AudioCircle
Other Stuff => Archived Manufacturer Circles => Music Reference => Topic started by: Roger A. Modjeski on 9 Jul 2014, 06:33 am
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debunker
Hi,
I am interested in gathering together a group of Debunkers to expose the foolish and sometimes harmful "tweaks" that are becoming all more prevalent in our cherished hobby. Please read the definition above before you join this effort.
Here is Websters definiton of tweak, a verb not a noun; to change (something) slightly in order to improve it : to make small adjustments to (something) http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tweak
Somehow things we buy have become called tweaks. Perhaps they had better be called "upgrades" though I am not fond of that term also as some upgrades are actually downgrades. I invite others to come up with some suggestions on a name.
Scientific arguments on either side are most welcome. There are plenty of other sites to air non-scientific opinions.
Commentary on how tweaks harm or help our industry are welcome. There is a poll if you simply want to vote on that point.
I for one, and many others here are tired of the specious claims of the makers of useless tweaks. Perhaps we should start a site to "lampoon" the most egregious of them.
In a previous post, RIP, Tuning Fuses became the main topic. While pleased with over 2700 views in three days we did not come to any conclusions. I hope for better participation here.
The goal is quite simple. The magazines in print and online along with the forums are mostly in favor of tweaks. Perhaps we can stem the tide. There are better thing to spend our money on useless tweaks of questionable merit.
In the early days of Hi Fi writers both professional and laymen made genuine cases for things to improve sound. They were backed up with logic and science. This is the bugle call of this post.
I am not asking everyone to be a scientist, but I am asking them to be open to scientific discussion. There is plenty or unscientific discussion going on so no need to do it here. Here we hope to add some sanity to this hobby and perhaps save someone the cost and embarrassment of another Tice Clock.
-
I vote none of the above. By lumping all tweaks together you are at great risk of having this whole thing seen as arbitrary and illogical and with a high likelihood of backfiring.
If I refine the alignment of my phono cartridge, I'm tweaking it. If I clean my plugs and jacks, ditto.
Definition of terms? You can't lump all tweaks together and make any kind of meaningful statement.
That said, I doubt if you could prove something like tuning fuses can't possibly work. I'm not an advocate of tuning fuses, but likelihood is not proof.
It will be interesting to see what's written here.
neo
-
I vote none of the above. By lumping all tweaks together you are at great risk of having this whole thing seen as arbitrary and illogical and with a high likelihood of backfiring.
If I refine the alignment of my phono cartridge, I'm tweaking it. If I clean my plugs and jacks, ditto.
Definition of terms? You can't lump all tweaks together and make any kind of meaningful statement.
That said, I doubt if you could prove something like tuning fuses can't possibly work. I'm not an advocate of tuning fuses, but likelihood is not proof.
It will be interesting to see what's written here.
neo
I tend to agree with neobop on this.
-
I vote none of the above. By lumping all tweaks together you are at great risk of having this whole thing seen as arbitrary and illogical and with a high likelihood of backfiring.
If I refine the alignment of my phono cartridge, I'm tweaking it. If I clean my plugs and jacks, ditto.
Definition of terms? You can't lump all tweaks together and make any kind of meaningful statement.
That said, I doubt if you could prove something like tuning fuses can't possibly work. I'm not an advocate of tuning fuses, but likelihood is not proof.
It will be interesting to see what's written here.
neo
There are many manufacturers who claim Quantum theory, string theory, & particle physics went into the design of the product they' re trying to sell.
One example ...... "little black boxes" which claim to have some proprietary circuitry inside which alters the air in the listening room to make it more
compliant. These little black boxes sell for $1500 which according to the reviewer you need at least 4 or 5 of them to really notice the effect. How do you
measure the compliance of the air in a room. I think this is a good example of the kind of tweak Roger is talking about. In the review of the product it was
noted that the designer..... had a background in physics.
-
I vote none of the above. By lumping all tweaks together you are at great risk of having this whole thing seen as arbitrary and illogical and with a high likelihood of backfiring.
If I refine the alignment of my phono cartridge, I'm tweaking it. If I clean my plugs and jacks, ditto.
Definition of terms? You can't lump all tweaks together and make any kind of meaningful statement.
That said, I doubt if you could prove something like tuning fuses can't possibly work. I'm not an advocate of tuning fuses, but likelihood is not proof.
It will be interesting to see what's written here.
neo
I don't consider the things you mention, tweaks. Cleaning contacts and adjusting ones turntable are just normal maintenance.
Doc
-
Roger are you saying companies like Synergystic Research, Herbies, Mapleshade are Charletons ? Did you hear the demo of the Synergystic HFT's using a Bose radio at Rocky mountain ? Ever try Maplehade products ? Herbies TT Matt ?
When a company offers a 30 day money back guarr. what is the fuss all about ? If one is willing to learn something good or bad and gets their money back if desired let it be.
Now pet rocks and the like are out there for sure and anyone who falls for them well what can I say. however there are many products that actually make a difference. We have tested many using blind tests in our AudioSyndrome Audio Club.
Getting into a debate that is system dependent and subjective is waste of time. We have two members who use your Amplifier. We have experienced a change for the better using NOS tubes, Synergystic fuses and footers. One installed Duelund CAST caps which was a serious improvement. We have brought the amp to several homes with different components and speakers. Some combos sounded fabulous some horrible. Same amp different set ups.
In general the buyer must be pleased with the result. Wether actual or perceived improvement. Perception is key not someone else's opinion. If we able to measure why we cannot get the live sound at home that we hear live then I would agree that measurements and the science are the only determining factor in what we hear. Until then tweak away.
charles
-
................
-
I don't consider the things you mention, tweaks. Cleaning contacts and adjusting ones turntable are just normal maintenance.
Doc
No, that's exactly what tweak means.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tweak
neo
-
I vote none of the above. By lumping all tweaks together you are at great risk of having this whole thing seen as arbitrary and illogical and with a high likelihood of backfiring.
If I refine the alignment of my phono cartridge, I'm tweaking it. If I clean my plugs and jacks, ditto.
Definition of terms? You can't lump all tweaks together and make any kind of meaningful statement.
That said, I doubt if you could prove something like tuning fuses can't possibly work. I'm not an advocate of tuning fuses, but likelihood is not proof.
It will be interesting to see what's written here.
neo
Neo makes some good points here, so I will experiment with tweaking my post. :D
I woNo, that's exactly what tweak means.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tweak
neo
I agree with Doc that cleaning contacts, adjusting turntables are normal maintenance. These practices actually fit the Webster definition better than the current use of the word which I take to mean buying something based on the claims of others that cannot be supported in any other way than subjective.
I would like to see members here sharing things they have done to improve their systems, especially things that do not require significant expenditures of money.
As to tuning fuses, unlike magic dots they can be harmful to your system. The manufacturer is making a claim that he reduces microphonics in his fuse construction. Just how is a fuse microphonic and just how could that affect my system even if it was? I think I will go hook up a microphone to the power line and start talking to people thorough their systems. Gee why didn't Bell think or that.
One of the many things that offend me about the purveyor of Tuning Fuses is his claim, as expressed on his website, that manufacturers use the cheapest components they can find. For example: est. 90% used IC's in the Hifi - Equipment cost around $ 0,80 a piece, but the Highest - Quality IC's cost est. $ 60.00 a piece or more! Perhaps he naively believes that price equals quality. Perhaps he doesn't know or care to find out that a $60 op amp (there are very few) is designed to optimize some difficult characteristic, like offset, that wouldn't matter a hoot in an audio application. Perhaps he doesn't know that some op amps are very expensive because they are obsolete and in short supply. Perhaps he doesn't know that some 60 cent opamps are also available in a metal can and because that configuration is made in very small quantities it costs a lot more.
