Maybe an electron microscope would help?
Synergistic Red Fuse ...
I installed a SR RED Quantum fuse in my ARC REF-3 preamp a few days ago, replacing an older high end fuse. Uhh ... for a hundred bucks, this little baby is well worth the cost. There was an immediate improvement upon installation, but now that its broken in (yes, no kidding), its quite remarkable. A tightening of the focus, a more solid image, and most important of all for my tastes, a deeper appreciation for the organic sound of the instruments. Damn! ... cellos sound great! Much improved attack on pianos. More humanistic on vocals. Bowed bass goes down forever. Next move? .... I'm doing the entire system with these fuses. One at a time though just to gauge the improvement in each piece of equipment. The REF-75se comes next. I'll report the results as the progression takes place. Stay tuned ...
Any comments from anyone else who has tried these fuses?
Any comments from anyone else who has tried these fuses?
4,839 responses Add your response
^^^ A very good suggestion. However, I believe in another thread someone posted links to pictures of SR black receptacles that were identical visually to those sold at Lowes, but the SRs were treated with 2,000,000 volts and a graphene coating. Which is just to say there might not be a visual difference, |
Has anyone on this forum broke open an SR black fuse and analyzed what it is made of and constructed? Who knows, maybe it does not have a hair thin wire but a thick wire made of some other substance. Maybe it has anti-vibrational content differing from cheap basic fuses. Finding out what and how it is made could answer questions as to why it works and so well. In the meantime, I'll just keep listening to my fuse induced sonic improvements. |
Geoffkait 3-28-2017+1. A good audio-related example of that can be found in the current thread entitled "Most Important, Unloved Cable," in which several people reported that significant sonic improvements resulted from upgrading ethernet cables that are used in their systems. With the upgrades in most cases being very inexpensive. A couple of posters, including one who deals with ethernet networking professionally, dismissed that as preposterous, and undoubtedly the result of expectation bias. But for someone who happens to have the right background (me), it was a snap to explain those results. And to explain them in a manner, as I put it in that thread, that is "well within the bounds of established science and engineering." See my post in that thread dated yesterday, 3-27-2017. BTW, in saying this my intent is certainly not to toot my own horn, but simply to provide a specific audio-related example supporting your comment. Regards, -- Al |
Teo_audio wrote, "Most important take away: you can build things with scientific laws and facts, but you can’t explore the given difficult new thing with scientific laws or facts being in control of the outcome." no one ever said you have to control the outcome with scientific laws or facts. That's what is referred to as a Strawman. However, having said that, most or almost all observable phenomena CAN be explained by current scientific laws or facts. What might be difficult for one person to explain might be a snap for someone else. |
^^^ Talkin' 'bout old timers, there's this certain bus bench that's just right for the senior citizen dating scene: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qhL6I5eeDaE |
Saw john with catfish hunter many years ago in NY in basically an old warehouse where you sat on the ground. Very hot summer day, of course not air conditioned, they strolled out and sat on the stage floor with nothing but a large bottle of whiskey and ice bucket. They just drank and talked, and whatever they were talking about (those were the days) Belushi would periodically ask if there were any questions. He then would throw handfuls of ice at anyone that tried to ask a question. |
wolf_garcia Just watched an interview with Dennis Had (youtube) as I’m thinking about buying one of his Fire Bottle amps…at around 31 minutes he comments about silly tweaks…gold fuses…Inspiring? (pun) Maybe he should consider laying off the Fire Water. One doesn't really have to look very far to find amplifier designers who are living back in the last century. |
Just watched an interview with Dennis Had (youtube) as I’m thinking about buying one of his Fire Bottle amps…at around 31 minutes he comments about silly tweaks…gold fuses…Inspiring? (pun) Also, to explain what I meant about "predatory marketing skills," it would seem that the simple tweak area is the "low hanging fruit" of audiophile marketing. Why not make a product that costs very little to produce, claim to expose it to some proprietary treatment who's technical explanation is convoluted enough to defy reason and and/or inhibit criticism (or involves bees), and sell it for a gigantic profit into the "naive tweaker" market. A brilliant idea that seems to work every time. |
teo_audio I prefer to avoid the personality part but like most... have to deal with it in recognition of what may be going on in the given case. Nor do my comments have meaning in that area, ie subtle jabs or whatnot. Which creates trouble as people sometimes think they are in the text. Huh? That’s weird. Subtle jabs? Whoa! What do you think is going on? I mean, aside from my pointing out that electrons, which you went on and on about in your previous post, have precious little to do with the subject of audio, in particular with the audio signal. Why would I attack you personally? I don't even know you. |
