Audible difference in high-end capacitors? - ABX samples

[ctrl]

As @SIY showed, that is not always the case and depends on context. If we look at the frequency domain, amplitude is complex and includes phase. In the time domain, it does not. That can be rather confusing

To make a small reference to the actual topic (I know, how dare you to post something on the actual topic), the measurements of the capacitors via tweeter represent a minimum phase system, so to speak. Therefore, the phase frequency response can be determined from the frequency response by using Hilbert transformation.

Measurement-wise, this is not quite so easy to show, since the two-channel measurement in Arta, corrects the possible phase errors of the measurement amplifier, but my measurement microphone is only frequency response calibrated and the audio interface (the mic preamp) may also rotate the phase a little.

This means that there is always some excess phase in the measurement system, but it must not change from measurement to measurement within the limits of measurement accuracy.

So let's compare the measured phase and the minimum phase from the measurements of the Alumen Z-Cap and the Old-Cap:

As said, phase and minimum phase is not congruent (as one would expect for a minimum phase system), since the measurement system contributes some excess phase.

So if really only the measuring system is responsible for the difference between phase and minimum phase, then the excess phase must not change during the measurements, within the limits of the measuring accuracy. Which is true, when we compare the excess phase for all three different caps measured via tweeter:


The three different capacitors therefore have no measurable effect on the time (diff) response of the tweeter.
(Except for the minimal FR difference measured - which was about -0.1dB at its best with the Old-Cap and since it is a minimum phase system, we get a tiny phase diff too)

Update 1:
Phase response of the three different capacitors in series to the tweeter 1-40kHz - no difference at all:


Update 2:
For all those who believe that the results would be different with real music as a signal, here is the evaluation of the phase differences between the Alumen Z-Cap versus Old-Cap and the respective "Fast Car" sample, and same for Alumen-Z-Cap versus Standard-Cap using DeltaWave to analyze the music samples:

In the test range from 1kHz to 20kHz, the phase deviations are practically always below 10°, which is completely inaudible to my knowledge.
In the high frequency range, I have not even managed to hear 360° phase rotation in an ABX test, since the resulting group delay is so small.

 

[pma]

If we look at the frequency domain, amplitude is complex and includes phase. In the time domain, it does not. That can be rather confusing

This statement is really confusing (or insane?). Please show me the phase in the amplitude spectrum.

 

[SIY]

This statement is really confusing (or insane?). Please show me the phase in the amplitude spectrum.

View attachment 320905

That's a magnitude spectrum. Amplitude = magnitude * exp (i*phi)

 

[voodooless]

That's a magnitude spectrum. Amplitude = magnitude * exp (i*phi)

So, “insane” it is then

@pma, don’t complain that it’s confusing when I just told you it’s confusing

 

[Cbdb2]

As @SIY showed, that is not always the case and depends on context. If we look at the frequency domain, amplitude is complex and includes phase. In the time domain, it does not. That can be rather confusing

Periodic signals in the time domain also have amplitude and phase, and if you use Euler you get the complex exponentials that relate to the freq. domain. You need both A and Φ in both domains to describe a signal.
Havent used a RTA for a while do any show phase?

 

[pma]

REW RTA shows both amplitude and phase of distortion harmonic components.

 

[Newman]

This is a bit unhappy definition. Normally, distortion term is used to describe nonlinear distortion, the situation when at the output of the device we have further frequency components that were not present at the input. Thus nonlinear distortion, as it depends on level, and possibly on frequency, creating harmonic and intermodulation frequency components.

“Linear distortion” is a change in amplitude and phase frequency response. It does not create new frequencies, just changes amplitude of the existing ones.

Hi Pavel, I am mostly in agreement with you on this one.

Since the dawn of audio time, the term distortion has been in general use in reference to non-linear distortion, aka harmonic distortion.

However, in recent years in audio discussion forums, I have seen a trend to include linear distortion in the general references to distortion.

It is a bit senseless to write “distortion = output - input”, because that includes level differences. When we consider that the entire function of an amplifier is to change levels (of voltage and/or current), then the perfect amplifier is nothing but distortion. So it makes sense not to use that definition of distortion.

If only we could go back to the good old days and say distortion when we mean harmonic distortion, and say nonlinearity when we mean deviations in phase and frequency response.

cheers

 

[voodooless]

If only we could go back to the good old days and say distortion when we mean harmonic distortion

The word “harmonic” is there for a reason, it implies that there are many kinds of distortion.

because that includes level differences

Well, in some cases, it does. Like with compression or modulation.

 

[musicforcities]

Expensive caps like these help with expelling the thetans of psychacoustics, assisting your hearing going clear. You need to successively improve by going up levels by buying more and more expensive caps. At level 15 you discover that they aliens who made us had far superior hearing and humans descended from alien-human coupling often therefore become audiophiles.

 

[wwenze]

The presence of a secret society certainly explains why most of them have the budget to afford their gear and room while engaging in occupations far-removed from human scientific understanding.

