[fastfred]

A couple of items:

fastfred - No sense of the high horse from me.

A good evening to all.

Don Quixote rode a high horse & tilted at windmills, you got me, guilty as charged!! 





cheers

[G Georgopoulos]

I had done some tests some time ago about fastblow fuses, these fuses opened at 150% of the rated current,there were consistency and i was satisfy with the results...

[playntheblues]

Great read guys, thanks to all the contributors   

[Roger A. Modjeski]

Oh, the sweet irony...
http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/net/net.html

As someone who spent a couple of decades earning his living by repairing equipment which had gone awry, I tip my hat to my sacrificial little friend - the fuse. I can't tell you how many times a well chosen fuse has limited the collateral damage of a destabilized circuit. A fuse must perform two tasks. The HiFi Tuning Fuse appears to concentrate all of its efforts on one of them, to the detriment of the other. Do you not find it at all disturbing that there is absolutely no published data regarding their 'fail' characteristics?

I don't have to strap paper wings to my arms and defenestrate myself from the 32nd floor to know that such wings will not enable me to fly. To imply that one cannot reason away certain ideas as folly is an insult to the human capacity to rationalize.

Thanks for you input from a technicians point of view. Proper fusing of equipment is essential to long life and freedom from catastrophic failures. My RM-9 MKII and SE have 10 fuses, one for each tube and two in the power supply. My RM-200 has 6 fuses, one for each tube and two in the power supply. My RM-10 has 3 fuses, one for each pair and one in the power supply. They are in the circuit so as not to affect the sound in any way. Of course people who don't understand circuits don't appear to understand this.

That article in 6 moons starts off great, he makes all the right arguments but then folds, and is blown over by the tuning fuse. As if not enough he is also dazzled by the other products of the charlatan at HI FI TUNING.

[Roger A. Modjeski]

It would seem obvious/logical to take a handful of these fuses and subject them to some objective destructive testing to see how they perform in their primary job.  As anyone done this yet?  Maybe I've missed it?

Dave.

I have done the tests and published my results as to their effectiveness as tube fuses. They fail miserably in that function though the maker gives no warning and one PF reviewer in particular recommended them for just that function. I have explained all this in detail and described exactly what happens in this thread. Perhaps you should review my posts.

[Roger A. Modjeski]

Another thing to do is email Positive Feedback, and let them know what you think of their reviewer(s) who make(s) subjective claims for the improved sound magic fuses afford their system(s). It calls into question their very credibility, on any and all subjects and products. Of course, if the Editor is one of those who has made the claim, it will be falling on, heh, deaf ears.

Last night I sent emails to the editor in chief, 2 senior editors, 4 technical editors and the reviewer who recommended the fuses for use as tube fuses in a CJ amplifier. I have one reply so far.

I have started a new thread to report the results of these queries.

[James Romeyn]

Last week NPR broadcast a story that Professional Scientists had intentionally and knowingly committed the fraud of "Peer Reviewing" (with fraudulent ID) their own science papers.  Remember the professional scientists/hired tobacco guns who swore under oath nicotine is non-addictive while their employer was simultaneously "tweaking" the dose to maintain addictive qualities?  Such scientific frauds seem to dwarf any confirmed audio fraud I can think of off the top of my head. 

Not saying 2 wrongs make a right, just some perspective compared to a taxpayer licensed industry that killed millions. 

Circa mid-late 90s some Cabinet guy or just below that level publicly announced cigarettes are a drug delivery system and must be labeled a dangerous controlled substance, IOW, no more public sale except to persons with license or Rx or some such.  That guy quickly disappeared from the public scene.  The US govt makes millions off nicotine addiction.  Yes, it's probably a net loss with medical care, but it still is income on a balance sheet somewhere.       

Why not just bypass the fuse entirely, if its so bad?  Oh wait - hahahahahaha

You mean with a small value capacitor, as someone I knew was fond of doing, or just short the contacts?

 

[Roger A. Modjeski]

Last week NPR broadcast a story that Professional Scientists had intentionally and knowingly committed the fraud of "Peer Reviewing" (with fraudulent ID) their own science papers.  Remember the professional scientists/hired tobacco guns who swore under oath nicotine is non-addictive while their employer was simultaneously "tweaking" the dose to maintain addictive qualities?  Such scientific frauds seem to dwarf any confirmed audio fraud I can think of off the top of my head. 

