PROTOTYPE FUSES - NEW THREAD

Frank, I had a look at the prior thread but I couldn’t see if the company will be offering a range of fuses or only a single “color”. Also will they be offering both fast and slo blow?

Thanks

Objective listening impressions are not scientific.

"Objective listening"? Is that a new ninja technique? Listening is always subjective.

Listening is observation. Observation is accepted scientific proof. Go back to school.

You can measure an amplifier’s distortion of a given signal.

Sure we can. But no measurement of amplifier distortion will give us an indication of what it sounds like or how musical it is.

Surely it would be easy to compare fuses using these measurements if they made any actual difference.

Sure it’s easy to measure fuses and compare them. But like measuring amplifier distortion levels, it’s not going to tell you what they sound like.


Anything else I can help you with?

@cleeds 

Observation is a fundamental part of the scientific method

Don’t expect know-it-all’s to understand scientific method. It wasn’t taught in special ed. 

I tried a QSA light blue two weeks ago mainly because of what I heard on these boards. I was amazed at the improvement it made to my system. I expected it could perhaps make a slight change, but it turned out to be very noticeable. So much so that I am upgrading all my fuses and my heightened interest in Franks threads.

If fuses made no difference in my system I would say so. I have no skin in the game and I paid full retail.

I can understand why somebody would be skeptical and refrain from trying audiophile fuses, but I am perplexed as to why anyone would feel compelled to claim they do not work when they have not even tried them? 

" Double yawn. Lay intuition. None of the great things humans have done were done by mystics. They were done by educated people using science the correct way."

Triple yawn back at you. 

Educated people use scientific method. Something you clearly never heard of.

Scientific Method - Observe; develop hypothesis to explain observation; test hypotheses; end up with theory if hypothesis test true..

Your method - Don't bother to observe for yourself; when too ignorant and under educated to develop a hypothesis, claim observations as false; pat yourself on the back for being such a smart "scientist"; delude yourself that nothing in the universe is true unless you understand it; flaunt your ignorance of science on a forum. 

Did I miss anything?

I did mean to say SUBJECTIVE listening impressions are not scientific in that they can can be influenced by placebo effect. Maybe it’s more accurate to say they are not CONCLUSIVE proof of anything.

Observation IS conclusive proof. We know the sun shines because we see it. We did not doubt that the sun was shining for millennia until we managed to measure its energy, we knew it shone all the way back from our Stone Age days.

When multiple unrelated people make the same observation it is considered conclusive truth and on that alone a number of people have been sent to the electric chair.

So far no one has been able to describe to me exactly how a fuse affects the audio signal. The audio signal does not pass through the fuse

Really? So you’re the world’s smartest genius that would understand why everything would work? Really? You don’t know how a microprocessor works - yet your iPad works just fine right? You have no problems using that no?

It’s 40 bucks to test. You don’t have to understand how it works to get benefit.