the tone cap myth...

[Stan H]

Mike,
When you say you cannot hear a difference...I believe you...you cannot hear a difference.

I say I can hear a difference (and not because I have dog ears...my hearing sucks).

I don't think he said "he couldn't hear a difference". I believe what he said was there is no difference.

[GlennW]

Glenn, are you the same GlennW who's currently talking about Guild bass humbuckers and Gibson mudbuckers over at TalkBass? I'd imagine you are, but it just occurred to me.

That's me, and happy birthday.

[David Schwab]

That's me, and happy birthday.

I had realized I was talking to you on two forums at the same time!

Thanks.

[soundmasterg]

Greg:

Agreed! I will be building the cap switch box so that I can test these premium caps throughout the entire range of 0 to 10, just to see if there are some that I prefer over the others. And hopefully to clear out some of the BS from the people selling these caps at outrageous prices...

The fact that a given cap produces good results doesn't necessarily prove that all other caps don't: I want to be able to do instantaneous A/B tests on all of these caps. I guess I really don't have to build the switch box right away but just solder in some tiny alligator clips in my PRS SE Singlecut II with a single tone control...

For many years now I've been happy replacing the cheap stock caps with decent 630v polyester caps from Mouser, et al- I think that they do a really great job! But maybe some of these premium caps do a better job- I dunno...

I shall soon find out!

Steve Ahola

Very cool Steve! The results will be interesting.

I've used those Mouser caps too and they seem to work and sound just fine.

The fact that you think you hear a difference does not mean that you do. It has to be proven, either way.

"can't or won't": personal comment?

Mike,

What I'm trying to say is don't get so caught up in what the numbers say that you lose sight of what you or others hear. Since we all hear different, it may be that others hear something that you can't, and I've seen it before where people get so caught up in the math and the test results numbers that they discount obvious things that their senses are telling them because the numbers say it can't possibly be true. Not everything related to audio can be measured and tested.

Greg

[Mike Sulzer]

Mike,

What I'm trying to say is don't get so caught up in what the numbers say that you lose sight of what you or others hear. Since we all hear different, it may be that others hear something that you can't, and I've seen it before where people get so caught up in the math and the test results numbers that they discount obvious things that their senses are telling them because the numbers say it can't possibly be true. Not everything related to audio can be measured and tested.

Greg

I am sure that others can hear things that I cannot; as I said earlier, my hearing is not that good anymore. But, for example, Possum's clips are very different to me, and must be more so to others. But let's not neglect the engineering. Some things can be shown to be much smaller effects than others; these are hard to hear. I am amazed that so few recognize how easy it is to perform a bad listening test, and how hard it is to get it right.

[hasserl]

Mike,

What I'm trying to say is don't get so caught up in what the numbers say that you lose sight of what you or others hear. Since we all hear different, it may be that others hear something that you can't, and I've seen it before where people get so caught up in the math and the test results numbers that they discount obvious things that their senses are telling them because the numbers say it can't possibly be true. Not everything related to audio can be measured and tested.

Greg

And maybe others only think they are actually hearing a difference.

If you don't (won't?) conduct blind testing to confirm what you think you hear, then all you have is anecdotal stories. At the minimum you have to do some kind of testing that allows a fast switch between the two components, even if it isn't blind. An audio recording that you can post so others can listen will make this even better. But best is a double blind test where neither the player/listener, or the person making the switching knows which cap is which. Just relating an experience where you played around with different caps means very little at all, except to those that also believe it and are looking for confirmation.

[GlennW]

I've put them on a rotary switch. There's a difference.

[soundmasterg]

And maybe others only think they are actually hearing a difference.

If you don't (won't?) conduct blind testing to confirm what you think you hear, then all you have is anecdotal stories. At the minimum you have to do some kind of testing that allows a fast switch between the two components, even if it isn't blind. An audio recording that you can post so others can listen will make this even better. But best is a double blind test where neither the player/listener, or the person making the switching knows which cap is which. Just relating an experience where you played around with different caps means very little at all, except to those that also believe it and are looking for confirmation.

