Hey Dom,
Sorry it took while to get back. Your setup does seem challenging, especially for these big caps. And yes there are lots of concepts about caps and bypassing.
I wonder if some of these came from when less caps were as refined as they can be now, or from using nice, but not “really nice” caps that don’t mix as well? Don’t know, but I find nicer caps can mix well, though not all pure shoe-ins. So I know it can be tricky to try to conceptualize an ideal blend for a given speaker and system without actually trying some different caps, which I can do, but that is sort of unusual.
I think most cap “rules” have real basis, but not necessarily in all cases…ideas like: "no bypasses can integrate properly" "bypasses of the same cap type/bandwidth are needed to really work together," "caps are directional and must be put in with the outer winding closest to ground," or, "bypasses should be 10% or less of the cap value below," etc.
There can be truth to all of these and more, but when the goal is integration toward a holistic total cap sound that makes our system sound more real, I want to find any ways I can for improving natural extension and spectral balance; completeness from the finest detail to the most macro detail; immediacy, micro and macro dynamics bottom to top; spatial clarity and complete decays throughout; smooth and sweet inner detail and space that make it all alive and complex… I think concepts can be useful toward these ends, but if too rigid, they can also be barriers to discovery.
Trying to integrate Miflex KPAL Oil, Duelund bypasses with other bypasses, I was reminded how particular I have become as my system refines, and how much each cap matters… especially when they have notable signature characteristics like Duelund bypasses and this pretty distinctive warm but also very clear and spacious KPAL. With different bypasses and values between these two characterful caps it has been trickier to find the deep magic, even when all is relatively burnt in.
The big Miflex KPAL seem good now, the relatively full bass in the balance creating a warm feel without masking complex detail. Bass is faster, probably just a little slow for my tastes on its own, but there is something ingratiating about the slight lag in immediacy that is growing on me and I suspect contributes to the cap's tendency to a lively euphonic sound, while still having a pretty nice hit here. Enlivened by a notably clear and now more complex aluminum foil feel mids-up, the inner space and fine detail has gotten really good. And not surprisingly, everything works easier with the base cap more sweet and balanced. But good bypasses reflect/accentuate base cap balances…and with clearer bypasses, overall detail with the KPAL tends toward too crisp and bold for me. But the cap is quite compelling, so I have been working on bringing out the finer info with warmer yet resolving helpers, while building on the beautiful clear detail and ambient space qualities from the cap.
I first was settling with a 3.3 KPAL, with a 0.33 and 0.022 KPCU, and a 0.0022 Mallory 150… really, really nice here. Then I started adding more KPAL to see where I could take its sound. Now, down to refining two sets that have some nice flexibility and would likely translate pretty, well, I am relieved. I am a little worn out from trying so many cap for days, and listening this “hard” with a critical criteria that they enhance most recordings, so I am glad to simplify using mostly Miflex Oils for now.
Overall, in all tests I preferred 2-4 caps per tweeter, three and four cap sets sounding more complete and musical to me...
I had been trying to use a 0.1 knowing you might need one to reach a full 3.9 uF starting with a 3.3, and that extra cap fit into what it sounds like you got from Bob’s email… Adding different layers of caps can be challenging depending on the caps, perhaps taking work to find the really deep beauty. In my system, and a lot of nice cap choices, it seemed good either way, but for now I am back to what I was using before these tests, about 3.65 uF, and I agree that simplicity is easier when it works. Even so, I found a lot of good sounds using a 0.1 in the mix, and once “there,” pretty amazing, and in a different league for me than the stock caps that came with my HR-1+ upgrades, caps that sounded pretty good for small sizes that take little room, but not like these. And really, why would we even try if we didn’t hear possibilities for refining what is there?
More close to the set you are considering now, 3.3 and 0.47 KPCUs, I wanted to see what I thought with just on and two caps. Not the same, but a 3.3 KPAL alone sounded quite good, and adding a 0.33 KPCU it sounded quite good also, both nicely complex for having no high bypasses and indicating how good these Miflex oils are.
