I do have one connection to AES I totally forgot about. From Stereophile forum circa 2014, Machina Dynamica video conference with AES Just to mention I participated in a video conference with the AES group at William Patterson University in New Jersey, lasting about 45 minutes and I presented several of my products, including Brilliant Pebbles, the Clever Little Clock, Super Intelligent Chip and Dark Matter as well as performed the Teleportation Tweak to see if we could detect any effect on voice or video. Great group of Audio Engineering students with a lot of excellent questions. Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica We do artificial atoms right! |
I think I already answered your question. Don’t get too hung up. 😬 In the town I’m from the roads don’t end at the edge of town. It’s not like Pleasantville, where you’re from. There are some places that the road doesn’t go in a circle. There are some places where the road keeps going. Where I come from I don’t need anyone’s approval. |
Excellent, excellent...
besides, we know that a bit of dirt or oxidation OR some imperfection of the fuse holder cannot be the real explanations since the correct fuse direction is repeatable and transferable. Hel-loo! Naysayers are like the Greek dudes seeing shadows on the walls of cave and imagining what the shadows actually are. |
Why on Earth would I wish to become attached to any group that considers itself the ultimate source of knowledge on all things related to audio? That’s not my idea of science. Science should always be questioning, never taking anything at face value, even established facts, or become complacent. Much less, arrogant.
|
Moops, did you forget to take your smart pill again? Note to self: Is it just me or is it getting crazier out there?
|
Kramer of Butthole Surfer fame was the intermediary between James Randi Educational Foundation, cough cough, and my customer during the halcyon days of the Intelligent Chip for a controlled double blind test that could win my customer a cool one million duckaleros if, and that’s a big if, he could pass the test with flying colors. 🇧🇩🇦🇺🇦🇹🇧🇫
Well, now get this, it turns out that Kramer wanted to dictate all (rpt all) the terms of the test. Well, I guess he would since it was his million bucks. But it is not (rpt not) scientific. Not by a long shot. The Randi dudes would not allow my customer to use his own CDs, wanted the test to be performed in Florida on a system the Randi dudes selected. And they wanted to have a number of their people present for the test. Come on, people, this has scam written all over it!
Finally, now get this, Kramer dude wanted my customer to pass ten consecutive blind tests. That means in a row. I ask you, gentle readers, does that seem fair? Or am I incorrect that just because someone calls a controlled double blind test SCIENTIFIC it is no such thing. In fact it’s the opposite of scientific. It’s a scam. Hel-loo! Duh!
The only role for controlled double blind testing that I can see is as a weapon in discussions like these or threads regarding controversial tweaks or ideas. “I bet you can’t pass a scientifically controlled double blind test!” What a scam! 🤡 |
Yeah, the peer review process. What a scam that is? Give me a break!
|
Gerry? Apparently pseudo skeptics can’t spell. Who woulda thunk it? 🤡
An ordinary man has no means of deliverance. 😩 |
People who demand proof don’t understand the situation.
When you control the mail you control...information! - Newman
|
moops, I published How the Clever Lil Clock ⏰ Works with May and Peter Belt 6 years ago. I published the Definitive Explanation for How the Intelligent Chip Works 15 years ago. And The Story of How The Teleportation Tweak Works more recently. My, how Time flies. Thanks for asking.
|
Roberttcan, I hate to judge before all the facts are in but it appears we’re not on the same page. Just because YOU use the term “scientifically controlled” doesn’t impress me like I’m sure you were expecting. If you’re looking to be nominated for bloviator-in-chief you’re on the right track. 🤡
|
roberttcan. Oh, I get it! I'm the one who doesn't understand. Gee, what a great argument. Did you think of that all by yourself? |
More than I care to remember, jitter. I also have considerable testing experience for other government agencies. 🤫
When you see a large block of platinum it’s mostly just empty space. 🤡 |
roberttcanYou are right, I don’t know you. So enlighten me on your involvement in scientifically controlled, double-blind listening tests in audio. I am willing to listen. Are you willing to share enough details for the post to be relevant?