Not saying 2 wrongs make a right, just some perspective compared to a taxpayer licensed industry that killed millions. 

Circa mid-late 90s some Cabinet guy or just below that level publicly announced cigarettes are a drug delivery system and must be labeled a dangerous controlled substance, IOW, no more public sale except to persons with license or Rx or some such.  That guy quickly disappeared from the public scene.  The US govt makes millions off nicotine addiction.  Yes, it's probably a net loss with medical care, but it still is income on a balance sheet somewhere.       

You mean with a small value capacitor, as someone I knew was fond of doing, or just short the contacts?

 

A capacitor would have to be very large to bypass the low resistance of the fuse and reduce low frequency heating. I believe Tyson suggests eliminating the fuse permanently.

For an experiment, as long as your amplifier does not blow up on a regular basis, one could short out the fuse with a heavy, short clip lead and  note the difference if any. It is unlikely your amplifier will fail at that moment. It does not bother the amp in any way to short out the fuse temporarily. Be careful not to hit ground with the clip while playing music.  Only do this if you know what you are doing.

[jarcher]

I really have to agree w/ James that in perspective the sins of many other industries, including the scientific, seems more serious than a fuse which may or may not fail to prevent catastrophic failure to a piece of entertainment gear.  There's a lot we put up with in the "boutique" high end audio world in the experimental quest for better sound - subjective or otherwise.  The "hi-fi" fuse industry will stand or fall on it's own merits in the fullness of time.  We're not talking about a large industry anyway, the audiophile market that is. 

With regard to tobacco, promoting that industry is probably in the governments benefit not only because of tobacco tax revenue, but because tobacco smokers tend to die earlier and more quickly, reducing social security and other government benefits paid out down the road.  Assuming of course there's any money left to pay out SS and other benefits in the future.  But that another story and I'll stop before straying even further off topic.

[Doublej]

Bose's comment on audio starting at 43:30ish seems pertinent here.

"Because most of what you know is pure unadulterated folklore that's in these hifi magazines."

http://teachingexcellence.mit.edu/inspiring-teachers/amar-bose-6-312-lecture-01-introduction

[Roger A. Modjeski]

Bose's comment on audio starting at 43:30ish seems pertinent here.

"Because most of what you know is pure unadulterated folklore that's in these hifi magazines."

http://teachingexcellence.mit.edu/inspiring-teachers/amar-bose-6-312-lecture-01-introduction

Need I say that I second that motion.  :)He said several interesting thing on that subject. Also note that was 1995. I wonder what he would say now?

[bdp24]

     I wish he had cited some examples. Each of us knows what would top our own list, but what about his? I'd guess interconnects and speaker wire, an easy, popular, and predictable target of old-school engineers; I doubt he would even be aware of audiophile power cords, which are more questionable I think almost all here would agree, let alone Tuning Fuses. More unpredictable would be his view of anything a guy like, say, Julian Hirsch, was mistaken about. Frank Van Alstine took the trouble of demonstrating to Hirsch a couple of tests that that he, Hirsch, could put an amp through that would reveal a design problem in that amp under certain circumstances. Hirsch dismissed Frank's incontrovertibly valid test, using the excuse that the test was not part of the already established testing program for not adopting Frank's revealing test. It is that attitude towards what is already known versus what isn't, and the attitude that people like he are certain there simply isn't anything to be known that isn't already, that cast doubt upon the relevance and validity of technical measurements amongst seekers of better sound from home Hi-Fi. Products like the Tuning Fuses prove that the willingness to accept the possibility of ANYTHING corrupting good sound can be taken too far. Which is worse? Hirsch Labs was very influential in product development and market calculations by the mass-market companies, and his antiquated test limitations may have held back the advancement of Hi-Fi for decades. Meanwhile, the small, underground, and it could be argued, unqualified High End (ugh) designers went about at least trying to achieve better sound. Again, which is worse? I found the smugness of guys like Hirsch irritating in the extreme, and consider it very unfortunate they were so influential. How about Dr. Bose? Did he not just impede Hi-Fi progress, but actually lead it down an ill-conceived, even technically "incorrect" path? I'm just askin'!
     What I find most encouraging is that all of this did nothing to stop advances in the recording end of the chain by guys like Roger's client in the Santa Barbara area, the great purist recording engineer Kavichandran Alexander. We have music recorded to a quality level yet to be able to be fully reproduced. Room for improvement!