When I go shopping for op amps, such as the one I am using in the servo for my OTL, I note that the same part number varies in price widely with the letters on the end. Perhaps he doesn't know what these letters mean. In many cases they mean an op amp is selected from production to have optimum characteristics in some particular area that might be important in one application but not in my application. The letters also describe the temperature range the part is guaranteed to operate over. It costs more to make or select an op amp to run over a wide temperature range. We don't need our op amps to operate from -55 to +125 C. Here are the temp ranges used by makers of electronic parts. Wider ranges cost more. Is that money well spent or would it be better spent on a bigger power supply or more isolation from the power line. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operating_temperature
The silicon used in a $60 op amp is the same silicon as in a 60 cent op amp. I invite you to read the whole page http://www.hifi-tuning.com/index_eng.html. I also find it odd that although he is the creator of HI FI Tuning Fuses I could find no mention of them on his website.
Speaking of Mapleshade, I have been getting his catalog for years and I feel the man is making an honest effort to make something real. At least his products won't damage your system. His brass tube covers have a good chance of reducing microphonics in tubes. If properly used they do no harm. I do think it is appropriate for us to mention particular problems we might have encountered with anyone's products. For instance I repaired some of his cables and found the copper foil to be very fragile. That is something that would be useful to know and perhaps he could improve.
I think we all want to see better products. I think the ones making specious claims should be discussed as to the validity of those claims. My interest is education. Read the post http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?. I entered this discussion to give the reader some simple rules that would allow him, from reading simple specs, to determine if an amp has the possibility of being class A. Many manufacturers are claiming class A when their very specs say otherwise. Once a person understands what class A means he can decide for himself is the claim is true. The discussion has also brought up the question Is class A bias even necessary in today's amplifiers?
I have chosen Tuning Fuses as an example because the claims by the maker and the reviewers are so much like what Harry P said to me years ago about High End audio. "Hi Fi is a drug and I am the Hi Fi pusher" When a reviewer of some merit says "I loved listening to this CD player, but when I replaced the fuse this rather good player became a world class player" I have to wonder what is going on in his mind. We who make things work hard at our craft. OEM pricing on many "audiophile" capacitors, fuses etc. often has a 70% discount off what the public can buy it for. If the maker of the CD player could transform his good player into a world class player with a fuse that cost him a few bucks, wouldn't he.
High End audio is not supervised or regulated by any agency. Consumer Reports doesn't even notice us. Perhaps we need some organization or forum to look at equipment objectively. We certainly have enough organizations looking at it subjectively. Although subjective tests may be amusing there is no end to them.
-
Even if we use the definition of a tweak supplied by neobop, the concept is a moving target. Simply put, we have no reference line to compare it to. The tweak may make it sound different, but is different better, or just plain different. I have tried many tweaks over the years and almost all of them have been undone the day after I tried them. Why? Because the tweak was just that, an alteration.
One has to ask some of those age old questions. For example, there are studies that suggest that most of the food that we taste is actually stimulated by our eyesight. And the other question I have is why does buttered toast taste better with the butter side up? I thought all the taste buds were on our tongues?
We all know that we hear music with our ears, but we can also feel it with our nerve endings in our skin. We feel it in our bones. Perhaps our eyes contribute as well. On top of that, I believe that temperature and humidity (that change from day to day) affect the way we hear things.
Oh, did I forget that we are a moody lot?
-
I'll play...
Don't know what these technically are, or even if one can say, "this is a technical tweak, system upgrade, maintenance, necessity", or whatever... Just my experiences on some things that improved or did not.
NOS Tubes made marked improvements to my tube amps. Primarily the driver tube. Any new production signal tube has yet to surprise me. Some are good, but none have the magic that some of the NOS tubes can give.
Another improvement is feeding my entire system with a PI Audio UberBuss. This is one fantastic product that only improved my system in all ways, and this is not subtle. I show people what it does regularly, and I get some looks and some "What happened?" when I do this. I've garnered sales for Dave more than a few times doing this.
Isolation on my TT and CD transport made nice improvements as well. Never heard any differences using isolation under anything else.
Damping tubes has done nothing but negative things here, but I will say I've never spent more than a few cents on some O rings to try this... Also only tried on the top and or bottom of the tube, cause I don't want to mess up the pretty print :)
Absorption and diffusion considered a tweak? If so, this made tremendous improvements to my listening room. No question.
Never tried or even thought of trying audiophile fuses. I won't put them in my system for fear of something happening. Tried and true is where I stand in this regard.
My system, my ears, my brain..... YMMV...
-
Fascinating stuff, this variability of human perception and the interaction of our different senses, environmental conditions and emotional state.
I hadn't really thought about it, but it kind of makes sense that eating toast buttered side down when angry wouldn't be as satisfying as butter-up & happy.
Steve
-
LOL! Butter on just about any food makes me happy. ;)
-
Why does buttered toast taste better butter side up? Because you can't taste it on your shirt. :duh:
Doc
-
I also think the topic is too broad and vague.
If using contact cleaner is a tweak, is it suggested that the effects of contact cleaner/conditioner are inaudible? In my experience the sonic benefits are obvious.
Regarding tube dampers. My experience has alos been that o-rings consistently muddy the sound. However, the tube damper devices from Herbies Audio Labs have been (again obviously so) totally positive.
As far as cables, some would say that there's no difference in how cables sound. Some would probably say that different cables can't possibly matter. My experience is that differences are easily audible, power cords especially, in my system. I can easily demonstrate the difference to even the most totally non-audiophile.
Absolute phase? That's another easily demonstrable item that, again even for the non-audiophile, can be easily demonstrated in my system.
There are of course systems where the differences between cables, tube dampers, parts, solder, etc. won't be audible. I'm only reporting on my first hand experience and that of others first hand experience.
Personally, I'd be leery of purchasing a product from a designer who says that different wire types don't matter, that different solder doesn't matter, that different types of caps, resistors, etc. don't matter.
-
Perhaps we need some organization or forum to look at equipment objectively.
Like this? http://www.asa.org.uk/Rulings/Adjudications/2011/1/Russ-Andrews-Accessories-Ltd/TF_ADJ_49597.aspx#.U72A8rGTHqQ (http://www.asa.org.uk/Rulings/Adjudications/2011/1/Russ-Andrews-Accessories-Ltd/TF_ADJ_49597.aspx#.U72A8rGTHqQ)
Methinks we have too many lawyers here for that to work.
Although subjective tests may be amusing there is no end to them.
That's the part I like. :wink:
In all honesty Roger, I think you're wasting you time. Believers are going to believe, whether it's magic power fuses or power bracelets http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_Balance (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_Balance). They all "work" on some, regardless. It's only human. Can't change that.
You seems to make some very nice amplifiers. That's where I would concentrate my serious efforts.
View the rest as solid, unending entertainment. :green: http://www.stereophile.com/asweseeit/1107awsi/ (http://www.stereophile.com/asweseeit/1107awsi/)
cheers,
AJ
-
Even if we use the definition of a tweak supplied by neobop, the concept is a moving target. Simply put, we have no reference line to compare it to. The tweak may make it sound different, but is different better, or just plain different. I have tried many tweaks over the years and almost all of them have been undone the day after I tried them. Why? Because the tweak was just that, an alteration.
