New Sozo caps

[billyoung]

----

[billyoung]

------

[chief mushroom cloud]

heres a post from metro board


listen to this amp


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AnGsMAnmoi4

its not easy to get that tone.
is
think you need to do complete spectral and network analysis.

even tube are not linear and only matched at like one frequency, so to be honest they may match at frequency

of tester but do they match over entire frequency range they get used at. 6000 hz is a big component of most guitar

signals......personally I dont like 1 khz rather see it scooped.

I havent seen proper analysis of the real plexi, spectrum analysis over the range being used.

public broadcasting tested multi million dollar violins versus $30 k violins vintage last tuesday.

using blind folded virtusos's and the results were embarassing to the top violinists.

They felt and played them. Most guessed wrong on which was the multi-million dollar violins,

only one guy was in good humor about it. Just shows to go you how bad ears are.

Ears have to go from pin drop to full jet engine afterburner sound pressure levels and survive,

miraculous sound instruments, however any half decent audio analyzer is way way way better

at measuring and characterizing sound. Ears are logametric detector ie the decibel, and dont

detect sound levels in a linear way , have to increase sound levels by logametric jumps before even

the most discerning ear can distinguish differences, where as a good distortion analyzer can resolve

like .05 % distortion products, so even crude instruments can beat the ear hands down. This tells us

if we can discern difference in types of signal caps it will stick out like a sore thumb to audio analyzers.

This is not like putting man on moon engineering wise. A proper *(even crude analysis of say the black flag

marshall jtm50 with mustard caps and nos mullard tubes or like amperex bugle boys is easily doable,

but the tester needs to know which parameters are important to the subjective listener, which again

can only resolve logametric jumps. You need like bruel and kjar calibrated mikes (like owsley used for

grateful dead in the legendary wall of sound) and some recording analyzers which now a days are alot easier

to do with the computerization of test equipment. basically if we hear differences its going to show up by a ton in data.

So in order to duplicate the sounds, start with measuring the sounds in question , rather than the paper and winding pattern

of a RS deluxe transformer. To properly reverse engineer this type of equipment you first need to scientifically

determine the behavior and data of the electronic devices in question. Its kinda like audiophiles claiming the can hear the

capacitance of wiring a tube amp with teflon wire. Prove it scientfically. I dont buy it !! A virtuoso cant tell a 5 million

dollar violin versus a 30 k violin, even when touching and feeling it while its being played. And they probably have a much

more educated ear than a drunken eric clapton on heroin, or keith richards (worth 300 million $ ). It should be real easy to

measure the difference, I am sure nasa could collect the data in less tha a days time. This isnt close to rocket science.

Given enough paper and typewriter ribbon a monkey can type the king james bible (given an infinite lifespan)

and we can calculate how long it should take, but is it worth doing ? Alot of audio mythology is the same kinda deal.

If we can not hear it (discern the differences) then chasing it, is not worth the effort involved. So much of audio is pure

crap. The best studio tape machines in the world were really not workable above 15 khz, yet audiophiles claim to hear

the high end (over 15khz) in the recordings. Due to the limitations of tape head construction in sa a 2 inch 24 track Studer

tape machine those frequencies were not there in the master, so millions of hours arguing over the high end sounds in

audiophile equipment was all pure FU*CKING fantasy. I think the same applies to vintage electronics. If it aint in the

master it sure isnt there in the millionth duplicate of the master. I have an audio engineer friend who knows his shit

and we used to laugh. I had a big collection of mc Intosh tube amps and we tested an mc75 75 watt amp at 225 watts,

but the distortion was like 5%, however you can get 225 watts out of two measly 6550/kt88 s, which is asounding. You need

frank's special bifilar wound transformers to get it tho, so dont think a 50 watt jmp can crank 225 watts but i bet you can

load it down to a 100 watts. Mc Intosh made fine amps and there were many in the wall of sound system. Guitar amps

are very crude in comparison to say a mc intosh mc75 or mc275, but we want the cool distortion sounds. (cool being even

order harmonic distortion.) We dont look for signal to noise specs of say minus 92 db from a guitar amp, but its sure is nice

in a live PA System for a rock concert.



If I record brahms with a recording oscillograph and look at the paper print out would it be the same as going to a going

to a great performance ?

