Is it feasible to mod chinese pro audio gear with higher quality components?

[Blake Klondike]

Following up on a question from earlier this week, regarding products like this:

https://astoundsoundrecording.com/c...ts/n-sonic-n73eq-500-series-1073-equalizer-eq

I get the impression that Chinese knock-off companies save money by using lower quality parts, and I see threads where people talk about going in and replacing with better components. Here's the board inside:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5v2WbuVzOnUYmVyZVFHRVhkYjA/view

Any thoughts re: whether replacing components would yield a better product? As someone who hasn't used a soldering iron in 40 years, is this feasible, or should I just save up for better gear?

Thanks!

 

[Speedskater]

You might end up with an oscillator.

 

[JSmith]

Any thoughts re: whether replacing components would yield a better product

Yes... better as it may last longer with higher quality capacitors, sound no.

This was raised recently where Apollon suggested they offer a cap replacement option with ones that last longer.

There is a general concern of build quality in many components now.



JSmith

 

[JeffGB]

I'm the first person to take equipment apart to see if I can make it better but I wouldn't think this would work out well. First, the cost of doing it would be high because you will need equipment to desolder and resolder smt devices. Second, most of the capacitors etc seem to be high quality brands, but some MAY be fake copies of the good stuff. How can you tell the difference, unless it fails or is a really cheap, obvious fake?

Don't get me wrong. If you decide to do it, I'll be interested to see the outcome, but I've damaged enough circuit boards doing mods than I care to remember .

 

[mansr]

You might end up with an oscillator.

But it would be a quality oscillator.

 

[earlevel]

Any thoughts re: whether replacing components would yield a better product? As someone who hasn't used a soldering iron in 40 years, is this feasible, or should I just save up for better gear?

It's not uncommon at all. There are companies that do all or part of their business by modding cheap knockoff gear to make it better, at a total cost lower than that of buying the good stuff. Super common with pro audio mic preamps, for instance. And a whole lot of mic modding.

I bought a CAD mic for $50, including tax and free shipping, and replaced all the components in it including the capsule (the most expensive part). While it seems nuts to replace everything, the $50 bought a really nice, solid shell and shock mount. But, that's extreme. I ended up with a nice mice for a few hundred, but mostly I wanted to experiment.

It's very common to upgrade capacitors in the audio path. Most of these knockoffs are not using audio-grade electrolytic caps, and in many cases you can switch from electrolytic to polypropylene for smaller audio-path values, something these companies would not consider due to cost. Or also possibly improve the bypassing caps (in some cases changing values). Upgrading the power supply filtration might make a big difference in some cases. Pro audio clones of classic gear often use transformers in the audio path, and that's a big opportunity for an upgrade, at a big step up in investment.

For example:

https://www.zenproaudio.com/golden-age-project-pre73-mail-in-mod

https://www.blacklionaudio.com/product-category/modifications/

 

[earlevel]

I'm the first person to take equipment apart to see if I can make it better but I wouldn't think this would work out well. First, the cost of doing it would be high because you will need equipment to desolder and resolder smt devices. Second, most of the capacitors etc seem to be high quality brands, but some MAY be fake copies of the good stuff. How can you tell the difference, unless it fails or is a really cheap, obvious fake?

Don't get me wrong. If you decide to do it, I'll be interested to see the outcome, but I've damaged enough circuit boards doing mods than I care to remember .

He doesn't seem to be talking about SMT, he posted a jpg of traditional thru-hole components.

In my experience—I could be wrong in some cases—I don't see any effort to fake buyers with fakes of high-quality capacitors, in the Chinese clones. They just use cheap capacitors . Not much point in fooling people—if it doesn't sound as good as the competition, it doesn't matter what label is on the caps. Either way, if we buy a cheap clone of expensive gear, we can assume they didn't use premium capacitors.

Interestingly, I've read that even for their stuff made in China, Panasonic uses their own capacitors—I don't know if that's strictly true, but Panasonic does make good audio-quality capacitors at bargain prices.

 

[JSmith]

audio-quality capacitors

Mate a capacitor is a capacitor, type/toplogy aside... so what is an "audio-quality" capacitor?



JSmith

 

[earlevel]

Mate a capacitor is a capacitor, type/toplogy aside... so what is an "audio-quality" capacitor?

That is so easy to answer. Go to digikey, search on "aluminum electrolytic capacitors", select the filter option "audio", under "Applications".

Not all the good ones will be tagged for audio applications—the Panasonic FM and FM are fine choices, at good prices.

And...I'm not sure if you're just using "topology" in the wrong (to me) sense here, and mean type. I suspect you know there is a vast difference in audio-path usefulness between a mica cap and a polypropylene. I think you're saying an electrolytic is an electrolytic. I don't think so, but I'm fine with your opinion. (Seriously, it a reasonable assertion, and I'm not a zealot.) I'm not one to go super exotic, or expensive for the sake of it, even if it only alters the BOM but a couple of bucks (it's the principal of it). Panasonic caps are cheap, Nichicon not much more. I just don't see the point of doing the work to put in a cap and save a few cents for a cheap Chinese cap. I understand it in mass production.