cleeds2,477 posts10-22-2019 12:26pm roberttcan61 posts10-22-2019 12:08pm No it does not drive us crazy because it is pure supposition not at all supported by fact. It is also a claim that you are not willing to put your money behind. You don’t know what you’re talking about. You don’t know me, and you apparently don’t know anything about my involvement with scientifically controlled, double-blind listening tests. You are right, I don’t believe your claims ... What claims are those? >>>>>I’m sufficiently familiar with The Amazing Randi Million Dollar Challenge to understand the “scientifically controlled double blind tests” for audio can be easily manipulated so that no one has a snowball’s chance in hell of passing one. I also have much testing in my professional experience for enormously expensive and complex mission critical systems for both NASA and FAA. IMHO Scientifically controlled double blind tests are a SCAM, in so many words - especially when they are used in the context of controversial audio devices and concepts. |
I just KNEW that was coming! The old Amazing Randi ploy. Well played. 🤗 Next up, the $10,000 Blind Test Challenge. Just when you thought this thread couldn’t possible get any funnier.
|
A single test, whether controlled double-blind or any other kind of test, is simply a data point. Therefore, no conclusions should be drawn. Certainly not proof of anything. It’s only when the test results have been repeated on the same system and on other systems by other individuals can inferences be made. It’s a question of evidence accumulating over time, it’s not about proof. The motivation of the tester should should also be examined. 😬
|
Eggs-ackley! Most likely scenario is a miscreant Wiki scientist’s full blown attack on audiophile tweaks. They are red herrings and they’re logical fallacies. So typical. Highly motivated (who knows why?) escapees from the James Randi Educational Foundation. 🤡
“It can’t pass a double-blind test.”
“Perform a double-blind test and you’ll get your answer.”
“None of those crazy tweaks can pass a properly performed controlled test.”
|
There it is! It was only a matter of time before controlled double-blind testing reared it’s ugly head. By now you would have thought everybody and his brother knows the results of a double blind test don’t mean anything, anymore than any other kind of test. This is classic pseudo scientist behavior.
|
OK, kiddies, what time is it? It’s time for the Intro to Zen and the Art of Debunkery again. 🤗 “Seeing with humility, curiosity and fresh eyes was once the main point of science. But today it is often a different story. As the scientific enterprise has been bent toward exploitation, institutionalization, hyperspecialization and new orthodoxy, it has increasingly preoccupied itself with disconnected facts in a psychological, social and ecological vacuum. So disconnected has official science become from the greater scheme of things, that it tends to deny or disregard entire domains of reality and to satisfy itself with reducing all of life and consciousness to a dead physics. Science seems in many ways to be treading the weary path of the religions it presumed to replace. Where free, dispassionate inquiry once reigned, emotions now run high in the defense of a fundamentalized "scientific truth." As anomalies mount up beneath a sea of denial, defenders of the Faith and the Kingdom cling with increasing self-righteousness to the hull of a sinking paradigm. Faced with provocative evidence of things undreamt of in their philosophy, many otherwise mature scientists revert to a kind of skeptical infantilism characterized by blind faith in the absoluteness of the familiar. Small wonder, then, that so many promising fields of inquiry remain shrouded in superstition, ignorance, denial, disinformation, taboo . . . and debunkery.” |
For some it’s simply the fun of needling madman.
|
It’s ironic that such a comment would come from someone who’s the poster boy for audiophiles stuck in the 80s. Some folks don’t learn no matter how many times I repeat it. A little bit of a re-tar-da-shun, I suspect. No biggie.