I’m sorry if I side-tracked this topic but "human clan nature" kind of sums it up. Not really, ie, the longer a problem is in existence, the more fundamental the error in the creation of the question. Not perfect, but a good premise when looking at the unsolvable. Which gets right back to the theory vs laws aspects. we be making lots of flippy floppy as humans are on the cusp. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2lxJ4S-2-M You know..... when asked (about our given projections - which we think are in balance and informed)... "we got both both kinds, country and western.." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vS-zEH8YmiM |
So if a fuse, the design of which includes a tiny, hair thin wire since it's designed to melt instantly if needed, is a "bottleneck" to the AC in any device in which it's used, then why is the equally tiny wire in, for example, an SR fuse, allowing "More Better and Special Treated" current to flow back and forth in it thus perhaps obviating the bottleneck phenomena and enhancing cello tone? The wire in it remains necessarily tiny, it will melt (we know this), and in spite of all that it's claimed to impart wonders into the circuits around it. This isn't the application of bespoke and protected technology, it's the application of predatory sales marketing skills aimed at the gullible, who once having paid through their noses to hear the magic can't help but imagine hey, "I can hear it…really…I can." |
teo_audio, I like your references to "human clan nature". It reminded me of a similar but relevant quote that dealt with this phenomena in the political world, among others. With just a few changes, it can describe all manner of resistance to change: "My point is the following: Behavioral scientists from another planet would notice immediately the semiotic resemblance between animal submissive behavior on the one hand and human obeisance to religious and civil authority on the other.... And they would conclude, correctly, that in baseline social behavior, not just in anatomy, Homo sapiens has only recently diverged in evolution form nonhuman primate stock." ---E.O. Wilson, Consillience: The Unity of Knowledge. I'm sorry if I side-tracked this topic but "human clan nature" kind of sums it up. All the best, Nonoise |
I prefer to avoid the personality part but like most... have to deal with it in recognition of what may be going on in the given case. Nor do my comments have meaning in that area, ie subtle jabs or whatnot. Which creates trouble as people sometimes think they are in the text. But we are talking about music, which generally cannot successfully be done coldly, no matter how one might try. I tend to prefer to not truly aim for scientific coolness, but to be aware. Contradiction? Possibly. Human? Yes. In related topics, I stopped cold a just opened thread on another forum (a few days back)... a soon to be tidal wave of rants against oddities and 'charlatans' in audio. It would have went on for another 2-20 pages, with you as the opening rants - whipping boy centerpiece. Stopping it was harmful to my personal and company reputation, as some of those might be potential customers. No matter how well I may have posted, someone would (and will) take it negatively, and run with it. |
Teo_audio wrote, "Something I seemed to have forgotten since the Stereophile forum days, that I’m now being reminded of. That you are a twisty cat, who... well..who knows what." You may not remember but I am someone who likes to stick to the facts of the case and avoid personalities. I seem to recall from the Stereophile daze you don’t. Correct me if I’m wrong. |
also, it took me time to build that post, so your prior one which expanded the one just above, seems like it was trashing my earlier points, when the follow up one did steer to a better more involved clarification. My remark was tied to the earlier post. All due to post creation and posting times rearing their head. The twisty bit is about intelligence and complexity, not meant as derogatory. You mentioned a meme that can come into being, mainly "It’s the photons, stupid." I mentioned the fluid has these properties when one considers the absorption and reflection of photons. Which may be a clue, or data point... as to what is going on with it. Properties in the area involving photons, that are considerably different than that of wire. Anyway, this is about fuses and science and hearing, in an area involving emotions and drives. Music. Depending on the design of the given piece of gear, the fuse in use can make a subtle to gross difference, and specifically in ways that are important to human hearing function, involving capacity to discern. This happens in a given system whether it is a cheap fuse, an old fuse, a new fuse, or an audiophile tuned fuse, or given different designs utilizing various fuse materials. We hear this, or we don’t. The rest is an argumentative atmosphere of discussion... unless one chooses to not participate. An important point is that fuses are a scientifically and in engineering terms and circles...known creation points for non-linear odd harmonic distortions of the given pass-through signal. As a culmination and cumulative effect, this affects the outcome when dealing with highly dynamic complex music signals. And our highly evolved but individual intelligence capacity (not all the same!!!!) hearing (one's hear-q) will either hear it or not ...and like it or not. Depending on on the given item in situ, using the given fuse, you will hear this to a greater or lesser degree. To some the given distortion creation or taming enabled by the use of the given fuse.... will either be pleasant or not really a big deal. Simple enough. |
