Murphy - 1437 Update - Finale!

[Dan025]

I understand your viewpoint, Cagey. I'll be damned if I would be able to hear the difference between a Sprague 'Orange Drop', a Paper In  Oil one, or a  cheapy capacitor from the local electronics retailing shop like Tandy, but I'm equally damned sure I'd know about one that WASN'T working properly... :laughing7:

But it does seem to be the 'thing' that repairers do. I have a great sounding Esquire from Warmoth parts that needed a setup and took it along to a repairer. When I collected it, he said that he'd replaced the ceramic cheapies with better quality ones, but it sounded no better to my half deaf ears!

For me, the jury is still out on the exotic, hard-to-obtain-so-you-have-to-pay-premium-prices capacitors.

There actually is a difference between capacitors, but it's not from what people think. They're just notoriously sloppy parts. A tolerance range of 20% is not unusual. So, you may get a difference by replacing what's supposed to be a .022uf cap with a .022uf cap from another manufacturer or that has a different composition, when what you're actually doing is replacing a .018uf with a .024uf part because one was at the low end of the range and the other was at the high end for that size part. Of course they sound different. The frequency response of the circuit changed.

Somebody does a "cap job" on an amp, and maybe a dozen caps inadvertently change size. The amp sounds different now, but was it because the caps went from metalized Mylar to polyester film caps? No. It's because the tone control filters, cathode bias filters and coupling capacitors are all now a different value than they were before. I would be shocked and amazed if it sounded the same. But, people credit the capacitor's construction or the source of the parts for the difference, so now there's all this mythology out in the market. Naturally, the OEMs, aftermarket suppliers, and repair techs allow the myth to continue, because there's a lot of money in it for them. They can sell $.10 cent caps for $5 to $20 or more, or brag that their $350 amplifiers use superior parts and are worth $3,500.

i'm not sure a human can here the diference between metal film and polyester, and i don't know about the charecteristics of an oil paper cap or what type of cap an "orange drop" is. i mean i know what you are talking about and i know they are huge but what type construction are they?  :dontknow: anyway most acknowedge there are bad cap choices for audio. electrolytic are known to sound muddy, and ceramic are known to sound "grainy" there is science behind it but i dont know the details. -CB- talks about the "esr" of the cap, whatever that means, maybe i can look it up on wikipedia. other more expensive caps sound in between, but is there some magic cap out there that will turn you into the next BB King? NO!. oil paper is what really old things used and in guitar conventional wisom old = good. well it is true that many old designs sounded fabulous it doesn't mean that our modern design and advancements have degraded the sound of instruments and we should get everything old put in our guitars.

old things had more care in the construction and many times were infact better. but some of it was just dumb luck. fender didn't use nitrocellulose pickguards because they had great resonant properties, they used them because that was the only thing to use. they didn't use such and such a cap for it's electrical properties, they used them because it was all they had. the list goes on from cab speakers to tubes vs solid state ect. ect. tubes have advantages over solid state and are still used in some hifi as they can reproduce sound as good as any solid state system, maybe better if designed right. the fact is that they just sorta got lucky on that. cab speaker on the other hand had horrible response curves but they happen to compliment the guitar well, again there were no other speakers to use.

on the other hand if you stick an old martin and a taylor guitar in my hands and blind fold me i'll bet i vote for the taylor in an a/b a/b b/a sound test. most of the guitar industry is now afraid to move into the future, i think they or atleast the customers have a bad taste in there mouths from the 80's and 90's.

 

[line6man]

I was just curious because it looked like an electrolytic, which are no good at all for that kind of application.

That's exactly what I thought. The casing looks very much like an electrolytic (polarized) capacitor.  :icon_scratch:

As far as capacitors go, the voltage rating and composition mean squat for this application.
The difference that many people claim to hear when swapping capacitors is due to changes in the actual capacitance value caused by variations in manufacturing tolerances.

Just because two capacitors say 0.047uF or 0.022uF or whatever doesn't mean that that is the value they measure out to. As mentioned above, 20% tolerances are unfortunately quite common with certain types of capacitors.

If you take two different capacitors of the same actual capacitance, they will sound the same.
If you take two different capacitors of the same rated capacitance, you could have as much as 20% difference from the rated value on each capacitor.

