Someone said Tantalum caps in audio circuits are not as good as traditional
electrolytics? Is this true?

I was told bi-polar electrolytic caps as coupling caps have a better
bandwidth than polarized....?

In article <370191ea82505854733d94ef07f1e4a326a76fd8@i2pn2.org>,
UFO <tech@parts-link.net> wrote:
>Someone said Tantalum caps in audio circuits are not as good as traditional
>electrolytics? Is this true?

You might want to review what's said at

https://sound-au.com/articles/capacitors.htm

A lot of people really don't like putting tantalums in an audio signal
path (especially the more-common solid-tantalum "bead" caps), either
because they "sound bad", or because:

- They don't tolerate reverse polarity at all well (distortion
and/or failure)
- They don't tolerate over-voltage
- They don't tolerate sudden charge/discharge cycles
- When they fail, they tend to fail shorted (sometimes solidly
so, sometimes intermittently so)

They're used, a lot, as power-supply bypass caps in older test
equipment (Tek, HP, etc.), and I'd say that they're the #1
cause of failure I've seen in such equipment. When a piece
of test gear just stops working (and sometimes starts emitting
a horrendous bad smell) my first reaction is to look for a tantalum
bead cap which has shorted out and fried itself... and I usually
find one. I usually replace 'em with high-frequency-rated aluminum
'electros of about 5x or 10x the capacitance, and that has always
worked fine.

>I was told bi-polar electrolytic caps as coupling caps have a better
>bandwidth than polarized....?

Depends what you mean by "bandwidth", and how you're comparing. According
to Elliot, most modern 'lytics have a bandwidth up into the MHz range...
the foils are bonded togther in a way which minimizes parasitic
inductance (unlike in some older 'lytic types). So, they should have
a high-frequency bandwidth limit far in excess of what you'll need
for audio coupling.

Bipolar 'lytics tend to be physically larger than polar ones, for the same
voltage rating and capacitance. If you're limited to caps of a particular
physical size, then you can get more uF into that space with a polar
'lytic, and this will extend the low-frequency end of the frequency
response range (all else being equal). Whether that's relevant or not
in your circuit, is up to you to decide.

My general understanding is that polar 'lytics can work as well as
non-polar, for signal-level audio coupling, if you keep two things in
mind:

- Use a large enough amount of capacitance that the voltage across
the cap does not vary significantly during normal use... that is,
the low-frequency cutoff is well below audio. Elliot recommends
sizing them at 10x what you'd need to get your desired low-end
rolloff frequency.

- Bias them properly. Lore usually holds that distortion can begin
to appear if the voltage across them dips down below zero (reverse
polarizing the dielectric). I've read some opinions that this
isn't a significant problem for _small_ reverse voltages (say,
a volt or so) but haven't personally tested this.