Upgrade sound card before DIYing?

[letterbeacon]

Cool, thanks for the info.

Why is using bipolar capacitors on the output better than using polarised?  I'm thinking of replacing the capacitors with Panasonic FC caps but can't find them in the UK as bipolar, is there a significant advantage to having them bipolar?  The original caps are polarised...

I'm thinking of replacing the through hole input and output caps too, seems like a fairly simple mod and a few people have noticed sonic differences.  I'm going to try the Panasonic FC series on the electrolytics and maybe squeeze an Orange Drop in for the film cap on the input stage.

What do you think?

 

[abbey road d enfer]

Cool, thanks for the info.

Why is using bipolar capacitors on the output better than using polarised? 

Do you have undisputable proof of that assertion? If the caps are the right value, their contribution to "sound" is negligible.

I'm thinking of replacing the capacitors with Panasonic FC caps but can't find them in the UK as bipolar, is there a significant advantage to having them bipolar?  The original caps are polarised...

I'm thinking of replacing the through hole input and output caps too, seems like a fairly simple mod and a few people have noticed sonic differences.  I'm going to try the Panasonic FC series on the electrolytics and maybe squeeze an Orange Drop in for the film cap on the input stage.

What do you think?

You read too much audiophoolery...

 

[letterbeacon]

Cool, thanks for the info.

Why is using bipolar capacitors on the output better than using polarised? 

Do you have undisputable proof of that assertion?

It's a question, not an assertion as I have no idea!  Using bipolar caps was discussed here and I would like to know why that might be the case.

I'm thinking of replacing the capacitors with Panasonic FC caps but can't find them in the UK as bipolar, is there a significant advantage to having them bipolar?  The original caps are polarised...

I'm thinking of replacing the through hole input and output caps too, seems like a fairly simple mod and a few people have noticed sonic differences.  I'm going to try the Panasonic FC series on the electrolytics and maybe squeeze an Orange Drop in for the film cap on the input stage.

What do you think?

You read too much audiophoolery...

Haha, maybe!  It can't hurt though can it?

 

[abechap024]

I hear Panasonic SU bipolar caps are some of the lowest distortion in some tests done by jensen: http://www.jensen-transformers.com/an/an003.pdf

panasonic bi-polar: ece-a1cn221s

They should have some of those available somewhere in the UK. Also don't be afraid to increase the uF on the out put and input a bit. I personally wouldn't recommend trying to fit a bunch of big caps like the orange drops in there as space is a bit limited already...

Good Luck!
PS I modded mine with PAnasonic FC caps but If I could do it again I would use bi-polar, because for a few pennies more...why not?

AC

 

[abbey road d enfer]

Read the Bateman articles, put that in perspective with what coupling caps do in a signal path.
He measured worst case 0.005% THD, with a voltage that is at least 10 times larger than what a typical coupling cap sees, and as I mentioned before the resulting output THD is a fraction of the cap distortion*, so that means a predictable level of THD in the output ranging from 0.0005 to 0.00005.
Is it worth loosing sleep over it?  
*see attached

 

[pstamler]

Recordings are only as good as your weakest link.

Actually, recordings are less good than their weakest link. One of the things that information theory teaches us is that degradation in a system is cumulative. (That's one of the reasons information theory holds the title of The Dismal Science which used to belong to economics.)

In practice, if you have one link in the chain which is WAY worse than the others, that will be the limiting factor. But unless you're running Neve preamps through a Behri EQ, that probably won't happen. In most systems, the degradation contributed by each element is of the same order of magnitude...which means that you'll hear the improvement when you put a better mic pre through the Delta.

Peace,
Paul

 

[abbey road d enfer]

Well, the OP has not mentioned what mics he is using, so I suspect after room treatment, they are the next candidates...

 

[letterbeacon]

As I said, it's a fairly modest recording set up.  I only have two mics, an SM58 and a Shiny Box 46MXL ribbon mic.  It's not that I'm terribly unhappy with my recordings, it's more that I was wondering if it was worth building these incredible bits of kit when my A>D convertors might be letting the side down.

At the moment my recording chain is 46MXL > TL Audio 5051 > Delta 1010.

I hear Panasonic SU bipolar caps are some of the lowest distortion in some tests done by jensen: http://www.jensen-transformers.com/an/an003.pdf

panasonic bi-polar: ece-a1cn221s

They should have some of those available somewhere in the UK. Also don't be afraid to increase the uF on the out put and input a bit.

