Turn Amp off ??
Ken Luke
Or is it ok to just leave amp on all the time ?
Which is better ?
Arny Krüger
Ken Luke wrote in message
<01bdba46$a6dfbe00$9cc9...@pc6.repro>...
From an equipment life standpoint, the question is dependent
on how long until the next use. If it is under an hour, just
leave the stuff on. If it's a week, turn it off.
Where is the borderline? Probably someplace around 4-8
hours.
bro...@ase.com
"Ken Luke" <kl...@repromail.repro.ohio-state.edu> wrote:
> Is it best to turn the amp off every time with the pre amp ?
>
> Or is it ok to just leave amp on all the time ?
>
> Which is better ?
Turn the power amp off first, then the preamp. Turn on the preamp first ...
TB
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
Robert Morein
time. The filter capacitors have a lifetime of about 10000 hours -- see
the Cornell-Dubilier capacitor handbook. The transistor semiconductor
junctions diffuse with time, although failure of these components is
years out.
Do not trust the opinion on this question of anyone who is not an
electrical engineer.
Steve Zipser (Sunshine Stereo) wrote:
> I leave the amps on in all our stereo systems here at Sunshine. They
> sound better, and will last longer.
Robert Morein
Steve Zipser (Sunshine Stereo) wrote:
> At 09:26 PM 7/28/98 -0400, you wrote:
> > Your amplifier will definitely wear out faster if you
> > leave it on all the time. The filter capacitors have a
> > lifetime of about 10000 hours -- see the Cornell-Dubilier
> > capacitor handbook. The transistor semiconductor junctions
> > diffuse with time, although failure of these components is
> > years out.
>
> You are an idiot.
> I have amplifiers that I have left on for ten years. Please explain.
OK. I'll explain. The facts surrounding electrolytic capacitors are not
subtle, and have been known for many years, if you care to check the design
manuals. All audio amplifiers contain these big cans, which consist of
tightly wrapped coils of aluminum foil with a thin liquid layer of potassium
hydroxide electrolyte in between. Not unlike a voltage cell, except that
since the two electrodes are both made of aluminum, no potential is
independently produced. When the capacitor is manufactured, a layer of
aluminum oxide is "formed" on one of the foil electrodes by passing a
current through them. When the oxide layer is formed, the current stops, as
the two electrodes are theoretically insulated from each other, although
electrolytics are leakier than other capacitor types.
Particularly in power supply filtration service, a phenomenon known as
dendritic growth occurs, which means that tiny crystals of aluminum grow at
a steady, calculated rate from one electrode to the other. The more
impurities in the aluminum, the faster they grow, but no aluminum is 100%
pure. The rate of growth doubles with each rise of 10 degrees Fahrenheit of
the capacitor. When these crystals finally reach the other plate, the
capacitor shorts out.
The above stress on the capacitor exists even if the amplifier is idling.
The reason is that the capacitor is constantly stressed by the 120 Hz ripple
from the rectifier bridge, which exists even in quiescent state.
But long before that, capacity is lost due to slow evaporation of
electrolyte out of the can. This is why old amplifiers frequently have hum
problems.
Conversely, an electrolytic has a tendency to fail if used only
occasionally, but that's another issue. If Mr. Zipser were to measure the
capacity of some of the electrolytics in his ten year old amps, he would
find them considerably degraded.
Transistors are gradually degraded due to diffusion of the semiconductor
junctions. Although this does not occur in normal use, it will occur over
the period of a decade in amplifiers which have high bias current designs.
I respect Mr. Zipser's judgment with respect to subjective questions of
audio quality. However, unless he's done the hard coursework required to
become an electrical engineer, or atleast has read some of the component
manufacturer's manuals, he should stay clear of these issues. If any of you
are casually interested, you can call Digi-Key for a free component catalog,
which contains several pages of electrolytic capacitor specifications.
>
>
> 24hrs x 365 days = 8,760 hours in one year.
> You tell me an amp will fail in one year? Are you that stupid? Try
> doing the math, sir.
>
> YOU ARE NUTS. The 10,000 hours is ONLY if you raun the cap at
> max capacity the whole time - and there is not an amp made that
> comes close to stressing any cap like that. You are so wrong
> it is laughable!
>
> In fact, the meere turning an amp on and off will stress its components
> far more than leaving it on all the time.
>
> >Do not trust the opinion on this question of anyone who is not an
> >electrical engineer.
>
> WRONG! Trust the opinion of someone with 24 years of experience.
>
> Do NOT trust the opinion of a book reading engineer with a sliderule
> in place of a brain, like Robert Morein
> Zip
Johnny Y Boey
> Your amplifier will definitely wear out faster if you leave it on all the
> time. The filter capacitors have a lifetime of about 10000 hours -
bullcrap. I have owned or played with hundreds of SS gear of all price range.
Everything has always been left on continuously. None of them failed in
10000hr due to a bad capacitor.
JB
Johnny Y Boey
> The lifetime of a capacitor is defined in terms of the number of hours it will go
> while continuing to meet manufacturer's specifications, within some limit.
>
> Consumer equipment is warranted for consumer use. It's largely a statistical gamble
> on how many units will come back. You cannot infer the life of the equipment by
> reading the warranty.
>
> I suppose someday audiophiles will discover tantalum electrolytics, and start
> screaming for them. The military consider them a necessity, because they are far
> more reliable than electrolytics.
>
and for your information, not all components use electrolytic capacitors.
JB
Sandman
Ken Luke <kl...@repromail.repro.ohio-state.edu> wrote in article
<01bdba46$a6dfbe00$9cc9...@pc6.repro>...
> Is it best to turn the amp off every time with the pre amp ?
>
> Or is it ok to just leave amp on all the time ?
>
> Which is better ?
How do you like your electricity bill? Sunny side up? Or poached.
Sandman
Steve Zipser (Sunshine Stereo)
I leave the amps on in all our stereo systems here at Sunshine. They
sound better, and will last longer.
Zip
--
Sunshine Stereo, Inc http://www.sunshinestereo.com
Tel: 305-757-9358 Fax: 305-757-1367
9535 Biscayne Blvd Miami Shores FL 33138
PASS Labs NOVA Acoustics Miranda CODA Audible Illusions CEC
Camelot Technology Audio Logic Parasound Kinergetics Cabasse
Chiro Benz Micro Gallo Acoustics Dunlavy Audio NEAR NHT Jadis
Niles Zenith INTEQ Crystal Vision Straightwire Mordaunt Short ESP
Rega Vans Evers Cleanlines Monster Cable ENTECH EAD Arcane Audio
Sunshine Stereo encourages all audiophiles to support their local
dealers. If you do not have a local dealer, we will gladly assist
you with all your audio and video needs! *** ENJOY THE MUSIC! ***
Steve Zipser (Sunshine Stereo)
> Your amplifier will definitely wear out faster if you
> leave it on all the time. The filter capacitors have a
> capacitor handbook. The transistor semiconductor junctions
> diffuse with time, although failure of these components is
> years out.
You are an idiot.
I have amplifiers that I have left on for ten years. Please explain.
24hrs x 365 days = 8,760 hours in one year.
You tell me an amp will fail in one year? Are you that stupid? Try
doing the math, sir.
YOU ARE NUTS. The 10,000 hours is ONLY if you raun the cap at
max capacity the whole time - and there is not an amp made that
comes close to stressing any cap like that. You are so wrong
it is laughable!
In fact, the meere turning an amp on and off will stress its components
far more than leaving it on all the time.
>Do not trust the opinion on this question of anyone who is not an
>electrical engineer.
WRONG! Trust the opinion of someone with 24 years of experience.
Do NOT trust the opinion of a book reading engineer with a sliderule
in place of a brain, like Robert Morein
Zip
>Steve Zipser (Sunshine Stereo) wrote:
>
Steve Zipser (Sunshine Stereo)
>
> Robert Morein wrote:
>
> > Your amplifier will definitely wear out faster if you leave it on all the
>
> bullcrap. I have owned or played with hundreds of SS gear of all price range.
> Everything has always been left on continuously. None of them failed in
> 10000hr due to a bad capacitor.
JB:
This guy is an idiot.
I f you leave an amp on for only one year, that is about 8500 hours, so
according to this genius, Robert MorON, an amp will last about 14
months. Now I wonder how all manufacturers of solid state amps are able
to guaranty their products from three to twenty years and stay in
business.
This is embarassingly stupid of this guy to continue to post. I have
owned amps that were left on for years, and they never failed and never
had caps fail. In fact, the caps are about the LAST thing that fails in
a modern amplifier.
This guy should go back to school. In fact, maybe he never graduated.
Zip
Gruvmyster
>I have amplifiers that I have left on for ten years. Please explain.
>24hrs x 365 days = 8,760 hours in one year.
>You tell me an amp will fail in one year?
I have a 100/wpc Pioneer Integrated I run my TV through. It has been
on for over four years, 24/7.
It was in my stereo for about nine years prior to that.
Even after leaving it on for all that time, it still sounds terrible.
So do the Bose 301s connected to it. (I watch about 10 hours of TV per
year, so a HT system is not a priority...):-)
BTW, I won the 301s, so I only feel slightly ripped off...:-)
Doug
--
"If I had thought about it, I wouldn't have done the experiment. The
literature was full of examples that said you can't do this."
