• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). Come here to have fun, be ready to be teased and not take online life too seriously. We now measure and review equipment for free! Click here for details.

Capacitor upgrade in crossover - You CAN'T handle the TRUTH! - Part 3

OP
C

ctrl

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Jan 24, 2020
Messages
582
Likes
1,904
Location
DE
Thread Starter #161
I am assuming that the reproduction potential of high-quality loudspeakers cannot be fully captured by measuring microphones (i used a UMIK-1 and the original supplied measuring microphone) ....For me this is a indication that the measuring method is probably the bottleneck here. It could be the same with the capacitor measurements.
You've claimed this several times in the thread now, but again today the technical justification for your assumption is missing. What is the technical reasoning behind your assumption?

A good measurement microphone will outperform the human ear in frequency resolution (depends on sampling rate), frequency range (10hz - >20khz) and dynamic range (>140dBspl <3%THD).

Condenser microphones are also used for studio recordings or live recordings. This means that if these microphones cannot fully pick up certain musical details, then these details will also not be present on the recording and especially not when the recordings are played back through "high-quality loudspeakers".
 

SIY

Major Contributor
Technical Expert
Joined
Apr 6, 2018
Messages
5,335
Likes
10,976
Location
Phoenix, AZ
How do you test for that?
If your meter doesn’t measure it directly, run a voltage through a resistor in series with the cap. Choose the value to give you, say, a 30 second time constant. After a long enough time to let the cap charge, say 10 time constants or more, measure the voltage across the resistor to get the leakage current.
 
Joined
Sep 4, 2020
Messages
37
Likes
8
Yeah, an accurate bass response does sound disappointing at first. It's not "exciting".

I had the same experience when I tried to EQ a pair of headphones for the first time. It sounds flat and boring to begin with.

It takes time for the brain to recognize and appreciate the control and authority of a good flat bass response.

Let your brain do some burn-in, or just enjoy the room modes without correction.
That could be the solution.
See below:

Earthworks FAQ - 02 / Technical
'Why do you make microphones that exceed 20kHz?'
Link: Earthworks FAQ

With such a microphone (type M50, …), the happening in the room can really be captured correctly, i.e. deliver optimal data for the correction calculation.
I will do my next attempt with a UMIK-2 instead of my UMIK-1. An improvement should be audible here.
 

SIY

Major Contributor
Technical Expert
Joined
Apr 6, 2018
Messages
5,335
Likes
10,976
Location
Phoenix, AZ
FWIW, I ran the Dirac measurements with both the NAD-supplied mic and a PCB lab grade condenser. No significant difference.
 

richard12511

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
1,929
Likes
2,609
Hello to all folks around, I registered just to follow this thread.

Replacing one part with another of identical specs and getting the same result makes sense. However, you have to agree that there are many similar threads, posts and experiences from different users, who all claim they hear some difference.

Agreed, some difference may come from age-altered specs of old capacitors that were replaced with a brand new ones. However, if expensive capacitors do not make any change in the sound, why are they used by speakers manufacturers at all? If they all sound the same, why don't we just see a basic $3 crossovers in speakers, especially in ones under $1000-$1500 price?
I seriously doubt that a manufacturer would bother to put better caps in a relatively cheap speaker, if they don't do anything at all. Most of buyers (especially buyers of more affordable equipment) doesn't have a clue about that stuff and the rest of them won't really care.
The incentive is there because most customers still believe they do make a difference. You can see ample evidence of that in the responses to this thread, and this is the most science oriented consumer audio forum there is. Other forums are likely 90%+ believers. That same incentive is there in all sectors of audio components. For example, I'd bet most good DAC manufacturers know that their more expensive models don't make any difference at all over their entry product, but they also know that the customers don't know that. It's a great way to make money. What matters is not what the manufacturer believes, but what the customer believes.
 

trl

Major Contributor
King of Mods
Joined
Feb 28, 2018
Messages
1,322
Likes
1,341
Location
Iasi, RO
You've claimed this several times in the thread now, but again today the technical justification for your assumption is missing. What is the technical reasoning behind your assumption?

A good measurement microphone will outperform the human ear in frequency resolution (depends on sampling rate), frequency range (10hz - >20khz) and dynamic range (>140dBspl <3%THD).

Condenser microphones are also used for studio recordings or live recordings. This means that if these microphones cannot fully pick up certain musical details, then these details will also not be present on the recording and especially not when the recordings are played back through "high-quality loudspeakers".
You don't need a mic to do these tests, you can connect directly to tweeter wires an ADC, then compare the differences with DeltaWave. This way nobody here will blame the mic or you for not respecting the exact distance and angle between measurements.
 
Joined
Sep 4, 2020
Messages
37
Likes
8
You've claimed this several times in the thread now, but again today the technical justification for your assumption is missing. What is the technical reasoning behind your assumption?
See also my thread #113

I find trl's approach very promising using DeltaWave without a microphone.
 
Joined
Sep 4, 2020
Messages
37
Likes
8
FWIW, I ran the Dirac measurements with both the NAD-supplied mic and a PCB lab grade condenser. No significant difference.
Which devices were used within the signal chain (model no.)?
What does you mean with 'No significant difference'?
 
Joined
Jan 13, 2021
Messages
15
Likes
0
Location
Serbia
Can anyone explain why do we see some oil impregnated capacitors (mundorf's selling them for a price of a cheep pair of speakers) and what is their implication in audio?
 

