Do you leave your components on 24/7?

03-09-11: Audiofeil
>>03-09-11: Sebrof
I think people give way to(sp) much credence(sp) to what the manufacturers say<<
Good point.
It would be silly to think the manufacturers know more about their products than you.

Never said I new more, I just said they're is little reason for the manufacturer to do the test so in most cases they do not, and that their are other reasons for releasing statements two customers then what mite look at face value.

Well said.... Rodman...

NOR did I say, "I can't explain why." There are numerous reasons. ie: It takes some time for the dielectrics within capacitors to fully form/absorb their charge, once they have been discharged(http://www.designers-guide.org/Modeling/da.pdf), and they WILL NOT sound the same, before and after. The better the dielectric(ie: Teflon, polypropylene, polystyrene), the longer that process takes. Regardless of what facts are presented; those of you that are concrete(thoroughly mixed up, and completely set) in your beliefs, will NEVER be convinced! Why bother trying? Tooth Fairy? One thing of which I AM now fully convinced: YOU are King of Unfounded Assumptions(especially regarding others, their knowledge, experience and capabilities.

03-09-11: Rodman99999
NOR did I say, "I can't explain why." There are numerous reasons. ie: It takes some time for the dielectrics within capacitors to fully form/absorb their charge, once they have been discharged(www.designers-guide), and they WILL NOT sound the same, before and after. The better the dielectric(ie: Teflon, polypropylene, polystyrene), the longer that process takes. Regardless of what facts are presented; those of you that are concrete(thoroughly mixed up, and completely set) in your beliefs, will NEVER be convinced! Why bother trying? Tooth Fairy? One thing of which I AM now fully convinced: YOU are King of Unfounded Assumptions(especially regarding others, their knowledge, experience and capabilities.

the article that you cited about dielectric absorption was quite interesting and all, but did you actually read the article before you cited it? as interesting as it is, i don't see how it is of any relevance to this topic. the reason why the author was concerned about dielectric absorption was for its effect in sample and hold circuits. i can see how that would be relevant to someone designing a high-speed sample and hold circuit, but i don't see how it is relevant to audio equipment [for example, the article refers to a capacitance model that has a frequency pole in the 20MHz frequency range]. nor, for that matter, is there any suggestion in the article that dielectric absorption has anything to do with powering on/off equipment.

am i convinced by your arguments? no, i'm not. i don't know what you know, but from my perspective, your use of grammatical histrionics in your postings makes me suspicious that you are trying to rely upon histrionics in lieu of substance. i don't find that kind of "I KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT!" argumentation to be very persuasive; i'm much more likely to believe a well reasoned argument (one that sets forth a logical basis for the conclusion) instead.

Blah, blah, blah! Again- your being comprehensively challenged, has revealed itself. The very first paragraph of that treatise states, "Less appreciated, but no less important, is the
role it plays in determining the quality factor, or Q, of the capacitor. Dielectric absorption
has both storage and loss components that act, and are significant, over the entire
usable frequency range of the capacitor." That audio signals are much more complex, and their components more delicate, than anything that might pass a sample and hold circuit, obviously escapes you. Nor am I surprised that you do not understand how DA would relate to powering a circuit up and down. I believe I mentioned that, regardless of facts presented; I would not expect one such as you, to be convinced, in the least. It seems I have entered a battle of wits, with an unarmed individual. Enjoy, "The Last Word." You have become quite tedious.