-Spencer Silver on the work that led to the unique adhesives for 3-M
"Post-It" note pads.
William M. Johnson, Jr.
When's the last time you saw a light bulb fail any time other than when you
turned it
on or off?
The rapid thermal stress caused at power on (and more rarely power off) is
the point
at which failure of any component is more likely.
In the electronic repair industry, the general rule of thumb is that
electrolytic capacitors
last for ten years. Whether they've been stored in a box and never used or
been in
constant use really doesn't seem to matter much. Either way, ten years.
By that time they will almost always read as having substantially
degraded capacitance value. They begin to conduct slightly as they age
(for reasons
mentoned earlier) and as they do that, they consume power and generate
heat. This
additional heat exacerbates the problem, causing further deterioration to
occur faster.
Capacitors in the last stage of their lives before catastrophic failure
usually exhibit
physical symptoms that are easily seen. They may leak slowly (and I've
seen them blow
their electrolyte all over the chassis quite violently at the end, too.) and
they may show
swelling on the plastic end cap. It's also common to see caps wearing
labels that appear
to be too small for them. The label is shrink wrap material and when the
cap gets hot
the label just keeps shrinking.
The electromigration of transistors is also a function of heat and time.
In theory they
won't last as long in a class A amp design as in a class B or C amp at the
same power
level. But either way, we're talking about a very long service life. Most
of the first
transistors ever made are still functional if they haven't been thrown away
or scrapped by
now. So a fifty year service life (or more) is quite reasonable.
A good policy to follow is to replace all electrolytic caps in your
equipment (amplifiers,
particularly) every ten years if you want to keep them. In the case of
High End amps, that's usually going to be an economical jobs. The large
filter caps aren't cheap, but generally there aren't very many other
electrolytics in the circuits.
Chris
wjoh...@palmnet.net
Robert Morein
while continuing to meet manufacturer's specifications, within some limit.
Consumer equipment is warranted for consumer use. It's largely a statistical gamble
on how many units will come back. You cannot infer the life of the equipment by
reading the warranty.
I suppose someday audiophiles will discover tantalum electrolytics, and start
screaming for them. The military consider them a necessity, because they are far
more reliable than electrolytics.
The fact is, electrolytics lose considerable capacity over a period of afew years
of use. This was known and quantified before Mr. Zipser was born. I did not write
the book on electrolytics -- other people did. Instead of calling me names, why
don't you do a little research, as I suggested, from the DigiKey catalog. It's
free!
Steve Zipser (Sunshine Stereo)
> I suppose someday audiophiles will discover tantalum electrolytics, and start
> screaming for them. The military consider them a necessity, because they are far
> more reliable than electrolytics.
Audiofiles were using small hispeed tantalums as bipass caps,
parallelled with their electrlytics 20 and 30 years ago.
Try again Robert - you been wrong everytime out so far
Zip
Robert Morein
Yes, they do.
>
>
> JB
Robert Morein
Steve Zipser (Sunshine Stereo) wrote:
> Robert Morein wrote:
>
> > I suppose someday audiophiles will discover tantalum electrolytics, and start
> > screaming for them. The military consider them a necessity, because they are far
> > more reliable than electrolytics.
>
> Audiofiles were using small hispeed tantalums as bipass caps,
> parallelled with their electrlytics 20 and 30 years ago.
>
>
The use of tantalum electrolytics as bypass capacitors does not negate the fact that
the electrolytics are still in the circuit. By the way, tantalums are really lousy for
bypass work, having the same speed problems of electrolytics.
Johnny Y Boey
> > and for your information, not all components use electrolytic capacitors.
>
> Yes, they do.
>
Ignorance!!
Robert Morein
Johnny Y Boey wrote:
I'll tell you what. I'm a reasonable guy. Give me the make and model of afew
components that you know do not use electrolytic capacitors, and I'll check with
the manufacturer. How about it?
Br...@mckay.net
leave my pre and power amps on at all time and yea they definetly
sounded better that way. Then we had a really bad eletrical storm one
day where the power was going up and down - I heard this loud
"tearing" noise from the rec room. To make a long story short, the pre
amp was toast, the power amp needed repaired and the tweeters in the
speakers needed replaced. I now keep everything off and turn on the
power an hour or so before any serious listening or watching.
I guess you could run a line conditioner (at that time there was no
such thing) or just turn them off before any storms - but it was an
expensive hit that I don't want to go through again :(
Johnny Y Boey
VSR speakers, Ayre K1 preamp, some Levinsons and *COUNTLESS* others that don't use
electrolytics, at least not in the critical paths (lots of them don't use at all).
JB
Greg Pavlov
Br...@McKay.net wrote:
:
: ..... Then we had a really bad eletrical storm one
: day where the power was going up and down - I heard this loud ....
: I guess you could run a line conditioner (at that time there was no
: such thing) or just turn them off before any storms - but it was an
: expensive hit that I don't want to go through again :(
A "line conditioner" will help if the lightning strikes are far
enough away, but don't count on it to stop anything that's close,
regardless of what any salesman might tell you. The "guarantee"
that comes with these units is an insurance policy and *not* a
statement of capability.
greg pavlov
[not affiliated with Canisius College]
Robert Morein
> electrolytics, at least not in the critical paths (lots of them don't use at all).
>
> JB
Now be specific. Name a component that one turns on and off that doesn't use
electrolytics.
Johnny Y Boey
Isn't the Ayre K1 specific enough??? Who cares if they can be turned on or off. They are
of course off if you disconnect the power. In fact, you save you the trouble, enclosed
is a picture of the CJ PF2. Have fun.
Point 1) We have proven you wrong by saying that components go bad in 10000hr if powered
on continuously. This is far from the truth. I've had my Krell KSA250 for over 5yr. Not
in use anymore, but one time continuously on for 2yr. And you know that thing runs hot
idle.
Point 2) I said there are hifi gear that doesn't use electrolytics. It's a fact, just
accept it.
Lastly, please reply here *ONLY*. I do read the NG. Please don't send me unsolicited
email directly. It's hard to filter. I like my mailbox tidy.
JB
Robert Morein
Acoustics, who consulted the designer, Charles Hansen, on the question we have been debating
in this newsgroup. Please note, Mr.Boey, that the Ayre K1 does use electrolytic capacitors
as the primary capacitors of the power supply.
The response of Ayre Acoustics:
All of the parts of Ayre equipment are designed for essentially a lifetime of performance,
EXCEPT for the electrolytic capacitors. According to Charles Hansen, these capacitors will
drift out of spec somewhere between one and ten operating years.
The response of Conrad Johnson:
All Conrad Johnson solid state power amplifiers use electrolytic capacitors. Tube amplifiers
do not, but should not be left on continuously because of the adverse effect on tube life.
If the primary concern is the best sound, the equipment should be left on continuously. If
the concern is SAFETY AND EQUIPMENT LIFE (capitalization my own), the equipment should be
turned off when not in use. For best sound, the equipment should be turned on the day before
use. The Conrad Johnson PF2, a preamplifier, does not use electrolytics in the power supply,
and, since the power drain is minimal, may be left on continuously.
Unlike some others in this newsgroup, I do not enjoy incendiary posting. My object is to
obtain the facts, and present them fairly. I have tried to relay the position of these
manufacturers to readers of this newsgroup as accurately as possible, even though some of
their remarks may contradict my own. However, it appears that Charles Hansen, an immensely
respected audio designer, does agree with me on the limited operating life of electrolytics,
which are, except in rare cases, an indispensable part of audio equipment.
The reader should understand that the term "critical signal path", as applied to audio
equipment, is an issue of quality. Although the power supply capacitors do not usually
qualify as a signal path, the integrity of these parts is absolutely required for proper
operation of the equipment.
Johnny Y Boey
> Robert Morein wrote:
>
> > > VSR speakers, Ayre K1 preamp, some Levinsons and *COUNTLESS* others that don't use
> > > electrolytics, at least not in the critical paths (lots of them don't use at all).
> > >
> > > JB
> >
> > Now be specific. Name a component that one turns on and off that doesn't use
> > electrolytics.
>
> Isn't the Ayre K1 specific enough??? Who cares if they can be turned on or off. They are
> of course off if you disconnect the power. In fact, you save you the trouble, enclosed
> is a picture of the CJ PF2. Have fun.
>
oops... should be a PFR. I intended to scan the cheaper PF2 but in my haste, pulled the
wrong photograph.
JB
Johnny Y Boey
> Today, on 7/29, I spoke with technical support at Conrad Johnson, and with Gary at Ayre
> Acoustics, who consulted the designer, Charles Hansen, on the question we have been debating
> in this newsgroup. Please note, Mr.Boey, that the Ayre K1 does use electrolytic capacitors
> as the primary capacitors of the power supply.
>
> The response of Ayre Acoustics:
> All of the parts of Ayre equipment are designed for essentially a lifetime of performance,
> EXCEPT for the electrolytic capacitors. According to Charles Hansen, these capacitors will
> drift out of spec somewhere between one and ten operating years.
>
> The response of Conrad Johnson:
> All Conrad Johnson solid state power amplifiers use electrolytic capacitors.
what do you expect? Their most expensive SS amp delivers 240W and list at $3k. And they spend
too much time tailoring the sound that they cannot afford to put big polystyrenes in there.
