Nichicon Series Replacement Capacitors

mustang1102

mustang1102

AK Subscriber
Subscriber
This may be a stupid question, and I apologize if this has been beat to death by others, so I apologize in advance if this is a rehash of the past, but I'm looking for just a little common sense and wisdom from you veteran repair folks in regards to this issue. When looking for suitable replacement Nichicon caps for Audio gear, like in the pre or power amplifier sections of the Pioneer units, there obviously are a lot of "options" in the series of caps when it comes to selecting what is needed. I'm trying to decide if paying more for a cap that is designed for audio equipment is worth the extra cost, or if a general purpose cap is adequate and sufficient to be used as replacements in amplifier sections.

It seems that the UPW series is the most commonly cited replacement, which according to Nichicon is a "General Purpose" cap. But then there is:

UKA - High Grade, For Audio Equipment
UKZ - Premium Grade, For Audio Equipment
UFG - High Grade, For Audio Equipment
UKT - General Audio Equipment
UKW - Standard, For Audio Equipment
UFW - Standard, For Audio Equipment
USW - For Audio Equipment
UMW - General Audio Equipment

Obviously, the Premium and High Grade caps cost more, as well as some of those other ones listed. Is it worth the cost to replace with these higher grade caps? Is it just about sound quality, can the average listener tell any difference in sound between a premium cap like the UKZ or the general purpose UPW, which is much less expensive. Any thoughts would be appreciated.... Thanks.
 
Register to hide this ad
Add to your list UES. the nice green ones. I like to use the UKA/UES/UKL for signal paths.
You are basically splitting hairs. As a person buying a few it is not such a big deal, if you are a mfg buying 1000's, then the differences add up real fast.
Logically, if you look at the specs they tell some of the story.
Sonically it is a can of worms. How does an ecap sound musically?
I have seen some use these ecaps in precision oscillators, the best was UES, but we are talking ppm numbers here.
Good luck
 
The only specialty cap I specify is the Nichicon UKL capacitors, low leakage caps. I have proved that when the CEANL cap is called for in the BOM, the UKL is needed, I HAVE done side(L) by side(R) comparisons, and proved increased noise floors.

All modern caps tend to beat 70's caps, even when they were new.

Arguing "sound" or "tonality" is like a religious or political argument - there is no universal answer.

My stance is and has been that unless physics and repeatable measurements can PROVE the improvement, it's snake oil.

There are a LOT of improved capacitors out there, but the improvements are NOT aimed at Audio, but rather for one example the electromagnetic hell of a switching power supply - where ESR and HEAT are significant factors.
 
markthefixer said:
All modern caps tend to beat 70's caps, even when they were new.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't go so far as to say all, but I do agree in principle. People get so wrapped up in the variety of new caps available and their specifications, and lose sight of what the specs were on the original caps used when the unit was built. You're right--pretty much any new cap from a reputable manufacturer and vendor are going to be "better" than what was used "back in the day"--either the tighter tolerances weren't readily available, or were cost-prohibitive.

I know it's a whole 'nuther topic, but I find this especially prevalent with people re-capping XO networks in 40+ year-old speakers--seeking out "exotic", "boutique" caps with <1% tolerance for applications that originally used "off the shelf" 20% tolerance parts in a speaker that was "tuned by ear" by the designer.

Yes--"better" parts can produce "better" results, but if the originals sounded good, and lasted 30-40-50+ years, they couldn't have been "that bad".
 
I'll post up Mark the Fixer's "Rule of Thumb" for Nichicon's in PIONEERS that he wrote for another poster about 10 years ago. I've used this "recipe" pretty much exclusively on various brands (PIONEER, SANSUI, FISHER(pre-Sanyo) S.S., and ALL of my Tube gear (except when I couldn't get the value/voltage in any of those series) for 10 years. I did at one time take a PIONEER SX-535 loaded one channel with Marks recommended caps, and the other with UFW and UKW. There was absolutely NO AUDIBLE DIFFERENCE between channels. From a cost standpoint the UPW/UHE and UKL combo is about 20%-25% cheaper (for a whole unit) than UFW/UKW combo in my experience. AFAIC 25% for a nice pretty "Gold colored wrapper" isn't worth it.

QUOTING MTF
Cap rules of thumb (nichicon)

I use upw, uhe for general caps including signal coupling in that order depending upon stock "cea"
I use ues, uep & uvp in that order for bipolar depending on stock
I use ukl for low leakage caps (in sensitive areas they reduce the noise floor)"ceanl", "cssa", "csza"
0.1uf to 2 uf I use stacked film where they fit: DFS and ECQ

solid aluminum and tantalum caps get stacked film when possible, or ukl's otherwise. "cssa" "csza"

c?B means it's an axial cap = one lead on each end
c?a = radial = both leads on one end
Click to expand...
 
