Hi Charles, Well, the works on the recording include Bach's famous "Toccata and Fugue in D Minor," excerpts of works by Vivaldi and Wagner, and a piece by a 20th century American composer named Alexander Russell. The performer, Lloyd Holzgraf, I understand was the long-time organist of the First Congregational Church of Los Angeles, where the recording was made, and he certainly gives a noteworthy performance IMO. However, organ music tends to be an acquired taste to many, and I would expect that there will be many to whom these pieces would not be appealing. And for that matter they are not pieces that I find myself wanting to listen to with any particular regularity, either. The following YouTube links appear to be uploads derived from CD transfers of the original direct-to-disc LP, each link corresponding to one side of the LP: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jd0bETda5uMhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c5nzfPi8w4EBest regards, -- Al |
Al if I’m unable to find this CD is there an alternative good organ recording you might suggest? Yup: https://www.amazon.com/Saint-Sa%C3%ABns-Symphony-No-3-Camille/dp/B000003CSK/ref=sr_1_1?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1469925056&sr=1-1&keywords=cd-80051 Saint-Saëns’ Symphony No. 3, known as the "Organ Symphony," is music that I would expect to have much broader appeal than the pieces on the M&K disc. And I would certainly consider your use of the word "majestic" to be applicable to it as well. I have this on the original 1980 Telarc LP. Don’t let the fact that it was digitally recorded and mastered in the early days of digital discourage you; the sonics of many of the digital recordings that were originally issued on LP by Telarc prior to and around the time CDs came into being are excellent. That said, assuming that the CD was created with no added dynamic compression relative to whatever minimal amount (if any) may be present on the LP, I disavow any responsibility for what may happen if and probably when some of the passages on this recording drive your amp well into clipping :-) Best regards, -- Al |
|
In general, sarcasm, exaggeration, biting criticism, parody, etc., that a reasonable person can be expected to not take as literal truth, are not considered by the courts to be defamation.
However, referring to a member as "deranged" is a violation of Audiogon’s terms of service. Note that if you point to the lower right corner of any post a "report this" link will appear. If you click on it you will see that one of the reportable categories that is listed is "abusive towards another member."
Just FYI. Regards,
-- Al
(Licensed but non-practicing attorney-at-law)
|
Geoffkait 8-3-2016 6:58 am edt
To be fair - and correct - the technically experienced here have been saying either that fuses ARE directional or that fuses MIGHT BE directional. Not sure whom that might be. In any event, in the opinion of this technically experienced person (i.e., me) the best insight into the question of fuse directionality, at least in the case of AC applications, was provided in this thread by Ralph of Atma-Sphere. Some excerpts: Atmasphere 5-23-2016 4:52pm edt
It has to do with the fact that the connections on fuse holders are not perfect. The act of reversing the fuse sometimes gets you a better connection. However, directionality really isn’t the issue. Similar to a power switch, the contact area of the fuse holder that is actually doing the work is a fraction of the total contact area. As a result, if you simply rotate the fuse in its holder, you will find that there is a best position where more of the fuse holder contact area is touching the fuse contacts. When the fuse was reversed, on occasion you got better contact or worse contact, which appears initially to be a directional issue, but that is really an illusion.
Interestingly, this effect is measurable as a voltage drop across the fuse holder. As you might expect, the less voltage drop the better. So it is possible to adjust (rotate) the fuse in the holder for minimum voltage drop and thus the best performance. A side benefit is the fuse will last a little longer as the operating temperature is reduced.
Atmasphere 5-26-2016 12:31pm edt
I joined this thread recently with some results on testing. Those results are that the directionality appears out of coincidence and that actually greater improvement can be had by rotating the fuse in the holder for best contact. The improvement is measurable and audible; descriptions others have made on this thread of what happens when you get the direction right accurately describe what happens when the contact area is maximized.
Occam’s Razor has something to say here! Given that a fuse has to be used in AC circuits and given that people report differences by reversing the fuse, and also understanding how fuses are inherently incapable of having directionality in any way whatsoever, the explanation that they somehow have an effect by reversing them in the holder is a fairly complex explanation: some sort of unknowable, unmeasurable quality of the fuse itself.
A simpler explanation is that the reversal is improving the contact area because fuse and holder are not dimensionally perfect and the fuse might sit better in the holder in one direction. By rotating the fuse in the holder without reversing it gets the same effect only more profoundly.
Regards, -- Al |
Without betraying proprietary information, let me note that the More Than a Fuse dramatically increases the impedance from 0.2 ohms to 10 ohms at 10 MHz, thus increasing high frequency noise-rejection fifty fold over that of a conventional fuse. While I don’t doubt that the Audio Horizons dealer twosome mentioned above are great people, and for all I know the AH fuses may be the greatest such product ever, I would hope that no one here will take this technical rationale to be anything more than ad copy. I’ll spare everyone a lengthy discourse on the subject, as well as saving myself a lot of time, but suffice it to say that if the AH fuse provides better sonics in a given application than some other fuse, it will not be because its impedance is 10 ohms at 10 MHz. Also, a far more effective approach to attenuating 10 MHz noise, as well as noise at other similarly high frequencies, would be to put a suitably chosen ferrite clamp costing a few dollars around the power cord, near the IEC connector on the component. And because the Platinum Reference “More Than a Fuse” also reduces ultra high frequency noise by up to 46 dB or more, a ratio 200 times that of a typical fuse, high frequency harmonic texture is heard against a dead quiet background.... 46 db corresponds to a voltage ratio of 200x, so it follows from this statement that a "typical fuse" provides no attenuation of high frequency noise. I don’t doubt the correctness of that implication. Regards, -- Al |
David, thanks for providing that clarification.
Regards,
-- Al
|
Hi Lowrider,
If I recall correctly you are using a Sunfire 300 amp, with its "current source" outputs connected to the tweeters, and its "voltage source" outputs connected to the lower frequency drivers. In looking at a rear panel photo of that amp I see that in addition to the mains fuse there is a 5 amp slow blow fuse that is apparently in series with the "current source" output of each channel. I presume that what you replaced with the SR Black is the mains fuse.
