Are capacitor 'upgrades' really better?

[walpurgis]

There's an awful lot of talk about capacitor upgrades.

The moment somebody mentions an older piece of equipment, the 'experts' will chime in with comments like "of course you'll have to change all the caps for better ones". Is this necessarily true? I change capacitors that I suspect are past it or are definitely knackered, but if a capacitor measures well, I tend to leave be.

It's no good someone saying "I changed mine and it was a huge improvement". Well, maybe it was, but as you obviously can't do an A/B comparison, this is very subjective. Also, there must be cases where a so called upgrade has been detrimental.

I'm sure capacitors vary in quality and capability, but if a cap meets the required spec for its designed purpose, what can be gained by using 'audiophile' components and is this measurable? Where does the superiority lie?

[John]

Well I upgraded the capacitors on my crossover and although they had the same values I could definatly hear a lot more detail and still consider it a worthwhile upgrade

[istari_knight]

If the original electrolytic measures within tolerance then replacing it with a modern "audiophile" approved part like black gates & elna silmics is a waste of time but it will probably make you feel better. Replacing it with a superior [film] part will always give reasonable improvements IME.

[John R Leddy]

.
I once had a self-extinguishing cap let go in a DAC. Strangest thing I have ever seen. Just like those trick things you put in the end of a smoker's cigarette, except bellowing out of my stereo. Scary!

A friendly wholesaler was kind enough to send me free of charge a pair of their poshest audio caps to the same values under the guise of samples.

How would I go about allocating a sound to those particular components?

I have a suspicion others are suggesting their perception of a music track is constant every time they listen to it. I guess it would have to be in order to able to allocate a sound to a new part.

However, it is my understanding human beings are incapable of replicating the same perception every time they hear or listen to the same sound.

If it is true we cannot control the brain's allocation of new versus remembered sound, what do we think we are saying when we claim there is, or is not, a difference in the sound we are hearing?

If the same track is perceived differently from the last time we heard it, how do we know which differences in sound to subtract from the overall change in sound in order to allocate the new component its value in the change?

When and where did we adopt this idea of absolute and universally applicable constant aural perception? Who is likely to gain from our adoption of this concept?

I know my other senses are subject to continual change without cessation. Nerve damage may be a means of stopping this ongoing bodily process.

Under these conditions it should come as little surprise a person may claim there is, or is not, a difference in sound after fitting a new component.

Salesmen are well aware a customer may hear a substantial change in sound for a minor component change within their system, and if no change is perceived, or a detrimental change is experienced, the customer has only to be convinced to hold on to the product for a while longer until an inevitable improvement is experienced.

It is with great interest I notice the decision was taken to adopt descriptions from the motor industry: bedding-in, and running-in. Fascinating. Who would have thought a hi-fi salesman would wish to be compared to someone in the motor trade, but there we have it.

So, while I readily accept we can perceive changes, or not, under very similar circumstances, and personally choose not to waste my time worrying about certain aspects of audiophilia, questions still remain: How do I allocate an absolute, universally applicable, sound to an object? Why would I want to?

John.

[NRG]

Given the right capacitor for a given application then yes changing them can make a difference to the sound. Ask on any Audio DIY forum.

[6L6]

The moment somebody mentions an older piece of equipment,

(emphasis mine)

The crux here is 'older'. How old? It's a given that tube-era electrolytic capacitors will have dried out, and also a reasonable assumption that the same has happened to '70s gear as well. Weather or not the same holds true for more recent kit should be taken on a case-by-case basis.

But aluminum (aluminium?) capacitors dry out with age. So if it's old, there is a reasonable chance that the caps are out of spec.

[Reffc]

It's seemingly fashionable for people to talk about various capacitors and occasionally amusing to read descriptions of how they "should" sound without consideration of the circuit/design or what they are replacing quite often. This is often no more than a reaction to what others might have said about "x" brand where generalisations are often assumed. I find some of these comments to be a little naive and non-nonsensical, although there are certainly instances where a particular type and rating of cap will bring improvements depending on the circuit usage. As mentioned in posts above, if older electrolytics are in a circuit, then after "x" years it's probable that they may have dried out and would need replacing. Replacing with new budget electrolytics or suitable alternatives is likely to give improvements simply due to bringing the capacitance values back into line with what the designer intended for the circuit and not because the cap uses unobtanium-in-oil construction. Some people though just have to have that fashionable cap to remove any nagging doubts about using "inferior" brands, and that is their choice.