> Tube amplifiers
> do not, but should not be left on continuously because of the adverse effect on tube life.
> If the primary concern is the best sound, the equipment should be left on continuously. If
> the concern is SAFETY AND EQUIPMENT LIFE (capitalization my own), the equipment should be
> turned off when not in use. For best sound, the equipment should be turned on the day before
> use. The Conrad Johnson PF2, a preamplifier, does not use electrolytics in the power supply,
> and, since the power drain is minimal, may be left on continuously.
>
Ooops... the picture I sent you should be a PFR. I intended to scan the cheaper PF2 but in my
BJRICHMAN
I have to respectfully disagree with the contention that c-j uses electrolytic
capacitors because their top SS amp "only cost $3000 and the sound is being
tailored". Johnny, the Ayre K-1 preamp lists for $5250 - and that's without a
phono stage (with the latter, it's almost $7000! - which you have to admit, is
hardly an inexpensive preamp - you can get Krells for less). Therefore, you
can't make the argument that it's a matter of cost - unless Ayre is really
overpricing their products.
FWIW, c-j SS amps have the reputation of being voiced somewhat to emulate the
"sound" of their tubed products - because many of us "like" that sound. By
comparison, my own preamp, the c-j PV12, admittedly tubed, includes a phono
stage and 2 tape loops, and, IMHO, gives you a lot of value both sonically and
in terms of flexibility for a MSRP of $2500 (a lot less than the Ayre). Also -
it has NO ELECTROLYTIC CAPACITORS
(per Mr. Morean's discussion with the folks at c-j).
What would really be educational for all of us, perhaps, would be to solicit
and obtain more frequent participation from audio manufacturers on this NG.
That would be the best way to answer some of these questions, even allowing for
the manufacturers' biases.
Unfortunately, my sense is that many of the manufacturers take one look at this
NG and decide that, given the low S/N ratio and heavy flame content, it just
isn't worth their time.
Hopefully, if RA-moderated comes to be an option, that situation will change.
Bruce J. Richman
Robert Morein
> > The response of Conrad Johnson:
> > All Conrad Johnson solid state power amplifiers use electrolytic capacitors.
>
> what do you expect? Their most expensive SS amp delivers 240W and list at $3k. And they spend
> too much time tailoring the sound that they cannot afford to put big polystyrenes in there.
Although I have seen an example of a solid state preamplifier that does not use electrolytic
capacitors, all solid state power amplifiers, without exception, use electrolytic capacitors. The
reason is that it is impossible to provide the power storage density with any other technology.
Readers should be aware that all solid state power amplifiers, be they Krells or Heathkits, are
vulnerable to gradual aging of the electrolytic capacitors if left turned on continuously.
>
>
Robert Morein
> > The response of Conrad Johnson:
> > All Conrad Johnson solid state power amplifiers use electrolytic capacitors.
>
> what do you expect? Their most expensive SS amp delivers 240W and list at $3k. And they spend
> too much time tailoring the sound that they cannot afford to put big polystyrenes in there.
Although I have seen an example of a solid state preamplifier that does not use electrolytic
capacitors,All solid state power amplifiers, without exception, use electrolytic capacitors.
>
>
Robert Morein
Steve Zipser (Sunshine Stereo) wrote:
Robert:Actually, it was covered. From my previous post, the position of Charles Hansen, chief designer at Ayre, is
I see you avoided asking them the critical question as far as I am
concerned. That was your stupid claim that the caps will last only
10,000 hours - approximately 14 months of use.That is absurd beyond belief.
Zip
According to Charles Hansen, these capacitors will drift out of spec somewhere between one and ten operating years.
One year = 8760 hours. Gary, their marketing chief, told me that their position and mine were in agreement.
And of course, I am simply quoting the published specifications for
longevity given by Cornell-Dubilier and others.
Johnny Y Boey
> I have to respectfully disagree with the contention that c-j uses electrolytic
> capacitors because their top SS amp "only cost $3000 and the sound is being
> tailored".
Yes, exactly my point. They spend so much time tailoring the sound (that's
investment), so they can't afford to use the much more expensive polystyrene caps.
> Johnny, the Ayre K-1 preamp lists for $5250 - and that's without a
> phono stage (with the latter, it's almost $7000! - which you have to admit, is
> hardly an inexpensive preamp - you can get Krells for less). Therefore, you
> can't make the argument that it's a matter of cost - unless Ayre is really
> overpricing their products.
what are you talking about??? The Ayre does *NOT* use electrolytics in the signal
path, only in the outboard PS. It lists at $5000 because it uses the highest
quality part throughout in the main unit. Get the point? You can afford to use the
highest quality parts in a $5k preamp, but you can't afford to do so in a $3k 240W
amp.
>
>
> FWIW, c-j SS amps have the reputation of being voiced somewhat to emulate the
> "sound" of their tubed products - because many of us "like" that sound. By
> comparison, my own preamp, the c-j PV12, admittedly tubed, includes a phono
> stage and 2 tape loops, and, IMHO, gives you a lot of value both sonically and
> in terms of flexibility for a MSRP of $2500 (a lot less than the Ayre). Also -
> it has NO ELECTROLYTIC CAPACITORS
>
It doesn't use polystyrene either. It doesn't have an outboard PS, and the build
quality is so-so. Have you seen the circuit board?
JB
Johnny Y Boey
> > > The response of Conrad Johnson:
> > > All Conrad Johnson solid state power amplifiers use electrolytic capacitors.
> >
> > what do you expect? Their most expensive SS amp delivers 240W and list at $3k. And they spend
> > too much time tailoring the sound that they cannot afford to put big polystyrenes in there.
>
> Although I have seen an example of a solid state preamplifier that does not use electrolytic
> capacitors, all solid state power amplifiers, without exception, use electrolytic capacitors. The
> reason is that it is impossible to provide the power storage density with any other technology.
>
> Readers should be aware that all solid state power amplifiers, be they Krells or Heathkits, are
> vulnerable to gradual aging of the electrolytic capacitors if left turned on continuously.
>
Yes, but contrary to what you said, they *DON'T* break down in 10000hr. Most higher end designs don't
use them in the signal path anyway. These capacitors usually have a very wide tolerance anyway, so a
few years down the road, getting a little out of specs won't hurt, especially not in the signal path.
JB
Corman
amp on/standby is better than turning it off. The Mark Levinson page says
this about powering on and off...
"There are several benefits to having a true "standby" condition. When in
standby, the power supply remains powered up, as does the sensitive voltage
gain circuitry. Only the output stages are shut down in order to conserve
energy (since they are the largest consumers of power in the amplifier).
This way, the power supply components are never stressed through everyday
charge/discharge cycles, and the voltage gain circuitry is always warmed up
and sounding its best."
---- http://www.madrigal.com/33x_lit.html
Steve Zipser (Sunshine Stereo) wrote in message
<35BE83...@sunshinestereo.com>...
>At 09:26 PM 7/28/98 -0400, you wrote:
>> Your amplifier will definitely wear out faster if you
>> leave it on all the time. The filter capacitors have a
>> lifetime of about 10000 hours -- see the Cornell-Dubilier
>> capacitor handbook. The transistor semiconductor junctions
>> diffuse with time, although failure of these components is
>> years out.
>
>You are an idiot.
>I have amplifiers that I have left on for ten years. Please explain.
>
>24hrs x 365 days = 8,760 hours in one year.
>You tell me an amp will fail in one year? Are you that stupid? Try
>doing the math, sir.
>
>YOU ARE NUTS. The 10,000 hours is ONLY if you raun the cap at
>max capacity the whole time - and there is not an amp made that
>comes close to stressing any cap like that. You are so wrong
>it is laughable!
>
>In fact, the meere turning an amp on and off will stress its components
>far more than leaving it on all the time.
>
>>Do not trust the opinion on this question of anyone who is not an
>>electrical engineer.
>
>WRONG! Trust the opinion of someone with 24 years of experience.
>
>Do NOT trust the opinion of a book reading engineer with a sliderule
>in place of a brain, like Robert Morein
>Zip
>
>>Steve Zipser (Sunshine Stereo) wrote:
>>
Steve Zipser (Sunshine Stereo)
I see you avoided asking them the critical question as far as I am
concerned. That was your stupid claim that the caps will last only
10,000 hours - approximately 14 months of use.
That is absurd beyond belief.
Zip
Robert Morein wrote:
>
> Today, on 7/29, I spoke with technical support at Conrad Johnson, and with Gary at Ayre
> Acoustics, who consulted the designer, Charles Hansen, on the question we have been debating
> in this newsgroup. Please note, Mr.Boey, that the Ayre K1 does use electrolytic capacitors
> as the primary capacitors of the power supply.
>
> The response of Ayre Acoustics:
> All of the parts of Ayre equipment are designed for essentially a lifetime of performance,
> EXCEPT for the electrolytic capacitors. According to Charles Hansen, these capacitors will
> drift out of spec somewhere between one and ten operating years.
>
> The response of Conrad Johnson:
> All Conrad Johnson solid state power amplifiers use electrolytic capacitors. Tube amplifiers
> do not, but should not be left on continuously because of the adverse effect on tube life.
