I have both xovers wired up and soldered save for a few possibly changing components. I have one speaker running at the moment. I have played with the 4 coil values and thus far prefer the original dipped 1.22mH value over the other 3. The tweeter is currently a bit sibilant, so it might need tweaked and maybe reduced a dB or 2. Time will tell, andi should have the other running tomorrow. I like some of what I'm hearing, and hope to improve some other things.
@Wolf said:
I have both xovers wired up and soldered save for a few possibly changing components. I have one speaker running at the moment. I have played with the 4 coil values and thus far prefer the original dipped 1.22mH value over the other 3. The tweeter is currently a bit sibilant, so it might need tweaked and maybe reduced a dB or 2. Time will tell, andi should have the other running tomorrow. I like some of what I'm hearing, and hope to improve some other things.
I appreciate how you 1st go to listening to tweek / adjust components post initial model. Sometimes it’s to ‘easy’? to first measure (which may ‘color’ what you then are hearing).
Cabinet number 2 is now populated, both xovers on top and running. Even in a pair, I still prefer the 1.22mH tap on the woofers. I think part of it is the 2-3kHz range. I have the breakup pulled down further with the larger lowpass coil. It also reduces whatever was causing that beaming at 2kHz I heard with test tones sans xover. No matter the measurement, it sounds better this way.
Initially, in the left channel only, I felt the tweeter was a little sibilant, and had a bit of a spitty character. I figured some electrical damping might be necessary. Just like domes, the Fs or other resonances can rear their ugly heads if not damped. I first popped a 27 ohm across the AMTs, and it was immediately apparent how much better that was. I further went to a 22 ohm for more level adjustment, and this dialed it in quite nicely.
They tend to be pretty dynamic. The bass is never heavy or boomy, and quite tuneful. The AMTs really resolve all of the detail in everything. If I were to say what the weak link is, it's the 2-3k region in the SIG180. It sounds good/okay like it is, but other drivers may be better suited and do a little better in this range. I really feel I have these woofers going as high as they can while maintaining good sound.
I still have to do some acid test tracks to see what I think about what I know very well. Then I'll do some measuring and see what they wiggle like.
I'll report my findings and further thoughts in a few days...
Went further down to 20 ohms across. The tweeters seemed to still overpower the midbasses a bit.
I found I have the same cap values in the Jantzen Blue Z-Standards, so I will be trying those too. Ironically, they are the same dimensions as the Cebos. After the Anomalies and Nephila, I expect there could be a difference in a swap. I'll only have to cut at one solder joint to do it for the highpass. If that shows preference, then I'll do the one in the notch.
What I'm chasing is a bit of grit/fizz/hash in the lower AMT range. The resistor helped a lot. The Wavecor in the Anomalies kinda had the same issue, until I gave it better caps. I will also attempt a mild notch below xover, or even an additional 4th order coil to see if this problem persists or subsides.
I really hate tweeter buzz, no matter the variety....
I'll likely try the caps first, rather than add MORE parts. I even have others to try in those particular values.
HD sweep will be taken as-is and after.
This LCR across the tweeter is the next possibility:
I have some small wire coils that may fit here, I'll see what I have. An additional HP coil really didn't do much in the target area.
Left to right channel matches, but I did not have mates for some caps in both values and did the best I could. With 3 pigtailed alligators, I have my choices at my fingertips.
I also found I have a pair of 0.1uF Sonicaps. So- I can pull one from the pages of JBL and Ron E and connect those across the HP for a steeper slope circuit if it sounds preferable.
I did not match cap values as who can trim caps like that? There is about a 0.2uF difference from smallest to largest as measured. BTW, Amazon carries the Arcotronics.
Brad would like me to bring them over with these options as shown so he can listen too. Could be fun...
