Cheap caps worth buying?

[HogmanA]

Despite science, we still have the phenomenon: some guitarists claim to hear a difference and some do not.

While there is the possibility that this is due to 'placebo effect', let's consider David's tests.

Even though I fully expected to hear a difference, I did not.

Did anyone else who expected to hear difference actually hear one?


What those tests have helped to do is weaken the 'placebo effect' argument.










^

 

[freefrog]

If my life wasn’t full of much more vital things, I’d feel as a pain to see EACH discussion about tone caps falling sooner or later in the trap of endless arguments, where the mind boggling complexity of lived reality disappears behind big “visions of life” struggling against each others.

And I DO suffer to some extent when I see some members that I respect caught in an online fight.

Is it NOT possible to take the question with a bit more openness to incertitude, to our own human frailty, and a bit less tendency to generalize abruptly?


A while back, I’ve tried to “measure the opinion” about guitar tone caps on another forum. I was questioning pickups winders and specialized guitar techs. I’ve quickly been punished for my naive candor: the question was judged so implicitly “indecent” that I’ve been almost immediately satirized… then my topic has been closed as if I was a troll (while I’m a 52 years old dude with a PhD, moderator on a guitar forum in my country and earning my life by teaching in a school for engineers).

Since this day, I’ve decided to stay away from this eternally reborn debate about tone caps. "Too much noise, not enough signal", to quote a metaphor used by one of our fellow members and that I've found spot on...

[EDIT - What I've wrote above makes me edit out a few personal details that I had inserted here. Those who know my past contributions will understand].

 

[Matt_Krush]

If you play with your pots dimed all the time, you will not notice any difference.

HEY!
I resemble that statement.

I actually have 1 Gibson that the tone for the neck pickup is rolled back...slightly...
Twenty-two years...never used the tone controls.

 

[David Collins]

Despite science, we still have the phenomenon: some guitarists claim to hear a difference and some do not.

While there is the possibility that this is due to 'placebo effect', let's consider David's tests.

Even though I fully expected to hear a difference, I did not.

Did anyone else who expected to hear difference actually hear one?


What those tests have helped to do is weaken the 'placebo effect' argument.










^

Not quite - that's actually a misunderstanding of what placebo effect means. Whether you consciously expect to hear a difference or not, the correct and logical interpretation of the results would be as this -

If listeners noticed a difference when they knew which caps were engaged (non-blind comparison), and then could also identify a difference when they could not see which cap was engaged (blind test), that would indicate a true noticeable change in tone, non-placebo.

If differences were clearly perceived in non blind tests, but unable to be identified in blind tests, that would indicate placebo effect was involved.

You may have been expecting to be able to identify a difference, but if you could do so only in open comparisons but not in blind ones, that is a textbook example of indicating placebo effect.

Just trying to clarify methods and definitions. We do indeed have a phenomenon. The challenge is to determine if this phenomenon is one of electrical or psychological nature.

 

[chupe442]

HEY!
I resemble that statement.

I actually have 1 Gibson that the tone for the neck pickup is rolled back...slightly...
Twenty-two years...never used the tone controls.

Me too.. Neck pick up is pretty much the only one I mess with (if at all)... Bridge is always dimed out.

 

[HogmanA]

Not quite - that's actually a misunderstanding of what placebo effect means. Whether you consciously expect to hear a difference or not, the correct and logical interpretation of the results would be as this -

If listeners noticed a difference when they knew which caps were engaged (non-blind comparison), and then could also identify a difference when they could not see which cap was engaged (blind test), that would indicate a true noticeable change in tone, non-placebo.

If differences were clearly perceived in non blind tests, but unable to be identified in blind tests, that would indicate placebo effect was involved.

You may have been expecting to be able to identify a difference, but if you could do so only in open comparisons but not in blind ones, that is a textbook example of indicating placebo effect.

Just trying to clarify methods and definitions. We do indeed have a phenomenon. The challenge is to determine if this phenomenon is one of electrical or psychological nature.

