Cream "Gibson" Color Survey?

[RedHouse]

Strangely enough in the Amps the difference wasn't as obvious as was in a guitar.

Specially with old caps like the Paper-n-Oil and the old Bumble Bee's, the low end was nicer sometimes but the mid and highs were mucked about with a little too much for me, specially when one is focussed on that mid-honk which can interfere with pulling other nice tones available from the wood (sometimes).

The Black Beauties I have are NOS, I got them from an old guy who used to run a radio repair shop.

Old guy, that's funny, here I am 50 and I'm calling him and "old guy", well life rolls on until....

...it doesn't matter - only well-matched double blind tests allow one to see past people and their biases and opinions.

Amen to that.

[Joe Gwinn]

I'm actually in the process of building a cap testing rig. I've bought every type of capacitor possible in bulk so that I can find the closest values matching possible and I plan to put them in a box on a rotary switch.

So far I have PIO, Polypropylene, teflon, mica, ceramic, aluminum/paper/oil, and another of the poly's, and a few others.

Sounds like a good plan. I would measure and record the actual capacitance and dissipation factor at 1000 Hz with the Extech as a part of this process. This will tell you the actual values to better than 1%, allowing you to disentangle the effects of capacitor value and capacitor type.

I have to make a decision though as to whether or allow caps in parallel or caps in series.. Doing both expands my choices for caps.. I figure im going to allow caps in parallel but not in series.

Why would series connection be a problem?

[Joe Gwinn]

Strangely enough in the Amps the difference wasn't as obvious as was in a guitar.

Hmm. Some capacitor types are microphonic. Wonder if that's the difference here. Easiest test is to connect a capacitor across a cable, with capacitor outer wrap (marked with a ring or bar on the case) connected to the cable shield, hook capacitor cable into an amp, turn it up, and tap on the capacitor case with a stick. If you don't hear the taps coming out of the speaker, the microphonic sensitivity is too small to matter in practice.

Be sure to compare with an open cable (no capacitor) being tapped - most cables are microphonic as well.

Specially with old caps like the Paper-n-Oil and the old Bumble Bee's, the low end was nicer sometimes but the mid and highs were mucked about with a little too much for me, specially when one is focused on that mid-honk which can interfere with pulling other nice tones available from the wood (sometimes).

Some kinds of dielectric are frequency sensitive, causing capacitors made with such kinds of dielectric to behave in non-ideal ways. I know that "behave in non-ideal ways" is pretty vague, but that's the best generalization one can make without specific tests of a specific kind of capacitor.

However, the larger the dissipation factor (related to the Q, can be measured using an Extech), the odder the behaviour.

The Black Beauties I have are NOS, I got them from an old guy who used to run a radio repair shop.

Old guy, that's funny, here I am 50 and I'm calling him an "old guy", well life rolls on until....

Careful there, sonny...

[Possum]

I apologize Jon, but when you got RedHouse making inane scrambled brain comments directed in nothing more than mean spirited uninformed fashion against YOU, lets see how you react. I think if I posted quotes from the Webster Dictionary here, RH would claim Webster got it all from Wikipedia and that he made all those words up himself ;-) and doesn't know how to spell. Did you ever just maybe think I'm giving little "clues" out, hoping someone not scared of actually doing some hard work might follow the tracks to making a more authentic representation of those pickups? Nope, everyone already seems to know everything about the subject and there are no questions worth asking, its all on Wikipedia and you can find out everything just by Googling and you become an instant vintage pickup expert. Well, thats what RH does I guess, works for him? You really want to believe I spent maybe an hour or two on this subject, and I'm telling you that waters are way deeper than you've looked, thats fine with me, you've done it all know it all, you've quit looking, satisfied that the tip of the iceberg is all there is. I'm rather glad you all think that way actually. I'm done....

[JGundry]

I was Joking Dave. One thing that makes this place mildly entertaining is the blow hard nature of it. I'm as guilty as the next guy when it comes to this. Well almost as guilty.

[belwar]

Why would series connection be a problem?