We can conduct some experiments if we have the time and interest. Perhaps we can share how we go about determining if a change is worthwhile or not. AB testing works for me, however it takes a lot of effort to set up. I want to hear the difference in a controlled situation. As Wayner said, We are a moody lot and I hope to minimize that effect.
Perhaps others would like to share how they evaluate changes in their system.
-
Having an open mind about this stuff is what got me into this hobby. Back in 1994 I was reading and learning everything I could about car audio since I spent a lot of time in my car. I had little interest in a home stereo. While I'd always been impressed by the Bose and B&O demos I had not learned about true high end audio until my brother threw a catalog from the local hi-fi shop into my lap. I saw $5000 speakers on the cover, laughed at the absurdity and tossed it in a corner.
Months later and after upgrading the receiver and speakers in my car I was looking for ways to maximize the sound quality in my car. I found that catalog again and despite the ridiculous prices (I was making roughly $800/mo at the time) I found in the back they sold Kimber Kable. I'd heard of Monster cable but was surprised that I had never heard of Kimber even though they got started in the late 70's. I was intrigued enough that I took a trip out to the shop. I listened to the $5000 speakers and was thoroughly impressed. I heard a sound stage for the first time! While they were using the Kimber cables in their systems it seemed to me that these expensive electronics and heavy speakers did most of the work. I was skeptical but wondered if even just one pair of RCA interconnects could make a difference. I had a small external amp mounted under my dash which was connected to my receiver via two 1/2m pr. of those cheap freebie RCA cables. (I'm guessing they were out of 1m cables that day or were just being really cheap when they installed my amp. Seeing their shoddy install work made me realize I could've done it better myself)
Since cars were supposedly more "noisy", shielded interconnects were imperative. But Kimber's cheapest cable, the PBJ, was unshielded. I was torn. The next step up was a semi-shielded version of PBJ called the KC-1 for roughly $70. I swapped that in and played my discman and heard a lot more detail than I was used to hearing. At some point I had doubts about that "shield" and decided to strip it off leaving just the bare PBJ and take my chances with it being unshielded. It actually sounded better and the audiophile bug bit hard at that point.
Since then I tried all kinds of cheap tweaks. Most with little to no appreciable changes. Eventually, I had to accept that many tweaks were mostly placebo effect. I even tried one of those Hi-fi fuses which lasted about a week until the cheap 5AR4 tube went belly up in my ST70. The fuse cost more than the tube! I never did hear any difference either. I still use Kimber Kables. Mostly the 4VS and 4TC speaker cables as they're reasonably priced and they've consistently sounded better than every cheaper speaker cable I've tried.*
I don't dabble in tweaks as much as I used to. Cap rolling is about all I do these days. Lately, my main system has been sounding pretty damn satisfying so the obsession has diminished.
*For Roger...
Kimber 4VS (Polyethyline insulation)
(Cp) parallel capacitance: 340.0 pF @ 20 kHz
(Ls) series inductance: 0.596 µH @ 20 kHz
(Rdc) dc loop resistance: 0.041 Ω
(Xt) total reactance: 0.075 Ω @ 20 kHz
Frequency response ± 0.5 dB: dc - 250 kHz
Kimber 4TC (Teflon insulated)
(Cp) parallel capacitance: 362.0 pF @ 20 kHz
(Ls) series inductance: 0.715 µH @ 20 kHz
(Rdc) dc loop resistance: 0.038 Ω
(Xt) total reactance: 0.071 Ω @ 20 kHz
Frequency response ± 0.5 dB: dc - 500 kHz
-
It should be noted that the specifications above for the Kimber 4VS and 4TC cables are for a 2.5 meter length with bare ends, so if comparing to other cables you could divide by 2.5 for the value per meter or divide by 8.2 for the value per foot (except of course for the frequency response!).
Steve
-
I don't consider the things you mention, tweaks. Cleaning contacts and adjusting ones turntable are just normal maintenance.
Doc
+1 I think a tweak is something that may not universally benefit any/all users 100% in all situations. Realigning a cartridge should be 100% beneficial in all instances (unless it was just re-aligned 5 minutes ago). Assuming contacts are dirty, cleaning them should also be 100% beneficial in all instances. Say you go overboard with the realignment and cleaning routine and do it daily. The benefit is still there, but the actual perceived improvement may be unnoticeable. That just makes you tweaky....er......obsessive compulsive. :thumb:
-
I think many tweaks are simply emulating the successful marketing ploy of 'break in time'. How many times has some poor schmuck come on a forum with "I'm not liking my XXX cables, they really sound no different than my old ones. Any owners out there?" Followed by several owners posts "Oh, you have to break those in for another 200 hrs, that's what Joe Blow says, and he's right, they really open up". So the poor schmuck listens for two more weeks and talks himself into going with the flow. "You're right, these wires and plastic really opened up." And so when the next poor schmuck posts a similar thread this guy will simply parrot the break in time meme. "Wow". Another veil lifted!" How many veils can a decent component have and still be considered decent? :scratch:
-
Okay, here goes my first post ever on a forum, so bear with me.
For those of you who may not know, I work with Roger and have found this discussion to be rather amusing.
I'd like to help people discern the differences between modifications and tweaks, using the following automotive analogies.
Like exhaust or suspension modifications for a car, we should use the term modification for things like fuses, power cords, capacitors and other various bolt on components.
Roger and I would like to use the word tweak to describe an adjustment of sorts, to bring a product to its original specification.
In this next paragraph, I try to compare tube fuses to car mufflers, and share my opinion on why some people are inclined to try easy to bolt on parts.
I'm sure many of you have seen and heard a "modified" Honda Civic with a huge muffler protruding out the back of it. Sometimes these aftermarket mufflers can have an inlet and outlet diameter in excess of five inches! Most of the time, these mufflers are tacked onto the stock exhaust pipe, which is around 1.5 inches. Sure the Honda enthusiast might be going for a more aggressive sound, but ultimately the owner is trying to unlock more power from their engine. It's much easier and cheaper to bolt on a big muffler, as opposed to a complete exhaust system from the manifold to the end tip. Even still, a well tuned exhaust system considers back pressure and valve train design, where the two work together, and should be tuned synonymously. That being said a performance exhaust system will most likely diminish the power of a stock engine, especially in the low RPM range. Consumer cars need to meet requirements i.e financial, emissions and safety, to name a few, which limit what manufacturers can do, making certain automotive modifications understandable. Amplifier builders such as Roger, should be trusted and their products should be trusted and held in high esteem like the engineers who make the Agera sports car, or Fully built race cars. The amps as well as the race cars, are finely tuned, and there is really no room for improvement (well I can think of a few things, but that's a different topic and deals more with systems as a whole, rather than just a component). I want to make the point that tuning fuses are not like mufflers, because a muffler can have an measurable effect on performance, where a tuning fuse will not. If you want to improve the sound of your system, you need to think more big picture.
Our purpose here is to educate the consumer to the point where he or she can notice if they are being misled by someones claims. If you have any questions or comments please don't hesitate to email me at: tubeaudiostore@gmail.com
Lastly, Roger and I don't feel it is possible for a fuse to be microphonic, and even if they were microphonic how would that energy get passed through the extremely large caps and into the amplifier? We use sand filled fuses which should be less microphonic than said tuning fuses in theory, but they are filled with sand to eliminate arcing, not microphonics.