Ok, Geoff, in once sentence, then: For engineers and the average dude, they are laws; for scientists and explorers of such nature, they are theories. Simple enough, but few folks recognize that --or in their daily lives are even required to do so. Thus it can build into a problem of projection of ’high predictability in the given theories’ becoming a dogmatic rule enforcement (human clan nature) that curtails potentials and turns exploration into a circular argument that self limits. This situation arose when the German teaching methodology (1700’s-1800’s) which was so effective in creating functional engineers, became the gold standard in teaching. To get more people doing good engineering work. After all, one cannot teach that at the core of each ’law’ is actually a box of squirming worms that USUALLY (ridiculously high odds) swim in a known direction, but that the box of squirming worms MIGHT be a problem. Nothing would ever get built. And if it was built, it might be dangerous,or dubious in use or human mental reach. And so on. Eg, anyone can walk across a bridge, few can build one. For the questioners, those reaching for the limits and then looking for the new....to teach them that each law is actually a box of squirming worms that MIGHT have different results, but it is very unlikely that it will happen. To remain suspicious of all facts, in the face of observations that do not fit the laws or facts. To investigate and try and fit, but to not fudge, to not fake, to not force or silence contrary data. To leave room for the new, so it can change the old. Otherwise, we’re all dead with no future. However, with those who were taught scientific laws (and probably they went in that direction due to their mental orientation -or were never aware of this issue) the new thing or data that does not fit MUST be force fit or killed as it cannot be anything but lies, charlatans, freaks and asshats with agendas and ulterior motives. Humanity is largely dogmatic due to the need for social and cultural systems to be functional. So unconscious projection of norms is a fact of human life as human groupings go. Thus the school of engineering fact and law enforcement and then the explorer scientific methodology of ’no such thing as facts or scientific laws’. Most important take away: you can build things with scientific laws and facts, but you can’t explore the given difficult new thing with scientific laws or facts being in control of the outcome. Doing so would just be the church, synagogue, mosque, temple, or imperial edict ---- with another face. Exploratory science recognizes this. Engineers and the general public are, for the vast part... not even taught or shown that this critical point even exists. So we get this violence on forums, in the face of the new or the not yet understood. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Something I seemed to have forgotten since the Stereophile forum days, that I’m now being reminded of. That you are a twisty cat, who... well..who knows what. |
From our old friend, Wikipedia, "The laws of science, scientific laws, or scientific principles are statements that describe or predict a range of phenomena behave as they appear to in nature.[1] The term "law" has diverse usage in many cases: approximate, accurate, broad or narrow theories, in all natural scientific disciplines (physics, chemistry, biology, geology, astronomy etc.). Scientific laws summarize and explain a large collection of facts determined by experiment, and are tested based on their ability to predict the results of future experiments. They are developed either from facts or through mathematics, and are strongly supported by empirical evidence. It is generally understood that they reflect causal relationships fundamental to reality, and are discovered rather than invented.[2] Laws reflect scientific knowledge that experiments have repeatedly verified (and never falsified). Their accuracy does not change when new theories are worked out, but rather the scope of application, since the equation (if any) representing the law does not change. As with other scientific knowledge, they do not have absolute certainty (as mathematical theorems or identities do), and it is always possible for a law to be overturned by future observations. A law can usually be formulated as one or several statements or equations, so that it can be used to predict the outcome of an experiment, given the circumstances of the processes taking place. Laws differ from hypotheses and postulates, which are proposed during the scientific process before and during validation by experiment and observation. These are not laws since they have not been verified to the same degree and may not be sufficiently general, although they may lead to the formulation of laws. A law is a more solidified and formal statement, distilled from repeated experiment. Laws are narrower in scope than scientific theories, which may contain one or several laws.[3] Unlike hypotheses, theories and laws may be simply referred to as scientific fact.[4] Although the nature of a scientific law is a question in philosophy and although scientific laws describe nature mathematically, scientific laws are practical conclusions reached by the scientific method; they are intended to be neither laden with ontological commitments nor statements of logical absolutes." To put it more succinctly - it is what it is. |