 

[Cagey]

I was just curious because it looked like an electrolytic, which are no good at all for that kind of application.

That's exactly what I thought. The casing looks very much like an electrolytic (polarized) capacitor.  :icon_scratch:

As far as capacitors go, the voltage rating and composition mean squat for this application.
The difference that many people claim to hear when swapping capacitors is due to changes in the actual capacitance value caused by variations in manufacturing tolerances.

Just because two capacitors say 0.047uF or 0.022uF or whatever doesn't mean that that is the value they measure out to. As mentioned above, 20% tolerances are unfortunately quite common with certain types of capacitors.

If you take two different capacitors of the same actual capacitance, they will sound the same.
If you take two different capacitors of the same rated capacitance, you could have as much as 20% difference from the rated value on each capacitor.

Right, that's what I said. But, you go on some forums and say those things, and them's fightin' words! <grin>

The variations in design, construction, and packaging generally have more to do with dielectric strength, size, manufacturing ease and unit cost than anything else. The object of the exercise in all cases is to provide a device with a given capacitance so it will react in a predictable way in a circuit. If you use a thinner dielectric, you can use smaller plates to develop a given capacitance, but you may reduce its working voltage. But, you get a physically smaller cap so if you don't need a high working voltage, you can save money or space or both. Other considerations may come into play as well, which is why there are so many different caps. But, in the end, if you need .022uf that can withstand XXX volts, any .022uf cap that can withstand XXX volts is going to behave the same way if it's indeed .022uf. That's why most manufacturers will simply use the least expensive part they can get that has the appropriate value and a reasonable life expectancy.

There is some variation in the effect a cap can have on a circuit that has to do with packaging and other things that you normally wouldn't consider, but generally speaking those things only need to be considered in very high frequency applications where incredibly miniscule amounts of capacitive and inductive reactance as well as DC resistance can really gang up on you, but in audio applications the frequencies we deal with are so low even at the top end of the scale that it doesn't matter.

 

[ORCRiST]

Cagey, if you contend that caps don't really influence tone per sa, what do you think about the following articles?

Part I: http://www.premierguitar.com/Magazine/Issue/2008/Mar/Auditioning_Tone_Capacitors.aspx

Part 2: http://www.premierguitar.com/Magazine/Issue/2008/Apr/Auditioning_Tone_Capacitors_Part_II.aspx

I'm to inexperienced to voice an opinion one way or another, so I'm always looking for more information - thanks!

ORC

 

[Cagey]

Cagey, if you contend that caps don't really influence tone per sa, what do you think about the following articles?

Part I: http://www.premierguitar.com/Magazine/Issue/2008/Mar/Auditioning_Tone_Capacitors.aspx
Part 2: http://www.premierguitar.com/Magazine/Issue/2008/Apr/Auditioning_Tone_Capacitors_Part_II.aspx

I'm to inexperienced to voice an opinion one way or another, so I'm always looking for more information - thanks!

Part 1 is pretty straightforward, and worth reading. Part 2 is clearly written to both pander and amuse, and ends up saying nearly nothing unless you read between the lines. For instance, in the very beginning in describing "Bumblebee" caps he says: "If you want to use the vintage caps, make sure that you use vintage cloth wire inside your guitar and the Gibson fifties vintage wiring, otherwise you will not fully experience the tones from these caps." You know he's kidding here, because unless he's profoundly retarded or terminally stupid, he'd never support the idea that cloth insulation could make a difference in tone. So, what he's doing is making fun of the cork-sniffers in the vintage instrument market who can't stand a single molecule out of place without considering the piece ruined beyond repair. Then, in the next example of ancient, obsolete caps, he says: "Everything written about Black Beauties applies equally to bumblebee caps." In other words, the angst about these caps is as big a pile of horsepucky as it is about those caps. On and on.

The real problem is most of the people passing judgement on these kinds of devices and components aren't engineers or physicists, they're technicians at best, and more often just artists. That is, they're very subjective people for whom the power of suggestion is as great as kryptonite. Facts mean almost nothing, and opinions carry the weight of religious dogma. Then, there's the hero influence, where if Jeff Beck said chocolate guitar strings were the wave of the future, anybody with money would be investing in Hershey or M&M/Mars.