-
I'll provide some personal experience which is most relevant to the 'audibility of fuses' debate. I have Magnepan 3.7s. In stock form, they have fused tweeters (ribbons) and midrange elements (quasi-ribbon (aluminum on Mylar)). These fuses are directly in the signal path and, judging by the way the fuses often fail, they operate fairly close to their rating when one is 'cranking' these speakers. Experimentation with faster fuses for the ribbons (ribbons often fail with in-tact fuses) resulted in nuisance opens about once a month. I simplified my connector plates. I fiddled with a few tweaks for a while and then returned to the purest/simplest installation.
The point I'm trying to make is that I cannot imagine a fuse more likely to introduce audible non-linearity than these, not to mention the rivet construction fuse holders. I did not upgrade these fuses. I completely eliminated them, along with the extraneous wiring and hardware. I cannot conceive a more effective upgrade along these lines than this.
What was the sonic result? To be completely honest, I'm not sure there was one. I perceive a slightly cleaner, crisper top end. I'm aware that such perceptions are circumspect. I haven't the means to prove it to myself, so I take it as a possibility. Still, that description utterly pales in comparison to those of the professional reviewers.
Removing fuses from my speaker crossovers could only endanger the drivers they formerly protected. The protection the fuses provided was questionable for the ribbons and unnecessary (short of abuse, which I have no trouble avoiding) for the quasi-ribbons. The ribbons aren't expensive to exchange and they are simple to replace. Knowing what I don't know about the HiFi Tuning fuses, I don't see any difference, from the perspective of safety, between them and no fuse at all. From the standpoint of perfect conductors, no fuse can be better than no fuse at all.
I don't know where the HiFi Tuning fuse is finding all of these other fantastic improvements. There is only one way I can imagine for more of an improvement from the use of a special fuse over the elimination of the fuses from the circuits. We don't hear with our ears; we hear with our brains. The distinction is very, very important.
-
That's a good one, I like it, but educating oneself and researching helps one to perhaps make a more informed decision about whether a tweak is 'affordable, or if it 'kind of makes sense'. Probably it could save one from a few hoaxes.
I am constantly amazed at the willingness of some to try a modification (tweak) that cannot possibly work. That is the whole point of this post. A fuse cannot be microphonic no more than pigs can fly. :duh:
-
I would like to know where they connect the 2,000,000 volts,
To some this may first conjure images of Frankenstein. For me it's, "This bird wouldn't "voom" if you put four million volts through it!" http://www.montypython.50webs.com/scripts/Series_1/53.htm (http://www.montypython.50webs.com/scripts/Series_1/53.htm) & elsewhere.
My limited contribution to this subject, other than run thru the streets screaming, "The emperor has no clothes!" is stating (the probably obvious to most):
Can fuses sound different? Don't know. Don't have the background to pontificate on this question.
Do fuses sound different? Don't know. Have appropriate scientific skepticism. Well designed & executed experimentation may shed some illumination.
How much different do they sound if at all? Seems a reasonable question.
To those who poo-poo experimentation, measurement & calculation, I agree. I have seen textbooks which prove thru careful measurements & calculation that bumblebees cannot fly. Experimentation suggests otherwise. Going further back, there was a time when consensus opinion held the world was flat. (or banana shaped. http://montypython.50webs.com/scripts/Holy_Grail/Scene6.htm (http://montypython.50webs.com/scripts/Holy_Grail/Scene6.htm))
Nevertheless untestable hypothesis are religion not science. Whether religion or science is the more appropriate framework for discussing do all tweaks alter sound is another thread.
Someone previously asked in these threads why weren't tweaks around in the '50s. I don't know. I didn't pay attention to the hi-fi industry in the years before I was born. I was reading hi fi mags including The Absolute Sound in the 70s & 80s. RM's HR quote aside, I recall an individual named or at least writing under the name Enid Lumely. She did all kinds of little tweaks such as testing which orientation of her power chords plugged into sockets produced less background noise. (Is this the absolute phase one poster wrote of?) Tweaks may not be 60 years old but they're more then 30 years old.
Hope this helps a little.
-
To some this may first conjure images of Frankenstein. For me it's, "This bird wouldn't "voom" if you put four million volts through it!" http://www.montypython.50webs.com/scripts/Series_1/53.htm (http://www.montypython.50webs.com/scripts/Series_1/53.htm) & elsewhere.
My limited contribution to this subject, other than run thru the streets screaming, "The emperor has no clothes!" is stating (the probably obvious to most):
Can fuses sound different? Don't know. Don't have the background to pontificate on this question.
Do fuses sound different? Don't know. Have appropriate scientific skepticism. Well designed & executed experimentation may shed some illumination.
How much different do they sound if at all? Seems a reasonable question.
To those who poo-poo experimentation, measurement & calculation, I agree. I have seen textbooks which prove thru careful measurements & calculation that bumblebees cannot fly. Experimentation suggests otherwise. Going further back, there was a time when consensus opinion held the world was flat. (or banana shaped. http://montypython.50webs.com/scripts/Holy_Grail/Scene6.htm (http://montypython.50webs.com/scripts/Holy_Grail/Scene6.htm))
Nevertheless untestable hypothesis are religion not science. Whether religion or science is the more appropriate framework for discussing do all tweaks alter sound is another thread.
Someone previously asked in these threads why weren't tweaks around in the '50s. I don't know. I didn't pay attention to the hi-fi industry in the years before I was born. I was reading hi fi mags including The Absolute Sound in the 70s & 80s. RM's HR quote aside, I recall an individual named or at least writing under the name Enid Lumely. She did all kinds of little tweaks such as testing which orientation of her power chords plugged into sockets produced less background noise. (Is this the absolute phase one poster wrote of?) Tweaks may not be 60 years old but they're more then 30 years old.
Hope this helps a little.
Perhaps you are recalling my post about burn-in where I questioned: If burn in is real, how come it wasn't discovered in the 1950s? I can only suggest that people weren't searching so hard to make something out of nothing.
I recall Enid Lumely and her little tweaks, one of which was to put the cable against the wall and then put pine boards angled at 45 degrees to cover them. The good thing about people like that is they eventually go away. However if they start to make money from it, that takes longer.
-
While I was writing this reply to fastFred his wonderful rant was QUARANTINED.
No these people are afraid the uninformed majority will catch the play & stop buying their product. There is no other reason for a quarantine.
The reply was quarantined likely because it was a side attack against a manufacturer. If you have a problem with a manufacturer's product, raise it directly with the manufacturer. AC moderators would likely quarantine similar attacks against Music Reference.
All we're doing in this thread is pointing out products we believe to be bogus.
You may not agree even if we have proof that they're bogus. If there is one person who saves his hard earned audio dollar, for another perhaps more
rational product choice. Then I've done my job. Nobody is forcing people to give up their precious tweaks. I don't go on tweak sites and try to hijack
their threads over to my way of thinking. Yet it's perfectly ok for someone in the snake oil business to come over here & challenge what I hear.
I believe the OP intent is to provide education, not to bully, insult or ridicule.
In fact, the OP said :
Scientific arguments on either side are most welcome.
I am not asking everyone to be a scientist, but I am asking them to be open to scientific discussion.
And also :
Our purpose here is to educate the consumer to the point where he or she can notice if they are being misled by someones claims.
The OP has provided personal experience regarding the physical damage that fuses not UL-certified can cause. That to me is a useful service.
The rest is counterproductive. Education, to me, meant learning in the classroom, not going into the schoolyard to defend against the school bullies.
If audiophiles have irrevocably partitioned themselves into the scientific, measurements side and the emotional, golden-ear approach to sound reproduction, then there will be no advance, much like a dysfunctional government.