Just a guess, but given especially that the amp is probably a dozen or more years old you might try removing the current source fuses that are in series with the tweeters, cleaning their contacts with a good contact cleaner such as one of the Caig products, reinserting and removing them a couple of times (so that the residual cleaner on the fuse might benefit the holder as well), and perhaps even try them in various positions of rotation. (See the comments by Atmasphere that I quoted in this thread on 8-3-2016, on page 49).
Good luck. Best regards,
-- Al
|
Also, of course, a mains fuse would not be rated at 32 volts. P.S: Unless perhaps a previous owner replaced the original fuse with a 32 volt automotive fuse, which might also explain why the fuse that was in there was a fast blow, rather than a slow blow which is what I’m pretty certain an MDA-10 is. And if a previous owner had indeed replaced an MDA-10 250 volt slow blow fuse with a 32 volt automotive fast blow fuse, I would certainly not find it surprising that changing to a more properly rated fuse would make a transformative difference. And perhaps changing from the SR fast blow you went with to a slow blow would reduce the sonic downsides that you indicated resulted from the change. As well as minimizing the risk that this expensive fuse will blow prematurely. Best regards, -- Al |
Lowrider & David, thanks for the additional comments. Lowrider, yes, in the rear panel photos of the amp that I’ve looked at via Google Images it says "120VAC 50/60 Hz" immediately under the fuseholder, as you indicated. But further down and a bit to the right, just under where the power cord emerges from the panel, the photos I’ve looked at say something like "for continued fire protection use original fuse type and rating only of MDA-10." Here is a datasheet for the MDA series of fuses. Note in its title and in the first line under "description" the words "time delay," which would certainly seem to correspond to slow blow. Also, Digikey’s listing of that fuse, shown here, states "response time: slow." And the "nominal melting" spec of 1491.3 amps squared-seconds for the MDA-10 is well into the "slow" category, for a 10 amp fuse. So if that same wording appears on the rear of your amp I would have a good deal of concern that an expensive fuse described as fast blow might not last too long in that amp, regardless of what the manual says. Regarding Bob Carver, he certainly was (and still is) quite an innovative designer. For a goodly number of years starting around 1982 I used his model M400t amplifier, a 200 watt/channel amp in the form of a cube measuring just a bit more than 7 inches on a side(!). It was designed to emulate the "transfer function" of the very highly regarded Mark Levinson ML-2, a pure class A design rated at 25 watts or so into 8 ohms but capable of providing enormous amounts of current into low impedances. Although Mr. Carver pretty much admitted in a TAS interview a few years ago that as might be expected the design succeeded in emulating the ML-2 just to a loose approximation at best, it provided me with very satisfactory results for quite a few years, until I eventually transitioned to tubes. And it seemed every bit as powerful as its rating would suggest, at least when used in conjunction with the easy to drive speakers I was using at the time. Prior to that time, though, I very briefly owned a predecessor model, designated as the M400a if I recall correctly, which was not designed to emulate anything and provided sonics that were quite disappointing. But the M400t was a "night and day" improvement on that earlier effort, and he presumably carried the benefits of those experiences forward into his Sunfire years. Best regards, -- Al |
What is the value of the amp fuse?
David, the photo I looked at of the rear panel of the Sunfire 300 amp indicates that the mains fuse is a type MDA-10, which I'm pretty certain is a 10 amp 250 volt 6.3 x 32 mm slow blow fuse. Regards, -- Al |
Lowrider, is the amp a Sunfire 300, as I was recalling? And does it say "MDA-10" for the mains fuse on the rear panel? Also, of course, a mains fuse would not be rated at 32 volts.
Best regards,
-- Al
|
Yes, David, as you no doubt realize Carver's 1970s Phase Linear Corporation has often been referred to as "Flame Linear." But believe it or not the Carver Corporation M400t I mentioned that I purchased around 1982 is still going strong in the home of a relative.
The predecessor M400a model that I mentioned I previously very briefly owned (I couldn't wait to get rid of it), did often manifest a very prominent glare in the treble region, among other sonic shortcomings. Which I can imagine would have induced ringing in the ears of many listeners. That and most of its other shortcomings, though, were completely eliminated in the M400t. At least, as I said, when it was used with easy to drive speakers.
Regards,
-- Al
|
Lowrider, it looks like the MDA-10 may have been superseded by the MDA-10-R, which is very similar except that it is lead-free and complies with the European RoHS (Restriction of Hazardous Substances) requirements. As you may have noticed at the link I provided for the MDA-10 Digikey has no stock under that part number, but that page refers to the MDA-10-R as being an RoHS compliant replacement, and the technical specs on the two parts look very similar. The page for the MDA-10-R shows thousands as being in stock, for $1.58 each in small quantities. Digikey is a distributor of electronic parts, mainly serving industry. But they have no minimum purchase requirement for most items (apparently including this fuse, since a quantity 1 price is indicated for it), and every transaction I have had with them over the years has been prompt and flawless. Best regards, -- Al |
A T800 fuse is slow blow. The thinness of the wire reflects the small 800 ma (0.8 amp) current rating of the fuse.
Also, given the reports that have been made in this thread by several people indicating that in some applications SR fuses have had to be derated somewhat to prevent them from blowing when they shouldn't (i.e., to have current ratings that are a bit higher than specified by the equipment manufacturer), it would seem prudent to choose an SR fuse rated at 1 amp, rather than 800 ma. Both ratings provide a wide margin relative to the 20 volt-amp consumption of the DAC, but the brief current surge that may occur at turn-on could be significantly larger.
Regards,
-- Al
|
Mlaurentiu, I looked at the manual for the Linn Numerik DAC, and at the section of this Wikipedia writeup which among other things addresses BS (British Standard) 1362 fuses. It appears that the 5 amp fuse referred to in the manual is in the mains plug, not in the DAC itself. The DAC itself apparently has a fuse with a MUCH smaller current rating. That rating is not indicated in the manual but may be indicated on the rear of the unit, and/or on the fuse itself. Also, note the following statements in the Wikipedia writeup: There are two common misconceptions about the purpose of the fuse in a BS 1363 plug, one is that it protects the appliance connected to the plug, and the other is that it protects against overloading. In fact the fuse is there to protect the flexible cord between the plug and the appliance under fault conditions....
... BS 1362 specifies sand-filled ceramic-bodied cylindrical fuses, 1" (25.4 mm) in length, with two metallic end caps of 1/4" (6.3 mm) diameter and roughly 1/5" long.