Well i would be worried that there is some effect that would happen in the first capacitor that would happen in the subsequent ones - In parallel, whatever happens would be split between the caps equally but in series whatever is in front could taint the outcome - I dont have an indication of what effect (if any) this would have. Any thoughts? This was/is my only hesitation. Series is the only way I can add the standard electrolytic caps to the mix as the lowest i've been able to find in those was .1uF . I figured if I allowed series/parallel arrays of caps I could test virtually every variety.

[Joe Gwinn]

Well i would be worried that there is some effect that would happen in the first capacitor that would happen in the subsequent ones - In parallel, whatever happens would be split between the caps equally but in series whatever is in front could taint the outcome - I don't have an indication of what effect (if any) this would have. Any thoughts? This was/is my only hesitation.

Ahh. It does not work that way. A rat's-nest of capacitors (no matter how many or how they are connected together) acts as if it were a single capacitor of merged or ~averaged properties.

The above principle has a name, Thevenin's Theorem. Note that while the webpage linked below talks of resistances and DC voltage sources, the theorem also applies to general impedances, which includes capacitors and inductors in any combination. This is mentioned early in the webpage, where they talk about impedances and constant-frequency sources.

Thévenin's theorem - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

If you have a series string of capacitors, it makes no difference whatsoever what order the capacitors are in. There is no concept of "in front", as the same current must flow through all.

If you have capacitors in parallel, the overall current is simply the algebraic sum of the currents through the individual capacitors.

Series is the only way I can add the standard electrolytic caps to the mix as the lowest i've been able to find in those was 0.1uF . I figured if I allowed series/parallel arrays of caps I could test virtually every variety.

With electrolytic capacitors being used for AC signals, you must connect identical pairs in series-opposing, or you will implement what amounts to a capacitor in parallel with a rectifier diode, at least until the abused capacitor fails.

[RedHouse]

Now see that's where the rubber meets the road. In professional audio circles it's well established (fact?) that adding a smalll value cap in parallel to a large value cap increases high end clairity and "air" which would imply it changes the sound.

Recording Engineers and Electronic Engineers will argue all day long about it because the math doesn't support it, but check Rupert Neve's work, his boards are (were?) some of the best in the professional console business and nearly always incorporate a small .1uF cap across a 47uF coupling cap. This is something the ear can hear but the math doesn't support.
(not to be confused with the "oxygen free cable" folks)

I personally straddle the fence on this. I can't really dis' it because I can't really hear it, but I get work doing the cap jobs and mods for those who have high end recording consoles and say they can hear the difference, so it's valid enough to me.

[soundmasterg]

Nope Greg, Sound-MASTER-GEE, its not you, you're just my master He posts here as Sam Lee Guy, when he speaks pay attention. He knows how much work I've put in on my products, besides "google searching and Wikipedia," LOL, got a hoot out of that one.

Yah I know Dave, I was just teasing you because someone has to do it. Since you make such killer pickups, someone has to keep you humble or you end up like Gundry!

Greg

[Joe Gwinn]

Now see that's where the rubber meets the road. In professional audio circles it's well established (fact?) that adding a small value cap in parallel to a large value cap increases high end clarity and "air" which would imply it changes the sound.

Recording Engineers and Electronic Engineers will argue all day long about it because the math doesn't support it, but check Rupert Neve's work, his boards are (were?) some of the best in the professional console business and nearly always incorporate a small 0.1uF cap across a 47uF coupling cap. This is something the ear can hear but the math doesn't support.
(not to be confused with the "oxygen free cable" folks)

Actually, the math does support this -- the effect is well known in RF engineering circles. I guess it isn't as widely known in audio engineering circles.

The effect arises because large capacitors also have large values of self-inductance, and so act like series-resonant circuits, often peaking at surprisingly low frequencies. This implies that there is a frequency at which the total impedance of the capacitor is at a minimum. The classic solution if one needs broadband performance is to parallel a very large capacitor with a far smaller capacitor (which will have far less self inductance). At low frequencies, the big capacitor will dominate, while at high frequencies the small capacitor will dominate.

I personally straddle the fence on this. I can't really dis' it because I can't really hear it, but I get work doing the cap jobs and mods for those who have high end recording consoles and say they can hear the difference, so it's valid enough to me.