 

[charleski]

Mate a capacitor is a capacitor, type/toplogy aside... so what is an "audio-quality" capacitor?



JSmith

There’s an interesting (and rather long and detailed) analysis of capacitors here
https://sound-au.com/articles/capacitors.htm
He doesn’t have much time for ‘audio-grade’ marketing, and points out that ‘upgrading’ a component to one that’s too big and doesn’t fit properly will probably just make things worse.

‘Audio-grade’ generally just refers to caps with low ESR and good thermal stability, but you don’t need a special label to get that.

 

[Wombat]

Old advice:

"Why buy a cheaper new car and modify it to perform? Just buy one that performs from the get-go. It will save you lots of time and money".

Better resale, too.

 

[Sharpi31]

I don‘t place significance on ‘audio grade’ labels - often this just means no datasheet. There is a huge difference in electrolytic cap lifespan though - it annoys me to see expensive equipment with 85degree / 1000hr rated electrolytics, considering the small additional cost for 105degree / 7500+ hr caps. To me, use of cheap short lifespan electrolytics is a clear statement that the manufacturer has not aimed to build a product that will last.

 

[charleski]

One thing I think it's important to point out: It's certainly possible to show electrolytic capacitors producing up to 10% distortion (which would certainly be audible). I'm guilty of having seen these results in the past and thinking, "Oo, looks like I do need fancy caps for my DIY project." But as Rod Elliott shows in the article above, this is very much a function of the conditions in which the cap is operating, and can be reduced to insignificance by choosing the proper values.

If the maker has used carbon resistors it would be worth swapping them for metal film, but that would be really unlikely these days, and I'd take it as a sign that they'd been cutting costs so deeply there are probably hidden defects throughout the whole unit. Of course, since we're in audiophile-land, you don't have to look hard to find those who will claim that noisy and unstable carbon-film resistors 'sound better'.

Sound quality is almost entirely a function of the circuit design. Since these Chinese knock-offs are made by reverse-engineering the schematic of the original, they will sound very similar as long as they're actually using the same component values, and not just ones that they happen to have in their stock. Unfortunately you won't know that without being able to compare the knock-off to the original circuit board. And of course a lot of these knock-offs are of modish audiophile designs that may not be particularly good in the first place.

 

[earlevel]

He doesn’t have much time for ‘audio-grade’ marketing, and points out that ‘upgrading’ a component to one that’s too big and doesn’t fit properly will probably just make things worse.

As an aside, it's interesting how much smaller today's electrolytic caps are that decades ago. When re-capping, you sometimes need to (or just are able to) pick a much larger voltage spec. Usually more pertinent to power supply caps, which can benefit in physical stability with the same lead spacing, and not the smaller ones that don't matter. But a higher voltage rating doesn't hurt in longevity either.

 

[earlevel]

Old advice:

"Why buy a cheaper new car and modify it to perform? Just buy one that performs from the get-go. It will save you lots of time and money".

Better resale, too.

Well, the fact is most gear isn't well-suited to mods. But a few, with a relatively small number of important components, some of which affect the sound greatly, might be candidates. In my mind, this usually means equipment "with a sound", so more towards classic recording designs than home audio. New LA-2A compressor/limiter clones range from $300 to $5000, with basically the same circuitry (and even the top ones are clones). Similar for a Neve 1073-style mic preamps. Huge gain in the pre in particular (~70 dB), and driving them hard is a recording technique. These things have a sound, and some components are targets of cost savings and design choices (transformers especially).

However, to your comment about just getting the stuff you want, I am looking to pick up some low-end clones that reported sound good, but may have room for improvement (for instance, might be clean but not have the same character when saturating). I'd only mod if I felt the sound a little wanting, and feel adventurous enough to see if modding gets me what I want. The three components in mind, for the chain, would total $850. Getting "legit" pro versions could easily go to $10k and more. If I were a recording studio, the known-pro stuff is a no-brainer—it's amortized over a lot of clients, and pro studios attract clients by owning these expensive names. But for me recording me, no.

A different tactic, I have a mic pre on backorder that's based on the 1073 design, with modern improvements, for ~$1k. Far cheaper than a real Neve or most other high-end clones, and not a candidate for modding (I chose this particular one for it's modern take on the design, capable of a clean sound or more saturated). But there are popular ones for more like $300-$500 that people use as-is, or mod the transformers, etc.

Anyway, I'm not advocating buying stuff and upgrading it, just answering the question. Black Lion, Zen Pro, and others do mods that people rave about, so either it's effective or the emperor's new clothes, I won't judge. Some people buy a $7k U67 Reissue (Neumann clone of a Neumann mic—all these things are clones of things that haven't been manufactured in decades), then spend another few $k to send it to someone to give it the "vintage sound". Sounds a bit nuts, but these people love the results. Heck, if I spent that much, I'd love the results. I'd have to.