-
"extra"! "extra"! read all about it "Debunking tuning fuses" in a miracle cure. (plagiarized from Pete Townsend) the other members of the quarantine ward
were also released. .................... a freedom of speech issue???
............................ fasfred
-
Hi Roger and all.
There's lots of reading in this topic.
Very interesting and simple to understand.
For me:
Most of the tweaks were invented/created so the manufacturers make money
on the back of ignorant people.
Marketing sometimes is so good that it could sell refrigerator to Eskimos.
Please keep that topic alive, I like it.
Guy 13
-
deleted. Sorry if this appeared uncivil. It was not my intention.
-
It is nice to see the topic back. Let's keep it going in a civil manner.
It is a thankless effort (perhaps a fools errand) to explain the science of things to un-scientific people. Yet these people should realize that the best products come from good science. I would not be able to design good sounding equipment using the pseudo science that is bandied about in the industry. Has anyone noticed that the makers of these modifications (previously called tweaks) for the most part make no real products. They do not know how to make an amplifier and many of them cannot even explain how one works yet they feel they can make it better with their "discovery".
I read this from a review on a mains noise analyzer. Why anyone would want such a thing is a mystery to me. You either have noise coming out of your speakers from some power problem or you don't. However here is the gist of why you might need this. I think this was from a positive review of the product, but I cant be sure. However I like the way it reads.
In general the music lover is told that whatever is output from the wall is of inferior quality for her precious audio gear. This inferior power needs to be filtered, regenerated and carefully transported to the audio device over the last meter. Indeed the music from the speakers is nothing but a modulated mains signal. That mains signal then should be as good as possible. On its way from the power plant the signal gets polluted by Satan knows what. Late at night music sounds so much better, doesn't it? That’s because there’s less pollution. Or so we’re told. It seems like an airtight argument.
I recall a line from the movie Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead, "We only know what we are told, and even that isn't true". That really sums up some of the things we have been discussing here. I would not call it an "airtight argument" Its more of a fairy tale to me.
First lets see what is untrue in the statement above as it is this fear that power conditioner people feed upon.
Indeed the music from the speakers is nothing but a modulated mains signal. This is far from true. The music from the speakers is modulated DC from a well filtered power supply. Power supply caps tend to be thousands of microfarads isolated my many millihenries of transformer leakage inductance. Line conditioners have capacitors on the order of 0.1 microfarads 10,000 less than the power supply filters. Line conditioners have less series inductance than the leakage inductance of the power transformer. Therefore the contribution of a power conditioner may be some very small amount, in the parts per million range.
-
Roger, keep going,
your write up is very interesting and easy to understand.
By the way, I have a 1967 diploma in basic electronics (Tubes)
that won't change anything, but just wanted to tell,
not look for congratulation and/or a medal or the same...
Guy 13
-
Continuing this fuse topic in a civil manner, I did try the HiFi Tuning gold fuses in my Maggie 3.6R midrange and tweeter fused pathways. I had already placed Mye Stands and Cardas jumpers to positive effect--why not one more tweak? Looking at the tiny filaments in the stock fuses, I doubled the stock amp rating to increase the filament size. The listening results were good---the music had more authority, more weight to the soundscape. I had no expectations, nor did I have cynicism--mostly naiveté, since I do not possess much in EE skills. A few months later, I made some AC cords using Furutech plugs and their OOC cable. I like their products--very nice to work with and hear. They also have their own line of high-performance fuses. Why would they risk their reputation on a fuse offering? I don't know, but I had to try them in my Maggies. The results were even better--more clarity along with more weight--a definite improvement in the entire presentation.
You may say I am mistaken, that I cannot hear a difference, that I am only perceiving a false sensory phenomenon. You may certainly say all of these things, and you will, because you have to preserve your faith in your viewpoints. It's science, not faith, you may say, and that's a solid position--can't argue with what I don't know. But, if your thinking is so immovable, your ideas become a barrier to new discovery. This is true in any field. Those who keep an open mind are rewarded more often--my lack of knowledge allowed me to try something out of curiosity. I would not put the stock fuses back--not after hearing two levels of improvement in a very revealing system. So, let's keep the discussion going…...
-
I read this from a review on a mains noise analyzer. .....
FWIW, I don't think it makes a lot of sense and/or add to the credibility of the argument to pick on a comment from a reviewer who obviously doesn't have the technical background to explain how the thing works. If you want to argue from the basis of science, please at least do it honestly.... Just my opinion...
-
Personally I'm surprised Magnepan or other companies whether building preamps or amps ect don't install them.
Especially if they make such a huge difference.
I'd think at 30-70.00 for a fuse that they would at least try one just for gigggles.
Heck even my $18,000 Vac SIG MKII-A has regular fuses in it,even the power cord is average,HELLO.
Been thru the pc and fuse thing yrs ago,sold em all :thumb:.
-
It is nice to see the topic back. Let's keep it going in a civil manner.
It is a thankless effort (perhaps a fools errand) to explain the science of things to un-scientific people. Yet these people should realize that the best products come from good science. I would not be able to design good sounding equipment using the pseudo science that is bandied about in the industry. Has anyone noticed that the makers of these modifications (previously called tweaks) for the most part make no real products. They do not know how to make an amplifier and many of them cannot even explain how one works yet they feel they can make it better with their "discovery".
I read this from a review on a mains noise analyzer. Why anyone would want such a thing is a mystery to me. You either have noise coming out of your speakers from some power problem or you don't. However here is the gist of why you might need this. I think this was from a positive review of the product, but I cant be sure. However I like the way it reads.
In general the music lover is told that whatever is output from the wall is of inferior quality for her precious audio gear. This inferior power needs to be filtered, regenerated and carefully transported to the audio device over the last meter. Indeed the music from the speakers is nothing but a modulated mains signal. That mains signal then should be as good as possible. On its way from the power plant the signal gets polluted by Satan knows what. Late at night music sounds so much better, doesn't it? That’s because there’s less pollution. Or so we’re told. It seems like an airtight argument.
I recall a line from the movie Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead, "We only know what we are told, and even that isn't true". That really sums up some of the things we have been discussing here. I would not call it an "airtight argument" Its more of a fairy tale to me.
First lets see what is untrue in the statement above as it is this fear that power conditioner people feed upon.
Indeed the music from the speakers is nothing but a modulated mains signal. This is far from true. The music from the speakers is modulated DC from a well filtered power supply. Power supply caps tend to be thousands of microfarads isolated my many millihenries of transformer leakage inductance. Line conditioners have capacitors on the order of 0.1 microfarads 10,000 less than the power supply filters. Line conditioners have less series inductance than the leakage inductance of the power transformer. Therefore the contribution of a power conditioner may be some very small amount, in the parts per million range.
Seriously?
You take something out of context that looks like a description of "what we're told" and refute that?
Why don't you go to the source and refute the manufacturer's claims?
neo
-
Seriously?
You take something out of context that looks like a description of "what we're told" and refute that?
Why don't you go to the source and refute the manufacturer's claims?
neo
Here is the source. You decide what this guy is saying. I found it amusing and typical of what we are discussing here. I think he is couching his review by saying.... Hey this is what we have been told to worry about. So here is a device to help you see the gremlins.
http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/bluehorizon/1.html
Here are his accessories:
Furutech DeMag; ClearAudio Double Matrix; Nanotec Nespa #1; Exact Audio Copy software; iPod; wood, brass, ceramic and aluminum cones and pyramids; Shakti Stones; Manley Skipjack
Room treatment: Acoustic System International resonators, sugar cubes, diffusers
Here are the sugar cubes. http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/acousticsystem4/sugar.html
Take a look at the enormous expanse of glass he is trying to tame. How about some drapes? Does he think that little blocks of wood are going to make a difference on all that glass?