if you don’t learn from history you’re bound to make the same mistakes again. - Old audiophile axiom |
mitch2
Geoff, you are learning...I am glad you agree that any differences in sound likely result from the improved contact achieved by removing the replacing the fuses, and not something silly like minuscule differences in directional resistance....🤔
>>>>>Geez, Louise! That makes absolutely no sense. No matter how many times you take the fuse out and reinsert it in the opposite direction the sound will always be better when the fuse is in the correct direction. It’s predictable and it’s repeatable and transferable. You’ve heard of the scientific method, right? The fuse holder has nothing to do with it. Hel-loo! It’s just another example of silly non-believers grasping at straws. No offense to you or my pal, Al. Hey, that Rhymes! 😬
|
oregonpapa OP
So, there’s the wire extrusion factor (which no one has commented on yet), and now we have cryogenic treatment. How many more factors could affect the "sound" of different fuses? How about the use of different materials like graphene, beeswax ... etc? >>>>>Oh, geez, we’ve covered all that before. Hel-loo! Are you channeling Wolfman? |
Mitch, you’re right, I am learning. Unlike the non-believers who, if I can be so bold, all seem to suffer the same learning disorder. If you’d been following the fuse saga closely you would have seen that resistance is not the root cause of directionality, it’s only a symptom. That’s the point HiFi Tuning was making. The root cause of directionality is something we haven’t figured out yet, even though I’ve offered a prize to anyone who can. So far, there is not much consensus on what the signal even is. That’s life in the fast lane.
|
What is the purpose of all the sand? I’m assuming it’s for the refuseniks can pound sand?
|
The more important aspect of the very small differences in resistance is that the direction exhibiting the lower resistance is always (rpt always) the direction that sounds best. I would be the last person to claim that relatively large differences in sound exhibited by fuses are due entirely to the very small differences in resistance. In fact, this very point is stated in the HiFi Tuning data sheets. Hel-loo! To make matters even more irritating to the non-believers, as I’ve pointed on at least one occasion — the percentage of measured differences in resistance stated by HiFi Tuning are incorrect. As I recall 5% is the stated difference. In fact, percentages are much lower. Do the math. However the lower resistance is in the direction of best sound.
|
Yeah, it’s not obvious how much resistance a one-inch long wire could possibly have compared to all the wire in the power cord plus the internal wiring of the component. 😛 Recall the data sheets from HiFi Tuning showed definite differences among various fuses for measured resistance. And the data sheets showed reduction in resistance for the same fuse following cryogenic treatment. 🥶 All fuses, including bog standard commercial fuses showed improved resistance values after cryogenic treatment. AND all fuses showed differences in resistance according to direction in the circuit 🔛
Of course, the elephant in the room is how external forces like vibration and RF affect the signal through the fuse which is itself an electromagnetic wave.
- Your humble narrator and theoretical physicist
|
Gosh, did you think of that all by yourself, auxinput? That’s almost as clever as your moniker.
|
Just as I thought. Begone, troll!
|
Just as I thought. No arguments. No, I’m not going to go back and search through fuse threads. If you want to copy and paste your arguments go for it.
|
nonoise, What the heck are you going on about? Now that you mention it I don’t recall you ever making an argument one way or the other. Maybe you can refresh my memory and provide some arguments other than calling names. (I just hope Al doesn’t turn too fast or you might break your nose.) |
I have no idea what the “it’s only a sacrificial device” argument even means. The fuse obviously prevents high current from going any further, regardless of why the high current is there. It’s irrelevant to the fuse debate how the high current got there. There are really only a few bones of contention for fuses. Allow me to quickly summarize them.
Fuses do not all sound the same
Aftermarket fuses as a general rule sound better than stock fuses
There are easily identifiable physical and electrical reasons why some fuses are audibly superior to stock off-the-shelf fuses
All Fuses are directional in the sense they sound better in one direction than the other
In fact, it’s unnecessary to know why fuses are directional. So the whole argument about molecules and atoms is actually irrelevant. We already know all wire is directional. And have known for 25 years. I use the word we editorially. 😬
|
Even though what Al pointed out may be true, and probably is true, it actually has no real bearing on the case. You might as well say the sky is blue.
I could also point out that oregonpapa’s statement that all aftermarket fuses are directional is only a partial truth. Since all fuses -including stock off the shelf fuses - are directional. And all wire is directional - e.g., wire in all cables, interconnects, power cords, HDMI cables, Ethernet cables, transformers, capacitors, etc.
Cheers everybody!
|
Glubson
Not around here.
