Fuses fuses fuses

The integrity of the electrical path is very important. For example, a properly bedded fuse sounds better than a breaker; but a breaker is capable of breaking more than one line at a time, even if a fault is detected on only one line. This can be vitally important with +/- power supplies.

While I think it is possible that exotic fuses sound different, nothing in physical theory tells me that fuses should have directionality. I doubt that anyone has done a scientific, double blind study of directionality, while controlling all the ways that the human mind can find to deceive itself. Until such time, I am skeptical of the assertion that fuses have directionality.

I will certainly not pay for anything which is unlikely to make a difference according to physical theory, and which has no support in experimental evidence. There are many ways to spend 6 figures and get a demonstrable improvement at every turn. That's my path. YMMV

Charles, a hundred years of experimental psychology has evolved very strong paradigms for dealing with experimenter bias, subject bias, and confounding factors. It is easy for those with expertise in engineering or mathematics to dismiss these advances, but that would be a mistake. The experimental tools are there.

These tools can be used to demonstrate heretofore unsuspected effects. Doing so is good for careers. The absence of an effect which can be repeated in the lab is evidence against the existence of that effect. Not proof. Just evidence.

I find Ralph's explanation of the phenomenon to be convincing. And it would be very easy to test. Anyone who wanted to bother only needs to repeat the experiment many times with randomization, and count. I suggest a paradigm known as 'two alternative forced choice'. Elementary statistics would do the rest.

As I said before, there's lots of places to park money in this hobby, lots of places where everyone agrees. That's where I spend money.

@charles1dad 
"Terry9 I can tell you that the upgrade fuses are clearly effective in my system. However you’d likely remain skeptical based on your own inherent bias and preformed opinion."

Please re-read my earlier post, "I think it is possible that exotic fuses sound different" (2017/070/09/6:15 PM).


@geoffkait 
"OK, so if it would be "very easy to test" how come none of you guys ever bother to test it? Talk is cheap."

Because I'm not making an assertion which goes against established physics. You are. The onus of proof is on you.

I rest my case.

Hello Bob.

There are fuses that are made to be soldered in, they look like resistors, and don't cost much. I use them on conservatively rated power supplies for exactly this reason. You can buy them from DigiKey - search for fuses, 'through hole' under the column 'mounting type'. I think the smallest they sell is 1/16 amp, the biggest is 20 or so.

If you don't blow fuses much, it's a good solution.

@georgehifi 

Forgot to mention - you can get them blessed by a Cardinal. Then the sound is truly heavenly, but it is an indulgence.

@almarg 

Al, are you making a run for this year's Nobel for Patience? Just wanted to warn you, I think that they retired it and gave it to Ralph in perpetuity. But good luck, anyhow.

@teo-audio 

You write, "The reality, the only reality that the results propose, is: objectivity is a fabrication, a projection... of a fundamental reality which is entirely subjective and entangled. That we only posses probability, and theory, and not fact. That 'Fact' cannot exist."

Not so, not at all. The headline reads, "Probability that the QUANTUM world obeys local realism is less than one in a billion, experiment shows."

Don't break out the theramins just yet, Teo.

In the first place, probability is not the same as subjectivity. To see this, try betting on a roll of dice, and see how subjective the results are to the other players.

Deterministic is the antonym of probabilistic. Not objective.

Secondly, while it is true that there are no facts without theories, that is because theories are required to interpret observations. These interpretations may be revised in the light of new data and new theory, but that is not on the level of observation. Thus we can correlate flying saucer sightings and Virgin Mary sightings across the ages. The underlying observations are interpreted according to the dominant theory.

Thirdly, there is a fundamental principle of physics, that of correspondence. That is, a new theory has to agree with old theory within a restricted realm, usually one of precision or scale. In the case of quantum theory, which describes the very very small, quantum theory must correspond to classical physics in the realm of the not so small. Thus in the world which is remotely accessible to humans, the two theories must give the same results, and they do.

@almarg Thanks Al. Praise from you means a lot!

@teo Sorry if I was heavy-handed. Must be getting tetchey in my old age.