Then I added a 0.022 KPCU, harmonically enriching with more smooth/complex copper mixed with the KPAL, more fine information transparently and pleasantly integrated. Still, I liked this set better with a 0.0022 Mallory 150 bypassing the 0.022 Miflex Copper Oil, clearer, more spacious and articulate, while giving a little smooth warmth with increased fine detail, livelier, but staying relatively relaxed. The whole has a “trippy” soundstage loaded with ambience. Bending into “euphonic,” listening to caps so much slipped away….making me feel like I was more part of the music.
It is amazing what the right little cap can do with complimentary caps underneath. Divide 3.65 uF by .0022, the little bypass looks like it is 1/1659th of the whole. And I tried a .0047 first, then a .0033, before arriving at .0022, clear choices here. Your room with your speakers might well end up different, but I would not be surprised if you ended up preferring adding a 0.022 KPCU at least, and perhaps one of the Mallorys. And if you try this you will know how powerful small bypass can be, and not much $ risk, the small Miflex being low cost for the sound, and very small value Mallorys ridiculously so for what they can do with the .022 Miflex if "right" there. Though not always my choice, in this set, all caps were in the “right” direction, the ground line near the negative post, though I am not sure how the Mallory is supposed to go, and I find they can be “better” either way. One is milder and more spacious, and the other fuller/warmer with a bit more of everything — probably the “right” way, with the letters heading toward the negative post.
Now I am learning to utilize the spacious clarity of KPALs, a 3.3 KPAL, a 0.33 KPCU, a 0.022 KPAL, with a warm/smooth, but still clarifying (in this set) 0.01 Mundorf Silver/Gold Oil Evo. Changing from the 0.022 Copper Oil to 0.022 Aluminum Oil brought the KPAL detail and ambient qualities up, and with just the 0.022 high bypass, a nice complex balance. But wanting a little more fine detail and space, it got too hot on hotter recordings with a number of small bypasses I have. Then I remembered the warmer Mundorf Silver Gold Oil Evo, and so far it seems really good… allowing the sweet open clarity of the KPAL with the fine detail enlivened with a little warmth and solidity throughout, and without sacrificing complexity in any serious ways. So far it sounds really, really good. The little Mundorf I had found a little off-balance in more neutral settings a bit too much disparity between fine detail and thickish warmth and solidity. But now, it has a magical balancer with this KPAL/KPCU set, pulling the Aluminum Oil potential really nicely on first impressions. Now I can tune the CSP3 and ZRock fairly high if needed to bring it all together, tightening and enhancing bass, and lifting lucidity without concern for it getting too crisp, yet retaining a nice complex detail enhancement. Also the KPAL's slight bass slowness seems to have become pretty unnoticable, at least with the recordings I have heard so far. Looks like having done so much avoidance of compensation, my foundation is good enough for me to branch out and to start compensating more here and there!
I suspect that if I had a 3.3 KPCU, that I would not have had to work at it near this much, but I probably would not have found this particular beauty either. And though it was challenging to get it to work “just-so,” where each part together makes the whole better than the parts, it now sounds pretty right and quite beautiful in most every way… Not as richly complex and relaxed and "trippy" as the more copper set, but sounding more “accurate” and live, also having nice speed and solid hit, while being complexly and musically detailed and spacious …at least here, without hard edges that can easily come with clarity. Finally looking like a nice shift for me, I can't say this is "better" than the more copper set, which is closer to the set I have been using. But this more clear set so far looks like a nice alternative that is as good on first impressions, but different and exciting in its own ways. I never know with initial excitement, needing time to really "get" these things, but with any luck, I will be ready to fix up these connections without clips after a few days of digesting the sound with more music!
How these basic arrangements might translate into your setup, can’t know, but I can say they work nicely here, and there is a fair bit of flexibility with 4 caps, allowing trying more and less bypasses, and trying caps in different directions… so a nice variety to play with… and it would likely be even easier using all KPCU, a 3.3, 0.47, and 0.022 before a little Mallory.