Teo_audio wrote, "Importantly, engineering is not science. Science has only theories. Engineering has laws. Engineering is about building, so it has rules, so you don’t experiment with devices and constructions being built for the human world. Science is about exploration and that is wholly error prone. Since it is error prone, it cannot ever suffer a law, as laws will make it circular and closed off, with no expandable future. When we get to the real exploration in science, we find there is not anything like a fact, either. The bleeding edge of science, has, for as long as anyone can remember in this idea of organizing research and giving it a language in commonality...ie science...this science has not not one single fact. Zero. The only ’fact’ in existence in science...is that there are no facts. A paradox. The core philosophical argument of science, right at the core of it... is the same paradox as quantum science --the wave-particle duality. Everything is theory that is subject to change." .......... Whoa! Hey! There are no facts? There are no laws? It’s a little difficult to swallow all those statements in light of Newton’s Laws of motion, the Laws of Thermodynamics, even the simple little old equation E=mc2. The speed of light is constant in a vacuum. That is not a theory. It is not subject to change. There is a giant black hole in the center of our galaxy. That is 99.99% pure fact. Furthermore, wave particle duality is a specific idea and is not applicable to everything in science. Not everything in science is a mystery, a paradox or a theory. |
rilbr I tried an SR Black fuse in place of a relatively new fuse ( about 30 hours on the stock fuse). The SR Black sounded a little better. So to me it's not because the stock fuse was degraded over years of use. Still, I think they are way overpriced, especially if they can be mass produced with the graphine, beeswax or nano particles. I have little desire to buy more of them. .................... Mass produced? Shirley, you jest. Just curious, was your relatively new stock fuse insert in the right direction? Was the SR Black inserted in the right direction? |
What got me started on fuses was when I blew one in my amp. I replaced it with a standard fuse, and that got me thinking about them as a potential bottleneck to good sound. I then read about the SR blacks, and got one to try. The fuse the black replaced in my amp was new, and I still heard a very significant improvement. |
I tried an SR Black fuse in place of a relatively new fuse ( about 30 hours on the stock fuse). The SR Black sounded a little better. So to me it's not because the stock fuse was degraded over years of use. Still, I think they are way overpriced, especially if they can be mass produced with the graphine, beeswax or nano particles. I have little desire to buy more of them. |
Oh dear, no no no, lets not even go there
ptss. Cheers George |
Today I successfully installed a PCB fuse holder into my computer's power supply. The stock fuse had leads soldered to the ends that were then soldered directly to the PCB. It took careful work with the Dremel to widen the PCB inlets to accept the fuse holder and now I can roll fuses with ease. I'll soon order an SR Black fuse to replace the stock fuse rated at 6.3 amps/250V (5 x 20mm).
*This was cut from a post of mine under the Digital label titled "Computer PS Upgrade (Fuse/IEC/Teflon Cap)" |
teo_audio Geoffkait: For audio, at least, it’s not about electrons. Electrons have absolutely nothing to do with it. It’s about photons. Hel-loo! Teo_audio What, exactly, is a Photon? As you know...’good luck with that’... Geoffkait: Thanks for the excellent example of Newton’s Third Law: For every action there’s an equal and opposite reaction. teo_audio Speaking of photons and regarding electricity....Interestingly enough, the liquid metal mixture in the Teo Audio cables..just happens to be.... the most wide band high quality reflector known to humanity. As in: 1) widest chunk of the electromagnetic chart/spectrum reflected... and... 2) highest percentage of reflectivity (as in ’best’ among first surface mirrors) Besides truly functioning at the quantum level with kinetics and fluid, hydrodynamics and magnetics. More incomplete and unsolved math, theory, and engineering potential than you can swing a billy goat at. ........................ Whoa! What?! I’m rather relieved to hear something’s truly functioning at the quantum level. I do not like hear about incomplete and unsolved math, however. That’s a little too messy. So the liquid metal is reflecting photons? Interesting....pretty sure that’s the same way Pall Mall cigarettes worked, by traveling the smoke further and making it mild. 😄 |
Charles1dad 3-27-2017 Which brings to mind one of the reasons the lack of a good technical understanding of how a product "works" may be significant. Without such an understanding, or at least a basis for confidence that the designers of the product have such an understanding (which would seem doubtful if how the product "works" cannot be either fully explained or fully predicted based on generally recognized science), there would seem to be no basis for anyone (including the designers) to accurately predict the point of demarcation between optimization of a given parameter or design characteristic of the product and what may be overkill of that parameter or design characteristic, which will accomplish nothing in most or all applications. Therefore, IMO, it can be expected that what may in many cases be a significant driver of the cost of expensive tweaks or other products whose principles of operation are not thoroughly understood (in a quantitative manner, at least) is overkill of some or all of their design parameters and characteristics, which will accomplish nothing in most or all applications. Or that may make a difference in some applications, but a difference that is unpredictable, and may even be for the worse from a subjective standpoint. That, IMO, being a significant contributor to the loose correlation between price and performance that many audiophiles have reported in various contexts here and elsewhere. I agree with Charles’ second sentence that I quoted, of course. Best regards, -- Al |
