Something For The Fuse Guys ...
Will someone here start and moderate a FB page, where rules of decorum are enforced? No put downs, etc. Call it "Audio Forum Refugees". The ONLY reason it is enforced on Farcebook is because the OP of the original posting, if they are the administrator, has total power and can delete any post and block "subversive " members from further posting. Can see that working real well here...... |
roberttcan You 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 12:26pmroberttcan61 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’m still waiting for someone to, "prove" fancy fuses can’t/won’t/don’t improve one’s listening experience. OH, WAIT: you can’t. All I’ve seen/read here, thus far, are theories and subjectivity. Nothing’s ever been categorically proven by either. Theories are proven through experimentation & measurement(the Scientific Method). Again: you have to know what and how to measure, but- there are nothing but theories, in that regard, thus far(IF you’re honest/not brainwashed). Double-blind listening tests, depend solely on the listeners’ aural acuity(highly subjective). The ONLY way an audiophile will ever know, if fancy fuses will improve THEIR listening experience, is to experiment/listen on their own, with their own system and ears. |
| Post removed |
Untrained listeners are able to discern small differences in audio performance in quick AB blind testing better than trained listeners are in uncontrolled situations. That is why the method is used. Double blind AB(x) tests in audio don't determine whether something is "better" which would rely on aural acuity, but if something is different. rodman999994,108 posts10-23-2019 7:04amI’m still waiting for someone to, "prove" fancy fuses can’t/won’t/don’t improve one’s listening experience. OH, WAIT: you can’t. All I’ve seen/read here, thus far, are theories and subjectivity. Nothing’s ever been categorically proven by either. Theories are proven through experimentation & measurement(the Scientific Method). Again: you have to know what and how to measure, but- there are nothing but theories, in that regard, thus far(IF you’re honest/not brainwashed). Double-blind listening tests, depend solely on the listeners’ aural acuity(highly subjective). The ONLY way an audiophile will ever know, if fancy fuses will improve THEIR listening experience, is to experiment/listen on their own, with their own system and ears. |
roberttcan Untrained listeners are able to discern small differences in audio performance in quick AB blind testing better than trained listeners are in uncontrolled situations.That is a very interesting claim. That’s especially so because in most of the the blind listening tests where I’ve participated, organizers included some training for the subjects to help them with the experiment. Do you have any evidence to support your claim? I ask because, as you like to state: "What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence." |
Too bad Geoff can’t muster up any valid test results at all these days to support his bread and butter hifi theories about fuses, wire direction, Teleportation Tweaks, you name it. If his supposed methodology at Nasa was at all similar to what he presents here these days, I"m guessing he was canned pronto and found his new comfy home selling made-up, unsupported, theoretical concepts to desperate, gullible hifi enthusiasts with money to burn. I know he would be if he performed his current act and worked for me. |
Well he started his company right around the time he was busted down to training co-ordinator ... so your theory could hold some weight. But come on, you got to admit those magic pebbles are comedy gold! mapman16,252 posts10-23-2019 10:43amToo bad Geoff can’t muster up any valid test results at all these days to support his bread and butter hifi theories about fuses, wire direction, Teleportation Tweaks, you name it. If his supposed methodology at Nasa was at all similar to what he presents here these days, I"m guessing he was canned pronto and found his new comfy home selling made-up, unsupported, theoretical concepts to desperate, gullible hifi enthusiasts with money to burn. I know he would be if he performed his current act and worked for me. |
Published? .... pure comedy gold Gerry, that's pure gold! I wonder if The Onion is hiring? geoffkait17,650 posts10-23-2019 11:00ammoops, 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. |
Thinking about A/B testing, it occurred to me, how many times I’ve heard, "expectation bias", to discount the conclusions, when conducted by the typical audiophile(the tweak doesn’t matter). Today; I pictured a cadre of fire-breathing, rabid, naysayers(perhaps, even degreed), wondering what their, "expectation bias" might be, regarding the completely impartial(of course) listening test, in which they’ll participate. I haven’t, however, heard anything about peer pressure, within such a group. What are the odds, anyone within such a group(the completely impartial cadre, mentioned above), would dare say they heard an improvement, or- so much as a difference, knowing what they might face, from their peers(ie: being called a, "Fusist", ostracism, ridicule, black-listed from any further, impartial, testing, etc / just think about today’s political climate). Then; I’m also supposed to take the word(as Gospel/whatever), from those with whom I have no familiarity, as regards either their hearing health or listening tastes/training/abilities(just. "Trust me!") Call me a skeptic. |
roberttcan"he started his company right around the time he was busted down to training co-ordinator" That sounds like a vile, offensive, and abusive characterization so I would only reply as you do in you're own words that "What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence." |