Okay, quick and easy measurements (original Cebos in connections), just holding the mic. More or less, depending on whether shifted H off axis or not, they tend to line up pretty closely. I mainly did this to check similarity, impulse for polarity of drivers, and relative spectral tilt. Suffice to say, I know why I did not like the other LP coil taps. There would be peaking around 1.5k in those cases. I gated shorter as locations are not ideal, so I chopped them to 600Hz.
Last night, I felt the tweeters were just a little too quiet. I paralleled a 150 ohm across the 4.7 ohm to drop to about 4.5 ohms. After taking them to Brad's today, I feel that was the right call. 4.5 ohms is where I want them relative to the woofer, with the 20 ohm directly across the AMT as before. I also reduced the padding in the 10kHz notch from 7.5 to 4.7 ohms, but I think I'm going to put the 7.5 ohms resistor back in place. The 4.7 ohm is flatter, but the 7.5 ohm sounds better.
This tweeter is finicky for sure. Playing below 3k requires at least a 3rd order electrical, which results in 6th order acoustic rolloff. 2.2kHz is about as low as I'd take it at this slope, as the HD is not measurably bad, and it doesn't complain at higher levels. This is with a 4.7uF, 0.27mH, and 6.8uF cap. I initially had a 3.3uF in the first spot, which was even lower HD, but the 'body and warmth' of the lower treble into the midbass was lacking. 5.6uF was too large and cranking it up allowed it to complain at higher levels. The 4.7uF is just right, where 3.3 and 4.0 weren't enough 'body' to the music.
Then I went cap fishing.... and changed the front to 4.7 values...
I came out of it knowing what I preferred in the circuit, and knowing how some previously unused types compare. I hope Brad pops in here with his 2c too, as I'm pretty sure he felt similarly to my findings. We played the 3.3 value first, and he agreed the 4.7 value filled out the sound where it was needed. Meniscus Cebo first, and those were fine. Arcotronics, good vocal clarity. Dayton, a little reserved or overly smooth but neutral. Blue ZCaps, were hard hitting in the upper treble, and reserved in the bottom. I'll let Brad tell you what he thought. Clarity CSA were okay, but in my opinion indistinct and not as clear as the current best 4.7 Clarity CMR and 6.8 SoniCap combo. They were clearer, and had better spatial presence than the rest. So, I ordered a 6.8 CMR and 4.7 SoniCap to confirm what is best. I also found out the Rival Polar Caps (NLA) are VERY close in sound structure to the SoniCaps.
After this is all solid, I'll look at hearing what is best in the 4.7uF notch cap value.
Additionally, I'm on my phone now without access to the measurements, but suffice to say there is virtually no difference in FR amongst the same component values when engaged in the circuit. I will post them later so you can see it too. The HD measurements are only marginally different in a couple cases, so even that is moot in terms of showing differences. That said, I trust my ears, and it seemed the previously uninformed Brad also came to the same conclusions.
Okay, here is a few set of measurements, each graph in triplet is of the same value caps, but different manufacturers. I guarantee you they were different caps in the same measurement axis conditions.
3.3uF:
4.7uF:
See what I mean? Virtually no difference in FR can be gleaned from these above.
See what I mean? Virtually no difference in FR can be gleaned from these above.
Interesting. Did you have a chance to measure the caps vs company stated values? What little visible difference in the frequency measurements may be differing values?
But that doesn’t necessarily mean they didn’t sound different to you. I’m not an engineer - but thinking maybe (?) you can decipher (hear) difference in timing of signal path through theses? Thinking storage and release of energy.
I'm pretty solidly in the "if you can hear it, you can measure it" camp. So I'm naturally skeptical that capacitors have intrinsic sonic characteristics beyond their measurable parameters. Ben didn't share with me any of his impressions prior to listening. While I was familiar with the brand names, I'm not familiar enough with most of them to know which were more or less expensive (other than the Dayton & Cebo). I also didn't look at any measurements before listening. Ben did share that the FRs and HD all measured very similarly, and I dont have great critical listening skills so I was honestly not expecting to hear any differences. And I told him that before we started.
