Nichicon audio grade vs. preminum grade capacitors?

[Axtman]

What is the difference between Nichicon audio grade and preminum grade electrolytic capacitors? Is it just marketing and price?

[tedmich]

Probably? ELNA has made a ton of money making "music specific caps" with additives like silk.

In extreme people spend over $1000 for a single cap from Mundorf etc. and the fraud victims are the first to insist they DO sound better. I look strictly for numbers that means something: temp, ESR, lifespan etc while terms like "immediacy" "transparency" and "expanded sound stage" sound too much like a religious text.

[Chuck H]

I didn't know Nichicon was doing this. Link?

If you go to the Mouser search engine they do indicate "audio grade" but the voltage rating on those models aren't near high enough for tube amp power supplies. My guess would be that in this case (Mouser search engine) "audio grade" probably means they are suitable for the signal path.?.

I used the PW series for a while because at the time it was one of their better capacitors and Mouser had them in stock. Looking now I see that Nichicon has a better cap for our purposes IN STOCK at Mouser. The CY series. 500V rated, 12,000 hour life (PW is 8000hrs) and higher ripple current handling than the PW series.

All the Nichicon caps at Mouser that can handle 450V or 500V are "general purpose" capacitors.

EDIT: Note: The Nichicon spec sheet indicates that life hour rating is at spc'd voltage and temperature. So at 105* Celsius with 500V on them they're expected to last AT LEAST 12,000 hours. These specs are generously better than what you'll get from Atom caps.

[Pixel]

If it is for my own use I like Nichicon PW most of the time, HE for lower impedance. For power supplies, Nichicon CA, CS or CY, GY if it is snap-in.

If I am going to sell it I will put Nichicon FG in the signal path just because some people will pay more and you can sell it quicker. I have never done a blind test, but in my informal testing I couldn't tell the difference between FG caps and PW caps. Nichicon FG sure do look pretty though.

[Axtman]

My friend and MEF member, Mark Black, send this to me. Boy talk abouit confusing! Who knew Nichicon made so many different electrolytic capacitors!

http://www.nichicon.co.jp/english/pr...0CrJtrF_sCeGoy 7Nse9L9kmc1Lmm-f3oyI

[Axtman]

Chuck H,

Here is the link that started my question: https://www.amazon.com/Nichicon-Elec...cx_mr_hp_atf_m

[Chuck H]

OOooo... Spendy! I'll take Pixels word for it if he says they're enough of a draw to move a piece of gear. So, maybe? But for power supplies I like the data read on the CS and CA lines he posted. Long life and high ripple rejection. The PW series I used on my last few amps aren't as good with ripple and they perform great so far. But yeah, the CS and CA look better and the cost difference is peanuts.

[35L6]

2.70 at Mouser

[tedmich]

A cursory examination at Mouser suggests the "Audio grade" Nichicons cost between 20-60% more than Nichicons with identical numerical specs. They are very visually impressive...

[dai h.]

Judging from some comments of a couple of guys who seemed very technically knowledgeable (one was some remarks about Black Gate alu electros (no longer manf.) from the Samar Audio (mics, transformers) guy (who apparently has a PhD)--the particulars of which I don't recall), there does seem to be something "real" (i.e. actual differences), but overall (all IMO) based on using some and reading, I wouldn't expect some sort of automatic improvement just because you used an "Audio Grade" alu electro instead of some non-audio (of which there are MANY). IME, some seemed to give a bit of extra brightness (I remember one guy who used some to replace the input caps in a mic pre claiming that they "opened up the sound" so I thought something like that was happening) and maybe sometimes a weird brightness (the green Nichicon MUSE--I've only read one other person having that impression, so take it for what it's worth). For a path that's supposed to be linear, I tend to think the cap shouldn't have a sound, but for some effect IMO totally fine to use whatever floats your boat (be safe, etc.etc.).

My (very general) novice understanding is that how a cap is used will influence whether it's more likely to be heard (or not). So something like a coupling cap for full audio range in a mixer if it's sized correctly (you want it bigger if an alu electro to account for its deficiencies) should be non-sounding (bigger = less voltage drop particularly at lower frequencies which then don't affect the higher frequencies with distortion). There might be other details to watch for like making sure the polarity is correct (if polarized) if connected to a bipolar transistor (there can be some current going in or out of the base(input) and making sure there isn't some heat emitting component positioned so that it can "cook" the cap and so on.

(Maybe it'd be nice in a way if everything was on a clear linear scale from "worst" to "best", but) things can be complicated. One example that comes to mind: polypropylene is generally considered a (conventionally) "better" cap than metallized polyester in terms of distortion, but (my understanding) you can have a situation where inside a microphone's electronics (where the signal won't get big enough for the metal poly.'s larger distortion to be expressed) it can make for sense to use the "worse cap" (also because) there may not be much physical space (like those small diaphragm condensers in a narrow tube). Possibly other aspects to think about--topology--maybe for paths using lots of feedback differences (distortion) might be more neutralized compared to a path without much feedback. Maybe distortion (obviously can be totally normal for some guitar paths to have distortion) and maybe if the possible change takes place where the ear is more sensitive (1-4 kHz?).

[tedmich]

audio specific caps are, perhaps, at the beginning of knowledge!

[JP-Stereo]

While doing a recap job on a good old NAD preamp, i upgraded all signal path component with the best component spec possible at a reasonnable price.
Metal film resistors, mica caps, best electrolytics, when possible i also replace with surface mount component installed on the trace side of the board to minimise the leads lenght.
Low tolerance, high ripple current, smallest package, etc.
Only examples, because for each component there are choices to do, also taking availablilty in consideration.

At first earing it sound very dissapointing, cold flat sound with no stage at all...
Then i let the unit run for a few hours, each time i came back to listen the sound was better.
After about 8 hours, i put back the first program i listen to and it was not the same at all.
Vibrant, present with a incredible sound stage and i can feel the depth and the width of the stage.
It continue to improve for a week...

I think that for the power supply, any good quality standard component are enough, but for the signal path top rating is critical.
There is a lot of specifications that can be impact the sound and they are not always comming together.
The lower noise is not always the better slew rate, the best internal resistance caps not always have the best ripple current rating, etc...
One have to experiment a lot...

[Pixel]

audio specific caps are, perhaps, at the beginning of knowledge!

I really like this quote.

In my day job I always say we have to be able to somehow measure what we do whether that be the quality of deliverables, costs, etc. I haven't been able to find an objective measure that applies to audio caps. Perhaps one day we will advance beyond pseudo-science in this area. Until then I will be happy with the extra Benjamin that audio caps bring on sale day.

[Helmholtz]

If all components in a tube guitar amp would be free from non-ideal effects, I guess no player would like the sound.

[Chuck H]

If all components in a tube guitar amp would be free from non-ideal effects, I guess no player would like the sound.

I laughed out loud at this brilliant statement. It's funny that my own goal has always been to stringently eliminate component deficiencies so that other aspects of operational conditions could be controlled. But it just doesn't always work that way. In fact there are a few of your posts you demonstrate that the shortcommings of certain components were taken into account by the designer and used to benefit the overall circuit or design. I guess if we did away with every flaw in the components and reasoned every aspect of layout then designing tube amps that are intended to distort wouldn't be a black art like alchemy anymore. And where's the fun in that?