Thanks for that!  I don't understand the electronics behind why bipolar caps are better than polarised caps on the output...

 

[abbey road d enfer]

As I said, it's a fairly modest recording set up.  I only have two mics, an SM58 and a Shiny Box 46MXL ribbon mic.  It's not that I'm terribly unhappy with my recordings, it's more that I was wondering if it was worth building these incredible bits of kit when my A>D convertors might be letting the side down.

At the moment my recording chain is 46MXL > TL Audio 5051 > Delta 1010.

I really think the best way to improve your recordings would be the purchase of a good quality condenser mic. The SM58 has a very narrow frequency response that is adequate for live vocals, but that's about it, and the Shiny box, as most ribbon mics sounds rather dark and the polar pattern doesn't help with less than optimum room acoustics.

 

[tchgtr]

A decent condenser will also make any room deficiencies apparent, so room treatment should be a priority.
I've been very happy with an MXL 2003 that I modded based on info on this forum. Also the Nady 1050 (Apex 460), if you want a choice of patterns. I kept mine with the cathode follower and original tranny, and it's nice and clean with a 12AT7.
Also did the Royer 1 mod to an MXL V67, which excels as a room mic, but not as good for my voice as the 2003.
Yep, it's low-budget heaven over here...

I'm not gonna argue about the bi-polars (especially with the likes of d enfer). They were slightly more expensive than the Pana FCs, so I got' em. It's no Lavry, but it made my 1010 much smoother and more balanced. Not to say that a good set of high-quality caps won't sound as good - that's just what I did and I'm very happy, especially with the cost/time:improvement ratio.
Try it on a few channels..the 1010 isn't that hard to take apart.
Be gentle.

 

[letterbeacon]

I'm not gonna argue about the bi-polars (especially with the likes of d enfer). They were slightly more expensive than the Pana FCs, so I got' em.

Hey I don't want to start an argument either!    I'm just curious about the science or the theory about using bi-polar caps over polarised caps.  I haven't been able to find out why one is better than then other.

 

[tchgtr]

I am certainly no expert, and will defer to a higher authority, but my understanding is that polar electros basically become inductors above a certain frequency, hence the practice of putting much smaller (usually .01uf polypro) bypass caps in some places to pass along higher frequencies.
Bi-polar electros were claimed to extend this upper limit, and give a more even frequency response. I've seen them used in gear that had a good sound to my ear, so I tried it, and liked it.

 

[MikeClev]

I would like to add my experiences with a Delta 1010.

A few years ago I thought my 1010 sounded a little flat and murky (audiophool speak alert!), and I had only just heard about the idea of replacing capacitors. I had heard that Panasonic FC and FMs were regarded as good quality, so I ordered some FCs at about double the capacitance (120uF v about 47uF I think)

I unsoldered the old no-name 85 degree rating caps and stuck in the new 105 degree ones in just one pair of channels so I could A/B them while playing music through them.

I could definitely hear a difference, the newer cap channels sounded less murky and the bass was clearer. I went on to upgrade all the input and output caps, and the power supply caps just for good measure. I know about the idea that people will be biased towards favouring the things they have spent money on, by I really am sure I heard an improvement. Looking back I wish I had taken before and after recordings but at the time I wasn't interested in convincing anybody else, I just wanted the thing to reach its full potential and sound good.

Personally I think that the old caps had partly dried out, as I used to leave the unit switched on pretty much 24 hours a day. And the unit would get very hot! (I used to not leave a rack space free above it. I do now I know about cap ratings.) This might explain the subjectively poorer sound.

Just my 2 penneth! Carry on!

 

[millzners]

I'll add my 2 cents, I posted earlier in the thread, but I currently have a Delta 66, which I'm certain is close enough to Delta 1010 to keep this relevant.  Well on the black market I found someone offering a little Art DI/O which if you read all the hype about it from years back, supposedly has the potential to be an excellent converter; it's just a little 2 channel AD/DA box.  The person I bought it from made several modifications, including new high-end caps on the output stage, new op amps, and a beefier power supply to go along with an modified supply circuit.  Very clean/good soldering work etc.  For a modest amount of money I figured worst case I finally have a 2 more useable channels (I don't have any gear to use the 2 spdif channels on the delta) and best case I can finally put to rest how much of a difference a good converter makes...