No - your test was a blind test - I didn't hear any differences.

Are you saying that if you had revealed the capacitors first, I would have heard a difference?

Of course, that requires its own control.

But I did expect to hear a difference, even if I couldn't see the capacitors - I still expected the difference, yet didn't. It doesn't matter what causes the expectation in this instance.








^

 

[David Collins]

This is a misunderstanding of what "placebo effect" means.

When effects are noticed in open comparisons, but no effect detectable in blind tests, this indicates placebo.

The wine analogy I spelled out earlier. If people claim the red glass makes the wine taste different, but then when they come in for a blindfold taste test cannot identify any difference, this would indicate that the differences they did taste before was most likely placebo effect. Make sense?

 

[TKOjams]

This should put some claims to rest. The only time caps make a difference is when comparing different value caps to each other.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=92G-jw4TqS4[/ame]

 

[David Collins]

This should put some claims to rest. The only time caps make a difference is when comparing different value caps to each other.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=92G-jw4TqS4

Again though, if the player or listener are aware of which specimen is engaged at which time, the test is fully vulnerable to being corrupted. This type of comparison does nothing to determine whether results are actually affected by the cap, or steered and influenced through subconscious bias either in playing or perception.

 

[HogmanA]

This is a misunderstanding of what "placebo effect" means.

When effects are noticed in open comparisons, but no effect detectable in blind tests, this indicates placebo.

The wine analogy I spelled out earlier. If people claim the red glass makes the wine taste different, but then when they come in for a blindfold taste test cannot identify any difference, this would indicate that the differences they did taste before was most likely placebo effect. Make sense?

In your test, if we use the wine analogy, you:

Put the same wine in different coloured glasses (people knew you were testing different capacitors), but didn't tell them which wine was in which glass.

Despite the different coloured glasses (or knowledge of different caps) which all equate to expectation, all the wine tasted the same.

In your case, indicating that tasters could overcome the expectation bias.

Placebo effect is not set in stone, and doesn't always work. It's not 100%.


TKO Jams - that video only shows where the effect of different tone capacitors isn't - he in not using any drive, and his findings completely agree with mine on that point alone.

 

[David Collins]

HogmanA, I like discussing things with you, but I feel there we're talking from two different worlds here. I'm not even talking about caps any more, but simply broad concepts and definitions.

To be fair "placebo effect", while a fairly used colloquialism in this setting in that it refers to belief or expectations influencing effects or perceptions, is not a perfect description. Still...

When (situation A) differences are noticed in non-blind comparisons, this leaves open the possibility that expectations or peripheral sensory stimulus could be influencing effects.

When (situation B) comparisons are done blind, this is done to eliminate the opportunity for other stimulus or bias to affect results or perception.

There is nothing here about anyone overcoming expectation bias at all. Rather, the opportunity for expectation bias to influence results is only there when participants can see which sample is engaged. Even if someone expects to be able to identify a difference, blind testing ideally removes opportunity for expectation bias to influence results.

If participants could readily identify a difference in situation A above, yet fail to do so in situation B, this indicates that they were likely influenced by expectation bias when information was available for expectation bias to have influence, but unable to identify a change when influence of expectation bias was removed.


There is no overcoming of expectation bias in a blind test. Rather, blind tests are designed to remove expectation bias from the results. You can still expect to be able to detect a difference going in (and in fact participants should in order for the tests to be fair), but if you don't know which sample is in use at any given time, then the ability of these expectations to influence results has been removed, not overcome.

Perhaps an oversimplified definition, but "placebo effect" simply refers to a change being noticed when you believe or expect a change should occur. This type of blind testing is designed to remove influence of expectation bias, to see if those effects are still detectable when opportunity for expectation bias to influence results is removed.