That made it interesting when we began listening and I could pick out nuances in the sound between the caps. When I expressed to Ben what I thought I was hearing, he generally agreed with my subjective descriptions. So I think we were pretty much on the same page on all of the listening tests, except for 1 pair we had slightly different interpretations.
We played the Cebo first, so it was the default baseline. Which was a good role for it as it was very neutral, sounded good, nothing to complain about at all. The Dayton was a bit recessed in comparison, overall neutral but just a bit lacking in excitement. The Arcotronics was next which was a good, had good presentation and body to the sound, maybe a hint on the bright side but enjoyable. The blue Zcaps were bright and spitty on the female vocal, not enjoyable at all. The Clarity CSA were where I think Ben and I disagreed. I thought they were overall good for life and body but a bit bright for my liking, if I recall he thought the male vocal was a bit recessed. The Clarity/SoniCap combo had a bit of everything, good life and excitement while still being smooth and strong top end without being too much.
So, am I believer? Yes and no. Obviously this wasn't ABX, we didn't test repeatability of our results. It could be psychoacoustics or a form of confirmation bias. The cap values were not perfectly matched. Etc etc
On the other hand, I do think I did actually hear the differences as confirmed by Ben's agreement nearly across the board. So it does have me leaning toward there being more to the sonic characteristics of caps than simply the capacitance. I still think any differences could be seen in measurements, we just have to measure the right thing. And maybe that's more than just the capacitance value. Or maybe it was all in head.
All I know is I will probably spend more time testing different brands of caps of the same value when voicing in the future...
I just have to throw this out there because I am not sure about all of the variables involved in making an objective comparison of caps this way - humor me with a reply:
Q --> When you read a book or watch a movie that you had never read/seen before and read/watch it again for the 2nd time; Do you get something out of it that you didn't the 1st time?.
@Steve_Lee said:
Q --> When you read a book or watch a movie that you had never read/seen before and read/watch it again for the 2nd time; Do you get something out of it that you didn't the 1st time?.
Sure. Heck, a lot of time I'll reread a paragraph I just finished to ensure I caught all of the nuance.
Unfortunately, the phase response of the FR is just the derivative (calculus) of the FR and will not really show anything more than 'rate of change' of the plots posted. Being how close they are, very little difference will be shown.
I personally do not think there is a scientific test that can show what causes the difference in the audible results. Clearly, there are audible differences to those who can hear them, and are willing to accept differences could exist. Without the open mind constraint, listeners will not be swayed to acknowledge they do indeed sound different.
I am a skeptical objectivist when it comes to these things. Without the experience of the subject first hand, it is difficult to know the real results.
Caps and other passive components, actual cleaner power regulation, room acoustic panels, and filtration of noise all have results that can be beneficial here.
Thank you for the assist in the assertions, Brad. I'm glad it was informative enough to make you second guess and reassess your previous notions.
Usually, those insisting for ABX are those that think there is nothing to be learned from such experiments. And I will restate what Maynard said about my endeavors in 2010 with the Attitudes cap test...
More or less, according to statistical analysis, the results of the group could not be calculated to show that hearing the difference could occur more than chance, to paraphrase his reply.
@Steve_Lee said:
I guess audio resolution can reveal details in music that your mind cannot comprehend from books/video.
I guess perhaps I dont follow.
One could successfully argue that my brain was focusing on/noticing a new/different nuance or just perceiving it differently with each listen, and I was incorrectly assigning the differences perceived to the change in caps rather than a change in how I was absorbing/perceiving the material each time.
How is that different than noticing a different nuance each time I read a passage or watch a scene? It seems the same to me. But maybe I'm just not following the same line of thought as you are.
One could successfully argue that my brain was focusing on/noticing a new/different nuance or just perceiving it differently with each listen, and I was incorrectly assigning the differences perceived to the change in caps rather than a change in how I was absorbing/perceiving the material each time.