-
Continuing this fuse topic in a civil manner, I did try the HiFi Tuning gold fuses in my Maggie 3.6R midrange and tweeter fused pathways. I had already placed Mye Stands and Cardas jumpers to positive effect--why not one more tweak? Looking at the tiny filaments in the stock fuses, I doubled the stock amp rating to increase the filament size. The listening results were good---the music had more authority, more weight to the soundscape. I had no expectations, nor did I have cynicism--mostly naiveté, since I do not possess much in EE skills. A few months later, I made some AC cords using Furutech plugs and their OOC cable. I like their products--very nice to work with and hear. They also have their own line of high-performance fuses. Why would they risk their reputation on a fuse offering? I don't know, but I had to try them in my Maggies. The results were even better--more clarity along with more weight--a definite improvement in the entire presentation.
You may say I am mistaken, that I cannot hear a difference, that I am only perceiving a false sensory phenomenon. You may certainly say all of these things, and you will, because you have to preserve your faith in your viewpoints. It's science, not faith, you may say, and that's a solid position--can't argue with what I don't know. But, if your thinking is so immovable, your ideas become a barrier to new discovery. This is true in any field. Those who keep an open mind are rewarded more often--my lack of knowledge allowed me to try something out of curiosity. I would not put the stock fuses back--not after hearing two levels of improvement in a very revealing system. So, let's keep the discussion going…...
Hi,
Perhaps you missed some information in the previous posts on the topic by fast fred. http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=127160.0
I have no doubt you heard a difference with a fuse in series with your speaker. Several Maggie owners have gone one step further and eliminated the fuse. With a proper size amp you don't need them. Older Maggies have no fuses, but the company got tired of people abusing their speakers.
The original problem I had with Tuning Fuses and other Boutique fuses was to inform the public that these fuses provide no protection as a tube fuse where the circuit is DC and of high voltage with high breaking requirements. I have contacted 4 makers of these fuses and they don't even understand the problem or what a high-breaking fuse is asked to do. They have not tested their fuses for this. They have no industrial approvals.
I did an analysis of what they could do in a power-line application and found their effect was way down in the noise. Like 150 dB down. I did this because I can and the average person can't make such an analysis.
As to being closed minded, I will say that Music Reference amplifiers have broken new ground in tube design. Others here know this and will tell you.
-
Roger, if you don't mind me saying so, it could hardly have been possible for you to miss neobop's point any more thoroughly than you did.
-
FWIW, I don't think it makes a lot of sense and/or add to the credibility of the argument to pick on a comment from a reviewer who obviously doesn't have the technical background to explain how the thing works. If you want to argue from the basis of science, please at least do it honestly.... Just my opinion...
I thought I was. Is the humor not obvious?
-
Roger, if you don't mind me saying so, it could hardly have been possible for you to miss neobop's point any more thoroughly than you did.
What was his point and how did I miss it?
-
Hi Roger.
I find all your post super interesting.
Thanks.
Guy 13
Like they say:
Keep up the good work.
-
Hi Roger.
I find all your post super interesting.
Thanks.
Guy 13
Like they say:
Keep up the good work.
Thank you. It was a post you put up yesterday on the noise device that got me to post. Now I am taking the flack. Would you care to help out?
Here is that sleeping giant that was awoken. http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=106277.msg1345876#msg1345876
-
In general the music lover is told that whatever is output from the wall is of inferior quality for her precious audio gear. This inferior power needs to be filtered, regenerated and carefully transported to the audio device over the last meter. Indeed the music from the speakers is nothing but a modulated mains signal. That mains signal then should be as good as possible. On its way from the power plant the signal gets polluted by Satan knows what. Late at night music sounds so much better, doesn't it? That’s because there’s less pollution. Or so we’re told. It seems like an airtight argument.
The above quote from an author is accurate -- it "seems" like an airtight argument.
I can only change what I control, and I do not control the "cleanliness" of the power that comes to my house. However, the "inferior" power coming to my house should be filtered in the same way that I filter my tap water which I have no control over, either. Clearly, the filtered tap water is "better" and measurably cleaner than the unfiltered water. Thus, it seems reasonable to me that electricity works in the same manner. Based on experience, I know that my system sounds better when the electricity is filtered at the wall than when it is not.
-
Personally I'm surprised Magnepan or other companies whether building preamps or amps ect don't install them.
Especially if they make such a huge difference.
I'd think at 30-70.00 for a fuse that they would at least try one just for gigggles.
Heck even my $18,000 Vac SIG MKII-A has regular fuses in it,even the power cord is average,HELLO.
Been thru the pc and fuse thing yrs ago,sold em all :thumb:.
I often see comments like the above from folks who likely do not have any experience in producing audio components for sale. Adding very expensive fuses to a commercial product makes little to no sense for the manufacturer, as the cost/benefit ratio (assuming that a better fuse even has a performance value at all) is not adequate to justify the considerable additional expense.
At first glance it would appear to be no big deal for a manufacturer to supply, say, Hi Fi Tuning Supreme fuses in a component. But, consider: first, the cost of a good quality ceramic body fuses to a manufacturer is going to be ~.50 each, and the cost of the high end fuse is around $35.00 or so. OK, so the lay person with no experience in production costs would say the upgrade just adds $35 to cost of each unit, but, not so fast... The manufacturer needs to keep a stock of these fuses on hand (perhaps in different values as well). Say they need to keep a couple thousand fuses in stock to support production. OK, suddenly they now have tied up 70000$ in capitol to keep the fuses in stock, vs the $1000 it requires to stock the ordinary fuses. So we see that there is a significant cash flow expense to speccing the high end fuse-often this capitol would be borrowed, which means interest would also apply.
Most high end audio companies are barely staying in business these days, and do not have a bunch of extra cash laying around with which to play with frivolous things like expensive fuses or power cables.
-
The above quote from an author is accurate -- it "seems" like an airtight argument.
I can only change what I control, and I do not control the "cleanliness" of the power that comes to my house. However, the "inferior" power coming to my house should be filtered in the same way that I filter my tap water which I have no control over, either. Clearly, the filtered tap water is "better" and measurably cleaner than the unfiltered water. Thus, it seems reasonable to me that electricity works in the same manner. Based on experience, I know that my system sounds better when the electricity is filtered at the wall than when it is not.
Your analogy does not hold water technically. It is just this kind of thinking that tempts people to buy these things. I explained how the power supply in the amplifier does a much better job than a power conditioner and renders it useless. If there is a clearly heard noise in the system at rest and a filter can remove that, then by all means use one. However most are being sold on another basis and the device to measure things you aren't hearing is one of them.
The point of this post it techincal. I stated that in the beginning. The hope is that people will pay more attention to what technically can make a difference than what can't. I know many won't like this and I invite them to leave.
-
I often see comments like the above from folks who likely do not have any experience in producing audio components for sale. Adding very expensive fuses to a commercial product makes little to no sense for the manufacturer, as the cost/benefit ratio (assuming that a better fuse even has a performance value at all) is not adequate to justify the considerable additional expense.