> If the primary concern is the best sound, the equipment should be left on continuously. If
> the concern is SAFETY AND EQUIPMENT LIFE (capitalization my own), the equipment should be
> turned off when not in use. For best sound, the equipment should be turned on the day before
> use. The Conrad Johnson PF2, a preamplifier, does not use electrolytics in the power supply,
> and, since the power drain is minimal, may be left on continuously.
>
> Unlike some others in this newsgroup, I do not enjoy incendiary posting. My object is to
> obtain the facts, and present them fairly. I have tried to relay the position of these
> manufacturers to readers of this newsgroup as accurately as possible, even though some of
> their remarks may contradict my own. However, it appears that Charles Hansen, an immensely
> respected audio designer, does agree with me on the limited operating life of electrolytics,
> which are, except in rare cases, an indispensable part of audio equipment.
>
> The reader should understand that the term "critical signal path", as applied to audio
> equipment, is an issue of quality. Although the power supply capacitors do not usually
> qualify as a signal path, the integrity of these parts is absolutely required for proper
> operation of the equipment.
--
Stewart Pinkerton
>Robert Morein wrote:
>
>> The response of Conrad Johnson:
>> All Conrad Johnson solid state power amplifiers use electrolytic capacitors.
>
>what do you expect? Their most expensive SS amp delivers 240W and list at $3k. And they spend
>too much time tailoring the sound that they cannot afford to put big polystyrenes in there.
JB, do you have any idea what *size* polystyrene reservoir caps would
be in a 240W SS power amp? I doubt if they would fit inside a white
van! This has nothing to do with cost - electrolytics are simply the
only *practical* choice for SS power amps.
--
Stewart Pinkerton | Music is art, audio is engineering
Stewart Pinkerton
>BJRICHMAN wrote:
>
>> I have to respectfully disagree with the contention that c-j uses electrolytic
>> capacitors because their top SS amp "only cost $3000 and the sound is being
>> tailored".
>
>Yes, exactly my point. They spend so much time tailoring the sound (that's
>investment), so they can't afford to use the much more expensive polystyrene caps.
Cost has nothing to do with it, the reservoir caps in a 240W SS (or
indeed direct-coupled tube) amp are of such a high value that they
would occupy many cubic *metres* of space if polystyrenes were used.
Apart from other considerations, this would have poor sound due to the
high inductance of the necessarily long interconnections.
Electrolytics are quite simply the *best* choice for this application,
at any price.
>> Johnny, the Ayre K-1 preamp lists for $5250 - and that's without a
>> phono stage (with the latter, it's almost $7000! - which you have to admit, is
>> hardly an inexpensive preamp - you can get Krells for less). Therefore, you
>> can't make the argument that it's a matter of cost - unless Ayre is really
>> overpricing their products.
>
>what are you talking about??? The Ayre does *NOT* use electrolytics in the signal
>path, only in the outboard PS. It lists at $5000 because it uses the highest
>quality part throughout in the main unit. Get the point? You can afford to use the
>highest quality parts in a $5k preamp, but you can't afford to do so in a $3k 240W
>amp.
The power supply *is* part of the signal path, just like the shunt leg
of an attenuator is in the signal path, despite numerous ignorant
contentions to the contrary. A power amplifier is simply a control
valve connecting the power supply to the speakers.
This is not primarily a cost issue, it's a matter of using the
*appropriate* technology. Polypropylene or polystyrene reservoir
capacitors are only appropriate in high-voltage low-current
applications such as certain designs of tube 'power' amps, and tube
preamps. Otherwise, their sheer size makes them less effective than
electrolytics.
>> FWIW, c-j SS amps have the reputation of being voiced somewhat to emulate the
>> "sound" of their tubed products - because many of us "like" that sound. By
>> comparison, my own preamp, the c-j PV12, admittedly tubed, includes a phono
>> stage and 2 tape loops, and, IMHO, gives you a lot of value both sonically and
>> in terms of flexibility for a MSRP of $2500 (a lot less than the Ayre). Also -
>> it has NO ELECTROLYTIC CAPACITORS
>>
>
>It doesn't use polystyrene either. It doesn't have an outboard PS, and the build
>quality is so-so. Have you seen the circuit board?
You'll find considerable argument over the relative merits of
real-world polystyrene, Teflon and polypropylene capacitors. Indeed, I
took the 'upgrade' polystyrene caps back *out* of my RIAA headamp
because polyprops simply *sounded* better - no, I don't know *why*
they sounded better, they just did.
Robert Morein
Johnny Y Boey wrote:
> Robert Morein wrote:
>
> > > > The response of Conrad Johnson:
> > > > All Conrad Johnson solid state power amplifiers use electrolytic capacitors.
> > >
> > > what do you expect? Their most expensive SS amp delivers 240W and list at $3k. And they spend
> > > too much time tailoring the sound that they cannot afford to put big polystyrenes in there.
> >
> > Although I have seen an example of a solid state preamplifier that does not use electrolytic
> > capacitors, all solid state power amplifiers, without exception, use electrolytic capacitors. The
> > reason is that it is impossible to provide the power storage density with any other technology.
> >
> > Readers should be aware that all solid state power amplifiers, be they Krells or Heathkits, are
> > vulnerable to gradual aging of the electrolytic capacitors if left turned on continuously.
> >
>
> Yes, but contrary to what you said, they *DON'T* break down in 10000hr. Most higher end designs don't
> use them in the signal path anyway. These capacitors usually have a very wide tolerance anyway, so a
> few years down the road, getting a little out of specs won't hurt, especially not in the signal path.
>
> JB
Actually, it will. The performance on the test bench will be significantly impaired. For every 10%
reduction in joule storage of the capacitor bank, the dynamic power will be down by 10%.Hum will
increase.
And we have the recommendations of both Ayre and Conrad Johnson which , provided that safety and
longevity are the overriding factors, are against continuous unattended operation.
One thing you have to bear in mind is that even the highest grades of electrolytics fail in less than a
lifetime, and are degraded in as little as afew thousand hours of continuous use. Unlike every other
electronic component in your audio component, this is guaranteed by the laws of chemistry and physics.
A personally witnessed example: Using an oscilloscope, I measured the ripple on the two power supply
capacitors of a Nakamichi TA-4 reciever -- the one with Nelson Pass designed amplifiers. The capacitor
nearest the heat sinks had double the ripple of the one further away, due to elevated temperature. This
receiver has been in operation only afew thousand hours.
Some users may prefer the allegedly superior sound provided by continuous operation. It is not my
intention to address this point. If continuous operation is preferred by the user, he should be aware of
what the tradeoffs are.
As posted by Corman, Mark Levinson has an interesting solution. By cutting off power to the output
stages, the electrolytics are operated in a zero ripple state. This is a viable solution, since it is the
ripple current and elevated ambient temperature which destroys the capacitors.
As before, I am willing to invest a phone call to any power amplifier manufacturer who you feel is exempt
from the rules of electrolytic deterioration.
Sandman
Robert Morein <pro...@netreach.net> wrote in article
<35BFC3B5...@netreach.net>...
>
>
> > > The response of Conrad Johnson:
> > > All Conrad Johnson solid state power amplifiers use electrolytic
capacitors.
> >
> > what do you expect? Their most expensive SS amp delivers 240W and list
at $3k. And they spend
> > too much time tailoring the sound that they cannot afford to put big
polystyrenes in there.
>
> Although I have seen an example of a solid state preamplifier that does
not use electrolytic
> capacitors, all solid state power amplifiers, without exception, use
electrolytic capacitors. The
> reason is that it is impossible to provide the power storage density with
any other technology.
>
> Readers should be aware that all solid state power amplifiers, be they
Krells or Heathkits, are
> vulnerable to gradual aging of the electrolytic capacitors if left turned
on continuously.
I've followed this thread for a few days, and agree with the above
statement. No matter how long your solid-state amps live, they are
ultimately doomed by the fact that their electrolytic capacitors have a
built-in deadline before they give out. Thus, my original answer to the
question: "How do you like your electric bill: Sunny side up? Or poached."
BS hostile e-mail to the contrary, if you want to leave your amps on all
the time, you're just burning up your caps at the rate of your electric
bill. Turn the suckers off!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Sandman
Johnny Y Boey
it in a marketplace or whatever. Post here ONLY. I will read it. God damn motherfucker.
JB
Johnny Y Boey
> Johnny Y Boey <jb...@ix.netcom.com> writes:
>
> >Robert Morein wrote:
> >
> >> The response of Conrad Johnson:
> >> All Conrad Johnson solid state power amplifiers use electrolytic capacitors.
> >
> >what do you expect? Their most expensive SS amp delivers 240W and list at $3k. And they spend
> >too much time tailoring the sound that they cannot afford to put big polystyrenes in there.
>
> JB, do you have any idea what *size* polystyrene reservoir caps would
> be in a 240W SS power amp? I doubt if they would fit inside a white
> van! This has nothing to do with cost - electrolytics are simply the
> only *practical* choice for SS power amps.
