Aentons
Well-known member
I haven't either but I was under the impression that the higher the value the more microphonic and by the time we get to higher values that may be more microphonic we use film, so that's typically why it's a non-issue
when to use mlcc capacitors
- Thread starter BouncyBear
- Start date
zeropluszero
Well-known member
I feel like people need to stop linking that Aion page. If I paid attention to that I'd be broke. Wima caps what am I made of money?
pricklyrobot
Well-known member
I linked it because it had some relevant technical info about MLCC caps.
I don’t care what you buy, champ.
I don’t care what you buy, champ.
vigilante398
Authorized Vendor
I have several production designs with 2.2uF MLCC in the signal path, never had microphonics. It's anecdotal evidence, but there were literally 700 such units in 2025 alone, so I feel like it's a pretty good anecdote.
I will caveat that I use X7R or better dielectric mlcc for stability over temperature/voltage.
Last edited:
Aentons
Well-known member
Just curious if those were smd or thru hole?
Aentons
Well-known member
I think this is a really good answer for this specific use case of mlcc
electronics.stackexchange.com
Edit:
And here is another
How to chose the right decoupling/bypass capacitor variant for opAmp power rails?
Many experts here recommend 100nF bypass caps to the power rails of an op-amp. I made it a tradition myself that when I use any op-amp I always use 100nF decoupling cap from +Vcc to GND and -Vcc to...
electronics.stackexchange.com
Edit:
And here is another
Last edited:
I have, once. But the pedal was on the floor 3-4 feet in front of a cranked bass amp. It would ring on loud notes. Almost like a volume dependant oscilation.
It messed with em for a bit until the chopstick test proved the culprit.
Edit to add, this was definitely a 2 cent tayda or Ali cap.
vigilante398
Authorized Vendor
SMD, 2512 package
Bricksnbeatles
Member known well
What’s the deal with Tantalum again? Use them when the circuit calls for additional human suffering?
falco_femoralis
Well-known member
I harvested my tants from a failed project so I've done my good deed for the year
Fama
Well-known member
Ethically sourced human suffering when it's your own?
Or even there’s the possibility the not-so-good specs actually sound better …I love seeing old Fender and Gibson guitars that have a big ceramic capacitor for the tone control. I think of this kind of discussion every time.
NOS High Voltage Ceramic... "excellent sounding"
It may be that the limitations of the ceramic cap (noisy, etc) are mostly found in higher frequency applications and don't have as much, if any, effect at the lower freqs our circuits deal with.
There’s a few threads on forums in bass land where people have tried to trace and clone the Wal bass filter preamp - and EVERY SINGLE TIME I’ve seen it the person goes “oh wow the IC used is prehistoric we’ll have to upgrade that”
And every single time “oh it doesn’t quite sound like the original” - and I am def not a electrical engineer, and couldnt redesign it better but my designer logic thinks it’s almost as if the crazily slow slew rate might possibly be part of the reason the thing sounds like it does…
Stickman393
Well-known member
Yes, but only vintage tantalums are acceptable. That way, the flavor of the pain has had time to age into a distinct vintage.
NP0/C0G are the same thing. NP0 =Negative-Positive Zero Temperature Coefficient (meaning, capacitance does not change with temperature), C0G is simply the EIA three-letter code for an NP0 dielectric:
| ppm/°C | Multiplier | Tolerance in ppm/°C (25-85 °C) |
| C: 0.0 | 0: -1 | G: ±30 |
| B: 0.3 | 1: -10 | H: ±60 |
| L: 0.8 | 2: -100 | J: ±120 |
| A: 0.9 | 3: -1000 | K: ±250 |
| M: 1.0 | 4: +1 | L: ±500 |
| P: 1.5 | 6: +10 | M: ±1000 |
| R: 2.2 | 7: +100 | N: ±2500 |
| S: 3.3 | 8: +1000 | |
| T: 4.7 | ||
| V: 5.6 | ||
| U: 7.5 |
C0G's are *quite* good. In fact, if given the choice between a C0G and a Polyester film capacitor, I'm typically choosing a C0G. They're on par with polypropylene film when it comes to distortion (polypro tends to win by a hair), are better for circumstances requiring precision due to their very low temperature coefficient, and fare only a little worse when it comes to dielectric absorption.
Granted...cost per unit might be a factor. Depending on the value, polyester may be cheaper, and you probably won't notice much of a difference in most applications. C0G can be had up to about 220nF as far as I've seen in a leaded package, though they'll be a little larger than polyester in the larger capacitance ranges.