Interestingly, the more refined my system/room has become, pretty much one part at a time required to be an improvement, I can say, that if all is done with care for complete balances, especially with some value changes here and there when needed, each “addition” amazingly continues to make the whole better. And the deep beauty needs parts that can go there, but perhaps it has been less about parts and wires
doing this or that, than parts and wires
not doing this or that. If they are complete and balanced in most ways, little or nothing left out, and little or nothing getting in the way, I am thinking it is a lot about synergistically eliminating inhibitors to unrestricted and relatively uncolored musical beauty.
This seems about the same as saying greater and greater resolution, in balance, allows us to hear all that is there in the recording, including unclouded space with relatively discrete complex detail — the base sounds feathering into and contrasted by beautiful clear space... where a lot of the magic lives.
I am probably just scraping the surface, but more and more I think this pattern is leading to euphonic beauty, which in one sense does not make much sense. My conditioned view of “euphonic” has been associated with pleasantly syrupy and colored sound that holds space and detail really well, making it sweet when not overstated. But the more every part together supports complexity, balance and space, I am thinking that less colored harmonic complexity and spatial beauty can create a “euphonic” beauty beyond this… a sound that we trust as natural, so more easily pulling us into an immersive experience.
And layers of well put together bypasses can clearly effect all of this, whether in an amp, or DAC, or speakers.… finally coming down to the caps used and how they compliment one another and the system. And the more I try, the more I find that if each cap layer, or wire, or resistor does what it does more-or-less without compromise or exaggeration, including not having exaggerated detail consolidation and hardness, this has been the easiest way to get deeper beauty for me.
As to Duelund bypasses, I think I have learned that if caps under the Duelunds are a little warm and complex and harmonically rich, then the powerfully stated Duelunds reflect the richness of the caps below, integrating better, even beautifully… especially if part of a higher value cap set, the bigger caps taking up more of the sound space. I previously had not figured this out, many of my Duelund experiences with smaller value cap positions or sets, or with bigger value that were already pretty well articulated and clearly stated, so the Duelunds were too much. That said, though they can sound amazing, they still tend to put me a little on edge in many settings, but at least they have become a realer choice lately, which is a shift for me.
So I think with this expressive cap, context really matters. And considering all the work I have done to make my speakers, amps, and all faster, more resolving, spacious and complex, what shows up as a little exaggerated here could be a welcome addition in many settings depending on the speakers and system and room. I don’t have a lot in the way anymore, so the system/room shows traits of parts quite clearly for better or worse. Where 4-5 years ago, with also highly resolving tuning, but a less resolving system and room, the Duelunds instead of being a bit consolidated and powerfully stated, might have helped cut through subtle masks and slowness enough that I would have fallen for their traits, heightening beauty rather than tending to over-stated. I can imagine this especially since I was able to get the tinned copper to more-or-less integrate with beauty in a few of these tests sets in my present setup. Also, my fav tinned copper is the old handmade type, and the JDMs I have tried seem a little milder overall. So though I don’t have a 0.01 JDM tinned copper for direct comparison,
I am guessing the JDM tinned copper might be a little easier for me to use?
That said, and back to simplicity, the bigger 3.9 KPCU, known to be a highly evolved cap, might carry and utilize the Duelund quite well as a two cap set. Back to your beginning consideration. Or, a Duelund might be really good in your setting with your latest idea of starting with a 3.3 and 0.47.
I will write some thoughts on resistors in a little bit, but I hope this helps!
And having been writing this over some days as I experimented and learned, I just noticed your new thoughts on crossover platforms and wires after posting, an inventive idea that I will think about and get back on as well. Off hand though a pertinent potential issue would be raising the speakers and changing how you hear their balance. So maybe worth playing with some sort of minimally resonant risers to see what those effects might be before going too far into planning. This is part of why I am planning on a nice crossover box that will be a foot or so behind the speakers.
Will
Pages: 1
ERR modifications (Read 8869 times)