I'm not saying to use it in that application, which is not critical of the caps performing exactly
up to specs anyway. The guy is still wrong, they don't go bad after only 10000hr
JB
Johnny Y Boey
> Johnny Y Boey wrote:
>
> > Robert Morein wrote:
> >
> > > > > The response of Conrad Johnson:
> > > > > All Conrad Johnson solid state power amplifiers use electrolytic capacitors.
> > > >
> > > > what do you expect? Their most expensive SS amp delivers 240W and list at $3k. And they spend
> > > > too much time tailoring the sound that they cannot afford to put big polystyrenes in there.
> > >
> > > Although I have seen an example of a solid state preamplifier that does not use electrolytic
> > > capacitors, all solid state power amplifiers, without exception, use electrolytic capacitors. The
> > > reason is that it is impossible to provide the power storage density with any other technology.
> > >
> > > Readers should be aware that all solid state power amplifiers, be they Krells or Heathkits, are
> > > vulnerable to gradual aging of the electrolytic capacitors if left turned on continuously.
> > >
> >
> > Yes, but contrary to what you said, they *DON'T* break down in 10000hr. Most higher end designs don't
> > use them in the signal path anyway. These capacitors usually have a very wide tolerance anyway, so a
> > few years down the road, getting a little out of specs won't hurt, especially not in the signal path.
> >
> > JB
>
> Actually, it will. The performance on the test bench will be significantly impaired. For every 10%
> reduction in joule storage of the capacitor bank, the dynamic power will be down by 10%.
takes a hell of a long time for all of them to reduce by 10%. Hell, most aren't even rated within 10%.
JB
Johnny Y Boey
> Johnny Y Boey <jb...@ix.netcom.com> writes:
>
> >Robert Morein wrote:
> >
> >> The response of Conrad Johnson:
> >> All Conrad Johnson solid state power amplifiers use electrolytic capacitors.
> >
> >what do you expect? Their most expensive SS amp delivers 240W and list at $3k. And they spend
> >too much time tailoring the sound that they cannot afford to put big polystyrenes in there.
>
> JB, do you have any idea what *size* polystyrene reservoir caps would
> be in a 240W SS power amp?
Of course I do. I'm the one who posted the inside photo of the CJ PFR preamp with huge poly caps.
JB
Johnny Y Boey
> Johnny Y Boey <jb...@ix.netcom.com> writes:
>
> >BJRICHMAN wrote:
> >
> >> I have to respectfully disagree with the contention that c-j uses electrolytic
> >> capacitors because their top SS amp "only cost $3000 and the sound is being
> >> tailored".
> >
> >Yes, exactly my point. They spend so much time tailoring the sound (that's
> >investment), so they can't afford to use the much more expensive polystyrene caps.
>
> Cost has nothing to do with it, the reservoir caps in a 240W SS (or
> indeed direct-coupled tube) amp are of such a high value that they
> would occupy many cubic *metres* of space if polystyrenes were used.
who cares if these caps go slightly out of specs after several years? The tolerance is
pretty high anyway.
JB
Roy Briggs
>You'll find considerable argument over the relative merits of
>real-world polystyrene, Teflon and polypropylene capacitors. Indeed, I
>took the 'upgrade' polystyrene caps back *out* of my RIAA headamp
>because polyprops simply *sounded* better - no, I don't know *why*
>they sounded better, they just did.
Did you try to establish if there was any change in measured
performance?
_________________________________
Men will confess to treason, murder, arson, false
teeth, or a wig. How many of them will own up
to a lack of humor?
--FRANK MOORE COLBY
Roy Briggs. Remove [SPAMOFF] to reply.
Johnny Y Boey
> Johnny Y Boey wrote:
>
> > Robert Morein wrote:
> >
> > > > > The response of Conrad Johnson:
> > > > > All Conrad Johnson solid state power amplifiers use electrolytic capacitors.
> > > >
> > > > what do you expect? Their most expensive SS amp delivers 240W and list at $3k. And they spend
> > > > too much time tailoring the sound that they cannot afford to put big polystyrenes in there.
> > >
> > > Although I have seen an example of a solid state preamplifier that does not use electrolytic
> > > capacitors, all solid state power amplifiers, without exception, use electrolytic capacitors. The
> > > reason is that it is impossible to provide the power storage density with any other technology.
> > >
> > > Readers should be aware that all solid state power amplifiers, be they Krells or Heathkits, are
> > > vulnerable to gradual aging of the electrolytic capacitors if left turned on continuously.
> > >
> >
> > Yes, but contrary to what you said, they *DON'T* break down in 10000hr. Most higher end designs don't
> > use them in the signal path anyway. These capacitors usually have a very wide tolerance anyway, so a
> > few years down the road, getting a little out of specs won't hurt, especially not in the signal path.
> >
> > JB
>
> Actually, it will. The performance on the test bench will be significantly impaired. For every 10%
> reduction in joule storage of the capacitor bank, the dynamic power will be down by 10%.
takes a hell of a long time for all of them to reduce by 10%. Hell, most aren't even rated within 10%.
They're probably oversized anyway.
JB
Johnny Y Boey
> Johnny Y Boey <jb...@ix.netcom.com> writes:
>
> >Robert Morein wrote:
> >
> >> The response of Conrad Johnson:
> >> All Conrad Johnson solid state power amplifiers use electrolytic capacitors.
> >
> >what do you expect? Their most expensive SS amp delivers 240W and list at $3k. And they spend
> >too much time tailoring the sound that they cannot afford to put big polystyrenes in there.
>
> JB, do you have any idea what *size* polystyrene reservoir caps would
> be in a 240W SS power amp?
Of course I do. I'm the one who posted the inside photo of the CJ PFR preamp with huge poly caps.
I'm not saying to use it in that application, which is not critical of the caps performing exactly
up to specs anyway. The guy is still wrong, they don't go bad after only 10000hr
JB
JB
Tim Burr
fry your 25 Chiro amps you claim to have? Take a Valium and go fuck
yourself.
On Thu, 30 Jul 1998 08:11:15 -0500, Johnny Y Boey
<jb...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in secret code:
>How many times do I have to tell you, you fucking asshole. I don't want unsolicited emails unless I ask for
>it in a marketplace or whatever. Post here ONLY. I will read it. God damn motherfucker.
>
>
>JB
>
-Steve
++++++++++++++
"If it ain't broke, fix it 'til it is broke.
++++++++++++++
Johnny Y Boey
> Johnny Y Boey <jb...@ix.netcom.com> writes:
>
> >BJRICHMAN wrote:
> >
> >> I have to respectfully disagree with the contention that c-j uses electrolytic
> >> capacitors because their top SS amp "only cost $3000 and the sound is being
> >> tailored".
> >
> >Yes, exactly my point. They spend so much time tailoring the sound (that's
> >investment), so they can't afford to use the much more expensive polystyrene caps.
>
> Cost has nothing to do with it, the reservoir caps in a 240W SS (or
> indeed direct-coupled tube) amp are of such a high value that they
> would occupy many cubic *metres* of space if polystyrenes were used.
> Apart from other considerations, this would have poor sound due to the
> high inductance of the necessarily long interconnections.
> Electrolytics are quite simply the *best* choice for this application,
> at any price.
>
who cares if these caps go slightly out of specs after several years? The tolerance is
pretty high anyway, and they are probably oversized.
> The power supply *is* part of the signal path, just like the shunt leg
> of an attenuator is in the signal path, despite numerous ignorant
> contentions to the contrary. A power amplifier is simply a control
> valve connecting the power supply to the speakers.
>
yeah yeah yeah... you have to sound like you know more than all manufacturers. The Ayre
we talk about is not a power amp. Anyway, even in a power amp, the power supply is not
in the signal path because like the definition, the signal doesn't travel through it.
Yes, I've just checked the inside of the CJ 2300A photo in my album, it does have a
chock full of poly caps in the signal path.
JB
Norman
Norman
Johnny Y Boey <jb...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in article
<35C070F3...@ix.netcom.com>...
Johnny Y Boey
> Did that one little e-mail message crash your pathetic computer and
> fry your 25 Chiro amps you claim to have?
never claimed that, dumbass.
JB
Sid1
Johnny Y Boey wrote in message <35C070F3...@ix.netcom.com>...
Dave
<jb...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
>
>> Johnny Y Boey <jb...@ix.netcom.com> writes:
>>
>> >BJRICHMAN wrote:
>> >
>> >> I have to respectfully disagree with the contention that c-j uses electrolytic
>> >> capacitors because their top SS amp "only cost $3000 and the sound is being
>> >> tailored".
>> >
>> >Yes, exactly my point. They spend so much time tailoring the sound (that's
>> >investment), so they can't afford to use the much more expensive polystyrene caps.
>>
>> Cost has nothing to do with it, the reservoir caps in a 240W SS (or
>> indeed direct-coupled tube) amp are of such a high value that they
>> would occupy many cubic *metres* of space if polystyrenes were used.
>
>who cares if these caps go slightly out of specs after several years? The tolerance is
>pretty high anyway.
>
>
>
>JB
Yeah who cares if that $10,000 amp goes slightly out of spec, I mean
you just buy high-end for the slightest of imaginary improvements
anyways.
SJMARCY
like the other guy asked.
Why anyone want to deal with you is beyond me. As is why any manufacturer
would engage you as a dealer - they must not check folks out very well or they
just don't care. There are plenty of competent AV professionals out there for
those who care to look.