[fastfred]

....What I find most encouraging is that all of this did nothing to stop advances in the recording end of the chain by guys like Roger's client in the Santa Barbara area, the great purist recording engineer Kavichandran Alexander. We have music recorded to a quality level yet to be able to be fully reproduced. Room for improvement!

Talking to local musicians in the local Winnipeg music scene, I notice quite a few guitarists are using audio quest cables & claiming great benefits to their personal sound. So it looks like the insanity has leaked over to professional audio. ( or has it? ) check this website. 

( http://www.alessandro-products.com/main.html )

here’s another page ( http://www.alessandro-products.com/cables-inst.html )

or this one ( http://www.alessandro-products.com/main.php?p=cables-mic ).

There is an audioquest link on this website which no longer works. Maybe a sign that musicians are harder to fool?

[bdp24]

Equating finding differences between the sound of different wires with believing in the superiority of Tuning Fuses is painting with too broad a brush, IMO. Professional recording engineers have no time to waste on imaginary differences, and some of the best have in fact installed various brands of Audiophile cables in their businesses. And please, no "Sure, they have to, to keep their Audiophile credibility". Just ask Doug Sax. He was mastering through horn-loaded loudspeakers in the 70's, when those had about as much Audiophile credibility as Bose speakers. Guess what kind of wire he has running throughout his studio?

[OzarkTom]

Equating finding differences between the sound of different wires with believing in the superiority of Tuning Fuses is painting with too broad a brush, IMO. Professional recording engineers have no time to waste on imaginary differences, and some of the best have in fact installed various brands of Audiophile cables in their businesses. And please, no "Sure, they have to, to keep their Audiophile credibility". Just ask Doug Sax. He was mastering through horn-loaded loudspeakers in the 70's, when those had about as much Audiophile credibility as Bose speakers. Guess what kind of wire he has running throughout his studio?

Most of the recording studios today uses the cheap Monster Cables.

[bdp24]

Equating finding differences between the sound of different wires with believing in the superiority of Tuning Fuses is painting with too broad a brush, IMO. Professional recording engineers have no time to waste on imaginary differences, and some of the best have in fact installed various brands of Audiophile cables in their businesses. And please, no "Sure, they have to, to keep their Audiophile credibility". Just ask Doug Sax. He was mastering through horn-loaded loudspeakers in the 70's, when those had about as much Audiophile credibility as Bose speakers. Guess what kind of wire he has running throughout his studio?

Key phrase: "some of the best", Doug Sax's Mastering Lab being one of the absolute best. Not a recording studio per se, but related.

[Doublej]

Key phrase: "some of the best", Doug Sax's Mastering Lab being one of the absolute best. Not a recording studio per se, but related.

Mogami or Canare?

[Photon46]

Mogami or Canare?

No, they use Shunyata Research.

[Doublej]

No, they use Shunyata Research.

Am I misreading below? It appears that Doug is using Shunyata selectively and not for all wiring in the studio.

http://shunyata.com/index.php/reviews-all/professional-endorsements?start=3

Without knowing the inside scoop, it's difficult to conclude why someone is using a particular product. Is it because they really think it's a great product or they are being paid to use the product, or there is some business relationship between the parties.

Or perhaps they are simply as nutty as some of us out here who think that they can hear a difference with cables and such.

Or is it that we actually can hear a difference but only on poorly designed equipment which seems to be pervasive in high end audio?

Or is it that there is a difference but we have not be able to yet explain in more scientifically acceptable terms why?

Or is it that we need something to argue about so we can ignore the real reasons that two channel high end audio is dwindling?

Or is it some combination of all of the above plus more.

[bdp24]

I don't have an answer to all those questions (!), but I do know that Doug Sax is no fool, and takes his craft very seriously. When all the world was going one way, he was going his own. He has no need for free wire from any company, and does not choose the tools of his trade on that basis. He is known for the quality of his work, which is second to none---State of The Art. In fact, he advanced the state of the art in the 70's with his series of direct-to-disk LP's, still the most alive sounding recordings I've ever heard. He IS a little nutty, in the way that many gifted artists and engineers are. He is not going to risk his reputation by using pieces of gear that do not provide him with the most transparent view of the sound he is manipulating---he is THE mastering engineer in the world!