Killingbeans

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 23, 2018
Messages
1,115
Likes
1,908
Location
Bjerringbro, Denmark.
See also my thread #113

I find trl's approach very promising using DeltaWave without a microphone.
I'm getting those Don Quijote vibes again :confused:

Can anyone explain why do we see some oil impregnated capacitors (mundorf's selling them for a price of a cheep pair of speakers) and what is their implication in audio?
Pure grade A snake oil.
 

SIY

Major Contributor
Technical Expert
Joined
Apr 6, 2018
Messages
5,335
Likes
10,976
Location
Phoenix, AZ
Which devices were used within the signal chain (model no.)?
What does you mean with 'No significant difference'?
You can read my review of the NAD M10 online at AudioXpress website for hardware details.

Acoustic measurements have some variances, even when using the same mic and position. If I said “no difference” without qualification, some eristic fellow would complain that no two measurements are exactly the same.
 
OP
C

ctrl

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Jan 24, 2020
Messages
582
Likes
1,904
Location
DE
Thread Starter #174
You don't need a mic to do these tests, you can connect directly to tweeter wires an ADC, then compare the differences with DeltaWave. This way nobody here will blame the mic or you for not respecting the exact distance and angle between measurements.
I find trl's approach very promising using DeltaWave without a microphone.
Well, unfortunately I don't own a special ADC-USB measuring device, respectively I don't have sufficient electronic knowledge to perform such a measurement safely via an audio interface (if possible).

But the real reason to investigate audio components in this way at all was that in many forums where electronic measurements of audio components are presented, the argumentation always boils down to the claim that there are still undiscovered physical effects (that many don't want to admit) have decisive influences on the sound and that cannot be measured electronically in the conventional way.

As said in previous posts, all this is omitted when measuring by microphone. No one in their right mind would claim that high-end capacitors change the direction of movement of air molecules and thus create a better spatial representation. All mechanical capacitor resonances, advantages of "thinner dielectric insulator allows for a capacitor with less “memory” and one that is much faster reacting", etc. all these effects (if they exist) are captured in the measurement.

The point is not to show measurable differences (at the same capacitance) between capacitors, those exist and are shown in my RLC measurements.

What is important is whether these differences are audible to people. This is exactly what the recordings in the next part are supposed to show.
I am open to be surprised by audible differences, contrary to my previous measurements and conviction.
.
 

trl

Major Contributor
King of Mods
Joined
Feb 28, 2018
Messages
1,322
Likes
1,341
Location
Iasi, RO
Well, unfortunately I don't own a special ADC-USB measuring device
The same audio interface you were doing these measurements.
respectively I don't have sufficient electronic knowledge to perform such a measurement safely via an audio interface (if possible)
Given your work done here, I will ignore your above statement. :) Basically same ARTA may be used, that is "reading" the input from your audio interface and is outputting ARTA built-in audio generator.
 
Joined
Sep 4, 2020
Messages
37
Likes
8
Basically same ARTA may be used, that is "reading" the input from your audio interface and is outputting ARTA built-in audio generator.

I would immediately use real music instead of 'like' static signals from ARTA to cover the non-swung-in state too (see also thread #124).
 
Last edited:
Joined
Sep 4, 2020
Messages
37
Likes
8
FWIW, I ran the Dirac measurements with both the NAD-supplied mic and a PCB lab grade condenser. No significant difference.
You can read my review of the NAD M10 online at AudioXpress website for hardware details.
I don't see a Dirac Live measurement with a PCB lab grade condenser in the article. Is that correct?
By the way, what does "heavily modified NHT M3.3s" mean?
These are very interesting speakers.
 
OP
C

ctrl

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Jan 24, 2020
Messages
582
Likes
1,904
Location
DE
Thread Starter #178
Basically same ARTA may be used, that is "reading" the input from your audio interface and is outputting ARTA built-in audio generator.
As I said, I am not an electronics expert, but it is not as "simple" as you suggest.
If the voltage applied to the tweeter or woofer is taken, it is nothing other than the measurement of an power amplifier.
That means you have to take precautions so that the audio interface is not destroyed during the measurement - for example see here.
 
Joined
Sep 4, 2020
Messages
37
Likes
8
If the voltage applied to the tweeter or woofer is taken, it is nothing other than the measurement of an power amplifier.
This statement is incorrect. The capacitor acts like a frequency-dependent resistor, which naturally influences the voltage signal applied to the tweeter.
In addition, the physical behavior of the tweeter also affects the signal to be measured. With this method you should be able to obtain meaningful results if you measure at the same temperature, pressure and at operating temperature (steady state) of the devices.
 
OP
C

ctrl

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Jan 24, 2020
Messages
582
Likes
1,904
Location
DE
Thread Starter #180
This statement is incorrect. The capacitor acts like a frequency-dependent resistor, which naturally influences the voltage signal applied to the tweeter.
In addition, the physical behavior of the tweeter also affects the signal to be measured. With this method you should be able to obtain meaningful results if you measure at the same temperature, pressure and at operating temperature (steady state) of the devices.
The statement referred to the danger that exists for the audio interface. The measurement is comparable to the measurement of an power amplifier, where instead of a resistor, the tweeter or woofer with its serial capacitor sits.
.
 
Top Bottom