some argue measurements can't really encompass the complexity of our hearing, but subtracting the actual signals and being left w/ *actual* silence, well we can't interpret silence other than being silent :)
ps: it's impressive how quiet those pre-amps are.
Great experiment. Glad you did this. Unfortunately this is an old argument between techs and audiophiles. You can measure with all the availability, and it won’t stack to actual listening with both speakers and amplifier able to pick up a lot of detail. Manufacturers admit they can’t measure what the human ear can interpret to the brain. I myself am going to use electrolytic as long as I can get them if that’s what the engineers used.
Agree with what you're saying about listening through speakers, although 'Manufacturers admit they can’t measure what the human ear can interpret to the brain' - I do wonder if a fair bit of this is down to peoples brain interpreting differences that aren't necessarily scientifically there when they 'upgrade' certian components, or buy $1000 speaker cables - there's not really a difference there other than your brains expectations. Not that there's anything wrong with that - those upgrades feed the audiophiles hobby, and someone happy with a hobby is a good thing.
here's something that's barely mentioned in discussions on the topic you mentioned: by the age most ppl can afford 'proper' hifi gear, their hearing is *not* even close to what the papers use as standards... (add to that the fact that the vast majority of listeners have no 'listening training' but that's a bit besides the point)
in this particular case, the output of the caps is practically identical. the actual signals that ultimately reach the ear are subtracted and there is nothing left. no amount of hearing + hearing training can extract information from silence, there is nothing to interpret...
ps: there's nothing wrong w/ following manuals, it's my preferred method too... that being said, i find 'audiophile arguments' esoteric in nature :)
Uh NO, we can measure everything related to sound reproduction in minute detail. The numbers do predict what we will hear. I get so tired of the fallacy repeated over and over that the human ear can hear things we cannot measure. That's an old wife's tale and used by the snake oil salesmen to defend the crap they sell to the gullible. Now here's something to think about, by moving your head just an inch or more during a listening test with speakers, you will change the frequency and phase response going to your ears. It doesn't take much to make quite a large difference so making comparisons that way is not productive.
@@duroxkilo What gets me are the audiophile magazines and online reviewers that are in their 60s and a lot pushing 80 claiming their hearing is just as good as when they were younger. They are full of BS. Most can't hear past 10kHz yet make silly claims about high frequency detail for some piece of gear.
@@davidlong1786 Agree about moving your head, play a 1000hz test tone, and move around in your best listening spot. It's crazy how the sound changes, even disappears in some spots.
Tony's difference amp goes to 11
Only way he could feel it thru his spine.
Hi Tony, nice, scientific comparison. I did not hear you mentioning that electrolytics need a DC polarising voltage the right way round to function properly over time (maybe you said so)
Very interesting experiment
Awesome undertaking - must have been costly too! This must be a first on youtube or at least one of the few such videos on capacitor audio performance. It has to be the only such experiment (that I know of at least) of the comparison of two identical circuits with different components. The sophisticated equipment used to extend the breadth of the experiment is an extra plus. It's been so many years since Cyril Bateman's series of articles and praise is also due for resurfacing them.
My personal Engineering Experience with audio fixing. Electrolytic Caps you should always use low ESR caps, because high frequencies can heat up the caps. It also extends the life of the Cap. As far as audio coupling caps I would always use ceramic ones if possible. In the old day they just did not have ceramic caps in high values like they do now, so you had to use a film cap. As far as noise in a circuit where possible I would always use ceramic caps.
Tony, great great work. I would suggest that to start you should take only one output, run it into both channels of your comparator circuit to show how close the tests come out when looking at exactly the same signal.
I have a test for you Tony. i just recap my deck technics M270X and i could'n find any audio grade caps in 0.33uf and 0.68uf, so i put some Nichicon UVR & UPW caps in. I know the old caps are (now) panasonic MA serie, so i check the rimpel current for even or above of the MA-serie. The rest is a combination of rubycon and panasonic FR. Really, it sound great.
Very intersting , thanks ...........;besides I am not alone to percieve a sonic/ musical difference listening even to different film and foil capacitors of the same value, same with electrolytics .
Some electronics and systems do not respond or even so slightly sonicaly different to this , even if they measure to perfection ...........those are the amplifiers I do not use for top musical reproduction , they may sound good as they are and clean but not so revealing and connect to the music , more like perfect sound lacking qualities only fouind in the very best amplifiers and systems. .
This is such a great job. if I had to pick one of these it would be the one with the electrolytics. (did you hide the audio file while making this). Thank you for such great original videos. Mike
Tony you touched on being generous with the value of electrolytic coupling caps.this agrees with tests that Douglas self reported on in book small signal amp design that electro cap reasonably well performance as long as the ac voltage drop across the cap is kept low when used as a coupling cap.so larger than minimum for -3db point is good idea if using electrolytic caps for ac coupling.
.
I replaced the 4.7uF bipolar caps at the output of my Marantz 2250B tone board with film caps. The films caps had less than 1/10th the ESR and I swear it made a huge improvement in sound.
Awesome video, thanks for putting in the time to do it. I definitely would have expected to see some difference with the pink noise but here we are. The only question I have now is, do you notice any difference in sound signature between the two amps when you listen to music?