I'm a bit dyslexic but your statement above is what I was trying unsuccessfully to elucidate last night.
I've never done oscilloscope testing on capacitors, but these kinds of tests can be found and viewed online. Our own Roman has seen tests done of this type and they found there were issues testing the Jantzen Blues and Mundorf Gold caps. This is just paraphrased from his post in my Attitudes thread from back in 2010.
@Wolf said:
I've never done oscilloscope testing on capacitors, but these kinds of tests can be found and viewed online. Our own Roman has seen tests done of this type and they found there were issues testing the Jantzen Blues and Mundorf Gold caps. This is just paraphrased from his post in my Attitudes thread from back in 2010.
Those Zcaps are the one exception to my comments above. Those incontrovertibly sounded bad. Not sure if you noticed, but I actually grimaced at the sibilance on the female vocals on the 2nd track. I would love to see a full suite of measurements on those, because something with them is way off.
@Wolf said:
Unfortunately, the phase response of the FR is just the derivative (calculus) of the FR and will not really show anything more than 'rate of change' of the plots posted. Being how close they are, very little difference will be shown.
In Calculus, to be correct and clear, you must state that phase is the "first" derivative of frequency response in the time domain. But yeah in this case it doesn't show anything that the FR doesn't.
Correct, Craig. I suppose I should have stated it that way.
6.8 CMR showed up today. I bought the 630V version of them only because they were 2 dollars cheaper. Man, these are even bigger than I was expecting. Sorry for the bad pic, a 10W Lynk in front of it.
Okay, the SoniCap 4.7uF pair showed up today, and measured a little short of value; 4.56 and 4.57, where the CMR measured at 4.68 and 4.74. I found the lone 0.1uF Clarity SA I've had sitting to trim the smaller one and keep it clear in the family. I also found a pair of 0.1uF WonderCaps and have some others available to trim the SoniCaps if need be to decrease the value margin. I'll show some photos later.
I'm really hoping I prefer the SoniCaps, as they will be smaller and easier to fit on my pegboard.
Pretty sure those caps will deviate too once you put some juice to them and remeasure. Are you going for like gnats ass measurement or am I missing something?
Comments
I have both xovers wired up and soldered save for a few possibly changing components. I have one speaker running at the moment. I have played with the 4 coil values and thus far prefer the original dipped 1.22mH value over the other 3. The tweeter is currently a bit sibilant, so it might need tweaked and maybe reduced a dB or 2. Time will tell, andi should have the other running tomorrow. I like some of what I'm hearing, and hope to improve some other things.
InDIYana Event Website
I appreciate how you 1st go to listening to tweek / adjust components post initial model. Sometimes it’s to ‘easy’? to first measure (which may ‘color’ what you then are hearing).
Cabinet number 2 is now populated, both xovers on top and running. Even in a pair, I still prefer the 1.22mH tap on the woofers. I think part of it is the 2-3kHz range. I have the breakup pulled down further with the larger lowpass coil. It also reduces whatever was causing that beaming at 2kHz I heard with test tones sans xover. No matter the measurement, it sounds better this way.
Initially, in the left channel only, I felt the tweeter was a little sibilant, and had a bit of a spitty character. I figured some electrical damping might be necessary. Just like domes, the Fs or other resonances can rear their ugly heads if not damped. I first popped a 27 ohm across the AMTs, and it was immediately apparent how much better that was. I further went to a 22 ohm for more level adjustment, and this dialed it in quite nicely.
They tend to be pretty dynamic. The bass is never heavy or boomy, and quite tuneful. The AMTs really resolve all of the detail in everything. If I were to say what the weak link is, it's the 2-3k region in the SIG180. It sounds good/okay like it is, but other drivers may be better suited and do a little better in this range. I really feel I have these woofers going as high as they can while maintaining good sound.
I still have to do some acid test tracks to see what I think about what I know very well. Then I'll do some measuring and see what they wiggle like.
I'll report my findings and further thoughts in a few days...