At first glance it would appear to be no big deal for a manufacturer to supply, say, Hi Fi Tuning Supreme fuses in a component. But, consider: first, the cost of a good quality ceramic body fuses to a manufacturer is going to be ~.50 each, and the cost of the high end fuse is around $35.00 or so. OK, so the lay person with no experience in production costs would say the upgrade just adds $35 to cost of each unit, but, not so fast... The manufacturer needs to keep a stock of these fuses on hand (perhaps in different values as well). Say they need to keep a couple thousand fuses in stock to support production. OK, suddenly they now have tied up 70000$ in capitol to keep the fuses in stock, vs the $1000 it requires to stock the ordinary fuses. So we see that there is a significant cash flow expense to speaking the high end fuse-often this capitol would be borrowed, which means interest would also apply.
Most high end audio companies are barely staying in business these days, and do not have a bunch of extra cash laying around with which to play with frivolous things like expensive fuses or power cables.
Thank you. If they really made a difference we manufacturers would use them. I must add that one of the makers of these fuses outright insults all manufacturers over their choice of 60 cent vs $60 opamps as if cost was the determinant of quality.
-
If they [audiophile fuses] really made a difference we manufacturers would use them.
Actually I don't think you would. Even if you thought that somehow they made an audible difference, I don't think you would use a safety related component part in your product that didn't have some kind of electrical testing certification (UL, CSA, etc.) just as you wouldn't source a power transformer or power switch that lacked certification, and there haven't been any audiophile type fuses revealed so far that have any testing certifications.
Steve
-
In general, I find the debunkers more strident and as easily duped as the tweakers. A little knowledge can be dangerous.
That said, real science is real science, and he more we understand the better, period. I did not vote, as none of the categories seemed to apply. Also, I often find it valuable to compare hi-fi science to other more critical applications—military and medical. If a concept exists in those worlds, I think it is foolish to be dismssive. Now a reasoned response as to why technology X is not applicable is fine.
-
Many of the folks pointing out the nonsense regarding the use of "tuning fuses" have engineering backgrounds, and some are well respected members of industry. I think there input is much more creditable than any audiophool who has no technical background, but somehow claims to "hear a difference" with a placebo effect that could actually damage equipment in some conditions.
-
Many of the folks pointing out the nonsense regarding the use of "tuning fuses" have engineering backgrounds, and some are well respected members of industry. I think there input is much more creditable than any audiophool who has no technical background, but somehow claims to "hear a difference" with a placebo effect that could actually damage equipment in some conditions.
As it should be. When it gets rough is when you have a bunch of people with engineering degrees who hold reasonable but factually wrong fundamental beliefs. Then it gets nearly impossible to have a conversation. I think there are many audio issues that inhabit some grey area, moreso than fuses. For example, USB audio cables. I have seen many people with an intimate knowledge of engineering not be able to sort out IF there is a check-sum operation going on with audio data transfer. Turns out to be a complicated, multi-faceted issue; however, if you have an engineering degree and a completely dismissive attitude you can trot into a thread, give an authoritative answer and offer zero reason for that answer. Maybe the best approach is to offer as simple an explanation as is likely to apply to any given scenario and let people figure it out for themselves. How many times have I listened to an engineer make the point that all amps sound the same? I used to hear that much more often than I do now.
-
As it should be. When it gets rough is when you have a bunch of people with engineering degrees who hold reasonable but factually wrong fundamental beliefs. Then it gets nearly impossible to have a conversation. I think there are many audio issues that inhabit some grey area, moreso than fuses. For example, USB audio cables. I have seen many people with an intimate knowledge of engineering not be able to sort out IF there is a check-sum operation going on with audio data transfer. Turns out to be a complicated, multi-faceted issue; however, if you have an engineering degree and a completely dismissive attitude you can trot into a thread, give an authoritative answer and offer zero reason for that answer. Maybe the best approach is to offer as simple an explanation as is likely to apply to any given scenario and let people figure it out for themselves. How many times have I listened to an engineer make the point that all amps sound the same? I used to hear that much more often than I do now.
Can you provide an example as it applies to fuses?
-
Can you provide an example as it applies to fuses?
No. I have never heard anyone explain why a fuse would make a difference.
I suppose, having a less technical understanding, I am less annoyed at the believers. What I tend to notice is expert opinion that is incorrect, because it holds so much more authority. I also used to work in college textbook publishing, so my view of the value of a high-level degree is particularly jaded. I also got to watch how often what is taught gets updated. Obviously, soft side is more prone to these vagueries than hard science.
-
Jupiterboy---Roger explained why an amplifiers power supply does a much better job of filtering the powerline than any add on does. The big problem seems to me to be the fact that the High End Audio reviewers for the most part (there are exceptions, such as Dick Olsher) have zero technical knowledge, and therefore no ability to question the claims of the makers of such things as the fuses. The makers of these products are therefore free to make any product they want, and to claim any benefit from it they want, virtually risk free. They didn't count on the likes of Roger Modjeski (funny, the first three letters of your last name!) and Frank Van Alstine.
-
I think many tweaks are simply emulating the successful marketing ploy of 'break in time'. How many times has some poor schmuck come on a forum with "I'm not liking my XXX cables, they really sound no different than my old ones. Any owners out there?" Followed by several owners posts "Oh, you have to break those in for another 200 hrs, that's what Joe Blow says, and he's right, they really open up". So the poor schmuck listens for two more weeks and talks himself into going with the flow. "You're right, these wires and plastic really opened up." And so when the next poor schmuck posts a similar thread this guy will simply parrot the break in time meme. "Wow". Another veil lifted!" How many veils can a decent component have and still be considered decent? :scratch:
I'm glad someone pointed this fact out.
-
No. I have never heard anyone explain why a fuse would make a difference.
I suppose, having a less technical understanding, I am less annoyed at the believers. What I tend to notice is expert opinion that is incorrect, because it holds so much more authority. I also used to work in college textbook publishing, so my view of the value of a high-level degree is particularly jaded. I also got to watch how often what is taught gets updated. Obviously, soft side is more prone to these vagueries than hard science.
Interesting and, I think, relevant comment.
-
I am all for well done debunking. If you make a clear point and give reasons why, that is fantastic.
Anyone have any insights on why triboelectric noise is a non issue in audio?
-
We have a lot of customers that have good things to say about some of the boutique fuses.
Back in 1989 we were working on our MA-2 design. I had noticed back then that the link inside some fuses can 'dance' a bit depending on the current going through it. Its not much of a stretch to see that the series resistance must also be changing- after all, the fuse blows by being heated up enough to break the element. So we know it has some sort of resistance, and some of the lower current ones are pretty measurable on a regular DVM.
We were looking to reduce the effects of the AC wiring on the amp, as we had shown by that time that AC power cords could impose artifact on the sound (took a while to sort out why) so again it did not seem like that much of a stretch that the fuses might be able to as well. Since the MA-2s actually use two power cords to reduce the effects of both internal and external AC power wiring, it seemed like not a bad idea to try out some different fuse types. Back in those days the audiophile fuses did not exist. The best we auditioned was a slow blow device (which we needed as we were building a tube amp) that had a redundant element in it so that the main element would heat up a little slower. This fuse did not fit in the regular 3AG fuse holders- it was a larger style often used in electrical contract work. Interestingly enough many of the examples we found had silver contacts. None of them were purported for audio use. So someone elsewhere in the electronics industry thought that there might be a benefit from the use of silver...
-
Roger, I have to apologize, for in my defense of keeping an open mind about trying items questionable to those who have technical backgrounds, I appear to have directed my comment at you, the facilitator here. If I may, the spirit of my thought was meant for the collective "you"--all who have made their minds up and are no longer open to what seems implausible. I suppose that, as an inventor, you had to have an open mind to have introduced innovative products. I want to correct my references to include only those who seem to have jumped on the naysayers' bandwagon not from experience, but from other motivations.