Weren't you blabbering on about this in your last video. 🤔
Fascinating stuff, even though I also don't think there is any difference you just have to trust the people who designed the kit !....cheers.
Neat experiment! Quick question: Do you think that varying the load on the output of the preamps (ie the input impedance of the next stage) might reveal more difference between the film and electrolytic caps?
Interesting
One note on this experiment: whatever the performance outcome, there is always the longevity and robustness aspect that needs to be taken into consideration too when choosing a component. The component must be up to the task under the given conditions that one designs for.
Thanks for taking the time and effort to do this Tony. I’ve been concerned about this. I did 7 units in rapid succession using a lot of film caps. I feel better now. I’ve seen a lot of 10uf polarized electrolytic caps in the audio path. Are you suggesting that these could be replaced with lower value film caps because they have the same capacitance in both directions? I’ve been squeezing 10uf films in where I can. Thanks!
interesting comparison. If a person goes back to the landmark Richard Marsh cap testing done in the mid to late 1980s, they originally had problems measuring the difference. Would have been interesting to do a A vs. B listening comparison too. Maybe that is part 2 for this. Today in high end audio can't think of one manufacturer that uses electrolytic coupling caps (polarized or bipolar) over film caps.
👍
thanks for doing the test, I agree good design has superior results it is what makes it good design. The result for me is I am not going to be so worried that I do not have the exact replacement cap and can use good film caps.
I wonder if the reason for question at all has anything to do with the original cost and inbuilt tolerances of the older components
Almost everyone and most manufacturers use Wima polycaps.............in the end the sound gets a POLY-propylene sound ( = to much of the same sonic signature )............lean and clean...........somewhat flat sounding and kind ofa more lifeless polyproplyne type of sound.
Personaly I use them sparingly and I use the less as possible any caps in any circuit for music reproction .....If so I prefer FOIL capacitors .........and in a a PRE-amp of quality only ONE in the signal path .....
For regular repair and design i prefer polystyrene instead of polypropylene...better thighs and less coloration.........as used ever since in most SS phono RIAA amplifiers.
In ost commercial amplifiers the choice of capacitors doesn't make big difference as showed in this video...........as soon as correctioncircuits and NFB is used difference will be neutralized ....as the same happens to the music they produce...........on the testbank those amplifiers measure up to perfection but not soundwize even if they measure quite the same.......
Isn't hum a defect in the power supply?
Wow, that's new information for me, polarised caps only being half value in reverse polarity. I never learned that on any college course, nor have I seen mention of it in what I've read.
I wonder if the difference between the capacitors would show up more with dynamic waveforms more like music, rather than steady signals.
It's actually quite a bit less than half the capacitance in reverse polarity. The max voltage is also a small fraction of the max voltage in forward polarity.
@@xraytonyb Not that there should be any but a polarised at least will block DC.
We have all seen many polarised caps die / go short or loose value but regarding film caps, I think most of us seem to be under the impression that they never degrade unless having suffered moisture ingress. Are there any good videos about the degradation of film caps and the difference is say sound after replacing older film caps in older audio equipment?
@@xraytonyb So when calculating circuit capacitor values for electrolytics, there should be large correction factors built into the formulas. Why do we not normally see this?
what type of film caps did you use or would you use preferably ?
Nicely done Tony! If everything is equal (which it looks like it is), what would be the advantage of using film vs. e-caps? Are the film caps cheaper?
Good quality Film caps can last many many decades and not change values all that much, good quality electrolytic caps change values much sooner. Film is almost always more expensive all things being equal.
@@user-qq2jj2mn8w Thank you!
Ok, good tests with Pink Noise. Did you do a total harmonic distortion & intermodulation distortion tests? What about driving the preamp into clipping? Consider the life expectancy of Film vs Electrolytic capacitors? After you do the other tests mentioned above, I could then tend to agree that there is hardly any noticeable audio difference.
i am a old electroic technecin i really enjoying your videos. i am wondering if you equipment for sale??
I have replaced and upgraded the capacitor on an AU20000. The sound characteristics and tonal qualities have changed a lot, and I'm not sure whether the change is an improvement or not.
Electrolytics need time to form. The sound will change once you get some time on them and they settle in. Once they form they should be stable for decades. Of course an old stereo that has been stuffed in a closet for years may have to reform again. Older leaky capacitors can change the bias on transistors and change the sound. (leaking DC)
Guess it all boils down to the SRF of the specific type of capacitors. What would be interesting if you do those tests with different types of capacitors in parallel, typical one order apart in size. I know in the RF-lab, we always referred to some app note describing these things when introducing junior engineers to good design-principles, but I cannot remember the details, think it might have been an app. note from R&S of if it was in one of Dr. Rohde’s books. For audiophiles, sorry, cannot comment, but at least, in the RF world and EMI-world, there is sense in using capacitors in parallel. You can demonstrate it quite well on a VNA.
Are film caps any more microphonic than electrolytic caps in the audio path?
Better to damp components and circuits...........and protect them from magnetic induction ...........everything is microphonic and capture RF...........even transistors are microphonic .....