Even in a new power design that I am working on, we are putting a polypropylene or stacked polyester film cap in parallel with a UES BP ecap. Sansui did this all the time, Pioneer hardly ever did it, I guess they were not convinced that it was important or they were too cheap :-) Sometimes it comes down to best practices vs what you can measure and hear.
When I recapped a 1980 recently, I wanted to check the old ecaps vs the new ones, the new Nichicon UKL of the same size/V vs the orange CEANL(LR) type.
FYI, I just measured some again.
old CEANL(LR,2.2u/50V):2.38uF, ESR= 50ohm, D=0.090, Z=560 ohm, rho -84.9 degrees
new UKL(2.2uF,50V): 2.2uF, 19.3ohm, D=0.031,Z=603,rho -88.2
as a comparision
old Blue tant (CSZA,10uF/16V): 10.06uF, 3ohm, D=0.023,Z=131.9, rho -88.7
 
I'm again amazed at the amount of knowledge you guys have and are willing to share. I really do appreciate all the responses above, from rcs16, MTF, redk9258, larryderouin, and savatage1973. Huge Thanks to all of you, you are inspiring me to learn more and as much as I can to properly restore old audio equipment.
 
rcs16 said:
Even in a new power design that I am working on, we are putting a polypropylene or stacked polyester film cap in parallel with a UES BP ecap. Sansui did this all the time, Pioneer hardly ever did it, I guess they were not convinced that it was important or they were too cheap :) Sometimes it comes down to best practices vs what you can measure and hear.
When I recapped a 1980 recently, I wanted to check the old ecaps vs the new ones, the new Nichicon UKL of the same size/V vs the orange CEANL(LR) type.
FYI, I just measured some again.
old CEANL(LR,2.2u/50V):2.38uF, ESR= 50ohm, D=0.090, Z=560 ohm, rho -84.9 degrees
new UKL(2.2uF,50V): 2.2uF, 19.3ohm, D=0.031,Z=603,rho -88.2
as a comparision
old Blue tant (CSZA,10uF/16V): 10.06uF, 3ohm, D=0.023,Z=131.9, rho -88.7
Click to expand...
What was the advantage of putting the polypropylene or stacked film cap in parallel ???
 
I'm so glad mustang asked as I have been meaning to ask the same question. When I started doing refurbs a couple of years ago I (the noob) used the BOMs I found here which are largely populated by Nichicon UPW and UKLs (and Wima or Kemet films for the <=1uf sizes), for the reasons specified by Mark.

If you spend any time in the Marantz or Sansui forums you'll see some different Nichicon series commonly used there. Why would that be?
 
mustang1102 said:
What was the advantage of putting the polypropylene or stacked film cap in parallel ???
Click to expand...
Literally the distance between the capacitor's conductive surface and the output lead.

Imagine a cap as interleaved layers of aluminum foil and paper towels rolled together..

Electrolytics have a wire sticking out of the middle of the roll somewhere in that long foil coil, with a long spiraling path for the furthest electrons to travel out of the component. remember that electric current has magnetic field, thus these have a (comparatively) large parasitic inductance connected to SOME of the capacitance.

Polypro's or stacked films have FAR shorter paths for any electron to get OUT. The two layers of aluminum foil are offset in opposite directions, so that bare connections are available on either side, and part of the manufacturing process connects the coiled layers all together at each end.
Stacked films were like 2 paperback books with the pages alternated, with the bindings on the left and right being the electrical connections.

Short "electron paths".

The high frequency spatial information goes through the parallel "bypass" caps, more cleanly.
The greater capacitance of the electrolytic is what passes the low bass signal.
 
cuda440 said:
I'm so glad mustang asked as I have been meaning to ask the same question. When I started doing refurbs a couple of years ago I (the noob) used the BOMs I found here which are largely populated by Nichicon UPW and UKLs (and Wima or Kemet films for the <=1uf sizes), for the reasons specified by Mark.

If you spend any time in the Marantz or Sansui forums you'll see some different Nichicon series commonly used there. Why would that be?
Click to expand...

The ability to find the values and voltages in stock (at mouser) greatly influenced me in the selections. Factory capacitor selections for production runs are influenced as much by the bean counters and negotiations as the engineers.
 
markthefixer said:
Literally the distance between the capacitor's conductive surface and the output lead.

Imagine a cap as interleaved layers of aluminum foil and paper towels rolled together..