TL
R: There's no reason not to use C0G aside from cost and size. They're fantastic. X7R's are the next commonly available step down in MLCC's and are usable in many positions, but polyester is generally the better choice for everything except decoupling.Now...how much will this impact your builds? Probably not much. Changing one cap ain't gonna make the difference between god-like toan and poo. Though I'm a fan of using stupid overbuilds in pedals because I'm apparently Mr. Moneybags and like to spend more than I absolutely need to, cause my parents didn't love me enough.
Anything worth building is worth over-building, IMO!
Aleph Null
Well-known member
That's right—no kink shaming here!
The problem is, all the people who are smart enough to know and in a position to care aren't building or thinking about low power low frequency (audio) circuits. There are a lot of things that matter when you are doing high power or high frequency (digital) stuff that just aren't practical concerns for us. If you're an EE building fighter jet computers, you know when to use MLCCs and when not to. If you're a pleb building guitar pedals, "caps is caps."
Fama
Well-known member
I assume it might also be (at east partially) a case of the effect being very small amounts of audible distortion you can maybe hear in pristine conditions on good monitors, trained ears, and only listening to this signal, for example.
...and the pedal is a fuzz. So nobody can really say if it makes a difference, and whether it would be good or bad if there is a difference.
Stickman393
Well-known member
I dunno. Probably, yeah.
But I'm also kinda...well...I'm curious about the cumulative impact of all these individual decisions.
A single cap in a circuit doing a single job like, oh, coupling in the signal path...that ain't gonna be noticable unless the cap itself is failing.
A bunch, one after another? I dunno. How much additive ESR and Dielectric absorption or wide temperature coefficients does it take before one begins to notice? Probably too much for anyone to fret about using polyester vs polypropylene caps. But how about electrolytic vs film? Z5U vs C0G?
Truthfully, there are also circumstances when these things matter. Sample and hold circuits respond *much* better with caps can effectively discharge. A tone-shaping circuit built with caps that have a wide Tc will completely shift it's frequency range focus going from an indoor stage to an outdoor stage in the summer when the sun is beating down on your pedalboard.
But...then again, if that particular pedal uses germanium transistors...well, a little temperature-sensitivity is unavoidable.
Those are specific considerations for specific circumstances, granted. The rule of thumb, "caps is caps", is still good for 95% of pedals. Particularly if one is only particularly interested in the world of distortion and fuzz.
But I'll go to my grave, grasping my wah pedal, claiming that the dielectric of the range capacitor *really* does make a difference. Even if it's small, only I can hear it because I've willed myself into believing it, and it's really only so I can play out the following scene in my head:
Clearly, painfully imaginary individual: "Man, Stickman, you're so cool! That wah pedal sounds killer? What kind of dielectric does it use in the range capacitor?"
*Stickman Shreds, wahs, and melts faces with sickkkkkkk licks, stops and faces the clearly, painfully imaginary individual*
Stickman: Teflon.
*Stickman throws on a pair of shades and rides his motorcycle off into the sunset*.
But I'm also kinda...well...I'm curious about the cumulative impact of all these individual decisions.
A single cap in a circuit doing a single job like, oh, coupling in the signal path...that ain't gonna be noticable unless the cap itself is failing.
A bunch, one after another? I dunno. How much additive ESR and Dielectric absorption or wide temperature coefficients does it take before one begins to notice? Probably too much for anyone to fret about using polyester vs polypropylene caps. But how about electrolytic vs film? Z5U vs C0G?
Truthfully, there are also circumstances when these things matter. Sample and hold circuits respond *much* better with caps can effectively discharge. A tone-shaping circuit built with caps that have a wide Tc will completely shift it's frequency range focus going from an indoor stage to an outdoor stage in the summer when the sun is beating down on your pedalboard.
But...then again, if that particular pedal uses germanium transistors...well, a little temperature-sensitivity is unavoidable.
Those are specific considerations for specific circumstances, granted. The rule of thumb, "caps is caps", is still good for 95% of pedals. Particularly if one is only particularly interested in the world of distortion and fuzz.
But I'll go to my grave, grasping my wah pedal, claiming that the dielectric of the range capacitor *really* does make a difference. Even if it's small, only I can hear it because I've willed myself into believing it, and it's really only so I can play out the following scene in my head:
Clearly, painfully imaginary individual: "Man, Stickman, you're so cool! That wah pedal sounds killer? What kind of dielectric does it use in the range capacitor?"
*Stickman Shreds, wahs, and melts faces with sickkkkkkk licks, stops and faces the clearly, painfully imaginary individual*
Stickman: Teflon.
*Stickman throws on a pair of shades and rides his motorcycle off into the sunset*.
Similar threads