Stan
Robert Morein
Subject:
Re: Don't send me email, reply in the NG *ONLY*
Date:
Thu, 30 Jul 1998 08:09:08 -0500
From:
Johnny Y Boey <jb...@ix.netcom.com>
To:
Robert Morein <pro...@netreach.net>
References:
1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19
Robert Morein wrote:
> I'm sorry, but I spend quite a bit of time formulating my replies. This includes
> toll calls made at my expense, and research. If you wish to continue the debate,
> you can expect to receive email.
>
Now fuck you!!! I repeat, do not send me unsolicited emails. I post to the newsgroup
only, so you fucking reply to the newsgroup only!!!
This is a warning. If you fucking send me another unsolicited email, I will flood
your mailbox every time I feel like with my direct connection.
Yes, I know, your next step would be to contact netcom. DEAD WRONG!!! I certainly
don't have a direct connection at home. They will be sent from a private server at
work.
Now you hear me. Yes, this is a threat. DONT fucking send me another email unless I
ask for it. Post in the NG only. I will flood your mailbox until you formally
apologize.
JB
Robert Morein
takes a hell of a long time for all of them to reduce by 10%. Hell, most aren't even rated within 10%. They're probably oversized anyway. JB
Computer Grade Screw-Terminal Capacitors
Desc. Type Temperature Celsius Voltage Range Operating hours at temperature
High Capacitance DCMX -40 to +85 6.3-450 1000 @ +85
Long Life 500X -40 to +95 6.3-450 2000 @ +95
Low Impedance 139R -55 to +85 6.3-55 2000 @ +85
For each 10 degree drop in temperature, the life doubles. For your convenience, I have included the following table to convert between Celsius and Fahrenheit:
Celsius
Fahrenheit
85
185
75
167
65
149
60
140
55
131
Assuming the capacitors are at an ambient temperature of 131 degrees
Fahrenheit, this works out to a design lifetime of 16000 hours. The
reader should be aware, however, that in many cases, particularly if the
equipment is not operated in a free air environment, with full exposure
to radiation cooling on all sides, the ambient temperature could climb
to 140 degrees Fahrenheit or above. At these temperatures, the lifetime
would drop below 11000 hours.
Johnny Y Boey
Below are specifications from the Cornell-Dubilier Web Site:takes a hell of a long time for all of them to reduce by 10%. Hell, most aren't even rated within 10%. They're probably oversized anyway. JB
Computer Grade Screw-Terminal Capacitors
Desc. Type Temperature Celsius Voltage Range Operating hours at temperature
High Capacitance DCMX -40 to +85 6.3-450 1000 @ +85
Long Life 500X -40 to +95 6.3-450 2000 @ +95
Low Impedance 139R -55 to +85 6.3-55 2000 @ +85For each 10 degree drop in temperature, the life doubles. For your convenience, I have included the following table to convert between Celsius and Fahrenheit:
Celsius Fahrenheit
85 185
75 167
65 149
60 140
55 131
Assuming the capacitors are at an ambient temperature of 131 degrees Fahrenheit, this works out to a design lifetime of 16000 hours.
The reader should be aware, however, that in many cases, particularly if the equipment is not operated in a free air environment, with full exposure to radiation cooling on all sides, the ambient temperature could climb to 140 degrees Fahrenheit or above. At these temperatures, the lifetime would drop below 11000 hours.
ever cross your mind that there may be other caps out there? My 6yr
old Krell KSA250 has been on for at least 3yr (2yr continuously), and the
idle T is way over 50C. Why the hell is it still not having any problem
with the caps?
JB
Johnny Y Boey
> Yeah who cares if that $10,000 amp goes slightly out of spec, I mean
> you just buy high-end for the slightest of imaginary improvements
> anyways.
DEAD WRONG!!! The reservoir caps going a little bit out of specs (tolerance is already very
high anyway) does not mean that a Krell KSA100 is not going to deliver 100W into 8ohm.
Hint: it's way over that.
JB
Stewart Pinkerton
>Stewart Pinkerton wrote
>
>>You'll find considerable argument over the relative merits of
>>real-world polystyrene, Teflon and polypropylene capacitors. Indeed, I
>>took the 'upgrade' polystyrene caps back *out* of my RIAA headamp
>>because polyprops simply *sounded* better - no, I don't know *why*
>>they sounded better, they just did.
>
>Did you try to establish if there was any change in measured
>performance?
Yup, I couldn't find any measured difference - very irritating!
Could be there would have been something in HF IMD sweeps, but I had
limited test gear available at that time.
Stewart Pinkerton
>Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
>
>> Johnny Y Boey <jb...@ix.netcom.com> writes:
>>
>> >BJRICHMAN wrote:
>> >
>> >> I have to respectfully disagree with the contention that c-j uses electrolytic
>> >> capacitors because their top SS amp "only cost $3000 and the sound is being
>> >> tailored".
>> >
>> >Yes, exactly my point. They spend so much time tailoring the sound (that's
>> >investment), so they can't afford to use the much more expensive polystyrene caps.
>>
>> Cost has nothing to do with it, the reservoir caps in a 240W SS (or
>> indeed direct-coupled tube) amp are of such a high value that they
>> would occupy many cubic *metres* of space if polystyrenes were used.
>> Apart from other considerations, this would have poor sound due to the
>> high inductance of the necessarily long interconnections.
>> Electrolytics are quite simply the *best* choice for this application,
>> at any price.
>>
>
>who cares if these caps go slightly out of specs after several years? The tolerance is
>pretty high anyway, and they are probably oversized.
Quite so, but this has nothing to do with cost, as you were claiming.
>> The power supply *is* part of the signal path, just like the shunt leg
>> of an attenuator is in the signal path, despite numerous ignorant
>> contentions to the contrary. A power amplifier is simply a control
>> valve connecting the power supply to the speakers.
>>
>
>yeah yeah yeah... you have to sound like you know more than all manufacturers.
Nope, they already know this, that's why C-J and ARC *use* polys in
the PSU reservoir (and LC filtering) when they can. Sheesh, whatta
maroon!
>The Ayre
>we talk about is not a power amp. Anyway, even in a power amp, the power supply is not
>in the signal path because like the definition, the signal doesn't travel through it.
Of *course* it's in the signal path. You think the speakers are *self*
powered? The power supply is also in the signal path in a pre-amp, but
the current requirements are low enough that a tube preamp can justify
the use of polyprops or polystyrenes if the budget allows. You think
the signal path is just the wiggly line that joins the input pin to
the output pin on the schematic? Sheesh!
Dave
Hehe this sure is eating you up. Have you by any chance bought a
expensive amp that has been continuously left on. Slowly the caps are
dying, falling out of spec. It just isnt the same as a nice shiny new
amp with those fully functional caps. Personally I don't believe
there would be any difference in sound quality. But for the golden
ears than can supposedly hear differences in cables, broken in cables,
amps, broken in amps, cd players, and tweeks. I got to believe you
could hear something as significant as caps decreasing in performance.
Of course it is all just imagined, but just knowing your caps are
slowly dying will make you believe you can hear a difference whether
there is one or not. You will grow agitated and be forced to buy
something new to relieve yourself of paranoid delusions.
das...@ix.netcom.com
A lot of people in this NG are getting tired of your act.
Scott Hale
>
> Ummm..it's spelled dumb..not dubm......think twice zippy!
> Johnny Y Boey wrote in message <35C070F3...@ix.netcom.com>...
> unsolicited emails unless I ask for
> >it in a marketplace or whatever. Post here ONLY. I will read it. God damn
> motherfucker.
> >
> >
> >JB
> >
get a life, will ya.
Robert Morein
> ask for it. Post in the NG only. I will flood your mailbox until you formally
> apologize.
>
> JB
Regretably, Mr. Boey did follow through on his threat. I had to resort to asking my ISP to filter
him out.
Robert Morein
>
>
> ever cross your mind that there may be other caps out there? My 6yr
> old Krell KSA250 has been on for at least 3yr (2yr continuously), and
> the idle T is way over 50C. Why the hell is it still not having any
> problem with the caps?
>
>
> JB
I invite Mr. Boey to call Krell, or open up the amplifier, and determine
the brand of the electrolytic capacitors. I will be happy to research
their design lifetime.
Br...@mckay.net
Whatever happened to a nice informative discution on home theater
products?
Robert Morein <pro...@netreach.net> wrote:
>Subject:
> Re: Don't send me email, reply in the NG *ONLY*
> Date:
> Thu, 30 Jul 1998 08:09:08 -0500
> From:
> Johnny Y Boey <jb...@ix.netcom.com>
> To:
> Robert Morein <pro...@netreach.net>
> References:
> 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19
>Robert Morein wrote:
>> I'm sorry, but I spend quite a bit of time formulating my replies. This includes
>> toll calls made at my expense, and research. If you wish to continue the debate,
>> you can expect to receive email.
>>
>Now fuck you!!! I repeat, do not send me unsolicited emails. I post to the newsgroup
>only, so you fucking reply to the newsgroup only!!!
>This is a warning. If you fucking send me another unsolicited email, I will flood
>your mailbox every time I feel like with my direct connection.
