Dear @jasbirnandra @sns : ""
how many hours of burn in will open the cap."" "
Prior to burn in...."
Been a follower in the past I asked the same questions thinking to go in the rigth path and deceited by my self ears and because I wanted that that been happening no matters what .
My ignorance levels in that specific regards was really high till I learned through technical oriented gentlemans that know " what is all about a capacitors ".
If you can read carefully the next information ( that does not comes by me. ) to know that are our ears the ones ( along other " things " ) that makes a self deceit because caps does not need burn-in:
"""""" Speaking from science, not superstition, I have yet to see -- or hear -- proof that film capacitors need to "settle in."
The reasons you use film capacitors are: (1) they more closely approximate the theoretical ideal of a capacitor than electrolytics -- especially in regard to frequency response; (2) they are far less inclined to change their characteristics than electrolytics; (3) if carefully manufactured, the foil and dialectric are evenly wound or layered.
Note point (3). If a capacitor is NOT evenly wound or layered, then the capacitance per unit area along the foil wrap will exhibit a higher statistical variance; and this variance will show up as a correspondingly higher statistical variance in the transfer of signal through the electric field, which can further yield an indistinctness in phase response on the "downside" of the capacitor.
So, here's the challenge: what, other than an accommodation factor in the listening, is the technical explanation for why a film capacitor would need a "settling" or "burn-in" time?
One thing is clear about breaking in speakers . . . the compliance of the spider, and often of the surround DOES change with use (they become more compliant). Old speakers that have been sitting around a long time often have unduly stiff spiders.
Styli usually sag a little after a break-in phase, and need to have the VTA recalibrated.
* * * * *
Take a box of styrofoam chips and shake it. After a while, the chips do indeed settle. The semi-random motion of the chips allows them to fill more spaces between each other, plus as they settle the lumped potential energy declines as the center of mass of the chips moves slightly down.
So . . . are there physical imperfections in the manufacture of capacitors which allow small amounts of internal movement in the capacitor during the so-called "break in" time, such that the capacitor arrives at a lower energy state?
In an ideal capacitor, nothing should move.
. . . has anyone measured the microphonic characteristics of capacitors said to settle in over time? Has anyone determined if there's a tiny change in temperature? """"""
" I'll be the odd man out. I have never seen any evidence that capacitors, particularly film capacitors, require a burn-in. If a film capacitor significantly changes after, say, 25-50 hours of use, I quickly unsolder it, toss it in the trash and replace it with a stable device.
Film capacitors are not cheese or wine.
What "burns in" is the human brain, and this is referred to in psychoacoustics and elsewhere by terms like "perceptual accommodation". ""
""" With the exception of electrolytic capacitors in DC power supplies, capacitors don't burn-in. """
""" Honestly, if a film capacitor needs any sort of "break-in", it's poorly constructed and should be avoided """
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/capacitor-burn-in-how-long-does-it-really-take.442436/
Low QC with boutique caps is the real issue of that no-sense needs of " burn-in ".
Certainly not me but no one of you can prove it needs burn-in other than its low quality construction that makes that over 100-200+ hours of " play " its operation parameters changed ( this fact goes against the elctronics normal behavior and in speakers makes changes in the crossover frequency. ) when in any good engineered capacitor that does not happens.
So the boutique cap does not " improves " over time but the other way around: it just degraded through that time and it's this high degradation of the cap what we are listening through our imperfect and way limited ears.
In any audio system nothing can improve over time. The best that could happens in an ideal audio system is not degrade the audio signal we are listening but unfortunatelly this " ideal " audio system does not exist but in our imagination.
"" Does a capacitor improve sound quality?
A cap prevents the sound from deteriorating due to under-voltage, but doesn't actually improve the sound. It supports the amplifier by feeding it the power it needs for short bursts. So, while not improving sound quality directly, a cap does make it easier for the amp to perform its best. ""
A good cap makes that, a boutique cap can't do it.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.
Been a follower in the past I asked the same questions thinking to go in the rigth path and deceited by my self ears and because I wanted that that been happening no matters what .
My ignorance levels in that specific regards was really high till I learned through technical oriented gentlemans that know " what is all about a capacitors ".
If you can read carefully the next information ( that does not comes by me. ) to know that are our ears the ones ( along other " things " ) that makes a self deceit because caps does not need burn-in:
"""""" Speaking from science, not superstition, I have yet to see -- or hear -- proof that film capacitors need to "settle in."
The reasons you use film capacitors are: (1) they more closely approximate the theoretical ideal of a capacitor than electrolytics -- especially in regard to frequency response; (2) they are far less inclined to change their characteristics than electrolytics; (3) if carefully manufactured, the foil and dialectric are evenly wound or layered.
Note point (3). If a capacitor is NOT evenly wound or layered, then the capacitance per unit area along the foil wrap will exhibit a higher statistical variance; and this variance will show up as a correspondingly higher statistical variance in the transfer of signal through the electric field, which can further yield an indistinctness in phase response on the "downside" of the capacitor.
So, here's the challenge: what, other than an accommodation factor in the listening, is the technical explanation for why a film capacitor would need a "settling" or "burn-in" time?
One thing is clear about breaking in speakers . . . the compliance of the spider, and often of the surround DOES change with use (they become more compliant). Old speakers that have been sitting around a long time often have unduly stiff spiders.
Styli usually sag a little after a break-in phase, and need to have the VTA recalibrated.
* * * * *
Take a box of styrofoam chips and shake it. After a while, the chips do indeed settle. The semi-random motion of the chips allows them to fill more spaces between each other, plus as they settle the lumped potential energy declines as the center of mass of the chips moves slightly down.
So . . . are there physical imperfections in the manufacture of capacitors which allow small amounts of internal movement in the capacitor during the so-called "break in" time, such that the capacitor arrives at a lower energy state?
In an ideal capacitor, nothing should move.
. . . has anyone measured the microphonic characteristics of capacitors said to settle in over time? Has anyone determined if there's a tiny change in temperature? """"""
" I'll be the odd man out. I have never seen any evidence that capacitors, particularly film capacitors, require a burn-in. If a film capacitor significantly changes after, say, 25-50 hours of use, I quickly unsolder it, toss it in the trash and replace it with a stable device.
Film capacitors are not cheese or wine.
What "burns in" is the human brain, and this is referred to in psychoacoustics and elsewhere by terms like "perceptual accommodation". ""
""" With the exception of electrolytic capacitors in DC power supplies, capacitors don't burn-in. """
""" Honestly, if a film capacitor needs any sort of "break-in", it's poorly constructed and should be avoided """
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/capacitor-burn-in-how-long-does-it-really-take.442436/
Low QC with boutique caps is the real issue of that no-sense needs of " burn-in ".
Certainly not me but no one of you can prove it needs burn-in other than its low quality construction that makes that over 100-200+ hours of " play " its operation parameters changed ( this fact goes against the elctronics normal behavior and in speakers makes changes in the crossover frequency. ) when in any good engineered capacitor that does not happens.
So the boutique cap does not " improves " over time but the other way around: it just degraded through that time and it's this high degradation of the cap what we are listening through our imperfect and way limited ears.
In any audio system nothing can improve over time. The best that could happens in an ideal audio system is not degrade the audio signal we are listening but unfortunatelly this " ideal " audio system does not exist but in our imagination.
"" Does a capacitor improve sound quality?
A cap prevents the sound from deteriorating due to under-voltage, but doesn't actually improve the sound. It supports the amplifier by feeding it the power it needs for short bursts. So, while not improving sound quality directly, a cap does make it easier for the amp to perform its best. ""
A good cap makes that, a boutique cap can't do it.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.