I believe we can hear the differences in changing a compliment of signal caps in a classic guitar amp circuit, therefore the

measurements should be glaringly obvious, Even a cheap pc based spectral display with a powered condensor mike,(has

three terminals on thge 1/8 male jack and cost like 5 bucks) is much much better than a human ear. So for christs sake

someone measure the spectrum of these guitar amps like the jtm50 tube rectifier, so progress can really be made. Its not

the signal cap per se we listen to, Its the electronic network of the capacitors in a circuit including the loudspeakers and

cabinet design. Ken bran said the speakers make the biggest difference between the 5f6a bassman and the jtm45 s, which

he determined to interchanging the components one by one. He was surprised by the contribution of the radio spares

deluxe versus the fender ( maybe a schumaker ??). This stuff scientifically is not quantuum physics, mathematically.

Probably people enjoy amps like they enjoy antiques, but the tone and sound are not the "patina " of an antique paul revere

silver set. If you want a louis the 14th china cabinet, then you may not care how a plexi really sounds, Heck I bet you

could isolate alot of the guitar from the original blues breaker album and characterize the "data" sound of the original amp

that put marshall on the map. the english couldnt get 100 watt fender amps or Les Paul guitar accross the pond, which made

marshall flourish, If leo could have suppled england efficiently maybe the plexi would not have even existed, and jim would

have just run a music store/drum shop.

THIS is the most sane post I've ever seen on any forum.

[vibratoking]

THIS is the most sane post I've ever seen on any forum.

I generally agree with the OPs points, but there are many holes left open. This is not gonna convince anyone that believes otherwise. There is not much besides opinion and hand waving. A common sense argument full of holes certainly isn't going to sway anyone. And anyone playing devil's advocate will easily find reasons why the OP's theory is incorrect. Just sayin...

[billyoung]

------

[vibratoking]

Dood, I basically agreed with the general premise and still you're on your soap box? Did you read what I wrote? I freely admit that I didn't read what you wrote in your last post. Way to much babbling for me.

NOT ONE NUMBER HAS BEEN COLLECTED AND WE ALREADY HAVE INVALID DATA WITH HOLES IN IT ???????????????

I'll answer this nonsense with one simple fact. If you knew the difference between AC and transient analysis, you would not be completely focused on spectral analysis. It doesn't tell the whole story. Measuring the output spectrum with a Les Paul plugged into a Plexi? Explain how you're going to do that. Sorry, but spouting off with uninformed comments isn't going to help your cause. It just makes you look uninformed. The truth is, you don't know what the fuck you are talking about although you sure are passionate about it. I can respect your passion. It's awesome.

[billyoung]

---

[billyoung]

------

[RWood]

Although Izotope is not the best way to measure......Its sure better than huma ears.
Please explain why its wrong to look at reality of the general output
of what people incessantly argue over ???.

Because I can only hear an amp with my ears so I don't give a rat's ass about other methods of measurement. If you can hear with your eyes looking at a graph or meter then have at it, you'll get no argument from me.
Just my opinion...which is just about as worthless as that rat's ass that I don't give about other measurements.

[cbass]

I can certainly hear differences in caps. Especially in certain spots. Its not something that's going to make or break an amp though.
Try replacing a ceramic treble cap with mica domino of the same value and it definitely changes. Try the same thing with the peakers on a 2203 circuit

[vibratoking]

I regret posting on this one. There is now a contradictory and mostly unintelligible mess in which someone appears to be on both sides of the fence.

[Reeltarded]

Because I can only hear an amp with my ears so I don't give a rat's ass about other methods of measurement.

[billyoung]

I have been in recovery over 30 years .....will try to delete my posts. I also

have same illness as Ken Fischer. Alot of mean people here it seems.

[John_P_WI]

I'll be civil and I'll throw this out, why be so focused on the caps?

IMHO, if you are delving into the micro watt adventure, the caps are going to be 10% or less of the "tone". Do you not think that a difference in tubes, transformers, modern resistors, pot tapers, voltages, and a difference in (or no) "back voltages" from the speaker through the PI, how hard the speakers are driven, the smoothing of the tone when the OT saturates, difference in PA compression, power supply sag will not impact the tone (just naming a few)?

There is a reason late 60's Plexis sound that way, and it is not only the caps. Trust me, there is something to be said and to behold about a vintage Pexi on 10 with good Les Paul, I agree.

Not flaming, just advising that there is a whole lot of variables to be considered beyond caps and their spectral analysis. I find 6v6's to be "mushy" and small tubes to be "fizzy"... focusing on caps without considering the rest of the "system" would be foolish and would be one of my last concerns.

[jelle]

I regret posting on this one. There is now a contradictory and mostly unintelligible mess in which someone appears to be on both sides of the fence.

There are two sides to this fence.