>Yes, I know, your next step would be to contact netcom. DEAD WRONG!!! I certainly
>don't have a direct connection at home. They will be sent from a private server at
>work.
>Now you hear me. Yes, this is a threat. DONT fucking send me another email unless I
Johnny Y Boey
> Get a grip and email him back privately. Spare us your usual diatribes.
already did, he won't back down. I am currently trying to get him kicked off.
JB
George M. Middius
>Whatever happened to a nice informative discution on
>home theater products?
A "nice informative discussion" with Johnny-Boy at
one end? You must be joking. Might as well as the
Krooborg to write an essay about why vinyl is
better than CD.
George M. Middius
Remove "jiffy" to reply
Robert Morein
Br...@McKay.net wrote:
> Geez,
>
> Whatever happened to a nice informative discution on home theater
> products?
>
This is Theatre -- of a different sort :)
BJRICHMAN
>A "nice informative discussion" with Johnny-Boy at
>one end? You must be joking. Might as well as the
>Krooborg to write an essay about why vinyl is
>better than CD.
>
Or ask Krooborg to lecture on how to develop honesty and ethics.
Bruce J. Richman
Johnny Y Boey
> Of *course* it's in the signal path. You think the speakers are *self*
> powered?The power supply is also in the signal path in a pre-amp
Nope they're not. The PS provides and is just a storage of the current/voltage needed in
receiving the signal, amplifying it, and output.
> , but
> the current requirements are low enough that a tube preamp can justify
> the use of polyprops or polystyrenes if the budget allows. You think
> the signal path is just the wiggly line that joins the input pin to
> the output pin on the schematic?
Yes, and they draw any power needed from the PS.
JB
Johnny Y Boey
> On Thu, 30 Jul 1998 12:20:30 -0500, Johnny Y Boey
> <jb...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
> >Dave wrote:
> >
> >> Yeah who cares if that $10,000 amp goes slightly out of spec, I mean
> >> you just buy high-end for the slightest of imaginary improvements
> >> anyways.
> >
> >
> >DEAD WRONG!!! The reservoir caps going a little bit out of specs (tolerance is already very
> >high anyway) does not mean that a Krell KSA100 is not going to deliver 100W into 8ohm.
> >Hint: it's way over that.
> >
> >
> >JB
>
> Hehe this sure is eating you up. Have you by any chance bought a
> expensive amp that has been continuously left on.
Yes, a lot of my amps are expensive, and they are left on continuously.
> Slowly the caps are
> dying, falling out of spec. It just isnt the same as a nice shiny new
> amp with those fully functional caps. Personally I don't believe
> there would be any difference in sound quality. But for the golden
> ears than can supposedly hear differences in cables, broken in cables,
> amps, broken in amps, cd players, and tweeks.
DEAD WRONG!!! I never claimed to be able to hear the differences of most stupid tweaks and
broken-in cables (except some network cables).
> I got to believe you
> could hear something as significant as caps decreasing in performance.
That will take much longer than 11000hr. The caps' tolerances are already very high and they are
most probably oversized anyway.
JB
Jester
Steve Zipser
>
> "Br...@McKay.net" said:
>
> >Whatever happened to a nice informative discution on
> >home theater products?
>
> one end? You must be joking. Might as well as the
> Krooborg to write an essay about why vinyl is
> better than CD.
>
> Remove "jiffy" to reply
Actually, George, this Robert Moron character is about twice as
obnoxious as Boey in a Steinborg sort of fasshion. In this arguement,
Boey is correct, and what Moron is espousing is not from this world.
Have you had any amplifier in the past twenty years that had a large
filter cap fail in the first year of operation? I haven't & I deal with
hundredds of amplifiers - PER YEAR! that is the claim of Robert.
Cheers
Zip
--
Sunshine Stereo, Inc http://www.sunshinestereo.com
Tel: 305-757-9358 Fax: 305-757-1367
9535 Biscayne Blvd Miami Shores FL 33138
PASS Labs NOVA Acoustics Miranda CODA Audible Illusions CEC
Camelot Technology Audio Logic Parasound Kinergetics Cabasse
Chiro Benz Micro Gallo Acoustics Dunlavy Audio NEAR NHT Jadis
Niles Zenith INTEQ Crystal Vision Straightwire Mordaunt Short ESP
Rega Vans Evers Cleanlines Monster Cable ENTECH EAD Arcane Audio
Sunshine Stereo encourages all audiophiles to support their local
dealers. If you do not have a local dealer, we will gladly assist
you with all your audio and video needs! *** ENJOY THE MUSIC! ***
George M. Middius
[snip]
Do me a favor and DON'T E-MAIL YOUR POSTED
RESPONSES!!
I've asked you this before. You once said
something like "I just reconfigured my e-mail
client and it didn't do what I wanted."
I read RAO regularly. If you post there, I will
see it. I don't read AH-TM all the time, but you
can see this thread is cross-posted, right?
Don't send me duplicate e-mails. OK?
BT S
Sully
Stewart Pinkerton
>ever cross your mind that there may be other caps out there? My 6yr old
>Krell KSA250 has been on for at least 3yr (2yr continuously), and the
>idle T is way over 50C. Why the hell is it still not having any problem
>with the caps?
Dubilier computer grade are about as reliable as you'll get. The
lifetime specs tend to be conservative, but Robert is right about the
sensitivity of *any* electrolytic cap to high temperatures - that's
one reason why they're kept away from the heatsinks in big amps.
p.s. You keep an amp with an idle draw of more than a *kilowatt*
powered up continuously?!! Glad you can afford the power bills!
Charles E Taylor IV
| it in a marketplace or whatever. Post here ONLY. I will read it. God damn motherfucker.
Yet *another* reason to killfile everything from rec.audio.opinion ...
*PLONK*
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Charles E. "Rick" Taylor, IV | Replace "nouce" with "net" to mail
cha...@innova.nouce |--------| me, but not if it's UCE!
http://orangesherbert.eng.clemson.edu |--------------------------
*** We got the MRxL, and spammers got none! ***
Scott Hale
somebody needs a nap.
U Thant
(George M. Middius) wrote:
Why don't you guys simply filter your mail? Isn't it a hell of a lot more
trouble to respond, flame or flood the offender's ISP?
Just curious.
U
Powell
>George M. Middius wrote
>Do me a favor and DON'T E-MAIL YOUR POSTED
>RESPONSES!!
>
>I've asked you this before. You once said
>something like "I just reconfigured my e-mail
>client and it didn't do what I wanted."
>
Yea.. I've got that one, too. Perhaps it is just more of his boiler plate.
Like his offensive cable buyer essay. How close is boiler plate to...
spam... non-usenet intent?
>I read RAO regularly. If you post there, I will
>see it. I don't read AH-TM all the time, but you
>can see this thread is cross-posted, right?
>
Civility... nope it doesn't work either, George :-).
>Don't send me duplicate e-mails. OK?
>
But Steven, we can still be friends ;-).
Robert Morein
> Have you had any amplifier in the past twenty years that had a large
> filter cap fail in the first year of operation? I haven't & I deal with
> hundredds of amplifiers - PER YEAR! that is the claim of Robert.
Actually, the failure modes of electrolytic capacitors are several. They are
subject to degradation which cause subtle problems, such as
1) Increased hum
2) Reduced dynamic power
It is most unwise to dismiss the manufacturer's recommendations lightly. The
lifetime of these capacitors can be as little as 1000 or 2000 hours if a
power amplifier is installed in a confined space.
The catastrophic failure mode is less common, although it does occur.
Notably, we have already had the advice of both Conrad Johnson and Ayre that
maximum lifespan is obtained by powering the equipment when use is desired.
Powell
>Robert Morein wrote
>Actually, the failure modes of electrolytic
>capacitors are several. They are subject
>to degradation which cause subtle problems,
>such as
>1) Increased hum
>2) Reduced dynamic power
>
>It is most unwise to dismiss the manufacturer's
>recommendations lightly. The lifetime of these
>capacitors can be as little as 1000 or 2000 hours
>if a power amplifier is installed in a confined space.
>
>The catastrophic failure mode is less common,
>although it does occur.
>
1. The manufacturers of electrolytic capacitors are there many or few...
specifically in High-end gear?
2. Do manufacturers have a Mean Time To Failure... is that your 1000 to
2000 hrs specification?
3. Regarding manufacturers specifications of longevity... calculated or
field/history similar... tested based.
4. At failure (1000 or 10,000 hrs) what does the electronic industry
consider statistically significant at that point... 3%... 15%... 50%?
Johnny Y Boey
> BTW, if by flooding the offender's ISP you mean pelting
> the administrator with junk e-mails, that can get you
> in trouble with your own ISP.
No, it means flooding the a*hole's mailbox with huge files. And if your
company has a private server, and your administrator frequently comes
over for a beer, and your reactor system is fully automated, you can
have fun flooding the mailbox every time you feel like.
JB
Johnny Y Boey
> Why don't you guys simply filter your mail? Isn't it a hell of a lot more
> trouble to respond, flame or flood the offender's ISP?
> Just curious.
It is a lot less fun. I politely asked him several times not to send me a copy
(as you all know, I do read these newsgroups), and his responses? I don't
care.
Anyway, Richie MoreInBreed's ISP has issued him a warning.