Use a stetoscope to listen to filtercaps .........
Which CA2000 are you gonna keep??
Neither will pair up the best one with the ba2000 amp and sell as group. The other separate
Yeah but how does it sound? There's going to be a difference in sound?? you should do a sound test. What about harmonics your test doesn't show harmonics
maybe a listening test would have been good, just in case there were changes that are not detected by the test equipment. good video thank you tony
Thats not posible.
You must be very confused. We'd totally watch 2 hours of your videos! 😂😂😂
ok. now it's time for polyester vs polypropylene vs pet film caps vs. lytics.
turn the hakko back on tony.
Don't forget the milk bottle salt water capacitors! :)=)
@@xraytonyb and $200 oil filled ones!
what about making your own using teflon !!
This is my opinion based on my experience. Electrolytics have only one place in audio and that is in the power supply. The film caps are for the audio path. This may or may not be your way, but it is better than having any electrolytic capacitors anywhere but the power supply. The audio path is or should be exclusive to film capacitors. Poo pooing this is fruitless. Safety caps are ceramic. That was true earlier and it’s still tried and true now. Like the song says, you go your way and I’ll go my way. That’s why we have choices in recapping.
Film caps are going to have a lower ESR and faster rise time, but at slow audio frequencies would that be relevant? Would there be enough difference to cause a phase shift to become something audible? Can you be more specific? Just saying that a subjective opinion of A is better than B does not help us to understand why. Please explain the benefits, thanks
@@zulumax1
I've restored a humble Yamaha c450 amp, to use for background music in my audiorepairshop.
Used mainly the standard electrolitics, like in the original design, and used good quality too.
The amp is fed with a decent recordplayer, and also a very good sounding highend cd player.
Also decent loudspeakers and diy cables are used with high quality crossoverparts in the speakers.
This combination sounded very good, and i used it for about six months.
A year ago i decided to swap all electrolitics in the signalpath for filmcaps. For experimentel purposes, and my curiousity. I didn't expect much of a difference, but boy i was wrong!
There is a profound difference in resolution, transparancy, speed and decay of notes. Also the soundstage improved quite a bit, and i was very, very pleasantly surprised. This was easy noticeable, no need for audiophile ears.
Kickdrum attacs (much faster), aucoustic guitar, piano decay, you name it. I noticed no downsides in the sound.
Example, the number riders on the storm. Everyone knows that song. It has so many small and tiny details in the first part. It's like hearing new things in something very, very familiar now. Very enjoyable.
But Tony is right about the design of a circuit, and the designers who are taking into account the difference in parts. But things like speed, decay and soundstaging are not things you can measure, only hear when using a reveiling system without great bottlenecks. Every piece of the chain has to be of equal quality. Otherwise the difference is less easy to spot.
@@zulumax1, poo pooing a part for an upgrade in performance is laughable. There are such things as beyond question. The characteristics of the part demand scrutiny. Same capacitive value, possibly higher voltage rating and definitely higher temp rating. These effect longevity. Sonic, Jantsen, mylec, there are many brands but specialty caps open up resolution by having higher rise times and having or contributing to lowering the noise floor which opens up the sound. Some caps are more prone to smearing due to slower rise time characteristics. Sonic improvement is accomplished when the listener is happy. That is what matters. Just because a capacitor is rated the same, does not mean it will sound the same. Products, on the most part, are speced at a price point. This makes them subject to adequate performance given their quality. The signal path is a place given to varying frequencies and levels of operation, dynamic contrast. It makes sense to use parts that will allow that signal to be as least affected as possible. An electrolytic as a type is best suited to power supplies as it can handle swings well and in sufficient quantity will allow higher current capability, especially in power amps. The key to power supplies is being able to handle peaks without fatigue. There are brands like Nichicon which make audio grade capacitors. Can’t kick them, but the sonic benefit based upon ear checks and happy people that have a familiar friend in their gear and choose the high road to audio. Finding parts that deliver happy listeners, that matters. Whether this answers your question enough, that’s your call. This is a philosophy and a discipline. I can’t make others see what I hear. Their own ears are their guides. Happy people make the world go around.
Nothing is bory in your video's .
Next project ,use a battery to replace the power supply filter capacitor.
Do a new test: check which terminal of the film capacitor has the aluminum film is the outer terminal, as Mr Carlson's shows here -> ruclips.net/video/BnR_DLd1PDI/видео.html ,
then in Your circuit change the orientation of the capacitor, and also put some adhesive aluminum tape on the outside of the capacitor (shielding the body) and connect that alu tape to ground.
Now repeat all the tests again and see if have 50-60hz hum with this "shielding" and with this new orientation 😉👌
It won't make any difference with these types of film caps.
Some of the mylar caps (like those yellow ones and the orange drop types) used in tube gear will show a small difference, but it is very small, compared to the old paper/foil caps. I did a video on this where I installed the caps in an AM tube radio in both directions and was unable to see/measure any difference in SNR. Check it out when you get a chance.
@@xraytonyb Ok , Thanks ! 👍
@@uliseszx6044 Rectangular, stacked film caps are a different beast to cylindrical, coiled.