InDIYana Event Website
Went further down to 20 ohms across. The tweeters seemed to still overpower the midbasses a bit.
I found I have the same cap values in the Jantzen Blue Z-Standards, so I will be trying those too. Ironically, they are the same dimensions as the Cebos. After the Anomalies and Nephila, I expect there could be a difference in a swap. I'll only have to cut at one solder joint to do it for the highpass. If that shows preference, then I'll do the one in the notch.
What I'm chasing is a bit of grit/fizz/hash in the lower AMT range. The resistor helped a lot. The Wavecor in the Anomalies kinda had the same issue, until I gave it better caps. I will also attempt a mild notch below xover, or even an additional 4th order coil to see if this problem persists or subsides.
I really hate tweeter buzz, no matter the variety....
InDIYana Event Website
I'll likely try the caps first, rather than add MORE parts. I even have others to try in those particular values.
HD sweep will be taken as-is and after.
This LCR across the tweeter is the next possibility:
I have some small wire coils that may fit here, I'll see what I have. An additional HP coil really didn't do much in the target area.
I'm hoping the cap swap gets rid of the issue.
InDIYana Event Website
Almost ready to go....
Left to right channel matches, but I did not have mates for some caps in both values and did the best I could. With 3 pigtailed alligators, I have my choices at my fingertips.
I also found I have a pair of 0.1uF Sonicaps. So- I can pull one from the pages of JBL and Ron E and connect those across the HP for a steeper slope circuit if it sounds preferable.
I did not match cap values as who can trim caps like that? There is about a 0.2uF difference from smallest to largest as measured. BTW, Amazon carries the Arcotronics.
Brad would like me to bring them over with these options as shown so he can listen too. Could be fun...
InDIYana Event Website
Okay, quick and easy measurements (original Cebos in connections), just holding the mic. More or less, depending on whether shifted H off axis or not, they tend to line up pretty closely. I mainly did this to check similarity, impulse for polarity of drivers, and relative spectral tilt. Suffice to say, I know why I did not like the other LP coil taps. There would be peaking around 1.5k in those cases. I gated shorter as locations are not ideal, so I chopped them to 600Hz.
InDIYana Event Website
Last night, I felt the tweeters were just a little too quiet. I paralleled a 150 ohm across the 4.7 ohm to drop to about 4.5 ohms. After taking them to Brad's today, I feel that was the right call. 4.5 ohms is where I want them relative to the woofer, with the 20 ohm directly across the AMT as before. I also reduced the padding in the 10kHz notch from 7.5 to 4.7 ohms, but I think I'm going to put the 7.5 ohms resistor back in place. The 4.7 ohm is flatter, but the 7.5 ohm sounds better.
This tweeter is finicky for sure. Playing below 3k requires at least a 3rd order electrical, which results in 6th order acoustic rolloff. 2.2kHz is about as low as I'd take it at this slope, as the HD is not measurably bad, and it doesn't complain at higher levels. This is with a 4.7uF, 0.27mH, and 6.8uF cap. I initially had a 3.3uF in the first spot, which was even lower HD, but the 'body and warmth' of the lower treble into the midbass was lacking. 5.6uF was too large and cranking it up allowed it to complain at higher levels. The 4.7uF is just right, where 3.3 and 4.0 weren't enough 'body' to the music.
Then I went cap fishing.... and changed the front to 4.7 values...
I came out of it knowing what I preferred in the circuit, and knowing how some previously unused types compare. I hope Brad pops in here with his 2c too, as I'm pretty sure he felt similarly to my findings. We played the 3.3 value first, and he agreed the 4.7 value filled out the sound where it was needed. Meniscus Cebo first, and those were fine. Arcotronics, good vocal clarity. Dayton, a little reserved or overly smooth but neutral. Blue ZCaps, were hard hitting in the upper treble, and reserved in the bottom. I'll let Brad tell you what he thought. Clarity CSA were okay, but in my opinion indistinct and not as clear as the current best 4.7 Clarity CMR and 6.8 SoniCap combo. They were clearer, and had better spatial presence than the rest. So, I ordered a 6.8 CMR and 4.7 SoniCap to confirm what is best. I also found out the Rival Polar Caps (NLA) are VERY close in sound structure to the SoniCaps.