JB
Johnny Y Boey
> p.s. You keep an amp with an idle draw of more than a *kilowatt*
> powered up continuously?!! Glad you can afford the power bills!
>
University of Minnesota, my friend, and I come from a place where it's
summer everyday. Plus I joined the one-rate plan.
JB
Robert Morein
> >
> General Questions:
> 1. The manufacturers of electrolytic capacitors are there many or few...
> specifically in High-end gear?
There are very few manufacturers of large can electrolytics left. The big
cans are manufactured by Cornell Dubilier. I am not aware of any others,
since the market is so limited. Sangamo may also be around.
> 2. Do manufacturers have a Mean Time To Failure... is that your 1000 to
> 2000 hrs specification?
Bear in mind these are not my specifications, but published specs of Cornell
Dubilier.The aluminum electrodes are immersed in a potassium hydroxide
electrolyte, a caustic solution which reacts strongly with the electrodes to
produce a thin layer of insullating aluminum oxide. A combination of ripple
current, heat, and the corrosive effect of the electrolyte combine to limit
the life of the electrodes.Because it is a chemical process, the reaction
rate can be precisely predicted by the Arrhenius equation if all the above
characteristics are known. Thus these are mean values, but they cluster
fairly closely about the mean in a quasi Gamma (Erlang) distribution.
> 3. Regarding manufacturers specifications of longevity... calculated or
> field/history similar... tested based.
Manufacturers' specifications of reliability should be based on tests. I
cannot speak for Cornell Dubilier, though I assume that is what they do.
> 4. At failure (1000 or 10,000 hrs) what does the electronic industry
> consider statistically significant at that point... 3%... 15%... 50%?
Because the degradation process is a reaction rate which is fixed by afew
variables, the failures cluster significantly about the mean. I would guess
that 15 to 30% of the D.U.T's (device under test) go out of tolerance by the
projected operating hours, with the other units approaching the failure
margin.
Failure margin is defined as performance limits of the D.U.T. For an
electrolytic capacitor, the performance parameters are capacity and working
voltage. Capacitance usually is given with margins of -20% +80%, since
undercapacity is a more serious problem than overcapacity.
Thus when the capacitor has lost 20% of the design capacitance, it is defined
as having failed.
Catastrophic failures do not cluster about the mean. This accounts for the
confusion on the parts of Mr. Zipser and Mr. Boey on what actually
constitutes failure. They have an exponential density function which roughly
approximates the "memoryless" failure curve of the venerable light bulb. This
means that the probability of failure of a particular unit varies only slowly
over time.
By measuring the internal temperature of the amplifier, the reader can come
up with a moderately accurate estimate of loss of capacitance over time. The
main variable is the ripple current, which is strictly dependent upon the
quiescent current draw of the amplifier. In this regard, it would appear that
inexpensive, mass market pieces actually have some advantage in longevity
over the high bias, warm-running designs preferred by audiophiles.
Powell
Robert Morein wrote
>> Powell wrote:
>> 4. At failure (1000 or 10,000 hrs) what
>>does the electronic industry consider
>>statistically significant at that point... 3%
>>... 15%... 50%?
>
>Because the degradation process is a
>reaction rate which is fixed by afew
>>variables, the failures cluster significantly
>about the mean. I would guess
>that 15 to 30% of the D.U.T's (device under
>test) go out of tolerance by the projected
>operating hours, with the other units
>approaching the failure margin.
>
>of the design capacitance, it is defined
>as having failed.
>
about tubed amps and pre-amps in general (tube/ss)?
>Catastrophic failures do not cluster about
>the mean. This accounts for the confusion
>on the parts of Mr. Zipser and Mr. Boey on
>what actually constitutes failure. They have
>an exponential density function which roughly
>approximates the "memoryless" failure curve
>of the venerable light bulb. This means that the
>probability of failure of a particular unit varies
>only slowly over time.
>
The failure rate/audio detection level of a failing electrolytic
capacitor... is there such a thing as failure in one standard deviation. In
other words is there a time factor... say 20,000 hours where nearly all
units will have noticeable failure.
An old Marantz 1060 came back to me that I purchased back in the early 70's.
I was shocked at the poor fidelity... not what I remember anyway :-). The
background is quite noisy. Are there any audible test that would point
toward capacitor failure?
Johnny Y Boey
> Because it is a chemical process, the reaction
> rate can be precisely predicted by the Arrhenius equation
What??? The Arrhenius eqn can *precisely* predict rxn rates of chemical
processes? Who taught you that?
JB
Roy Briggs
>Yet *another* reason to killfile everything from rec.audio.opinion ...
Wouldn't it be easier to just unsubscribe from it?
__________________________________
Men will confess to treason, murder, arson, false
teeth, or a wig. How many of them will own up
to a lack of humor?
--FRANK MOORE COLBY
Roy Briggs. Remove [SPAMOFF] to reply.
George M. Middius
>Why don't you guys simply filter your mail? Isn't it a hell of a
>lot more trouble to respond, flame or flood the offender's ISP?
>Just curious.
Sometimes Zippy sends me actual e-mails instead of the
moronic duplicates of his RAO posts. If I filter him
out, I won't get the real ones. Of course, filtering is
the next step. A couple of other RAO bacteria didn't
get the message -- Bwian McDweeby and Roger Greasetrap,
to name two.
BTW, if by flooding the offender's ISP you mean pelting
the administrator with junk e-mails, that can get you
in trouble with your own ISP. Anyway, Zippy isn't
sending spam, he's just being half-assed.
Steve Zipser
George:
(a) I only occassionally send you email copies - when I want to make
sure you get the message.
(b) You have never before asked me not to send them & since I am
selective in what I send you, I presumed they were acceptable.
(c) Don't get your panties all bunched up - we're on the same side,
remember?
(d) Cheers
George M. Middius
>(a) I only occassionally send you email copies - when I want to make
>sure you get the message.
That's the odd thing. Just when it's seemed you
got *my* message, oops! There you go again.
>(b) You have never before asked me not to send them & since I am
>selective in what I send you, I presumed they were acceptable.
If you were one of Them, Steve, I'd point out
that this is a lie. As it is, you being a normal
and all, I'll just observe that your information
is inaccurate. I do recall you having various
connectivity problems -- including weeks at a
time when no e-mails got through to you -- so
your statement may be simply uninformed. In that
light, however, with your own even more specific
knowledge of your outages, you should say you
have never *received* such a request from me,
which might be true. As it is, well, sorry,
you're DEAD WRONG!!!
>(c) Don't get your panties all bunched up - we're on the
>same side, remember?
Of course I remember. Normals vs. the C&A crew.
That's why I didn't kill-file you.
>(d) Cheers
What do you think of Roger Greasetrap -- is his
brain shriveled up like a raisin, or what? ;-)
Steve Zipser
> What do you think of Roger Greasetrap -- is his
> brain shriveled up like a raisin, or what? ;-)
That presupposes that Roger Ramjet actually has a brain. This is an
arguable point.
I believe there are a number of raisins that take offense at your remark
:-)
Zip
Jay B. Haider
<jb...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>No, it means flooding the a*hole's mailbox with huge files. And if your
>company has a private server, and your administrator frequently comes
>over for a beer, and your reactor system is fully automated, you can
>have fun flooding the mailbox every time you feel like.
>JB
That's fun to you? Interesting. Some of us have more...civilised
definitions of the word.
Jay B. Haider
Freie Universitaet Berlin
"Science, like Nature, must also be tamed
With a view towards its preservation.
Given the same state of integrity,
It will surely serve us well" -Neil Peart
Justin Kennington
off. Hotmail is run by the second largest corperation in the world. He can take
it up with them if he thinks his little friend with a pirated copy of MS
MailServer can beat their system.
Cheers.
Justin
Johnny Y Boey wrote:
> U Thant wrote:
>
> > Why don't you guys simply filter your mail? Isn't it a hell of a lot more
> > trouble to respond, flame or flood the offender's ISP?
> > Just curious.
>
Johnny Y Boey
> This is childish, but I'm sending this to the group and his email just to piss him
> off.
What can we expect from a pathetic no-life like yourself? Get a real email account for
a change.
JB
Johnny Y Boey
> This is childish, but I'm sending this to the group and his email just to piss him
> off. Hotmail is run by the second largest corperation in the world. He can take
> it up with them if he thinks his little friend with a pirated copy of MS
> MailServer can beat their system.
>
you are so fucking stupid you don't even understand how it works. Nobody is going to
beat any ISPs. But what I can do is flooding your mailbox, you know, the tiny little
space Hotmail allotted you.
JB
Stewart Pinkerton
>> Powell wrote:
>> >
>> General Questions:
>> 1. The manufacturers of electrolytic capacitors are there many or few...
>> specifically in High-end gear?
>
>There are very few manufacturers of large can electrolytics left. The big
>cans are manufactured by Cornell Dubilier. I am not aware of any others,
>since the market is so limited. Sangamo may also be around.
Philips and BHC Aerovox also make big computer-type electrolytics.
Norman
"at will". Go away..
Johnny Y Boey <jb...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in article
<35C16107...@ix.netcom.com>...
> Justin Kennington wrote:
>
> > This is childish, but I'm sending this to the group and his email just
to piss him
> > off.
>