I have used switches before on guitars and amps to switch between caps and resistors, though in the example I used, I was using clip leads....probably because that is the most recent one I did on an amp. I agree that a double blind test is best, and failing that, a test where you can quickly switch is better than swapping with clip leads or resoldering. I'm not saying I won't conduct blind testing......I don't have the time right now to do something like that. If I really needed to know something, then I'd do a proper test. On the other hand, posting and saying others don't know anything about the subject because they didn't do a proper scientific test and the numbers say there shouldn't be a big difference is discounting other people's experiences. Sure some people will say there is a difference just because they've been told to expect one, it happens. We all know that there are some things associated with audio and acoustics that can not be measured, and we know the ear can be tricked too, so if everyone keeps an open mind until they try it for themselves, then I think we'll all get along better and it will lead to better and more informed discussions.

Greg

[hasserl]

That's fine Greg, just keep an open mind to the fact that the mind can play tricks, and we all are effected by subconscious suggestion; and none of us are able to prevent that from effecting how we play and listen when switching parts around. Sometimes the difference is so obvious there isn't any doubt, other times the difference is not so obvious, where differences in picking motion, fingering technique, etc can and do effect the tone. Blind testing is the only way to get beyond that.

I suspect cap type in guitar tone circuits is one of those situations where any difference in type is not so obvious. For those that claim it is, I'd like to see you consistently identify the different types thru blind testing. That would add some credibility.

If we're just talking for entertainment value, or sharing expriences and information, it's all good. But for the guys selling caps, they really need to offer up some proof. Doing blind testing is not that difficult, we're not talking rocket science here. Failure to do it shows lack of confidence in the outcome.

And just for something to consider, I recall watching video of an experiment where subjects were blindfolded then fed plain unflavored yogurt, but they were told it was fruit flavored, like strawberry, and orange and other rather strong flavors. And they were asked to rate the flavors. Each of the subjects firmly believed they were eating the flavor they were told, and when the blindfolds were removed they were amazed that they were actually eating plain unlfavored yogurt. The power of suggestion is very strong. I think that if you tell someone a particular cap sounds better and charge them a nice sum for the cap, people will naturally believe the special cap does sound better, when in fact there may be no differece at all, or at least none that can be identified in blind testing.

[Mark Hammer]

We may not agree on politics, my friend, but we agree strongly on audio test methodology.

Sometimes, I think component-type effects are a bit like the role of saffron in a recipe. Does saffron have a "taste"? I'm told there is one (and that the quality of saffron purchased makes a difference in how tastable it is), but damned if I know what it tastes like, or am able to identify it. Sometimes, I just figure you throw a bit of it into a rice pilaf and the colour just makes things "taste" more lively because of how it looks, even though blindfold tests would have people unable to tell the difference.

I think it is also wise to consider that what tone-control caps do is remove signal content. For that to be audible requires several things to be in place. First, the content which is at risk actually has to BE there in some measurable quantity. Here, I will give the benefit of the doubt to Dave's pickups, which may well have the at-risk content in greater quantity than some other pickups. Second,the amp has to be able to reproduce the at-risk content such that one can tell if it is missing. That is, in turn, a product of amp settings and speakers.

So, it can be that tester A hears something which tester B does not hear, simply because of the test circumstances. Statisticians would call this a Type II error, insomuch as a true difference exists but the test conditions do not permit it to be detected. But, it can also be that tester A hears something as a result of unintended bias in their perception. Statisticians would call this a Type I error: a non-effect has been unintentionally, and falsely, detected as an effect.

[Steve A.]

And maybe others only think they are actually hearing a difference.

If you don't (won't?) conduct blind testing to confirm what you think you hear, then all you have is anecdotal stories. At the minimum you have to do some kind of testing that allows a fast switch between the two components, even if it isn't blind. An audio recording that you can post so others can listen will make this even better. But best is a double blind test where neither the player/listener, or the person making the switching knows which cap is which. Just relating an experience where you played around with different caps means very little at all, except to those that also believe it and are looking for confirmation.