After this is all solid, I'll look at hearing what is best in the 4.7uF notch cap value.
Additionally, I'm on my phone now without access to the measurements, but suffice to say there is virtually no difference in FR amongst the same component values when engaged in the circuit. I will post them later so you can see it too. The HD measurements are only marginally different in a couple cases, so even that is moot in terms of showing differences. That said, I trust my ears, and it seemed the previously uninformed Brad also came to the same conclusions.
InDIYana Event Website
A smorgasbord of capacitors, and not in your usual 3D chess configuration. I'll be interested in your final impressions/ selection.
Okay, here is a few set of measurements, each graph in triplet is of the same value caps, but different manufacturers. I guarantee you they were different caps in the same measurement axis conditions.
3.3uF:
4.7uF:
See what I mean? Virtually no difference in FR can be gleaned from these above.
InDIYana Event Website
Interesting. Did you have a chance to measure the caps vs company stated values? What little visible difference in the frequency measurements may be differing values?
But that doesn’t necessarily mean they didn’t sound different to you. I’m not an engineer - but thinking maybe (?) you can decipher (hear) difference in timing of signal path through theses? Thinking storage and release of energy.
Just showing that FR was the same. It has to be timing or something making the difference. I'm still of the opinion we can't measure everything.
InDIYana Event Website
I can see differences, but they would be more apparent if they were all on the same graph.
Holy cow, sorry this was so long...
I'm pretty solidly in the "if you can hear it, you can measure it" camp. So I'm naturally skeptical that capacitors have intrinsic sonic characteristics beyond their measurable parameters. Ben didn't share with me any of his impressions prior to listening. While I was familiar with the brand names, I'm not familiar enough with most of them to know which were more or less expensive (other than the Dayton & Cebo). I also didn't look at any measurements before listening. Ben did share that the FRs and HD all measured very similarly, and I dont have great critical listening skills so I was honestly not expecting to hear any differences. And I told him that before we started.
That made it interesting when we began listening and I could pick out nuances in the sound between the caps. When I expressed to Ben what I thought I was hearing, he generally agreed with my subjective descriptions. So I think we were pretty much on the same page on all of the listening tests, except for 1 pair we had slightly different interpretations.
We played the Cebo first, so it was the default baseline. Which was a good role for it as it was very neutral, sounded good, nothing to complain about at all. The Dayton was a bit recessed in comparison, overall neutral but just a bit lacking in excitement. The Arcotronics was next which was a good, had good presentation and body to the sound, maybe a hint on the bright side but enjoyable. The blue Zcaps were bright and spitty on the female vocal, not enjoyable at all. The Clarity CSA were where I think Ben and I disagreed. I thought they were overall good for life and body but a bit bright for my liking, if I recall he thought the male vocal was a bit recessed. The Clarity/SoniCap combo had a bit of everything, good life and excitement while still being smooth and strong top end without being too much.
So, am I believer? Yes and no. Obviously this wasn't ABX, we didn't test repeatability of our results. It could be psychoacoustics or a form of confirmation bias. The cap values were not perfectly matched. Etc etc
On the other hand, I do think I did actually hear the differences as confirmed by Ben's agreement nearly across the board. So it does have me leaning toward there being more to the sonic characteristics of caps than simply the capacitance. I still think any differences could be seen in measurements, we just have to measure the right thing. And maybe that's more than just the capacitance value. Or maybe it was all in head.
All I know is I will probably spend more time testing different brands of caps of the same value when voicing in the future...