I’ve seen separate indications confirming that the 25.4 mm length dimension is the overall length of the fuse including the end caps, and so I’m not sure that the 6.3 x 32 mm fuses provided by SR and other makers would fit in the plug. Also, I found this set of time/current curves for the BS 1362 fuses, which can be used to determine whether those fuses fall into what is generally considered to be the fast blow or slow blow categories, or into something in between. Post back if you’d like me to make that determination. Regards, -- Al |
what about amplifier where existing fuse it is 4A slow blow? Next value
from SR it is about 5A. Do you recommend also greater value of 5A?
Yes, based on a number of experiences that have been reported earlier in this thread that would seem to be a prudent thing to do. In my opinion, from a technical standpoint there is negligible risk in doing so. The only possible downside I can envision is that if an unrelated problem arises in the amp, and the amp is under warranty and the manufacturer becomes aware of the substitution, they could conceivably use the substitution as an excuse to not cover the cost of the repair. But even that seems very unlikely. Good luck. Regards, -- Al |
nobody can explain the technical design aspects of "special" fuses .... FWIW, I for one certainly can’t. I’ll say also that it seems to me that audio is somewhat unique in that there are countless technical variables that can be cited for which it is not readily possible to define a quantitative threshold separating what may potentially be audible in some systems from what is unquestionably insignificant. In the absence of that kind of quantitative perspective there is essentially no limit to what a perceived or claimed sonic effect can be attributed to. Or misattributed to. Best regards, -- Al |
Good comment by Mitch2, whose opinions and sonic perceptions have over the years earned very high credibility in my book. And I agree that the discussions/arguments about the efficacy of fuse upgrades have pretty much run their course. I would like to add something, though, to what has been said about the value or lack thereof of having a technical understanding of how tweaks such as these fuses work the magic that many users have described them as providing.
There are at least two reasons why some (including me) would find it unsettling that a persuasive technical explanation doesn’t seem to be available:
1)A persuasive technical explanation, especially one that seems to make sense when looked at in a quantitative manner, would tend to dispel doubts some may legitimately have about what could legitimately be considered to be the seemingly implausible efficacy of such a tweak. Which would add confidence that the investment of time that would be required to properly assess the tweak in the various possible applications within a system would not be wasted.
And by "implausible" I don’t mean to suggest that a fuse change can’t make a difference. In fact based on Atmasphere’s experimental results that I quoted on 8-3-2016 on page 49 of this thread I would expect that the mere act of removing a fuse and then putting the same fuse back in place could make a difference.
What does seem implausible to me, however, and frankly quite baffling, as well as fundamentally inconsistent with my technical understanding of how electronic designs work (and I completely recognize and acknowledge that technical understanding can neither explain nor predict a lot of what we hear or don’t hear in a system) is that the benefits of upgrading to a particular fuse would occur with the high degree of consistency that has been reported, ***among components that are completely different in design, that perform completely different functions, that are used in very different systems, and that are powered by AC having very different voltage and noise characteristics.***
2)A good technical understanding of how a given tweak works its magic may, hopefully, enable increased predictability of whether or not that magic will be forthcoming in a specific application.
Regards,
-- Al
|
John, I see in various photos and in the manual for the REF 5 that the following markings are present above the fuseholder:
5A Fuse
Slo-Blo
T3.15A (230)
I would interpret that to mean that you should use a 5 amp slow blow fuse, and that the reference to 3.15 amps would only apply if the preamp is wired for 230 volt operation, for use in a country having 230 volt (or similar) AC.
I don’t know either whether large or small is called for.
Best regards,
-- Al
|
Fazee 10-04-2016
One issue to consider is that Singapore’s electricity voltage is 230V whereas the voltage for the U.S.A. is 120V, therefore I have no idea if this would affect the fuse values in the Sony in anyway? In the case of an AC mains fuse the voltage difference will generally make a considerable difference in the current rating of the fuse that is necessary, because a given amount of power consumption by a component will correspond to almost twice as much current being drawn if it is configured for 120 volt operation than if it is configured for 230 volt operation.
However, the 3.15 amp rating of the fuses in Fazee’s 230 volt unit seems much higher than would normally be used in an AC mains application for a component such as the HAP-Z1ES, that is specified as consuming only 35 watts. That and the reference to there being two identical fuses leads me to suspect that those fuses are being used for much lower voltage DC applications in internal circuitry, such as the + and - 15 VDC voltages that are used in many designs. In which case the fuses that are required for the 120 VAC version of the HAP-Z1ES could very well be the same as for the 230 VAC version.
In any event, though, as Fazee suggested Butler should look inside his unit to be sure of what is necessary.
Regards,
-- Al |
According to Warren, when metal is extruded (drawn) to make wire it affects the direction of the grain in the metal. When the fuse is orientated in the direction of the grain, the sound will be the best. When the fuse is in the opposite direction, it will sound as though the system is out of phase.
Hi Frank, If you have an opportunity to speak with Warren on this question again, you might ask him why any such effect is not completely swamped by the randomly oriented grain directions of the vastly longer lengths of wire that are in series with the fuse, that are conducting exactly the same current. Especially in the case of AC mains fuses, where the AC wiring in the component and in the primary winding of its power transformer, and the wiring in the component’s power cord, are all conducting that same current. Not to mention the wiring inside and outside of the house, which are also conducting that current in addition to other currents. I also asked him about the rotational position of the fuse, and he said that it has nothing to do with the wire. He said that each fuse has a position where the contact point of the end caps is best. Find that best position and the sound will be at its best.
Agreed. See Atmasphere’s comments that I quoted on 8-3-2016, on page 49 of this thread, in which he indicated that he has found this effect to be both measurable and audible. Regards, -- Al |
Just as not all audible differences are measurable, not all measurable differences are audible. The following is quoted from a post I made on 4-8-2016 in this thread: https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/quality-and-security-of-littelfuse-products?page=2
Regarding the measurements described in the HFT paper (which Nonoise was
kind enough to link to earlier in the thread) which purport to support
the notion of fuse directionality:
1)Resistance measurements
related to directionality were provided for 16 different HFT fuses,
having current ratings ranging from 1.6 amps to 20 amps, as well as for a
few competitive fuses and standard glass and ceramic fuses (the
specific make of the "standard" fuses being unspecified). The
differences in resistance for the HFT fuses in the two directions ranged
from 0.000002 ohms to 0.000120 ohms. The differences in resistance for
the competitive fuses were a bit greater in some cases, with the worst
cases generally being the standard fuses, for which there was one
isolated case having a measured difference of 0.005200 ohms.