Well, sir, I beg to agree! And disagree as well...

I think that double blind testing is appropriate when dealing with subjective values like different people's opinions on what might sound (or taste) better. However, if the scientific method is followed for experiments which are properly documented and can be duplicated in other settings I see no need to compensate for personal biases.

"Scientific method refers to bodies of techniques for investigating phenomena, acquiring new knowledge, or correcting and integrating previous knowledge. To be termed scientific, a method of inquiry must be based on gathering observable, empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning. A scientific method consists of the collection of data through observation and experimentation, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses."

-- from the Wikipedia

Double-blind testing has more to do with experiments based on the observations of test subjects in fields such as pharmaceuticals or marketing. Anything where the biases of the subjects could affect the results.

If we were looking for measurable differences between different brands of capacitors, the proof is in the measurements. Likewise if we are listening to sound samples- the proof is in the pudding, whether we all can hear it or not.

In any case there are a lot of subjective elements involved in upgraded guitar components, and even downright hokum. If someone believes that a particular item makes them sound or play better, perhaps it will, even if there is no basis in science or reality! If their playing has in fact improved, who are we to say that it was all bullsh*t?

Complicating matters is the fact that most people are not trained for critical listening, so I would not really trust the results of a properly conducted double blind test. What really matters is the opinion of the person playing the guitar- which particular tone cap or caps do they like best with a particular guitar?

Steve Ahola

P.S. I finally received the Luxe Bumblebee cap I ordered weeks ago so I am ready to roll with some tests... Woohoo!

BTW doesn't Seymour Duncan use a white noise generator when they measure the frequency response of their pickups? It seems like one scientific way to measure tone caps would be with a similar rig as you rotate the tone control from 10 to 0 (or from 0 to 10 for those of you who think that the glass is half empty! )

[jason lollar]

heres what I set up yesterday- a rotary switch with 5 caps of different manufacture but all are matched value using a capacitane tester-some of the caps are underneath the rotary- you cant see them in the photo. Turn the knob and you have a different cap of the same value- I havent listened to it yet- all caps are .022 except one I tagged on at the end a .047 so I can listen to how a different value effects it. i havent had time to sit down with it yet

[Mark Hammer]

Steve,

"Scientific" measurement, as a substitute for (or improvement upon) double blind testing assumes that one knows what ought to be, or is being, measured. If the history of audio technology has taught us anything, it is that we continue to hear things that we have no clear operational definition of, and no means to reliably measure. That does not mean it does not exist, or that it is "mere" perception. All those things we depends on, and expect, nowadays for greater audio clarity were certainly unmeasurable 60 years ago because we didn't even know, or have any basis to describe, what sounded different between A and B.

For example, I will raise the topic of the BBE process, which aligns the lows, mids, and highs so as to produce a more coherent image, and an easier sorting or "mental assignment" of harmonics to fundamentals. It's as real as you or I, but hard to describe or measure in a few small concise metrics. As such, when developing and optimizing such circuits or devices, if you can't simply turn something up one unit of measurement, the only really practical basis for development is to use double-blind subjective listening tests. Same thing goes for loudspeaker design. Eventually, people understood a bit more about depicting the internal resonant properties of cabinets, and the external dispersion properties of the overall cabinet design, but that was a long time coming, and required subjective listening to really develop.

Is tone cap type something whose properties are so complex that they CANNOT be reliably and validly indexed by simple DMM measurements? Maybe...but then maybe not. Well-controlled listening tests, however, are not unreasonable to conduct until one is in a better position to say exactly what IS responsible for audible differences, and be able to measure it in a straighforward enough way that you can attach you meter probes to the leads, and predict exactly how that component would sound different.

Jason's on the right track, although the preferred arrangement is for the cap type to be changed without the player knowing or even hazarding a guess.

[jason lollar]

its difficult to not change your attack without intending to when you switch caps!

[Mike Sulzer]

its difficult to not change your attack without intending to when you switch caps!

Exactly what I found and described above.