So true. Learning disorder one assumes. |
Al, thanks for deciding not to participate in this thread. 😃 |
Of course that makes me really, really, really glad I don’t have to use fuses. There is never any end to it. Fuses are bad gnus. 🐂 🐂 🐂 Oh, I almost forgot to ask, are the prototype fuses directional?
|
Whoa! Wow! Hey, I didn’t realize madman was part of the brain police apparatus. Thanks for pointing that out.
|
|
Now I’m glad I didn’t bicycle all the way out to RMAF. 🚴♂️
|
madman, as the hillbilly in Deliverance said to the city slicker who was about to go up the river in a canoe, you don’t know nothin. No offense intended.
|
Yeah, right. RMAF is high end. 🙄 |
It appears to me you’re not quite following. Speaker cables and power cords are both AC. 🔛 The signal travels to and fro on each wire + and -. That’s why it should not (rpt not) be too difficult to imagine fuse direction might well be just as important as speaker wire direction. 🔜
|
More to my point, high end amplifier designers by and large are at least two paradigm shifts behind the power curve when it comes to audiophile stuff. I suspect it comes largely from being fat dumb and happy. Resting on ones laurels, hyper circuit focused. |
So, in other words, wolfman, you think the fuse is like the power cord - it just serves an electronic function and has no bearing on the sound? You think power cords all sound the same? 🙄 Besides, most high end amp designers are blissfully unaware of audiophile fuses. Even if they are aware of them they’re overly suspicious. Fancy fuses and high end power cords would blow their budget, anyway.
|
Paul’s favorite expression is, “I have no idea how it works but works it does!” Thanks, Paul. That was real helpful. 😬
|
wolf_garcia
If "special" fuses displayed even a fraction of the astonishing benefits touted by the hyperbole slinging sales force who claim to just be trying to share their wonderful insight, then Nelson Pass, Dennis Had, Jason Stoddard, and countless other gear designers would be all over ’em...for the vast majority of these designers, they’re not. Why is that?
>>>>Because you can‘t teach an old dog new tricks.
At the graduation ceremony of a big audio engineering school the president gave the address in which he said, Some of you will go on to big things. The rest of you will become audio engineers. |
It should be pointed out madman doesn’t actually have any products. One assumes it’s because he isn’t able to invent or design anything. But it’s probably just as well.
|
The fuse in the speakers is in line with the incoming signal (current) from the speaker cables which is alternating current just like the current coming off the power cord in the amplifier or CD player where the fuse usually is located. The only difference is that the current is a lot higher coming into the amp. Plus the current going to the speakers is alternating AC at a frequency according to the instantaneous audio waveform frequency whereas the frequency of the wall AC is 60 Hz. But they are both AC circuits. Follow? |
prof
If it's a normal part of being human to experience bias effects, we can expect a lot of people to experience bias effects. And so long as we are talking about people taking a "subjectivist" approach along the lines of "I don't need this to be objectively verifiable, if I hear it I know it's true" then that very approach self-selects for the pattern of people who "hear differences." They are all using the same problematic methodology.
>>>what a load of horseman knew her. Nobody is saying that certain psychological factors aren’t real but it’s the worst exhibition of pseudo skepticism to suggest that expectation bias, pro tweak bias, placebo effect, reverse placebo effect or whatever is responsible for peoples’ results in all cases - or even 50% of the cases. OK, let’s take the worse case scenario. Let’s say bias accounts for 50% of user results. That still leaves 50,000 who actually did get good results. and we only have like three dudes who got nothing. And then there are folks like yourself who won’t even experiment to find out. Give me a break. Just another skeptic in an ivory tower.
|
barts6 I’m just slightly confused! Can someone explain to me which order one would change (upgrade) fuses for max benefit? A/C input surge fuse, DC power supply fuses, speaker fuses? Of course testing after each change. I can’t imagine the AC power line fuse would make any difference. But, it does make a little bit of sense that a speaker line fuse could make some difference. >>>>>Why would a speaker line fuse make more sense than an AC power line fuse? They’re both AC circuits. |