IMO those numbers are so miniscule as to be:
(a)Laughable.
(b)Very
possibly attributable to changes in the voltage of the battery in the
measurement meter, from measurement to measurement (each measurement
imposing a slight drain on the battery), and from minute to minute. Or
if the meter was AC powered, to the very slight differences in AC line
voltage that may occur from minute to minute, as various loads are
turned on and off at nearby locations.
(c)Very possibly
attributable to differences in contact pressure and contact area between
the meter’s probe tips and the contacts on the fuse. The paper presents
separate measurements of fuse resistance as measured in a fuseholder
(for just one direction), indicating that the direction-related
measurements were performed by touching the meter leads directly to the
contacts on the fuse.
(d)Perhaps even contributed to by
differences in the resistance of the measurer’s body, that would have
been paralleled with the resistance of the fuse if he or she had fingers
on the probe tips and/or the fuse contacts while the measurements were
being taken.
(e)If Geoff’s comments about all wires being
significantly directional are to be believed, then these differences
would be totally swamped by both the resistances and the alleged
direction-related resistance differences of the vastly longer associated
wiring. In the case of mains fuses, that would include the power
transformer and the power wiring in the component, as well as the power
cord and the AC wiring in and outside of the house.
I’ll say
also that the comments I provided on the HFT paper in the "Fuses That
Matter" thread (linked to in one of my posts earlier in this thread) do
nothing to provide confidence that these measurements were performed in a
methodologically scrupulous manner, that would rule out the kinds of
extraneous variables described in (b), (c), and (d) above.
Regards, -- Al |
Okay, so does that mean that the "proper" direction of a fuse can be measured? Based on the comment and findings provided by Atmasphere that I quoted on 8-3-2016 on page 49 of this thread, and consistent with the second of the two comments by Warren of ARC that I quoted in my previous post (dated yesterday), in most (but not all) cases I would expect that if a fuse is tried in a given component in both directions the direction in which the least voltage exists between the two terminals of the holder would be preferable, if a difference in voltage does in fact exist in a particular case. However, implicit in Atmasphere’s findings is a strong possibility that that direction may not turn out to be the same if the two insertions are repeated and re-compared. Regarding the measurements that have been published by HiFi Tuning, I provided detailed comments earlier in this and other threads. The bottom line being that they provide no information that would be useful in predicting directionality, or that is even supportive of its existence when looked at quantitatively. IMO. Regards, -- Al |
If I have my equipment on stand by mode, are the PC’s considered to be breaking in or do I need to physically turn on my equipment and let music flow from my system? Fazee, in most cases the current drawn through a power cord by the component it is connected to will be very small in standby mode, and will therefore contribute little or nothing to whatever breakin effects may eventually occur in the power cord, if any. Although in the case of your HAP-Z1ES that current won’t be very much even in operate mode, especially given that you are operating from 230 volt AC. Also, as with most source components (and also most preamps) its current draw will be essentially the same in operate mode whether music is being played or not. The power amplifier section of your AVM C9, though, operates with class D bias, which means that its current draw (and consequently the current draw of your power conditioner, if the amp is plugged into it) will be considerably greater when music is playing than when the amp is operating but not playing music. (That would also be the case if the amp was a class AB design, although to a lesser degree, but would not be the case if the amp were biased in class A. An amp biased in class A will draw essentially the same amount of current through its power cord whether music is playing or not). How all of this correlates with the duration and effectiveness of the breakin process, however, is not possible to predict with any kind of precision IMO. But you may want to consider accelerating whatever breakin effects may occur by temporarily connecting the power cords to a refrigerator and/or to other devices that draw a large amount of current much of the time, and leaving them there for a few days. Regards, -- Al |
+1 to John's (Jmcgrogan2's) comment. Fazee, I suspect that if you Google "IEC Adapter" you will find something comparable that would be suitable for use in your country.
If you do end up performing the breakin while the cords are in the system, though, and if the three cords you ordered are identical (or at least if all of them are of adequate gauge for use on the amp), I suppose what would make sense is as follows: Initially run all three of them in the system at whatever volume is suitable at any given time, for some number of days or weeks. When you reach a point where no further improvement is noted, or if you don't notice any improvement during that time, then switch the cords between the integrated amp and the Sony player, and repeat the process, thereby subjecting the cord that was conducting the relatively small amount of current drawn by the player to the larger amount of current drawn by the amp.
And if you are connecting the amp directly to the wall outlet, rather than through the power conditioner, then repeat the process once more, with the conditioner's power cord swapped with one of the others. That step shouldn't be necessary, though, if you are powering the amp via the conditioner.
Good luck. Regards,
-- Al
|
I wish to comment on the statements about directionality in the article Dave linked to. Consistent with comments that have been made in this thread it states: There was talk on the web about whether the Black Fuse was directional so I called up Eliott Nommensen, one of the chief operatives in product development at Synergistic Research and asked him about this. He said yes, it’s true but there is no way of knowing which way to is the proper orientation, other than listening, because you can’t really see the circuit inside to figure out which way the fuse holder is wired. He suggested trying both directions when first using the fuse. One way will give you more detail than the other. That’s the way you want to leave it and during the burn-in process the sound will fill in and smooth out. Oh, great. I had already burned them in, so there was a 50/50 chance I had done it right. Late at night, I did the critical listening comparison and sure enough, there is a difference. The correct way has better focus and soundstaging, the other way is more diffuse and the soundstage is vaguer. First let me say as an experienced designer of advanced electronics (not for audio) I have never had any doubts that a fuse can make a difference in many applications. Although I have expressed some puzzlement in this and other fuse-related threads here about how the benefits of upgrading to a specific fuse could occur with the high degree of consistency that has been reported, among components that are completely different in design, that perform completely different functions, that are used in very different systems, and that are powered by AC having very different voltage and noise characteristics. Which is not to say that I doubt the accuracy of most of the reported perceptions, many of which were provided by members for whose credibility I have particularly great respect. But I do have a great deal of skepticism regarding claims of directionality in fuses, which IMO is fundamentally irreconcilable with any reasonable understanding of how electronic circuits work. Which is not to say, of course, that an understanding of how electronic circuits work can explain or predict everything about what we hear or don’t hear from our systems. It certainly can’t. But it can often help to provide a perspective on what does or does not have a reasonable possibility of being audibly significant, as illustrated in the last of the comments quoted below. And again, none of this is to say that I doubt the accuracy of most of the reported perceptions, it just means that in cases where those perceptions are accurate I believe that the cause was something else. And in that regard it would seem I’m in what I would consider to be pretty good company. Among the participants in the various fuse-related threads that have appeared at this forum there have been at least four different experienced designers of well-regarded audio electronics. Following are some of the comments they have posted in these threads. Ralph Karsten of Atma-Sphere: … Fuses are inherently incapable of having directionality in any way whatsoever. … I joined this thread recently with some results on testing. Those results are that the directionality appears out of coincidence and that actually greater improvement can be had by rotating the fuse in the holder for best contact…. Reversal is improving the contact area because fuse and holder are not dimensionally perfect and the fuse might sit better in the holder in one direction. By rotating the fuse in the holder without reversing it gets the same effect only more profoundly.
