I now have about 260 hours on my PADIS fuse and ready to some listening. The PADIS fuse appears to look exactly like the Furutech fuse. It has the same blue casing with the PF logo on one side. Actually, the only visible difference between the PADIS and Furutech is that the Furutech has “FURUTECH” printed on the opposite side. However, there are actually differences:
My very initial thoughts on the PADIS fuse (in the first few hours) was that the PADIS seemed somewhat dryer sounding than the Furutech. The PADIS did not have the typical “cold / wet /chimey” tones that fresh rhodium plated Furutech components generally have (I’ve tested Furutech rhodium fuses, power cord connectors, interconnect – they all initially contribute this cold/chime character).
I have often stated that Furutech rhodium is painful to burn in. I have burned in many Furutech fuses and it goes through several painful areas. There are days in Furutech rhodium burn-in where I would sit down to listen and the sound would just be so bright / harsh / hard-edged that I said “I can’t listen to this”. At that point, I would just walk away and let it continue to burn in. With the PADIS fuses, it never got that painful. I could hear the burn-in process changes, but it was always listenable. At the 180-200 hour mark, the PADIS did get very bright/hard-edged, but it was still somewhat listenable (I did not have to walk away). At 220 hours it was fully resolved.
Now, for the comparison. I will say that the PADIS is an excellent fuse. For the money, you really cannot beat it, unless you need a warm signature (in which case you need an Isoclean fuse). Both the PADIS and Furutech share the same essential sonic signature. However, there is definitely a difference. The PADIS sounds very good – do not get me wrong, it is an excellent fuse. However, the Furutech really did have an improvement. The tones on the Furutech were just a bit more pure and true sounding. The Furutech had a more “solid” sound to the audio. The Furutech had a bit more punch and meatiness to the bass / midbass. The PADIS, on the other hand, was a bit more loose in the highs, causing the high frequencies to be a bit more messy and rattling. This does cause the PADIS to sound a bit more dry. The PADIS also did not have quite the depth of soundstage when compared to the Furutech.
Now some people might sit down with me and say “I can’t hear a difference” or “your just splitting hairs”. I might be. The difference in sound is VERY subtle, but to me it makes a significant improvement. The differences could also be revealed when listening over a longer period (like 20-30 minutes). The music with the Furutech is just more engaging.
If you have very low resolution or warm equipment, it is possible that you would not hear the difference at all. However, on high resolution stuff, the Furutech could make that equipment “shine” just a little bit better. The PADIS is an excellent buy. For half the cost, you get a whole heck of a lot of performance (almost a no-brainer if you’re still running a stock fuse!). For those who want to bleed out the most amount of performance and resolution – the Furutech is worth the cost.
There are a few possible reasons I can think of that would cause the PADIS/Furutech difference:
- Furutech fuse state a special damping filler inside to reduce electrical resonance. I cannot find an reference to a damping filler for the PADIS fuses. This could be why the PADIS sounds a bit more loose/dry/harsh in the highs
- Furutech does a Cryogenic treatment process. I cannot find any reference that the PADIS fuses get the same treatement.
- Rhodium plating. It is possible that the Furutech fuses are manufactured with a much thicker rhodium plating. I know Furutech likes a thick rhodium plating on their A/C connectors. The PADIS could have put a thin plating on their generic “PADIS” fuses. This could help explain why my burn-in process was not as painful.
Anyways, those are my findings. Maybe next year I’ll do a BLUE vs. Furutech analysis.