| Post removed |
I have to imagine in any blind listening test where the organizers went through all the trouble of training the participants, that the results were of course published. Please share the link with us here. It no doubt would be very informative. cleeds2,483 posts10-23-2019 10:21amroberttcan Untrained listeners are able to discern small differences in audio performance in quick AB blind testing better than trained listeners are in uncontrolled situations.That is a very interesting claim. That’s especially so because in most of the the blind listening tests where I’ve participated, organizers included some training for the subjects to help them with the experiment. Do you have any evidence to support your claim? I ask because, as you like to state: "What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence." |
roberttcan I have to imagine in any blind listening test where the organizers went through all the trouble of training the participants, that the results were of course published. Please share the link with us here.Why would you imagine that? And why do you "have" to imagine it - can you not control your thoughts? Untrained listeners are able to discern small differences in audio performance in quick AB blind testing better than trained listeners are in uncontrolled situationsWas that a published study? |
Yes, unlike all your claims, it was published. cleeds2,484 posts10-23-2019 12:42pm Untrained listeners are able to discern small differences in audio performance in quick AB blind testing better than trained listeners are in uncontrolled situationsWas that a published study? |
While contemplating the above, I thought about my own fuse trials. Didn’t know what to expect, but- figured it was worth a try. My first fuse was the SR 20 Synergistic(yeah- it’s been a while), for which I didn’t care. Tried the HI-FI Tuning Gold, then their Supreme, which I’m still using. The SR 20 / 500V / 500mA / Slo-Blo / 6.3 X 32mm, pair(what my Carys use in their B+ circuits), have been sitting in a drawer, since. Anyone that can use that size/rating in their gear and wants to experiment, can PM me. I’ll ship them gratis(no cost / no strings). |
roberttcan Yes, unlike all your claims, it was published.Where and when was it published? Remember your mantra: "What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence." |
rodman99999 ... I'd love to see you experiment with the new Synergistic Research ORANGE fuse and report your findings here. At $159.99 it's a bargain in my estimation. And ... there's that generous 30-day guarantee to consider as well. Frank |
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! 🤡 |
geoffkait ... 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.That sure sounds like a scam. But there have been plenty of valid blind listening tests. Some of them have even been useful. Let’s not throw the baby out with the bathwater. |
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. Thanks for helping support my point: " (Geoff) can’t muster up any valid test results at all these days to support his bread and butter hifi theories " Words (which any literate person can type) and valid test results are two different things. Follow? |
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. |
You know George, it's rather funny that you constantly plead to authority telling us that you worked at Nasa, FAA, etc. (though doing what is not clear), and that because of that you are somehow an "expert" or infallible ... well on everything it seems, but when someone brings up a group, made of up actual audio researchers, experts, and others who are viewed by their peers as experts, that that group is suddenly of "no value". Cognitive dissonance much? |
If one were to go through all these fuse threads, they'd espy a glaringly overlooked matter. The naysayers say a fuse has no effect on the sound of an amp and that it's just there for safety reasons. They also say that the sound differences heard can be attributed to some microscopic piece of dirt and that simply removing and reinserting the fuse will result in different surface contact and that that is the reason an amp will sound different. Full stop. If the fuse is sacrificial and has no impact whatsoever on the sound of an amp, how can a piece of dirt or different surface contact result in a change of sound? All the best, Nonoise |
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. |
Did a journal search on your name. I came up with exactly 0 peer reviewed articles published by you george ... hmmm. p.s. AES conference papers are not peer reviewed, AES journal articles are. The AES which has been around since the 40s and the journal are not a pay to publish group. The survive just fine on member dues. geoffkait17,658 posts10-23-2019 1:31pmYeah, the peer review process. What a scam that is? Give me a break! |
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. |
"........but when someone brings up a group, made of up actual audio researchers, experts, and others who are viewed by their peers as experts, that that group is suddenly of "no value"." Perhaps: expectation bias and peer pressure? Oh, wait: those guys(the Naysayer Cadre) are COMPLETELY impartial(snort of derision). Or- is it possible, that there’s been a panel, selected from a completely random pool of music lovers, that have never met or compared notes, as relates to their listening preferences/biases? And: had their aural acuity tested, prior to listening? I’d be mildly interested in the results myself, were that the case! |
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 We do artificial atoms right! |