Well I plugged the unit in, and first A/B'd the output, where most of the modifications were done.  And I couldn't tell the difference at the levels I usually listen at.  I tried some music right off a CD player in my computer, some mp3's, and some music I was working on in my DAW.  I can't tell the difference, and I really wanted to.  Maybe it's me, maybe I don't have good ears, maybe I have a bad room or didn't listen to the music loud enough...  I don't know.

I then AB'd a stereo MS pair on a nice acoustic guitar, with an AT4050 side and an AT3035 mid; I matched levels, I used the same preamp and sent 2 channels to the Delta and 2 to the DI/O both at 24bit/96k.  I recorded both, and found that the DI/O had more high end, a little more detail in the 1k and up range, so much so that inverting one of the signals and summing them yielded a substantial signal that sounded like a HP on the tracks.  Awesome I thought!  Something tangible.  Then I noticed something else...  The DI/O has 10dB higher noise floor than the delta, and you can see it on a spectrograph starting at 1k and on up, as well as hear it.  Now I need to run some frequency sweeps on the device to see what's going on, but it seems like the extra high end is just a product of more gain in that spectrum...  The jury is still out.

But all in all I'm happy with the purchase and I don't regret it.  I needed the extra 2 channels, I like using the SPDIF outputs on the device to free up more room for other things, and I get a new thing to play with and test...  So no complaints.

 

[strangeandbouncy]

For me,


  adding different caps is a bit like adding go faster stripes to a family car . . . .


    you need a better range of things, different mics, better acoustics, better pres, comps etc, and whilst we are on it, hows your monitoring . . . .perfect, I doubt it.

      I really think you are not thinking along the right lines. sound card would probably be the LAST thing on my list.



  - your family car will still get you there.

  ANdyP

 

[abbey road d enfer]

I'm not gonna argue about the bi-polars (especially with the likes of d enfer). They were slightly more expensive than the Pana FCs, so I got' em.

Hey I don't want to start an argument either!    I'm just curious about the science or the theory about using bi-polar caps over polarised caps.  I haven't been able to find out why one is better than then other.

You should read these articles by Cyril bateman.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/2610442/Capacitor-Sound
You don't need to read the beginning, which describes how he built the test equipment he used for his evaluations.
He doesn't really give an explanation, just tells the facts.
However, one should take these conclusions with the proverbial pinch of salt. When caps are used as coupling, a good design rule is that the voltage across them is negligible, so the influence on the overall distortion is minimised. His conclusions are perfectly valid when caps are used in frequency-conscious circuits such as filters, EQ's, oscillators...

 

[abbey road d enfer]

I am certainly no expert, and will defer to a higher authority, but my understanding is that polar electros basically become inductors above a certain frequency, hence the practice of putting much smaller (usually .01uf polypro) bypass caps in some places to pass along higher frequencies.

Indeed all caps with leads become inductive at VHF (1MHz+). SMD caps don't. Electrolytics have a higher ESR than other types of caps. ESR is basically a small parasitic resistor in series with the cap, which, in combination with the load capacitance, creates an LPF  (again in the MHz range). Putting a low-ESR cap in paralles with the 'lytic somewhat cancels the low-pass response. FWIW...

Bi-polar electros were claimed to extend this upper limit, and give a more even frequency response. I've seen them used in gear that had a good sound to my ear, so I tried it, and liked it.

Bateman demonstrated clearly that bipolar 'lytics have lower intrinsic distortion. However, ensuring that the AC volage across coupling caps is very low makes distortion negligible.

 

[letterbeacon]

This is all brilliant info - thanks very much!

I suppose my original thought though wasn't 'how can I make my recordings better?' but more 'is there any point building this amazing pro kit when an amateur sound card might let the side down?'.  I suppose the answer is, there's more than just the sound card to contend with (the listening space, the monitors etc.).

 

[electrisizer]

Also did the Royer 1 mod to an MXL V67, which excels as a room mic, but not as good for my voice as the 2003.
Yep, it's low-budget heaven over here...

i absolutly love the v67 for female voice in electronic music...  :
i even tried a 3k brauner tube mic, but that gives not the electronic clear (maybe trashy) vibe of the mxl  im ashamed

 

[abbey road d enfer]

This is all brilliant info - thanks very much!

I suppose my original thought though wasn't 'how can I make my recordings better?' but more 'is there any point building this amazing pro kit when an amateur sound card might let the side down?'.  I suppose the answer is, there's more than just the sound card to contend with (the listening space, the monitors etc.).

Yes. Clearly, your soundcard is far from being the weakest element in your chain. Any improvement you may bring to it shall go unnoticed.