My uncle was a very successful deputy D.A. (98% conviction record) and his mentor, Vincent Bugliosi, advised him to always convict with circumstantial evidence since sometimes, that's all you have to work with. Connect the dots, so to speak. I believe it's been nicely put so as to relate to the court of science as well. We have our theories to hold us until they're disproved. What cannot be defined/verified by direct evidence can be confirmed by the empirical. All the best, Nonoise |
Geoff, Yes my expectation would be that a 119.00 dollar product should be superior to the 9.00 dollar product or why else would you spend the extra 110.00. What I recognize is that you don't know with any certainty until you actually compare via listening. Rodman99999, "good luck with that" You make an excellent point regarding expectation bias and open minded attitude. I just wanted to emphasize that this bias can work in the positive and negative realm and to equal degrees. Charles |
ptss "The absolute truths can come from anyone". The Estonian composer Arvo Part had a 'breakthrough" moment when one snowy morning he asked a street cleaner "What should a composer do?" The wise old street cleaner said simply "Love every note" Cheers to him-most humbly I suspect Arvo Part probably misunderstood the street cleaner. What he actually said was, "Love every mote." Get it? Street cleaner. Mote. 😃 |
Let's get down to hard fact. It's all about "JIGGLING ATOMS" per Richard Feynman. I'll drink to that. "The absolute truths can come from anyone". The Estonian composer Arvo Part had a 'breakthrough" moment when one snowy morning he asked a street cleaner "What should a composer do?" The wise old street cleaner said simply "Love every note" Cheers to him-most humbly |
For audio, at least, it’s not about electrons. Electrons have absolutely nothing to do with it. It’s about photons. Hel-loo! Speaking of photons and regarding electricity....Interestingly enough, the liquid metal mixture in the Teo Audio cables..just happens to be.... the most wide band high quality reflector known to humanity. As in: 1) widest chunk of the electromagnetic chart/spectrum reflected... and... 2) highest percentage of reflectivity (as in ’best’ among first surface mirrors) Besides truly functioning at the quantum level with kinetics and fluid, hydrodynamics and magnetics. More incomplete and unsolved math, theory, and engineering potential than you can swing a billy goat at. |
Charles wrote, Expectation bias can be overruled by actual listening experience if one approaches with an open minded attitude. Generally the better something is the more it will cost. There are without doubt exceptions to this generality especially in High End audio. Higher price and performance don’t allows go hand in hand. The Create Audio fuse could be better or equal to the SR Black for all I know. exactly! It could be better or equal or worse. But from what you said you would *expect* it to be worse, or am I putting words in your mouth? Charles also wrote, Problem is who determines which is better? Same answer as always, subjective, so better remains in the ear of the beholder/individual. No upgrade fuse is going to sound better than a stock fuse to someone convinced that it isn’t a possibility in the first place. Again expectation bias. Well, that’s pretty philosophical, on the other hand if a thing really is better sounding than Brand X most people who are not all thumbs and who can appreciate differences in sound would probably agree. Obviously there will be exceptions with just about anything. |
teo_audio For audio, at least, it’s not about electrons. Electrons have absolutely nothing to do with it. It’s about photons. Hel-loo! What, exactly, is a Photon? As you know...’good luck with that’... Thanks for the excellent example of Newton's Third Law: For every action there's an equal and opposite reaction. cheese |
@Teo- Everything in our universe can be broken down to energy, vibration and frequency. Science has been working on figuring out the mechanics(ie: Quantum) for decades, a major breakthrough being proof of the Higgs Boson’s existence and it’s effect on other bosons. I’ve been trying not to type too much, but- you opened the window and saved me a lot of keystrokes. THEORIES? ABSOLUTELY! It’s been quite some time since Case-Western Reserve University, BUT- to my knowledge: no one has yet actually observed an electron, or proven categorically how electricity actually works/flows/travels. That’s why just about everything about it(outside of what has been measured/recorded/repeated) is still considered, "Electrical THEORY". I’d like someone on this site, that is so convinced(scientifically) that a fuse can’t possibly make an audible difference in a sound system, to approach the discussion on the level of Fermions, up/down type Quarks, and Leptons(Charged or Neutrino / tau or muon). OR- the effect of a non-zero in empty space, electrically charged, Gauge boson’s effect on either a W or Z boson. Pick your own theory(wave/particle/string/make up your own, geniuses). |
teo ... Just wanted to say that I for one appreciate your creative writing. "The projected dogma inherent in the complex ape based vehicle of the human, makes such things difficult." "The good part is that we are individuals. If we were not individuals and we were all exactly the same, the world would be a very dead thing." Nice. :-) Frank |
