The new Synergistic Research BLUE fuses ....
jafreeman As suggested by many, the SR fuses are better conductors than the stock variety, which provide nothing more for a conductor than a thin wire, intended to melt during current overload. The SR fuses will also supposedly fail at the same point of overheating, but until they do, they are better conductors by way of the graphene, e.g., incorporated into the solid fuse body--again, superior materials improve what you are hearing. >>>>Not sure I go along with your detective work. Graphene would not enhance conductivity unless it were somehow incorporated into the fuse wire itself. Graphene on the fuse body could not (rpt not) enhance conductivity otherwise natural failure of the thin wire would not prevent disaster. Cheers |
jafreeman geoffkait: “Not sure I go along with your detective work. Graphene would not enhance conductivity unless it were somehow incorporated into the fuse wire itself. Graphene on the fuse body could not (rpt not) enhance conductivity otherwise natural failure of the thin wire would not prevent disaster." Geoffkait Not sure either--just that, the graphene is the breakthrough in the SR Blacks and Blues and is visible in the fuse body, so just what is it doing there if not enhancing conductivity? I propose it does enhance conductivity, but if the fuse element melts, the graphene by itself is unable to conduct the over-current. Any other ideas? >>>>>Well, I don’t want to reveal the big secret in case SR wishes to keep it that way, but obviously what you see on the outside body of the Black Fuse and the Blue Fuse cannot be Graphene. So, the Graphene must be hidden. And the graphene is almost certainly not part of the wire. So it must be under the black or blue fuse wrapper, but not all the way across the fuse body because Graphene is highly conductive. Ooops! Did I just give it away? |
Hint: Everyone is hyper focused on the idea that Graphene is used in some way to improve conductivity of the signal. You guys need to open your minds up to the possibility it has nothing to do with conducting the signal, even though it’s true that Graphene is a super conductor. 😃 Hint 2: Graphene conducts electricity much better than copper. Graphene's current density is 1,000,000 times greater than copper and its intrinsic mobility is 1,000 times more conductive than silicon. Graphene conducts heat better than any other know material in thermal conductivity. |
Sometimes the best tactic for a tweak manufacturer is provide a lot without providing anything. I always counsel the less said the better. Keep em guessin. No matter what you say there will always be a bunch of knuckleheads and pseudoskeptics lurking around who will attempt to debunk it. Sure as shootin. Besides, loose lips sink 🚢 |
Quantum coupling will undoubtedly go down in annuals of audiophile history as one of the greatest strokes of genius, just in terms of coming up with a great name for something. Certainly a name that is both provocative and quite irritating to naysayers. Two for one! You know, what with a bazillion of their products sold that have Quantum Coupling applied. Credit where credit is due. It doesn’t matter what you call it. The only thing that matters is how many you sell. Hel-loo! You guys seem to think this is some sort of Quantum Physics peer review. Give me a break! You guys can’t even figure out what the heck Graphene is for. Time to hang it up. Quick summary: Synergistic Research 200,000. Naysayers 0. There is no such thing as bad publicity. - PT Barnum |
👨🚀 gdhal geoffkait - ...The only thing that matters is how many you sell. Hel-loo!... Your quoted reply belies a response of yours in another thread where I mentioned (paraphrasing) that a for profit business is at play. Audioquest comes to mind. In that case you dismissed "selling", "business" and "profitability"entirely. >>>>>I never said any such thing. I’m sure you’re hallucinating. My quoted reply belies? Give me a break. Nothing succeeds like success and failure is no success at all. |
amg56 I still do not have an eloquent answer for why fuses or graphene at the ends of contact points work in the way of the lord. Next we will have sponsors walking on water. >>>I’m pretty sure we’ve established that Graphene is not utilized at the end points. If I am not mistaken we’ve also established it is not used to enhance conductivity of the fuse. amg56 I have heard to many spruikers, and have been ripped off by very few, to swallow the fuse and TC goo story. >>>>Folks would be generally much better off if they believed in too much rather than too little. It’s customary to wait until after the test results before making one’s mind up so irreversibly. 🤓 |