 

[jxdking]

In audio world, we also have Risers vs Tuners.

 

[Palladium]

Expensive caps like these help with expelling the thetans of psychacoustics, assisting your hearing going clear. You need to successively improve by going up levels by buying more and more expensive caps. At level 15 you discover that they aliens who made us had far superior hearing and humans descended from alien-human coupling often therefore become audiophiles.

There's so much infinite veils lifted in every little possible thing which is why Big Bad Harman found out the correlation between preference and price in headphones is so weak that its close to zero.

 

[mk1classic]

On the topic of testing caps. Two episodes by

https://www.youtube.com/@frankswerkstatt

 

[thewas]

On the topic of testing caps. Two episodes by

https://www.youtube.com/@frankswerkstatt

Both though with so many flaws and abusing the term blind test...

 

[ctrl]

On the topic of testing caps. Two episodes by

These are two good examples of how not to do it under any circumstances.
The fact that the real capacitance of the individually measured capacitors are not explicitly mentioned is more than problematic.

The "listening proof" presented in the first video was so flawed that the author had to add a warning about the errors.

The second video with the "blind test" at the end, is comedy gold.
I had to laugh so much when at the end of the video the test person, who in the "blind test", despite manipulatively conducted test and hints of the tester, wanted to see the most expensive capacitor not as the best capacitor but one of the cheapest capacitors in the test, was probably persuaded by the tester to install the most expensive capacitor in his speaker (although he felt in the blind test a cheap capacitor as better).

The videos show very obviously why you can't do "listening comparisons" this way.

 

[test1223]

These are two good examples of how not to do it under any circumstances.
The fact that the real capacitance of the individually measured capacitors are not explicitly mentioned is more than problematic.

The "listening proof" presented in the first video was so flawed that the author had to add a warning about the errors.

The second video with the "blind test" at the end, is comedy gold.
I had to laugh so much when at the end of the video the test person, who in the "blind test", despite manipulatively conducted test and hints of the tester, wanted to see the most expensive capacitor not as the best capacitor but one of the cheapest capacitors in the test, was probably persuaded by the tester to install the most expensive capacitor in his speaker (although he felt in the blind test a cheap capacitor as better).

The videos show very obviously why you can't do "listening comparisons" this way.

Both though with so many flaws and abusing the term blind test...

Even if you are right with some points, I don't like the way you address your criticism. As a thought experiment you can switch the role with Frank and think of the reaction from his perspective. He has put in the effort and did a test. I am sure if the criticism is brought to him in a respectful and not insulting manner he is willing to react to it and maybe he will do another better test which might be of interesst for a lot of people.

 

[SIY]

Even if you are right with some points, I don't like the way you address your criticism. As a thought experiment you can switch the role with Frank and think of the reaction from his perspective. He has put in the effort and did a test. I am sure if the criticism is brought to him in a respectful and not insulting manner he is willing to react to it and maybe he will do another better test which might be of interesst for a lot of people.

If you put on the lab coat, you should be held to standards. If your presentation is ridiculous, then expect it to be treated that way. If it reeks of “I know what I want the answer to be so I’ll rig it that way,” expect the criticism to be extra harsh- dishonesty has no place in technology.

 

[Karl-Heinz Fink]

For a moment, I was thinking of doing a listening test about capacitors in crossovers with some industry people here at my place and making a video. But honesty, the reaction to Franks testing made it clear to me that whatever result it will have, the usual people will tell us that it's all wrong or marketing or Bla Bla.
The first video, I thought, was not a good way, but having a person sitting there and listening and hearing a difference and describing it is something one cannot ignore. The question for me is, can he hear a reliable difference, not if the more expensive capacitor is the best one.
Even if this might not be the correct method, it must make you wonder if all the other people shouting that there are no differences, might not be right.

BTW, here you can download an article about capacitor sound of Martin Colloms, written in 1983 as far as I remember:

Martin Colloms article

I have a second article by Martin, but it seems not online. It contains measurements on capacitors
I don't want to upload without permission, but I will ask Paul Miller of HiFiNews and send a link if I can. Or you send me a PM.

I'm also still thinking if I should get me two of the D/A converters that Amir tested and give one a makeover with "Audiophile parts" to improve the performance. I would compare it with a second one on the same amp, just switching between the inputs, using the same cables and the same source (Eversolo via USB, playing via Roon). Not sure, if I can get a schematic, but often, the critical power supply can be found without it.

 

[fpitas]

A Martin Colloms article?

 

[test1223]

If you put on the lab coat, you should be held to standards. If your presentation is ridiculous, then expect it to be treated that way. If it reeks of “I know what I want the answer to be so I’ll rig it that way,” expect the criticism to be extra harsh- dishonesty has no place in technology.

No it is straight up poor communication skill you can say exactly what you want to say in a nice and respectful manner and you not weaken any of your points to the contraire your arguments gets way more weight and value since you stay constructive and respectful, which is a sign of an intelligent person who has his emotions under control and is interested in the truth and not to put someone down.