 

[TKOjams]

Again though, if the player or listener are aware of which specimen is engaged at which time, the test is fully vulnerable to being corrupted. This type of comparison does nothing to determine whether results are actually affected by the cap, or steered and influenced through subconscious bias either in playing or perception.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=817JHiYV_Po[/ame]

 

[TKOjams]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7Hu52vmxE0[/ame]

 

[Alligatorbling]

man buys guitar that cost 5,000 dollars.... man argues about components that cost pennies.

try them all, pick your favorite.

 

[TKOjams]

trying them all is a huge waste of time, unless you're comparing different values.
Caps of the same value sound the same, doesn't matter what their made of. But you have to check their value with a multi meter as older caps are prone to leakage and might sound slightly different, when comparing them. So you can't always go by what the cap "was" or the value written on it when it was produced.
To perpetuate the snake oil myth that type of cap can make a huge difference in guitar tone is dishonest at best.

But much like tonewood, the debate will march on...

 

[MATTM]

guitar tone is dishonest at best and simply put, totally wrong.

You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but the statement you made above is complete BS.

 

[SpareRibs]

Hello,
I'll stop in 6 pages from now to see if a final conclusion has been reached. So far all I can see is everybody agrees that every everybody is wrong except them.

 

[Alty]

"Background
When electric guitars were first introduced with ‘on-board’ volume and tone controls, the tone control was equipped with a ‘wound foil’ capacitor. Because the capacitor is made using a long length of coiled up aluminium foil, sandwiched inside a thin polyester or Mylar membrane, the capacitor has a small amount of undesired ‘inductance’ as well as the desired capacitance.

Explanation
In the professional electronics world, it has long been known that a ‘coil’ of inductive material like this can be very attractive to radio frequency transmissions from far off shortwave radio stations, taxis, aircraft', etc. This is why most radio sets working on the old Long, Medium and Shortwave frequency bands employ coils of wire inside them. They are used to help tune in the stations and could not work without them.

The guitar’s Tone control capacitor’s capacitance combined with this small amount of inductance forms what is known as a ‘resonant tuned circuit’ - just like inside the radio set. That tuned circuit’s resonant frequency is often coincident with the transmissions from radio stations or other broadcasters.

When ‘ceramic’ capacitors came along, the industry quickly changed to them... for two reasons. They were cheaper and, more importantly, they are NOT inductive. Therefore, switching to these meant that the risk of induced unwanted interference from far off shortwave radio stations was practically eliminated!

“Foil Capacitors Are A Must Have Tone Improvement!”
Take my word as an electronics professional, that’s simply not true! “But we’re told that foil capacitors are essential for great guitar tone.” Well, yes, they are better quality for good high frequency applications, but they are only brought into use when the tone control is set to minimum treble.

In which case the treble control, through its capacitor, is shorting all the high frequencies to ground. You don’t need a high quality capacitor for this purpose. So you’ll never hear their superior performance... ever!

At maximum treble, the capacitor is out of circuit entirely but can still induce RF (radio frequencies) into the instrument. Before you decide to rip out that ‘ceramic’ capacitor, think carefully about what I have said! Save your money and do not install ‘bumble bee’ or ‘orange drop’ capacitors.

You could find, depending on where you live or how close you are to radio transmitters, that installing them will make radio interference more of a problem. Even the time of the year can make RF interference much more prevalent... so why increase the risks?

Ceramic capacitors are used extensively (or should be) inside guitar amplifiers too. They are used to decouple (short to ground) RF from the power supply rails. This job cannot (should not) be done with foil capacitors for the same reasons already given! CERAMIC CAPS ARE NOT NASTY EVIL THINGS AT ALL!

“Foil Caps Are Best, Everyone Says So!”
Sadly, there’s a lot of ‘opinion’ out there, but forums are the best place for misinformation. They are where ‘semi-skilled brain surgeons’ live! And in any case, because something is widely believed, doesn’t make it right!"

Science beats BS everytime....no matter how many times you say it.

Stewart Ward - Guitar amp designer since 1967.