Well, if you cannot hear it, it's grounds for suspicion. But the customer is always right. But I would be tempted to run a little double blind test with some musicians.

[Mark Hammer]

I'm comparing what I see on the screen with a swatch/chunk of a sheet of creme pickguard material I bought from the Parsons St. facility in Kalamazoo in 1982. Does that count as "vintage"? I don't know. But for some damn technical reason, nothing I see on the screen seems to look like what I'm holding, and that's bloody frustrating.

[David Schwab]

Listen, I'm very disappointed with how this thread has gone. It was intended to evolve into my own personal chest thumping party. Now Possum has gone and messed it up by turning it into his own personal wank fest. So I guess I will have to turn it into my own personal ultra wank fest. So here it goes. I make the most awesomest, super primo, PAF ever. Seriously, check it out. You will cry yourself to sleep if you have not already. Years of research, I mean when I started I had no grey hair and now I have some. I even lost a little hair, I think. I know Possum lost some hair but I think he eats his so that does not count. Okay back to me. Really I mean since everyone knows I have the most awesomest PAF's why are you guys even wasting your energy typing anything other than praise for me? Okay so from now on I only want to see posts that reaffirm my most awsomest PAF maker EVER status. Otherwise I'm having the moderator shut this down.

So here's what we have learned...

• If gray hair equates to better pickups, Possum wins.
• Possum eats his hair
• People can't tell the difference between PAFs
• People don't know what a PAF sounds or looks like
• People think they want PAFs
• PAFs will make them sound like Duane, and have all the babes
• There was no standard shade of cream
• Possum and Jon wank
• Possum and Jon make the best PAFs even though there is no standard to compare them to
• Spence is Batman

And a question... how long before the PAF bubble bursts? Hope everyone gets a return on their time and money invested!

Heck, I'm not shutting this down... too much fun!

And all kidding aside, you both make great pickups.

[David Schwab]

The problem is subtle - people think the sharper or more mellow sound is due to the kind of dielectric, whereas it's really that one capacitor value was +20% over marked value, while the other was -20%, for a total span of 40%, which can be heard.

That has been my thoughts exactly. With maybe a little microphonics thrown in (in the case of cheap ceramic caps).

[RedHouse]

That has been my thoughts exactly. With maybe a little microphonics thrown in (in the case of cheap ceramic caps).

Naa, too much emphasis on test error (the tolerance thing) sorry there's no second gunman in the grassy knoll here.

Over the years it's always hard to get the point across after-the-fact but a few of us still gather now-n-then and discuss that day. It's a great exercise I highly recommend if you can manage. The cap-type question is quite settled in my mind.

Funny thing about the Sozo testing, those caps were touted as the latest and "best made caps" made out of the "same materials as the originals" after extensive "research and testing" and "nobody is making a cap like their today" the "big capacitor companies can't" ...is this sounding familiar to anyone?

Turns out they may have indeed been made like the originals, but didn't sound better than modern made caps, something that comes to mind constantly when I read these threads over the "PAF authenticity" topic.
(no offense intended)

Unfortunately I lost my sound clips of the cap testing in a hard drive crash some years ago, but it reminds of another test that was conducted publicly on the iNet over at 18watt.com five or six years ago where a guy made a test rig (amp) which was switching transformers for A/B testing of various output transformers. Most of those who voted on the "best sounding" OT's didn't pick the ringer (the actual vintage transformer) but picked modern made units.

Could it be that "getting it right" doesn't automatically get one the "best sound"?.

[Joe Gwinn]

That has been my thoughts exactly. With maybe a little microphonics thrown in (in the case of cheap ceramic caps).

In the article "Probing the Secrets of the Finest Fiddles" (mentioned in the thread by that name), some numbers are given, referencing an article by Fritz and colleagues in the December 2007 issue of the Journal of the Acoustical Socienty of America:

Musicians can just detect a 4 dB change in the strength of a resonance (in a violin body) and a change of about 5% in resonant frequency, for resonances in the few hundred Hertz range. This is far better than non-musicians usually achieve.