Peter Noerbaek of PBN Audio: How can you be sure that it was the fuse "direction" that made the change in your systems sound, in order to change the fuse you will have to shut down the system then power it back up again then wait for it to return to a fully equalized stage again then make judgement. This powering down / up, the resetting of connectors including the ones on the fuse holder itself will have MUCH larger effect on sound than in which direction the fuse is installed and is probably the real reason that there is some if any difference in sound.
Also in order for the experiment to have any validity at all you would have to be able to recreate the same situation , over and over and over again. i.e. you should be able to hear that if someone had changed the direction of the fuse without your knowledge - I’d state that this would be impossible.
George Stancheff, designer of the Lightspeed Attenuator among other things: It’s all VOODOO.
Roger Modjeski of Music Reference and RAM Tube Works: Has anyone considered what portion of the total resistance the fuse contributes to the whole of the circuit in which it is inserted?
From the Tuning Fuse data sheet their 2 amp slow blow 5x20 fuse has a resistance of 24.077 milliohms in one direction and 24.115 in the other direction and 26.257 in the holder. If a butterfly flew by while the measurements were taking place we might see a bigger difference than the 0.038 milliohm difference in direction. Of course it might depend on which direction the butterfly was flying. But never mind, the direction measurements were made with DC and we are using these fuses in AC circuits. Perhaps if the butterfly flies clockwise vs counterclockwise there will be a difference.
Sorry I just had to put that in to keep up with all the humor that has been presented here.
[Note: 0.038 milliohms is 0.000038 ohms] IMO, YMMV, FWIW, etc. Regards, -- Al |
Oregonpapa 10-28-2016
The AT ART-9 continues to amaze. What a cartridge! Yes indeed! And even more so considering that the price (ca. $1K) is a bargain compared to most competitive LOMCs. It was gratifying to me, BTW, to see in some other threads a while back that the ART-9 has received similarly effusive praise from a member (Dodgealum) who like me uses Daedalus speakers and a Herron VTPH-2 phono stage. Thanks for your comments, Frank & Dave. Best regards, -- Al |
Dave & Charles, the nice words are much appreciated. Thanks!
As you alluded to, Charles, in audio as in most fields of endeavor there are many things about which reasonable people may disagree, but it's always possible (and preferable) to disagree agreeably.
Best regards,
-- Al
|
Charles1dad 10-28-2016
His [the reviewer's] finding the source components more demonstrative of the Black fuse
than the power amplifier matches my outcome. No doubt that this is very
likely brand and/or component dependent.
I suspect a relevant factor is that both you and the reviewer use amps that are biased in class A, since both amps are SETs, and therefore the amount of current drawn through their mains fuses remains essentially constant and independent of the dynamics of the music. It might be a different story with amps that are biased in class AB most or all of the time, and especially in the case of class D amps, where the AC current draw fluctuates dramatically with the dynamics of the music. Which would result in rapid fluctuations in the resistance and perhaps other parameters of the mains fuse. Also, the generally much higher current ratings of fuses that are used in power amps and integrated amps, relative to those used in upstream components, and perhaps differences in designer preferences with respect to how much margin is provided between fuse ratings and actual current draws, could conceivably be factors that are involved. I note that both the reviewer's amp and yours are made by Coincident. As you said, "no doubt that this is very
likely brand and/or component dependent." Best regards, -- Al |
Thanks, Dave. Yes, as you found and as several others have reported earlier in the thread in appears that the SR Blacks blow a bit more readily than at least most stock and boutique fuses having the same ratings. And I agree that if there would be any sonic differences at all between SR Black fuses having somewhat different current ratings they would most likely be in favor of the fuse having the higher current rating (which presumably would have slightly less resistance and slightly less fluctuation in resistance as a function of variations in the current being drawn through it, although both parameters could very well be too small to be significant with either fuse). Also, I would expect that the current rating of the stock fuse in most components is determined by the designer somewhat imprecisely, by simply multiplying the nominal current draw of the component by a somewhat arbitrarily chosen factor (while also taking into account surges that occur at turn-on), as in general there is probably no need for a great deal of precision in that determination. That being one of the reasons why I would expect that most fault conditions that might arise in a component and require the fuse to blow would result in a much higher current draw than the rating of the stock fuse, and a fuse with a somewhat higher rating than stock but the same fast blow/slow blow characteristic would therefore seem very likely to provide adequate protection.
So in Alexa6404’s case the risk of unnecessarily blowing an expensive 10 amp fuse would seem to outweigh the risk that secondary damage might result from a fault which causes a current draw of just a few amps more than that but does not cause a higher rated fuse to blow. The manufacturer might see it differently, of course, because their interest is presumably in minimizing warranty claims and/or repair costs, but that’s how I see it. Although I suppose that there could be some manufacturers who might use the substitution of a fuse having a higher than stock current rating, if they became aware of it, as an excuse to invalidate warranty coverage of a repair that might become necessary for unrelated reasons.
As to deciding between the 12 amp and 15 amp ratings, my guess is no better than anyone else’s, but FWIW I suppose I’d go with 12.
