I would think that the use of boutique caps would be best applied to coupling caps where the audio signal passes through a capacitor. In the case of the Auricaps vs the Roderstein caps there was no argument that the Auricaps were superior and worth every penny. There was an obvious improvement of clarity with the Auricaps as compared to the original Roderstein film caps. I was very satisfied with the results of the recap job but the replacement of the input coupling caps was a revelation. I finished the recapping of the GFA-555 II and tried it out before I replaced the input coupling caps. The overall recap job was very successful but the replacement of the input coupling cap with the Auricaps removed a veil on the sound that I was not even aware of.
#Audio signal path capacitors full#
IIRC the input coupling cap was a 1uF cap and I happened to have a hand full of same rated caps by Auricap. It used a Roderstein film cap and they were considered good caps years ago. Along the recapping job I looked at the input coupling capacitors. The main problem I had with that amp is that is was getting old and needed a recap, which I did. These days it is in storage but back when I used that amp it was a steady and reliable work horse. I still own an old Adcom GFA-555 II power amp. I can only share my experience with a "boutique capacitor". Does anyone have any experience with the Wima FKP4 as coupling caps ? It will be interesting to see how that changes the sound when it is run in. This weekend, I optimised the EQ in the RTP-3C, which I have modified for tape head duty, and changed the Hovlands to Wima FKP4 PP film and foil caps while I was at it. Allen Wright used them in my factory built RTP-3D preamp, whereas I used Hovland Musicaps in the RTP-3C I built myself. There was at one time a popular trend of using PPS (Polyphenylene sulphide) caps. But in a well designed piece of equipment that adds little distortion to the signal, one should use components that add as little as possible to the signal.
Some people might like this kind of sound, which they associate with antique equipment, and these caps can ameliorate some of the artifacts created by negative feedback and other problems such as parasitic oscillations. One can see that easily in the square wave response. In antique classics such as the Leak TL12.1 and the Brook 12A, the ancient Supermetal pak caps and some of the modern PIO caps gave a rounder, "warmer" presentation, probably by rounding off transients and increasing harmonic distortion. I guess the effect is akin to using cables as tone controls. The less than perfect samples did add something to the sound. The beeswax ones almost melted in my tube amps. Ironically, the most expensive one also measured the worse. They measured from as good as the commercial MKP or FKP types to absolutely atrocious. Just for curiosity, I have bought for evaluation various exotic audiophile caps including PIO, beeswax, and extremely expensive film and foil types. A good commercial polypropylene capacitor nowadays approaches that of an ideal capacitor. Teflon films have advantages over polypropylene, but probably only at frequencies much higher than those in audio equipment. Granted, a better construction could minimise vibration (capacitors can act like microphones, and in fact condenser microphone capsules are essentially capacitors), but I am skeptical of the other claims. Paper in oil, foil made of precious metals etc. There is however a boutique industry catering to audiophiles that claim magical properties for their products. In theory, any capacitor that have similar levels of these parameters should sound the same.
We all learned that the perfect capacitor has negligible ESR, dissipation factor and dielectric absorption. They are not supposed to add anything positive. Like cables, capacitors can only distort the signal.
0 kommentar(er)