-
I think many tweaks are simply emulating the successful marketing ploy of 'break in time'. How many times has some poor schmuck come on a forum with "I'm not liking my XXX cables, they really sound no different than my old ones. Any owners out there?" Followed by several owners posts "Oh, you have to break those in for another 200 hrs, that's what Joe Blow says, and he's right, they really open up". So the poor schmuck listens for two more weeks and talks himself into going with the flow. "You're right, these wires and plastic really opened up." And so when the next poor schmuck posts a similar thread this guy will simply parrot the break in time meme. "Wow". Another veil lifted!" How many veils can a decent component have and still be considered decent? :scratch:
There's another side to that story. It's also about people who hear some kind of change without any external validation, and it's not about getting used to the sound.
Just because you can't explain or measure something doesn't necessarily mean it's not happening. Your presumption is that you can explain or measure everything, but it's not true. You can measure certain things and those measurements are only as good as the resolution of your measuring device.
The other side of that story is the "poor schmuck" actually heard a change and has come to agree about the cable run-in. Your characterization of his talking himself into it presumes that it's a delusion, but most "poor schmucks" would probably return said cables than seek validation for something they don't like.
Your story is not only arrogant, it's stupid. You seem to think these forums have some kind of power over people's perceptions, that people will be convinced into liking something they really don't like. Not only that, it's only a silly cable.
There are more things in Heaven and Earth, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
neo
-
Here's something interesting. It doesn't have to do directly with fuses, but adds to the side topic conversation about power filtration.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Noc2OA-xWCM
If I understand how these filters work, which Blue Circle and I believe Audience have been making for quite a long time in their power conditioners (Blue Circle especially), they use (guess what?) a bunch of capacitors. What else uses a bunch of capacitors (or a few large caps) in the power supply in an audio system? If you answered, "Amplifiers," you are correct.
Where these Blue Circle and Audience filters are somewhat unique is that they contain capacitors of various sizes / values to filter a range of noises coming from the wall. While the efficacy of these types of power filters may be limited when used with power amplifiers, especially those with large power supplies, I think their effect could be more pronounced with equipment that have much smaller power supplies (ie source / front end components).
Regarding how this relates to fuses (and Roger please correct me if my thinking is way out of wack): Unless the fuse is acting as a capacitor, then the fuse can't be acting as a filter to reduce power line noise.
-
Here's something interesting. It doesn't have to do directly with fuses, but adds to the side topic conversation about power filtration.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Noc2OA-xWCM
If I understand how these filters work, which Blue Circle and I believe Audience have been making for quite a long time in their power conditioners (Blue Circle especially), they use (guess what?) a bunch of capacitors. What else uses a bunch of capacitors (or a few large caps) in the power supply in an audio system? If you answered, "Amplifiers," you are correct.
Where these Blue Circle and Audience filters are somewhat unique is that they contain capacitors of various sizes / values to filter a range of noises coming from the wall. While the efficacy of these types of power filters may be limited when used with power amplifiers, especially those with large power supplies, I think their effect could be more pronounced with equipment that have much smaller power supplies (ie source / front end components).
Regarding how this relates to fuses (and Roger please correct me if my thinking is way out of wack): Unless the fuse is acting as a capacitor, then the fuse can't be acting as a filter to reduce power line noise.
RD, Thanks you for an amusing video. The only thing that could be in the Sillycone filter is some capacitors. The demo is very clever as it has a long shop cord coiled up for a supply point and another 15 foot extension cord, also coiled to the end test point. He uses an amplified speaker that lets us hear what is on the line while rejecting the 60Hz AC that dominates. Just a speaker and series capacitor connected directly across the line might have enough sensitivity. For all we know there is a blender or some motor running elsewhere putting a lot of noise on the line.
It is a very convincing demo, however note a few things. The 15 ft extension cord provides some series inductance resistance so that the Sillycone filter (capacitors) can shunt it. When you go to the other end of the 15 ft cord the noise is still there because the shunt is on the other end.
What is in the Sillycone for $850. A few capacitors that cost a few dollars. BTW there is no need for different size caps to filter different frequencies, Good caps dont work that way. One proper cap can do the job, but hey why not stack some up, makes a better story. The truth about paralleled caps of various sizes is they often cause ringing at certain frequencies that are worse than a single cap.
The electrical point I would like to make is this. Capacitors across the power line are presented with 120 Volts AC. The current through them can be calculated by a reactance calculator and ohms law. http://www.sengpielaudio.com/calculator-XLC.htm
A 10 uf cap at 60 Hz is 265 ohms and 120V/265 ohms is about 1/2 amp. That is about as big a cap as you can put on the line without some problems. By comparison the cap in a tube amp power supply might be 1000 uF (it's not conducting any large AC so it can be of unlimited size). In a solid state amp they might be 100,000 uF. So you can see the caps in the power supply do the majority of the work. In addition they are on the good side of the best series inductor, you power transformer.
If you really want a good, inexpensive power filter get a 1 KW isolation transformer and drive your electronics through that. It can be placed anywhere in the line, at the fuse panel, in a closet, in the garage just so the power goes through it. It will do several things. It will eliminate any DC on the line and is a very effective low pass filter as the leakage inductance is larger than most series chokes in power conditioners,
It is becoming more and more apparent to me how the modification business (tweaks) works. A guy who may not understand electronics cooks up something, sends it to a reviewer who doesn't understand electronics either who then writes about the glories he hears and that is what you buy. (well you don't, but the believers do).
This is where we are in the state of Hi Fi add-ons (modifications, tweaks, call them what you will). I happen to think there are more useful things we could do with out time, money and effort. Those are things I speak about here and teach in my school.
-
RD, Thanks you for an amusing video. The only thing that could be in the Sillycone filter is some capacitors. The demo is very clever as it has a long shop cord coiled up for a supply point and another 15 foot extension cord, also coiled to the end test point. He uses an amplified speaker that lets us hear what is on the line while rejecting the 60Hz AC that dominates. Just a speaker and series capacitor connected directly across the line might have enough sensitivity. For all we know there is a blender or some motor running elsewhere putting a lot of noise on the line.
It is a very convincing demo, however note a few things. The 15 ft extension cord provides some series inductance resistance so that the Sillycone filter (capacitors) can shunt it. When you go to the other end of the 15 ft cord the noise is still there because the shunt is on the other end.
Hmmm.......couldn't the demo have been done using just a wall outlet? Maybe it wouldn't have presented as bad of a scenario for the demo to be obvious. But thinking about the wiring in our walls taking the place of the extension cords and stuff he rigged up, wouldn't the outcome have been basically the same? Even if he had a blender hooked up somewhere and had it running, unless you have dedicated lines to your system, wouldn't the blender and/or other noisy appliances cause the same noise problems in other outlets throughout the house?
This is why you recommend an isolation transformer, correct? I'm assuming the use of it would be more for source components, rather than amps, since amps are basically self isolated already (assuming traditional power supplies using a transformer and capacitors).
-
If you really want a good, inexpensive power filter get a 1 KW isolation transformer and drive your electronics through that. It can be placed anywhere in the line, at the fuse panel, in a closet, in the garage just so the power goes through it. It will do several things. It will eliminate any DC on the line and is a very effective low pass filter as the leakage inductance is larger than most series chokes in power conditioners.
Would something like this be acceptable?
http://www.provantage.com/tripp-lite-is1000~7TRPC00H.htm (http://www.provantage.com/tripp-lite-is1000~7TRPC00H.htm)