I just have to throw this out there because I am not sure about all of the variables involved in making an objective comparison of caps this way - humor me with a reply:
Q --> When you read a book or watch a movie that you had never read/seen before and read/watch it again for the 2nd time; Do you get something out of it that you didn't the 1st time?.
Ben - can you post the phase response along with the FR sweeps when you have time to test some more, please?
(might be enlightening).
Sure. Heck, a lot of time I'll reread a paragraph I just finished to ensure I caught all of the nuance.
I guess audio resolution can reveal details in music that your mind cannot comprehend from books/video.
Unfortunately, the phase response of the FR is just the derivative (calculus) of the FR and will not really show anything more than 'rate of change' of the plots posted. Being how close they are, very little difference will be shown.
I personally do not think there is a scientific test that can show what causes the difference in the audible results. Clearly, there are audible differences to those who can hear them, and are willing to accept differences could exist. Without the open mind constraint, listeners will not be swayed to acknowledge they do indeed sound different.
I am a skeptical objectivist when it comes to these things. Without the experience of the subject first hand, it is difficult to know the real results.
Caps and other passive components, actual cleaner power regulation, room acoustic panels, and filtration of noise all have results that can be beneficial here.
Thank you for the assist in the assertions, Brad. I'm glad it was informative enough to make you second guess and reassess your previous notions.
Usually, those insisting for ABX are those that think there is nothing to be learned from such experiments. And I will restate what Maynard said about my endeavors in 2010 with the Attitudes cap test...
More or less, according to statistical analysis, the results of the group could not be calculated to show that hearing the difference could occur more than chance, to paraphrase his reply.
InDIYana Event Website
I guess perhaps I dont follow.
One could successfully argue that my brain was focusing on/noticing a new/different nuance or just perceiving it differently with each listen, and I was incorrectly assigning the differences perceived to the change in caps rather than a change in how I was absorbing/perceiving the material each time.
How is that different than noticing a different nuance each time I read a passage or watch a scene? It seems the same to me. But maybe I'm just not following the same line of thought as you are.
I'm a bit dyslexic but your statement above is what I was trying unsuccessfully to elucidate last night.
Nicely done.
I've never done oscilloscope testing on capacitors, but these kinds of tests can be found and viewed online. Our own Roman has seen tests done of this type and they found there were issues testing the Jantzen Blues and Mundorf Gold caps. This is just paraphrased from his post in my Attitudes thread from back in 2010.
InDIYana Event Website
Those Zcaps are the one exception to my comments above. Those incontrovertibly sounded bad. Not sure if you noticed, but I actually grimaced at the sibilance on the female vocals on the 2nd track. I would love to see a full suite of measurements on those, because something with them is way off.
Yes, I did notice. Harsh or your word shrill definitely describe them in this particular usage.
InDIYana Event Website
Thanks for the education.
In Calculus, to be correct and clear, you must state that phase is the "first" derivative of frequency response in the time domain. But yeah in this case it doesn't show anything that the FR doesn't.
Correct, Craig. I suppose I should have stated it that way.
6.8 CMR showed up today. I bought the 630V version of them only because they were 2 dollars cheaper. Man, these are even bigger than I was expecting. Sorry for the bad pic, a 10W Lynk in front of it.
InDIYana Event Website
Okay, the SoniCap 4.7uF pair showed up today, and measured a little short of value; 4.56 and 4.57, where the CMR measured at 4.68 and 4.74. I found the lone 0.1uF Clarity SA I've had sitting to trim the smaller one and keep it clear in the family. I also found a pair of 0.1uF WonderCaps and have some others available to trim the SoniCaps if need be to decrease the value margin. I'll show some photos later.
I'm really hoping I prefer the SoniCaps, as they will be smaller and easier to fit on my pegboard.
InDIYana Event Website
We splitting hairs here or... we are getting down to the tenths or so it seems . I appreciate your gusto Ben but
Pretty sure those caps will deviate too once you put some juice to them and remeasure. Are you going for like gnats ass measurement or am I missing something?