Best regards, -- Al
|
For fuses on AC power line, I am assuming that AC "signal" flows into the equipment thru Live/Line/Hot terminal and out thru the Neutral terminal....
... Please let me know your comments and if this theory is a proper way to orient fuses.
Hi Alex, While energy is of course transferred in the direction from the outlet to the component, the AC hot and AC neutral conductors are involved in that process equally. And the AC current alternates direction in both of those conductors (and also in the fuse), every 8.333 milliseconds for 60 Hz AC, and every 10 milliseconds for 50 Hz AC. Beyond that, all I can say in response to your question is to suggest that you read my post in this thread dated 10-28-2016, which appears near the middle of the previous page. And note that if the comment by Atmasphere that I quoted in the thread is correct (and he has indicated that he has verified his contention experimentally) it would follow that the existence of sonic differences resulting from changing the direction of a fuse does not establish that fuses are inherently directional. IMO. (And also, as you’ll see in the comments quoted in the post I referred to, in the opinions of four different experienced designers of well regarded audio electronics). Opinions of other audiophiles, most of whom are not electronics designers, will certainly differ in many cases. Good luck. Regards, -- Al |
Hi Dave,
I believe that the main difference between a ceramic fuse and a comparable glass fuse is usually in what is called "breaking capacity." That refers to the maximum amount of current the fuse is rated to be able to safely interrupt when a fault requires it to blow, that would not result in it rupturing or exploding or failing to open the circuit. And I believe that ceramic fuses tend to have much higher breaking capacities than glass fuses that are otherwise similar.
So that difference would only come into play if a fault arises in the sub which requires the fuse to blow. But whether or not the breaking capacity of the SR glass fuse would be adequate in that event can't be predicted with any kind of certainty without knowing the details of the sub's circuit design, and without having detailed specifications on the SR fuse. FWIW, though, my guess, based just on instinct, is that it is unlikely that you would ever have a problem as a result of that difference.
A separate question, though, is whether it would be advisable to choose an SR fuse having a somewhat higher current rating than the stock fuse, to minimize the likelihood of the false blows that various people have reported in this thread. My guess, again based just on instinct, is that it would probably be a good idea to go up one rating increment, which if I recall correctly would be to 8 amps.
Good luck. Best regards,
-- Al
|
You're welcome, Dave. BTW, I'm not sure if the reference in the second paragraph of my previous post to the SR fuse being glass was correct. But in any event the rest of my post remains as stated.
Best regards,
-- Al
|
Bill (Grannyring), as you realize a given length of 14 gauge wire will have much lower resistance than the same length of thin fuse wire. However, the very short length of a fuse wire will result in very low resistance anyway, since the resistance of a conductor is directly proportional to length (as are inductance, capacitance, and many other wire and cable parameters and effects). Consequently the voltage drop across a fuse in an audio component will be a small fraction of a volt, and in many cases a very small fraction of a volt. That can be confirmed via some simple calculations based on the detailed technical specs that are provided for Littelfuse and Bussmann fuses.
It would seem expectable that there will be **some** circumstances under which loss of a small fraction of a volt in a fuse would have audible consequences, although not necessarily in the direction of causing the sonics to be worse. However, as I’ve previously said in this thread what seems unexplainable is that upgrading to a specific fuse would be found to be sonically beneficial with the high degree of consistency that has been reported, among components that are completely different in design, that perform completely different functions, that are used in very different systems, that are powered by AC having very different voltage and noise characteristics, and in DC as well as AC applications. That continues to be a mystery as far as I am concerned.
Best regards,
-- Al
|
I have provided detailed comments on the HiFi Tuning measurements on a number of occasions in this and other threads. For example see the first of my posts dated 5-14-2012 about 3/4 of the way down on this page in the "Fuses That Matter" thread from several years ago. And regarding their directionality-related measurements see my post dated 4-8-2016 near the middle of this page of the "Quality and Security of Littelfuse Products" thread. And I had provided further comments about directionality in the first of my posts dated 10-28-2016 near the middle of this page of the present thread. The bottom line, as I stated in the first of those posts:
I don't exclude the possibility that a fuse change can make a
difference, but once again the explanations that are offered in support
of the existence of those differences do not withstand quantitative
scrutiny.
Regarding the comments about audio being a combination of art and science/engineering, I certainly agree. In fact that is one of the reasons I became interested in audio, several decades ago, and continue to be interested in it. Regards, -- Al |
Good points by Mitch2, IMO. Who as he stated has tried SR Red and several other audiophile-oriented fuses, with unimpressive results, and whose audiophile credentials and experience are unimpeachable IMO. Frank (OP), regarding the comments by Warren Gehl about directionality, which you had cited in this thread on 10-6-2016, I had made the following suggestion in the subsequent post: If you have an opportunity to speak with Warren on this question again, you might ask him why any such effect is not completely swamped by the randomly oriented grain directions of the vastly longer lengths of wire that are in series with the fuse, that are conducting exactly the same current. Especially in the case of AC mains fuses, where the AC wiring in the component and in the primary winding of its power transformer, and the wiring in the component’s power cord, are all conducting that same current. Not to mention the wiring inside and outside of the house, which are also conducting that current in addition to other currents. Also, I would again call attention to the comments about fuse directionality that have been presented here by four different designers of well regarded audio electronics, as quoted by me in the first of my posts dated 10-28-2016 near the middle of this page of the present thread. Which are to the effect that for a fuse to have inherent directional characteristics is impossible. And as a very experienced electronics designer myself, in my case in the defense electronics field, I agree. And furthermore, as quoted in that post, one of those designers (Atmasphere) has explained why a fuse may **appear** to have inherent directional characteristics, but that he has experimentally found that the same audible and measurable effect can be accomplished by simply rotating the fuse in its holder. It is certainly true that technical understanding and analysis can neither explain nor predict a lot about what we hear or don’t hear from our systems. And in fact I have said on many occasions here that from a technical standpoint there are many things that by their very nature are inherently unpredictable. But technical understanding and analysis can explain and predict some things with certainty. Including the impossibility of fuses having inherent directional characteristics, IMO and that of the aforementioned designers. If people hear differences when the direction of a fuse is reversed, something other than inherent directionality is responsible. Regards, -- Al |
Just want to reciprocate and extend good wishes to all for health and happiness, and good listening, in 2017.