 

[Mor Paul]

If you take two different capacitors of the same rated capacitance, you could have as much as 20% difference from the rated value on each capacitor.

40%, right? 20% higher than rated on one, 20% lower on the other?

 

[Dan025]

If you take two different capacitors of the same rated capacitance, you could have as much as 20% difference from the rated value on each capacitor.

40%, right? 20% higher than rated on one, 20% lower on the other?

technically that's 50% or 33% depending on how you look at it.

I was just curious because it looked like an electrolytic, which are no good at all for that kind of application.

That's exactly what I thought. The casing looks very much like an electrolytic (polarized) capacitor.  :icon_scratch:

As far as capacitors go, the voltage rating and composition mean squat for this application.
The difference that many people claim to hear when swapping capacitors is due to changes in the actual capacitance value caused by variations in manufacturing tolerances.

Just because two capacitors say 0.047uF or 0.022uF or whatever doesn't mean that that is the value they measure out to. As mentioned above, 20% tolerances are unfortunately quite common with certain types of capacitors.

If you take two different capacitors of the same actual capacitance, they will sound the same.
If you take two different capacitors of the same rated capacitance, you could have as much as 20% difference from the rated value on each capacitor.

Right, that's what I said. But, you go on some forums and say those things, and them's fightin' words! <grin>

The variations in design, construction, and packaging generally have more to do with dielectric strength, size, manufacturing ease and unit cost than anything else. The object of the exercise in all cases is to provide a device with a given capacitance so it will react in a predictable way in a circuit. If you use a thinner dielectric, you can use smaller plates to develop a given capacitance, but you may reduce its working voltage. But, you get a physically smaller cap so if you don't need a high working voltage, you can save money or space or both. Other considerations may come into play as well, which is why there are so many different caps. But, in the end, if you need .022uf that can withstand XXX volts, any .022uf cap that can withstand XXX volts is going to behave the same way if it's indeed .022uf. That's why most manufacturers will simply use the least expensive part they can get that has the appropriate value and a reasonable life expectancy.

There is some variation in the effect a cap can have on a circuit that has to do with packaging and other things that you normally wouldn't consider, but generally speaking those things only need to be considered in very high frequency applications where incredibly miniscule amounts of capacitive and inductive reactance as well as DC resistance can really gang up on you, but in audio applications the frequencies we deal with are so low even at the top end of the scale that it doesn't matter.

sorry i have a hard time completing thoughts sometimes.

 

[Cagey]

Right. Capacitors are notoriously sloppy parts. You're lucky if you can keep a batch to a 20% spread, which you would sell as a 10% part. Usually it's closer to a 40% spread. Electrolytics can be as wide as 50%. That is, a 100uf part could be anywhere from 50uf to 150uf. Some suppliers will sell you 1% parts, but they charge a mint for them because they have to discard such a huge percentage of the batch. You're effectively buying 15 or 20 caps for every one you get. Doesn't make them better caps, it just means they lucked out finding one that's close to what they were shooting for. The ones that get discarded don't find the trash bin, they go in bulk to manufacturers who build amps, or to Radio Shack.

 

[ORCRiST]

Right on. So whenever a topic interests me - Im a voracious reader, Ive read alot around 'Net about caps and pots - I just have zero experience (yet) with this particular subject.

So correct me if I'm wrong, but cap values and variances aside - is it true that caps act as an electronic 'filter' in the circuit, and thus effect tone via that filtering effect on the circuit?

And if you agree with the above, wouldnt various makes and designs of caps (both vintage and modern) 'filter' the circuit differently and therefore alter tone?

I'm just trying to find a common ground to link everything I've read, but being as tone is, by definition, a very subjective art - isn't there a reason why Person A swears by $40 botique caps vs person B who is happy with $0.15 cap from Radio Shack?

I.E. Surely there must be SOME reason to all the misinformation and differing opinions other than (I hope) people are morons?

It only makes sense to me, personally, that say you wanted a vintage 60's tone for instance you'd want a cap from that era? Or am I completely missing something?

Thoughts?