amg56 @geoffkait I think there are more who are not using SR fuses for the reason of no proof than the few spruiking them on this thread. Same with TC. >>>>Do you mean proof or evidence? There is evidence that something is going on. What proof is there of anything in this hobby? What would constitute proof? I haven’t seen any factual industrial or scientific proof on either products. Just a lot of here-say. I asked for proof and got nothing. Do you have it? >>>>>I’m afraid that’s often the case with new tweaks. There’s no proof. You call it here-say (sic). I call it evidence. We get a lot of demands fior proof these days, it seems. Relax, this isn’t rocket science or a cure for cancer we’re talking about. It might be a good idea to do some due diligence on the subject before clos8ng your mind. You apparently are still unaware of what Graphene actually is. |
amg56 @geoffkait Obviously you don’t either. I heard it’s a trade secret, until our Eastern friends copy it. >>>>Another clue for you all. Some users of TC have painted the end caps of their Blue Fuses for further gains in performance. So, obviously SR does not (rpt not) apply Graphene to the fuse caps, either inside or outside the fuse. Ah, sweet mystery of life. Was the person you heard it’s a trade secret from also a civil engineer? An Australian? 😁 Another clue for you all. The Walrus was Paul. Our Eastern friends? You mean in New Jersey? 😀 Next up, multiple choice? |
🐑 georgehifi Just another bit of "snake oil" you fuser’s need so you get those pesky fuses burnt in before the 30 day return period runs out. Good luck with that. Settle down, George. I tried reversing the 4 stock fuses in my 5-year old Fulton speakers to establish their directionality. I was thus able to establish the correct direction for all 4 fuses. No big deal. So I absolutely doubt that age has anything to do with it. How about them 🍎 🍏 🍎? Maybe you could try coming up with a dopier theory. Don’t follow leaders, watch the parkin’ meters. |
fleschler My friend/manufacturer thinks graphene is a joke, TC is a joke.....BUT he absolutely is convinced that the SR fuse and duplexes are NO joke. He doesn’t know why the fuse makes a difference except for the possibility that the SR fuse transfers more A/C current through than a cheap, thin wired fuse. He proved that by using a circuit breaker (he didn’t know whether it is magnetic or thermal type) with a large contact area that works as good as an SR Blue fuse. >>>>We already know a few reasons why fancy fuses are no joke. There is really no reason for speculation any more. Using a circuit breaker doesn’t prove anything. There are many explanations why circuit breakers might be better than fuses. We already knew that. We already know that eliminating the fuse/fuse holder is better than any fuse, too. And that bipassing the fuse with a solid fat wire is better, well, maybe. Better than a stock fuse, anyway. That your friend would think Graphene is a joke seems a little odd. Most people grasp that concept pretty easily. Must be the audio manufacturer syndrome I was talking about. 😀 Here’s the link to the wiki page on Graphene applications. Now your friend has something to go on. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potential_applications_of_graphene Your humble scribe |
🐑 gdhal @geoffkait I note you had a post of mine removed. It gets under your skin when I write the truth, hey? 😏 Why would I do that, spaceman? I oft get a chuckle, unintended though it may be, from your posts. Is it true when you lie your pants really are on 🔥? Plus it gives me a reason to call someone a knucklehead. I get the feeling there’s a vacation in your future. 🏄♂️ |
Timely tip: For anyone with Graphene contact enhancer, I still can’t bring myself to say Total Contact, whoops!, and ANY fuse, including a stock fuse, that is NOT an SR Black or Blue Fuse, paint the middle circumference of the fuse body with a thin layer of product, using care not to paint near the fuse caps, obviously, since the product is conductive. You do not have to remove the fuse, as least I don’t think you do. If you haven’t done the fuse caps, now is the time. |
georgehifi Geoffkait: “paint the middle circumference of the fuse body with a thin layer of product, using care not to paint near the fuse caps...” What will this "snake oil" do????, it can’t be an RF shield without the Graphene coating being earthed to chassis/mains ground, and to do that would be highly dangerous. >>>>>Baloney, George. It’s not always necessary to ground the shield. This is one of those times? The Graphene shield is not long enough to act like an antenna. That’s why the SR Fuses don’t have to be grounded either. Capish? |