Looking back at 2016, the only significant change I made to my system was purchase and installation of an Audio Technica AT-ART9 phono cartridge, which has been wonderful. I made the decision to do that in part because of the advocacy provided at this forum by Frank (OP), among several others. I continue to be grateful for that.
Best regards,
-- Al
|
Kedoades 1-14-2017
Hello, I am thinking of trying one of these black fuses. I see some people are recommending that you go one size up on the fuse, just wondering if this is always safe to do? thanks Based on the several reports we have seen in this thread of SR Black fuses blowing when they shouldn’t, it seems clear that the unspecified "melting point" of SR Blacks is lower than that of typical stock fuses having the same current rating. ("Melting point" defines the combination of current and duration that if exceeded would cause a fuse to blow, and is expressed in units of amps-squared x seconds). Therefore it seems clear that if for example you were to substitute a "5 amp" SR Black for a 5 amp stock fuse you would in effect be substituting a fuse having a lower rating than 5 amps. Also, from a technical standpoint it seems to me to be very unlikely that a fault in a component that should cause a fuse to blow would result in a current draw just slightly above the rating of the stock fuse. Especially in the case of a mains fuse, but most likely also in the case of DC rail fuses. On the other hand, it might be argued that use of a higher fuse rating than stock could invalidate warranty and/or insurance coverage. But that too seems very unlikely. And in any event the same argument could be made even if the same rating as the stock fuse is used, just based on the fact that the upgraded fuse does not have approval from UL and other such agencies. So IMO there is no problem going up one or two current rating increments. Although some others have expressed differing opinions earlier in the thread, and the post just above indicates that going up one or two increments may not always be enough anyway. Regards, -- Al |
Hi Dave.
I suppose it's possible that there is some relation between the apparently lower melting points of the SR Blacks, compared to typical stock fuses, and the sonic benefits that have been reported. But in the absence of a good technical understanding of why and how those benefits occur, that stands up when looked at quantitatively, and that accounts for the high degree of consistency that has been reported for those benefits among very diverse applications, I doubt that the question is answerable.
Best regards,
-- Al
|
Discussion of the use of circuit breakers in audio components can be found in the following threads. The bottom line would seem to be that it may be suitable and beneficial to use some breakers in some applications but not in others, with breaking time being one of several significant considerations:
https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/anyone-replaced-fuse-with-circuit-breaker
https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/by-pass-fuse-and-add-a-circuit-breakerAlso, use of a circuit breaker in a DC rail application may be problematical in many cases in terms of where it is located and how it is wired to, with the possibility of noise coupling to or from that wiring having to be addressed. Finally, I would imagine that in many cases a factor is that designers tend to go with approaches they have used previously, and are familiar with, and do not require significant time for evaluation and experimentation in return for sonic benefits that may or may not occur. Regards, -- Al |
Jetter 1-20-2017
Knowledge Expert definition - For my way of looking at things they are
Al and Ralph - Although I probably should not inject my interpretation
of their discussions, which is what I have done. So Al and Ralph, sorry
if I have misinterpreted your thoughts.
No problem, Jetter. To be sure my thoughts about fuses are clear, here is a summary of the major points I have made in this and other fuse-related threads: 1)I don't doubt that fuses can make a difference in many applications, even though ... 2)... Measured data that has been presented in support of the existence of those differences is not supportive of their existence, for reasons I have explained. 3)I have expressed bafflement at how any particular fuse, such as the SR Black, can provide the benefits it has been reported to provide with the high degree of consistency that has been reported, among components that are completely different in design, that perform
completely different functions, that are used in very different systems, that are powered by AC having very different voltage and noise
characteristics, and in DC as well as AC applications. 4)I have contended that it is impossible for a fuse to have inherent directional characteristics. See my post dated 12-31-2016. And I have said that even if a fuse did have inherent directional characteristics, the vastly longer associated wiring would as well, and the directional effects of that wiring would swamp those of the fuse. 5)I have pointed out in this and other threads that in audio it is often extremely easy to attribute a perceived sonic effect to the wrong variable. And that the methodology with which an evaluation is performed needs to be especially thorough in the case of tweaks that are technically unexplainable and/or seemingly implausible, to rule out the possibility that unrecognized extraneous variables are responsible. Also, regarding the question of why "non-believers" keep coming back to this thread, as would be the case in most threads discussion of that question is, IMO, neither constructive nor germane to the topic of the thread. Regards, -- Al |
Nyame 1-23-2017
It is very difficult to respond rationally to to this type of convoluted nonsense. The only way to determine whether a fuse make a difference is to listen to it. No "measured data" can make this determination. This is why final evaluation of high quality audio products has to pass a listening test before approved for sale. I agree, aside from the first sentence. My statement to which you were responding did not say or imply anything to the contrary. The only question is whether the resolution of the playback system is is good enough to allow the difference to be heard. Not all playback systems have the benefits of tuned acoustics, absence from vibrations, optimized loudspeaker placement, good grounding etc The sound quality and musical resolution of a component or system does not **necessarily** go hand in hand with the sensitivity of a component design to fuse differences, or its sensitivity to any other differences in hardware or tweaks for that matter. Conflating musical resolution and the sensitivity of a design to hardware differences is a common audiophile misconception, IMO, as I have said in a number of past threads. Although there will often tend to be at least a loose degree of correlation between the two, of course. To cite just one example illustrating that point, among countless others that could be cited, a speaker having low impedance and highly capacitive impedance phase angles, and/or an impedance that varies widely as a function of frequency, will tend to be more revealing of amplifier and speaker cable differences than one that is easy to drive and has a relatively flat impedance curve. Even though that says nothing about which speaker will provide better sound quality or superior resolution of musical detail. It is THE POWER SUPPLY that is reponsible for the improvements. The fuse allow the power supply to perform more effectively and this, not the fuse, is responsible for the improved performance. This is a meaningless distinction, IMO. I DID NOT CONCLUDE THAT THE FUSE ITSELF IS INHERENTLY DIRECTIONAL. Thank you for the clarifications you provided on this in response to comments by the others. FWIW, I did not say that **you** concluded that a fuse is inherently directional. Does any one on this forum really believe that Oregonpapa (The OP of this thread ) is delusional. Can all the many positive reviews of the Synergistic Research fuses on this thread, and in other forums, explained away by saying they are being misled by "perceived effects of the wrong variable? I have considerable respect for Frank’s system, sonic perceptiveness, and sincerity. My statement certainly did not imply that extraneous variables are responsible for all or even most of the reported differences. However I would feel safe in assuming that they were a factor in **some** of the reports. Especially when it comes to claims of inherent directionality. In any event, as things stand now it seems clear that the thread has encompassed a plethora of reported experiences, opinions, and technical considerations covering all sides of the issue. Those reading the thread can and will form their own conclusions as to whom and what to believe, and as to how and if to proceed with any fuse upgrades that may be considered. Regards, -- Al P.S: My thanks are extended to those who expressed favorable reactions to the summary in my previous post, "believers" and "non-believers" alike. |
Well said, Mapman, Frank, & George.