Having said that, and largely depending on where the caps are to be used, changing the rating and type of capacitor can yield improvements. I've found that when refurbishing crossovers, the use of decent quality (tight tolerance) polyprops (not outrageously expensive) of a slightly higher rating than the originals has often yielded better results than like for like replacements. Much of this is to do with improving the tolerance for the capacitance values in this particular signal path application. The best way to learn if you'd be wasting your money (or not) is to speak (if possible) with the designer/manufacturer. I know that for the EAR amp that I currently use, EAR have advised that it is a complete waste of time and money replacing any of the power supply or coupling caps with anything "smarter" than the original budget items. I know of someone with the same amp who spent £100's on capacitor "upgrades" for his 869 and afterwards admitted that EAR were right and it didn't make a blind bit of difference. I know (because I have heard the results) that similar cap replacements on some Jolida amps will yield improvements. I rather suspect that this though is more to do with tolerance and rating than which brand was selected although some do yield different results for whatever reason.

Also worth bearing in mind is if substituting larger rated caps (say 600V in place of 250v in a crossover for example) it can take longer to bed in and stabilise initially. In certain applications it may be worth upping the rating if you can squeeze them into the space provided. Suck it and see.

[Beobloke]

There's an awful lot of talk about capacitor upgrades.

The moment somebody mentions an older piece of equipment, the 'experts' will chime in with comments like "of course you'll have to change all the caps for better ones". Is this necessarily true? I change capacitors that I suspect are past it or are definitely knackered, but if a capacitor measures well, I tend to leave be.

It's no good someone saying "I changed mine and it was a huge improvement". Well, maybe it was, but as you obviously can't do an A/B comparison, this is very subjective. Also, there must be cases where a so called upgrade has been detrimental.

I'm sure capacitors vary in quality and capability, but if a cap meets the required spec for its designed purpose, what can be gained by using 'audiophile' components and is this measurable? Where does the superiority lie?

As with so many things in audio, changing your capacitors will often make a change to the sound - whether it's an improvement is up to the listener's ears!

In my experience, it depends on where the capacitors are and what they do. For example, every time I find myself fettling a pair of 1970s Leak or Goodmans speakers, replacing some of the crossover capacitors is almost a given, as the ones they used when new were no better than adequate - they had poor tolerance when new and do not age well. Even then, though, the ones that make the biggest differences are the ones in the midrange and tweeter circuits that are directly in the signal path - the bigger fellas across the bass driver tend to have much less of an effect on the sound.

On the other hand, though, when you open up an old piece of electronics and find capacitors that have discoloured, are mis-shapen or (as I had recently) leave a puddle of electrolyte on the table where you park the item there for a few days, then replacement is a very wise move! However, change for change sake seems a little pontless to me.

Finally, it's worth considering the actual provenance of the original items in question. If the equipment in which they are fitted was originally a budget item, then components were likely to have been specified that would do the job required and not cost too much. A high-end item, however, is likely to have had much more care taken in this respect. As a friend pointed out once, "Why would I want to change high quality 1980s Japanese capacitors for cheap modern Chinese ones?". He has a point...

[Reffc]

As with so many things in audio, changing your capacitors will often make a change to the sound - whether it's an improvement is up to the listener's ears!

In my experience, it depends on where the capacitors are and what they do. For example, every time I find myself fettling a pair of 1970s Leak or Goodmans speakers, replacing some of the crossover capacitors is almost a given, as the ones they used when new were no better than adequate - they had poor tolerance when new and do not age well. Even then, though, the ones that make the biggest differences are the ones in the midrange and tweeter circuits that are directly in the signal path - the bigger fellas across the bass driver tend to have much less of an effect on the sound.

On the other hand, though, when you open up an old piece of electronics and find capacitors that have discoloured, are mis-shapen or (as I had recently) leave a puddle of electrolyte on the table where you park the item there for a few days, then replacement is a very wise move! However, change for change sake seems a little pontless to me.

Finally, it's worth considering the actual provenance of the original items in question. If the equipment in which they are fitted was originally a budget item, then components were likely to have been specified that would do the job required and not cost too much. A high-end item, however, is likely to have had much more care taken in this respect. As a friend pointed out once, "Why would I want to change high quality 1980s Japanese capacitors for cheap modern Chinese ones?". He has a point...

...a very good point Adam

[User211]

http://www.humblehomemadehifi.com/Cap.html

One of the more popular cap sites.

Caps can make a big difference - literally capable of wrecking an amplifier, for instance, should good ones get swapped out for poor ones. I know I've witnessed it happen to one of mine.

What's the best type? The one you like the sound of best. How will you ever find that out, though? Unless you like DIY. you're probably best off reading the above link, and/or the DIY sites, and just taking a gamble based on said research.