This is not a murder trial. It’s an audio hobby. Hel-loo! We don’t require PROOF. In a court of law PROOF is desirable but not required “Proof” doesn’t necessary win the case, either. Proof can be shot down. Proof can be subjective. The glove thing, remember? 🥊 The case won’t even go to the District Attorney unless there is a “lot of evidence,” you know, multiple eye witnesses, blood evidence, etc. The jury and judge examine the EVIDENCE. They don’t examine proof. Here in the fuse thread the evidence is not examined, it’s ignored. Hel-loo! In audio we look for evidence, too. But we don’t need look for or expect proof in audio. Evidence in audio usually means user testimony, measurements, technical explanation/description, listening tests. It could be simply the buzz that convinces a potential customer. But proof is simply NOT something audiophiles require or expect. Besides what proof would these died-in-the-wool naysayers believe? Probably none. Nada. Zippy dee doo dah. That’s why almost everybody and his brother offers a 30 day money back guarantee. We already know nothing works in all systems OR to the same degree. Hel-loo! The preponderance of the evidence here in the case of Mr. Fuse is around 75,000 to 100. That’s beyond a reasonable doubt. |
amg56, apparently you’re plagued by reading comprehension issues. I have been consistent in my comments regarding the audio applications of Graphene. You have taken my comments somewhat out of context, one assumes to make it appear I’m contradicting myself. Don’t you have an actual argument? If you can’t keep up with the conversation maybe you should just consider dropping out. |
Actually it’s not true that carefully agreed terms of the test procedure ensure a valid test. As I’ve oft explained, the reasons why a blind test OR ANY TEST can go wrong are sometimes BEYOND the control of either party or any lawyers that might be involved. Especially when they are not test experts. It’s completely naive to believe that a negative result of a blind test, even one that is very thorough and agreed to, proves anything. In fact I’d go so far as to say anyone who suggests a blind test for an audio tweak is either naive or scheming. The threat of a blind test is simply a ruse, a ploy, a rather obvious one, used by naysayers to browbeat people into doubting what they believe or hear or to subject a controversial product to doubt and ridicule. Putting up money on the test only adds to the absurdity of the whole thing. The test hasn’t even taken place and the naysayer already knows the result? Come on, people! Wise up! Geoff Kait Machina Dynamica The difficult we do rapidly, the impossible takes a little longer |
cleeds geoffkait “Please note that I’m NOT saying the test has to be rigged.” It’s obvious that’s there is such a thing as a valid listening test, isn’t it? >>>>I’m saying there isn’t such a thing as a valid listening test. I thought I made that clear. The reason is because pitfalls can sometimes be beyond anyone’s control. That’s independent of the actual test results, or how the results are interpreted. >>>>That’s what they would have you believe. Just because someone follows test procedures exactly doesn’t mean the test results are valid. Obviously positive results are more meaningful, though, since positive results can be obtained even when there are errors in the system, hearing issues, failure to follow instructions, etc. |
cleeds geoffkait “I’m saying there isn’t such a thing as a valid listening test. I thought I made that clear. The reason is because pitfalls can sometimes be beyond anyone’s control.” Sorry, we’ll have to disagree about that, Geoff. I absolutely think there is such a thing as a scientific, valid listening test. It is not as simple to conduct as some here would have us believe, however. And the results of any one single test are of limited value, especially to an audiophile who’s comfortable and reasonably confident in what he hears. Hey, no problem. You sound a little bit like the spiritually minded scientist, Dr. Elizabeth Shaw, who replies in the movie Prometheus when asked why she thinks heaven would be beautiful, “Cause that’s what I choose to believe.” You seem to have much more confidence in the abilities of audiophiles than I do. I also happen to think you’re not really following my logic. |