Best regards,
-- Al
|
A difference of opinion, and a civil discourse regarding the same, is a good thing ... its the way we learn.
Again,
this thread is like a bunch of like minded guys sitting around the
local bar discussing a common interest. Every once in a while "someone"
has a little too much amber liquid and gets out of hand. Once sobered
up, we all hope "he" comes back at a later date and will be civil. So
far ... no luck.
+1. Well said, Frank. Best regards, -- Al |
... multiple pressings of CDs can have variable audio quality from the same pressing plant, in other words, they don’t sound necessarily alike. There is no electrical or physical reason that I’ve found or my friend Robert has found, but the proof in the pudding, listening to one after another. One CD can sound brighter/duller/tonally richer/thinner, etc. than another or they may sound alike. I don’t find that surprising. Assuming (as appears to be the case) that the data on the CDs being compared is identical, a possible explanation relates to minor physical differences that may exist between the pits or other physical characteristics of the two discs. Differences that might have resulted from aging and use of the pressing equipment that may have occurred between creation of the pressings being compared, or perhaps from the use of different equipment, or perhaps just from normal +/- tolerances in the pressing process. Those physical differences could conceivably result in one disc being "easier" than the other for the tracking servos in the player to track, resulting in less electrical noise being generated by the transport mechanism, resulting in less noise finding its way into the D/A circuitry (even if that circuitry is in a different component), resulting in less timing jitter at the point of D/A conversion. Undoubtedly there are other conceivable explanations involving comparably subtle technical effects. As an experienced EE I for one don’t doubt any of the claims or statements in your post just above. I do, however, doubt that fuses are inherently directional :-) Regards, -- Al |
Charles & Bill (Grannyring), Sebok isn't nearly as well known as his cellist friend and teaching and recording colleague Janos Starker, but he was a wonderful pianist. I have two of the Mercury Living Presence LP's they did together, of cello and piano sonatas by Bach and Brahms. Both are treasures. Although I haven't listened to them in many years, mainly because both LPs suffered the consequences of being played many times on the "all-in-one" compact system I had during the 1970s, before I knew better :-) Wikipedia has a brief bio of Sebok, and some links to external references. Enjoy! Best regards, -- Al |
Hi Charles, Ivan Moravec was certainly among the great pianists, especially when it comes to his interpretations of the works of Chopin. I have about a half dozen of his recordings for solo piano that were issued on high quality cassettes several decades ago, on the Connoisseur In Sync Label. All are wonderful! I’m not sure if they were subsequently issued on CD, or if CDs that may have been issued are still available. I’m not familiar with the recordings of Ms. Nikolyeva. Regarding the Starker/Sebok Bach recording I mentioned earlier, here is a link to it in LP form ($78 in "used/very good" condition!), and here is a YouTube link presenting two of the three sonatas it contains. I can’t seem to find a CD version, however. Best regards, -- Al |
Fleschler, some additional input relating to the hypothesis I provided earlier that in some cases might explain sonic differences between supposedly identical CDs. An Audiogon member whose screen-name is Kirkus is, in addition to being one of our most technically brilliant contributors, highly experienced in analyzing and measuring the internal circuits of CD players, transports, and DACs. An excerpt of a post he provided on 7-20-2011 in this thread: Two big conceptual errors I see very commonly are the assumption that any intrinsic jitter related to retrieval of information off of a CD actually occurs through the forward signal/data path, and that any sonic artifact associated with parts upstream of the DAC must be classifiable as jitter.
In reality, CD players, transports, and DACs are a menagerie of true mixed-signal design problems, and there are a lot of different noise sources living in close proximity with susceptible circuit nodes. One oft-overlooked source is crosstalk from the disc servomechanism into other parts of the machine . . . analog circuitry, S/PDIF transmitters, PLL clock, etc., which can be dependent on the condition of the disc.
... One would be surprised at some of the nasty things that sometimes come up out of the noise floor when the focus and tracking servos suddenly have to work really hard to read the disc. Such effects figure to be dependent on the physical characteristics of the particular pressing, the condition of the disc, and the design of the particular playback hardware. And to have little if any predictability. Regards, -- Al |
... the More Than a Fuse dramatically increases the impedance from 0.2 ohms to 10 ohms at 10 MHz, thus increasing high frequency noise-rejection fifty fold over that of a conventional fuse. Bill, as a point of information an 8 inch length of medium gauge wire will have an impedance of about 10 ohms at 10 MHz. And of course an AC mains fuse will be in series with far greater lengths of wire than that, taking into account the AC wiring in the component, in the power transformer, and in the power cord. Also, the power transformer itself can be expected to have far too little bandwidth to pass frequencies that high. ...And because the Platinum Reference “More Than a Fuse” also reduces ultra high frequency noise by up to 46 dB or more, a ratio 200 times that of a typical fuse... 46 db corresponds to a voltage ratio of 200 times, so this statement implies that a typical fuse provides zero noise rejection. I don’t doubt that :-) However, without a statement of what frequency the 46 db of noise rejection occurs at, and in what kind of circuit application, and without a basis upon which to determine if that unspecified frequency has any reasonable likelihood of having audible consequences in typical applications, the statement is meaningless. I would feel certain, however, that in the case of an AC mains fuse the associated AC wiring and especially the power transformer would provide far greater noise rejection than their fuse would. The bottom line: While I take no position on the efficacy of their fuses, these statements are misleading techno-babble. Regards, -- Al |