The funny thing is nonoise, not one of "strong" advocates of boutique fuses can offer any solid explanation of why a fuse could be better or worse. I mean like literally, I don’t think I have seen any of these so called experts make a claim for it ... (well other than a misunderstanding of how electricity works leading to an erroneous conclusion ... ). You will probably find the people who are not advocates of boutiques fuses can better articulate how they could make a difference: - They could have a better surface treatment that offers a better low resistance bond to the fuse holder, and one could claim reduce modulation of the contact resistance from vibration - They could be lower resistance: Which may make your power amp sound better, but then again it could, likely even would, make your pre-amp and digital player sound worse. - It could have less thermal modulation (you can actually measure distortion due to thermal modulation of a fuse when pushed hard, about 0.001% - going off memory for speakers. In a power line it would be much less). - It could have more or less inductance - If placed over sensitive circuits, it could have more or less shielding and less capacitive coupling into that sensitive circuit - Installed in one direction, and not the other, it could have a better mechanical/electrical coupling. - Due to the way the holder is implemented in the equipment, coupled with defects and/or mounting variations of the fuse element in the fuse, the effects of thermal modulation could vary more with the fuse mounted one direction than the other. And yes, simply taking the fuse in and out would be like sweeping contacts on a switch or plug and can lower resistance, but that could have been done with the low cost OEM switch. I have seen some pretty crazy explanations for fuses and fuse directionality here and on other forums .... rarely (almost never) real world engineering reasons and never with the effect quantified. All the things I described above are relatively easy to measure and their contribution to the electrical signal determined. People skilled in the art and honest don't refute that a fuse and its holder is part of either a AC power supply path and/or signal path (speakers). What they are skeptical about, and rightly so, is whether, you have to admit, the significant benefits attributed to boutique fuses is warranted given the difference in the electrical/thermal performance parameters possible between basic fuses and boutique fuses. I have seen articles where people have measured parameters for boutique fuses (well reviewed) and while better than your basic $0.10 OEM fast blow fuse, it was no better than the other $2.00 fuses they tested. What also creates skepticism is the claim that they are "always" better and while admittedly a lot of amateur and professional reviewers do not make that claim, most do, and with claims of huge performance improvements in all equipment, high and low powered. That simply does not cut the mustard based on how these equipment are designed. ME Report thisnonoise5,037 posts10-23-2019 2:11pmIf one were to go through all these fuse threads, they’d espy a glaringly overlooked matter. The naysayers say a fuse has no effect on the sound of an amp and that it’s just there for safety reasons. They also say that the sound differences heard can be attributed to some microscopic piece of dirt and that simply removing and reinserting the fuse will result in different surface contact and that that is the reason an amp will sound different. Full stop. If the fuse is sacrificial and has no impact whatsoever on the sound of an amp, how can a piece of dirt or different surface contact result in a change of sound? All the best, Nonoise |
roberttcan The funny thing is nonoise, not one of "strong" advocates of boutique fuses can offer any solid explanation of why a fuse could be better or worse. I mean like literally, I don’t think I have seen any of these so called experts make a claim for it ... (well other than a misunderstanding of how electricity works leading to an erroneous conclusion ... ). >>>>Ah, the old, I have been unable to find the explanation anywhere, excuse. There is a reason for being able to search the threads here. I and others have provided all the gory details many times. Let your fingers do the walking. You talk the talk, but can you walk the walk? 🤡 |
But you do george, that is why you can't stop yourself from responding to my posts .... geoffkait17,663 posts10-23-2019 2:22pmI 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. |
@roberttcan, Actually, most, if not all of your mentions were brought up in older threads as to why it could explain the efficacy of aftermarket fuses, but they were all shot down as worthless, meaningless, or just silly. A lot of these aftermarket fuses are based on high rupturing fuses which are made for medical, military, and other high end uses that have been around for many a year. All it took was some enterprising chaps to apply it to audiophile needs and jack up the price. That's not to say they don't perform better. But they do impact the resultant sound. Padis fuses go to great lengths to ensure that the end caps are positioned to ensure an even roll on a table, ensuring better and fuller contact with the fuse holder. They even go a step further by omitting any engraving on the sides of the end caps and print the values on the fuse body, ensuring an even fuller and more consistent contact surface. They use better and purer metals as well and cost about $25 apiece, which goes to show that one needs not spend a fortune. I'll admit that these fuses are overpriced, but what isn't? It's all about what one's willing to pay. I've tried 4-5 different brands and they all sound different and I don't need for anyone to quiz and test me as I've made it this far in life without resorting to fanatical lengths to make sure I'm hearing what I'me hearing. 👍 All the best, Nonoise |