 

[tubby.twins]

I think the further discussion of capacitors needs to move to another thread now.

 

[whyachi]

Threads actually about capacitors don't get many replies. There is no fun derailment going on.

 

[Patrick from Davis]

There is more than just the capacitance that can be different between the various types.  Does is have a noticeable effect on the tone?  I don't know.  But the fact of the matter is, a lot of the things we get here are for looks or to create a period piece.  How many types of tele bridges are out there, and is there a giant increase in tone/performance of one over another?  Really, if we want to be absurd with the assertion, lets just say that ebony, pau ferro, ziricote and canary are superficial and really can be accomplished with oiled maple to get that same sound.  They are all wood, and the differences are so miniscule that in a blind test people would be hard pressed not to be just guessing what a neck is made from.

Certainly you can decide for yourself if that is true, I don't care if it is or not.  I still want a Ziricote neck for no better reason than to have one.  As is the case with the paper in oil caps.  I got a set, not for performance, but because I wanted a set of them.  Price be damned.  And, they are gorgeous.  I got some bakelite pickup covers for my strat.  Absolutely the best thing out there to improve your tone, seriously, no really, I mean it.  OK, fine, I am being an ass about that one.

As far as the original assertion, well sort of, I heard a difference when I changed the "El Cheap-o-rama" ceramic caps out for polypropylene caps.  The, "strangle your sound by placing a pillow on your amp and squeezing," property was not nearly as drastic or uncontrollable in the onset with the poly prop caps.  They had a smooth response that was nicer to play with.  Same guitar, two different caps.  So for that, I will use better caps in my builds.  I will end up with a tropical fish cap in the next one, but that is because I think they are the coolest looking things around.

Oh well, rant over.
Patrick

 

[Dan025]

Right on. So whenever a topic interests me - Im a voracious reader, Ive read alot around 'Net about caps and pots - I just have zero experience (yet) with this particular subject.

So correct me if I'm wrong, but cap values and variances aside - is it true that caps act as an electronic 'filter' in the circuit, and thus effect tone via that filtering effect on the circuit?

And if you agree with the above, wouldnt various makes and designs of caps (both vintage and modern) 'filter' the circuit differently and therefore alter tone?

I'm just trying to find a common ground to link everything I've read, but being as tone is, by definition, a very subjective art - isn't there a reason why Person A swears by $40 botique caps vs person B who is happy with $0.15 cap from Radio Shack?

I.E. Surely there must be SOME reason to all the misinformation and differing opinions other than (I hope) people are morons?

It only makes sense to me, personally, that say you wanted a vintage 60's tone for instance you'd want a cap from that era? Or am I completely missing something?

Thoughts?

well yes the true size of the cap is important, and yes the different construction will have an effect but there are only two types that are common and not recommended in high quality audio. ceramic and electrolytic. by the way ceramic and electrolytic are used extensively in active electronics and solid state amps and effects pedals, so even they wont sound horrible.

the botique caps price is part low volume production, part lower tolerance, and part marketing. 
as we know the designs from the 1950's happened to sound great. the oil paper caps are a throwback to that. some have the idea that it is a key component to the vintage sound. some use them for restorations. is it worth the money? well it is if you are into that sort of thing then sure.

some of the cheap ones from radio shack are perfectly good for instrument use. i believe the metalized film ones are the same that come in new fender guitars, they look remarkably similar. the polyester film caps have been used in japanese fenders and many other guitars. they are small and green. the tolerance is high though. if you change a cap to another of the same rated value and it sounds different it may be due to a value that is 20% off of what you had. so testing the value is needed for an accurate comparison. the sound quality is not inferior to most botique caps and may be superior to at least the oil paper type. or maybe not. i really don't know enough to say but i know the audiophile crowd isn't chasing sources of oil paper caps to upgrade hifi equipment. and i know that any improvement over a metal film cap will be marginal at best.

that is not to say however that a number marginal improvements cant add up to make a better instrument, or that a marginal difference wont separate a normal guitar from something special. i wont tell you not to buy a nice cap and i wont tell you that you have to either.

i do recommend that if you do go nuts with caps and resistors and pots that you have you pedals upgraded as well. after all a (signal) chain is only as strong as it's weakest link.