Electrolytics have a wire sticking out of the middle of the roll somewhere in that long foil coil, with a long spiraling path for the furthest electrons to travel out of the component. remember that electric current has magnetic field, thus these have a (comparatively) large parasitic inductance connected to SOME of the capacitance.

Polypro's or stacked films have FAR shorter paths for any electron to get OUT. The two layers of aluminum foil are offset in opposite directions, so that bare connections are available on either side, and part of the manufacturing process connects the coiled layers all together at each end.
Stacked films were like 2 paperback books with the pages alternated, with the bindings on the left and right being the electrical connections.

Short "electron paths".

The high frequency spatial information goes through the parallel "bypass" caps, more cleanly.
The greater capacitance of the electrolytic is what passes the low bass signal.
Click to expand...
Wow, that is fascinating, gives me something to think about now in regards to circuit design. Thank you !!
 
cuda440 said:
If you spend any time in the Marantz or Sansui forums you'll see some different Nichicon series commonly used there. Why would that be?
Click to expand...
the circuits are basically the same and do roughly the same things, so there is no reason to use different parts. it is more personal preferences for components/mfgs that basically do the same thing. To me it does not matter what brand it is, I use the same high quality parts.
Mark basically turned us/me on to Nichicon because of his successes, so it only stands to reason to use what has been proven to work. manufactures tend to try to use common parts to keep inventories down.
 
rcs16 said:
manufactures tend to try to use common parts to keep inventories down.
Click to expand...

This is something to definitely keep in mind when repairing/restoring all of our old "toys".Pay close attention to what is actually on the board, NOT just what is in the manual. Changes get made during a production run--long after the manuals have been printed. Some of it has to do with performance issues, but sometimes it is just what they have a warehouse full of to deplete. Sometimes there are Service Bulletins issued to supplement the original Service Manual, but many times there are not. ALWAYS look at the actual values of the components on the board, and not just what is listed in the manual.
 
savatage1973 said:
This is something to definitely keep in mind when repairing/restoring all of our old "toys".Pay close attention to what is actually on the board, NOT just what is in the manual. Changes get made during a production run--long after the manuals have been printed. Some of it has to do with performance issues, but sometimes it is just what they have a warehouse full of to deplete. Sometimes there are Service Bulletins issued to supplement the original Service Manual, but many times there are not. ALWAYS look at the actual values of the components on the board, and not just what is listed in the manual.
Click to expand...
Very wise words to live by....thank you.
 
I'm still a bit confused about UKA/UKZ/UFG vs UPW and UKL. Looking at specs, UKA/UKZ/UFG seem to have leakage comparable to UPW, ie quite a bit higher than UKL. In terms objective specs, how are audio grade caps different? How does an audio grade cap (with a "normal" leakage spec) compare to a low leakage one in the signal path?
 
http://www.nichicon.co.jp/english/products/alm_mini/index.html
When in doubt I read the mfg datasheet for more insight, we find out and try to make sense of these statements, is this real or marketing hype?
UFG:
"Fine Gold" MUSE acoustic series suited for high grade audio equipment, using state of the art etching techniques.
Rich sound in the bass register and clearer high end, most suited for AV equipment like DVD.
UKZ:
Premium grade “nichicon MUSE” acoustic series. Ideally suited for first class audio equipment where qualitative and quantitative comfortableness is required.

To answer your ?
leakage can be attributed to noise, in a high impedance ckt like the input to a fet. leakage can also cause offset errors.
UKL is such a good ecap, you can use it almost anywhere, but they are more expensive and limited in values.
UES is another great performer for coupling AC signals. More expensive too. choices, choices. to many to be confusing at times.
 
Manufacturers datasheets are written by marketing geniuses that can put a shine on a turd.

MEASURABLE physical quantities are what to trust - not hype - NOT reputation - FACTS.
Think it's better? PROVE IT!!!!

For example - modern power supply caps. They are made to handle the electromagnetic HELL of a digital high speed
switching power supply - where milliohms of ESR can count towards HEATING. They are more expensive because of their
different construction.

TWO things I have had proved: UKL low leakage caps proved quieter in a SA-9500 phono amp - because of the noise levels
relative to the signal levels.

The SILMIC capacitors have lower microphonics apparently due to the chopped up silk in the separators. That means they are less susceptible
to picking up ambient vibrations. Think Power amps and 60dB down interference.

Sometimes construction details do make a difference IN components, reducing parasitic effects. Like the toilet paper roll versus interleaved book pages example. Higher frequency details carry the details of spatial information that our ears and brains extract from the signal.

Look for graphs, and repeatable engineering tests that can highlight WHY a capacitor is more suited for audio.

The "big secret" about electrolytic caps is that their performance is a composite of many many effects physical and chemical, which CAN be altered.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom