I’ve replaced all 5 of the SR BLACK fuses in my system with the new SR BLUE fuses. Cold, out of the box, the BLUE fuses stomped the fully broken-in SR BLACKS in a big way. As good as the SR BLACK fuses were/are, especially in comparison with the SR RED fuses, SR has found another break-through in fuses.
1. Musicality ... The system is totally seamless at this point. Its as if there is no system in the room, only a wall to wall, front to back and floor to ceiling music presentation with true to life tonality from the various instruments.
2. Extension ... I’ve seemed to gain about an octave in low bass response. This has the effect of putting more meat on the bones of the instruments. Highs are very extended, breathing new life into my magic percussion recordings. Vibes, chimes, bells, and triangles positioned in the rear of the orchestra all have improved. I’ve experienced no roll-off of the highs what so ever with the new BLUE fuses. Just a more relaxed natural presentation.
3. Dynamics ... This is a huge improvement over the BLACK fuses. Piano and vibes fans ... this is fantastic.
I have a Japanese audiophile CD of Flamenco music ... the foot stomps on the stage, the hand clapping and the castanets are present like never before. Want to hear natural sounding castanets? Get the BLUE fuses.
4. Mid range ... Ha! Put on your favorite Ben Webster album ... and a pair of adult diapers. Play Chris Connor singing "All About Ronnie," its to die for.
Quick .... someone here HAS to buy this double album. Its a bargain at this price. Audiophile sound, excellent performance by the one and only Chris Connor. Yes, its mono ... but so what? Its so good you won’t miss the stereo effects. If you’re the lucky person who scores this album, please post your results here.
Where the RED fuses took about 20 hours to sound their best, and the BLACK fuses took upwards of 200 hours of total break-in, the BLUE fuses sounded really good right out of the box ... and that’s without doing anything about proper directional positioning. Not that the BLUE fuses don’t need breaking in, they do. The improvement continues through week three. Its a gradual break-in thing where each listening session is better than the last.
Everything I described above continues to break new ground in my system as the fuses continue breaking in. Quite honestly, I find it difficult to tear myself away from the system in order to get things done. Its truly been transformed into a magical music machine. With the expenditure of $150.00 and a 30 day return policy there’s really nothing to lose. In my system, its like upgrading to a better pre amp, amp, CD player or phono stage. Highly recommended.
Kudos to Ted Denney and the entire staff at SR. Amazing stuff, guys. :-)
Frank
PS: If you try the SR BLUE fuses, please post your results here. Seems the naysayers, the Debbie Downers and Negative Nellie’s have hijacked the original RED fuse thread. A pox on their houses and their Pioneer receivers.
The spectrum of dissension has ranged from outright mockery and derision to pedantic lecturing, but whether dressed in tennis shoes or tuxedos, the abrasive naysayers were not invited by Frank, and, even if we are left only with mutual agreement and back slapping, at least he gets one of the threads to be in the spirit he has asked for, predictable as it may then become. Seems the only new ground to be broken here is that the more insulting, miserable trolls agree to try the SR fuses or leave. In other words--leave--time to clean house. We can still enjoy talking about general tweakery, personal asides, music and how good it all sounds. There will also be new explanations in material science breaking through.
I was referring to THIS thread George , this thread! As well you know but no, you try to play the obtuse card. Yes please dig back into the 2000,s to link stuff, at least it gives you something to do and keeps you away from here while doing so!
Get busy and link all the pages you can find. That way, we can discount it all at once. What you're doing is a form of confirmation bias. Be sure to discount any links that run counter to your beliefs: it will make you feel better.
We all welcome Prof's civil discourse; we admire the finesse and nuance in making a case, but in all of this, whether from a refined or from others' crude comments, I still come away with being told that what I report as my listening experience, along with scores of others reporting, is not good enough, is subject to bias, is probably a mistake in hearing, and, until a study with control and experimental groups is conducted, even though no audio product I know of has ever been marketed in such a way, skepticism will rule decision making on buying these fuses. Through all the superfluous appeals to science, we admit we buy our audio based on a combination of others' opinions, e.g., reviewers and audiophile forum reports, product reputation and going to audio stores to actually listen for ourselves, which brings us right back to the OP's invitation: If you try the SR Blue fuses please post your report here. No amount of circular reasoning, argument from incredulity, moving the goalposts, etc will replace this simple request---try one and tell us your impression. I love what I am hearing from the addition of SR Blues---wider soundstage, more musical information and better clarity. I confidently stand by my findings.
Funny how hardly anybody else feels the need to use the term in every post though is it not? Honestly I could not care less because all it does is make you look petty and cause your posts to run the risk of being removed. So if there was even a grain of intellectual interest in your posts you are dooming them to the sin bin right from the get go. But feel free and carry on my wayward son.
There is nothing wrong with the term "snake oil" when used with regards to most of the unbelievable effects of >$150 fuses claimed here, as the whole technical side of the industry uses that same term with regards to fuses and what's said here, save for the couple of them that are making money out of it.
George Just fyi Today has been a good spirited post type of day. Some good posts from opposing points of view. And guess what Not one member stooped to using the term "snake oil" until somebody rattled your cage. Go figure huh!
jafreeman You might reason a better fuse is like a better cable.
Ho! how very wrong and just more "snake oil", speaker/interconnect cable has inductance, resistance and capacitance, all of which "can" have an influence on sound, a fuse has none of these, save for a tiny fraction of micro-ohm resistance, which would absolutely do nothing.
@prof , kudos to you for your civility and eloquence. Your responses are well thought out and respectful.
Give him time, he’s a newbie, I've seen the cracks in a couple if posts, it's just a matter of time here.
Oregonpapa, you’re entitled to your opinion, of course, but in fairness I actually don’t attack people. I attack their ideas. See the difference? If I attack someone personally you’ll know it. 😛 I’m sure the Professor is a big boy and doesn’t need his Mommy.
Just so you won't feel as though you're coming under attack here, you're not. I enjoy your well thought out posts. Same with Geoffkait. Funny stuff ... and not insulting or over the top either. Well, maybe in Geoff's case sometimes ... :-)
Well Prof, I try to inform AND amuse. Good to hear you appreciate a finer cable. You might reason a better fuse is like a better cable. You might then actually try one. Then, you would have something of topic to comment on.
prof oregonpapa “Again ... tens of thousands of Red, Black and Blue fuses sold to an appreciative customer base with very few returns says tons more than a few skeptics posting here.”
I’m afraid not. That’s a fallacy.
If there are good reasons to be skeptical of a phenomenon being reported by large groups of people, it doesn’t matter if those reasons are voiced by a handful, or even one person, vs the majority. A lot of people using a faulty method of inference doesn’t add up to a sound method of inference.
>>>>>>Ah, the old UFO analogy. Well played! But aftermarket fuses isn’t really similar since 99% of users are happy campers. And they have been for 15 years. Hel-loo! And there is evidence that fuses work. And there are very good physical and electrical reasons why they should. Who cares about the 1%? They are outliers and can be thrown out.
A medical study using poor controls that yields a "positive" result isn’t any more reliable if it uses 100 or 7,000 people. Similarly, if the technical explanations for the sonic influence of audiophile fuses are only speculative, and the evidence beyond that is "many audiophiles reporting a difference" then it’s just being reasonable to admit "the results could be due to perceptual bias."
>>>>Actually I think it’s better to have a large population for a medical study. Also audio is not really analogous to medical studies.
Thousands, millions, of people believe things in unison due to such biases and cherry-picking to support their own biases. It’s just human nature. That’s why controls are put in place when studying anything that relies on our reporting our perceptions - be it medicine, studies of human hearing, etc. (Note that geoff could not, or would not, answer why hearing tests are blinded for the subject. Why not? Because admitting the reason clearly has implications for the reliability of his beliefs about fuses and other tweaks.
>>>>>I have always said blind tests are used by pseudo skeptics as a challenge to audiophiles, as if blind tests would prove them wrong. And don’t forget, if results of a blind test are negative they don’t mean anything. But if they’re positive it’s time to rejoice. Blind tests don’t have implications for anything.
Instead...he fell back on name-calling and silly "blind tests are for sissies." I guess he’ll be insisting on being told every time a tone is playing if he ever goes for a hearing test).
>>>>Hey, whatever.
Again, that is not to conclude fuses don’t make a difference; only to identify weaker arguments in defense of that claim.
>>>>>Who cares? Nobody has to prove anythung. Are you pretending to be obtuse?
I have no problem with anyone buying any tweak, trying it out, feeling it made a difference reporting on that, etc. Fine. I do that, we all do that. We all can’t spend our time doing scientific-level testing on everything we buy.
>>>>That’s awful decent of you. What a guy!
But it’s different when people refuse to show any epistimic humility, and use their subjective impressions to make objective claims that such tweak DO make a sonic difference, and that their own personal impressions are sufficient to establish this fact. Especially when we have entered an area of controversy, THAT is when it’s prudent to caution "Well, no, actually you haven’t really accounted for the possibility of bias in your results."
>>>>>>I recommend filing that paragraph under Whatever.
Its good to remember The Golden Rule. Do not try to dissuade others from buying and enjoying products that you haven’t experienced for yourself. Pretty simple, really.
>>>>>I’ll try to remember that. 😬
First, I’m not trying to dissuade anyone. But I disagree. It’s far from that simple.
>>>>no, it is simple. You’re making a mountain out of a molehill.
As I’ve pointed out numerous times, you don’t have to "try something for yourself" to understand when the method is an unreliable one, and therefore to have reasonable doubt about claims made on such a basis.
>>>>There is nothing magic about a blind test. That’s a fallacy perpetrated by pseudo skeptics like The Amazing Randi and the skeptics society. Blind tests are also unreliable. Especially if the results are NEGATIVE.
If I "tried astrology for myself" using the same method people use to read their horoscopes, engaging in the same method of cherry-picking hits and ignoring misses, then sure I can come out with the same result.
Astrology works! But, adopting what you know to be a dubious method of inference is hardly the way to establish whether something is true or not.
>>>>Oh, geez! So now we’re comparing audio tweaks to astrology?
If I just put aside everything I knew about the type of bias effects humans, and hence I myself am susceptible to, and think "Well, I’m just not going to apply those rules to audio" then sure, I can try out fuses, and green pens on CDs, and tiny vibrating discs and come out thinking "They all make a difference!"
>>>>No one is saying there are not biases in humans, for crying out loud. But pseudo skeptics want to claim that ALL USERS of fancy fuses are experiencing psychological effects. Which is actually absurd.
But...if I care about truth...why would I do that? I’d want to make sure I account as best I can for what I know about human bias when making such inferences.
>>>>>Hey, knock yourself out! Do whatever you want.
And raising reasonable skeptical doubts is a good thing (outside of church, anyway). It’s more information into the pot.
>>>>Real skeptics get to the bottom of things. Pseudo skeptics just keep up a steady stream of logical fallacies.
Think of people who are desperately ill who are swayed by reports of nonsense "cures." They will be able to find numerous true believer reports of the efficacy of the cure - but if they don’t know these reports are based on a very unreliable sample type - this can have bad consequences. People can and do lose valuable time, e.g. when they have cancer, going for b.s. treatments based only on subjective inference, that fail and allow them to die, vs going for more scientifically established treatments. Being right actually matters.
>>>>Again, there is no analogy between audio and medicine. I knew the “cancer ploy” was coming. Bold move, Professor! 🤡
So if someone is being advised of a dubious "cure" to "just try this cancer cure for yourself" it’s a good thing to let them know "actually, there’s little basis for that claim." Knowledge is power.
>>>>Again with the cancer. Oh, the knowledge is power ploy with the cancer ploy. Bold move, Professor! 😬
High End audio isn’t life-and death. But there are still consequences to being wrong. You may end up spending tons of money that you didn’t have to spend - and wouldn’t want to spend on something that actually didn’t do what it purports to do.
>>>>>Uh, oh, did I just detect the life and death ploy. And the tons of money. Wow! He’s pulling out all the stops, now, folks!
Why would it be good for a newbie, for instance, to only hear one side of the story? Only "THIS tweak works!" If there are good reasons for skepticism, then I think that side should be presented as well, so people get a fuller picture of what is going on. Then they can be in a more informed position to spend their money.
>>>>>Protect the innocent, the gullible, the naive, from the evils of fuses. 🤡
I’m certainly glad to have encountered all sorts of skeptical arguments I encountered early on. They saved me money! Though I could have, and sometimes have, bought tweaks anyway. But at least I did so with a fuller picture of the facts.
>>>>Unfortunately, the skeptical arguments you encountered were, by and large, of the logical fallacy variety, Professor.
And, again, someone doesn’t have to "try it for himself" in order to raise reasonable doubts about a claim.
It's cool that you actually did some blind testing for yourself. I don’t have anything against anyone doing blind testing, if they want to. The reason many on forums (myself included) have a negative reaction to it is because of those who use it as a bludgeon when someone reports hearing a positive difference with certain types of products. They arrogantly demand that the person prove it by taking a blind test. I seriously doubt these particular individuals ever initiate or participate in blind tests themselves.
Again ... tens of thousands of Red, Black and Blue fuses sold to an
appreciative customer base with very few returns says tons more than a
few skeptics posting here.
I'm afraid not. That's a fallacy.
If there are good reasons to be skeptical of a phenomenon being reported by large groups of people, it doesn't matter if those reasons are voiced by a handful, or even one person, vs the majority. A lot of people using a faulty method of inference doesn't add up to a sound method of inference.
A medical study using poor controls that yields a "positive" result isn't any more reliable if it uses 100 or 7,000 people. Similarly, if the technical explanations for the sonic influence of audiophile fuses are only speculative, and the evidence beyond that is "many audiophiles reporting a difference" then it's just being reasonable to admit "the results could be due to perceptual bias." Thousands, millions, of people believe things in unison due to such biases and cherry-picking to support their own biases. It's just human nature. That's why controls are put in place when studying anything that relies on our reporting our perceptions - be it medicine, studies of human hearing, etc. (Note that geoff could not, or would not, answer why hearing tests are blinded for the subject. Why not? Because admitting the reason clearly has implications for the reliability of his beliefs about fuses and other tweaks. Instead...he fell back on name-calling and silly "blind tests are for sissies." I guess he'll be insisting on being told every time a tone is playing if he ever goes for a hearing test).
Again, that is not to conclude fuses don't make a difference; only to identify weaker arguments in defense of that claim.
I have no problem with anyone buying any tweak, trying it out, feeling it made a difference reporting on that, etc. Fine. I do that, we all do that. We all can't spend our time doing scientific-level testing on everything we buy.
But it's different when people refuse to show any epistimic humility, and use their subjective impressions to make objective claims that such tweak DO make a sonic difference, and that their own personal impressions are sufficient to establish this fact. Especially when we have entered an area of controversy, THAT is when it's prudent to caution "Well, no, actually you haven't really accounted for the possibility of bias in your results."
Its
good to remember The Golden Rule. Do not try to dissuade others from
buying and enjoying products that you haven't experienced for yourself.
Pretty simple, really.
First, I'm not trying to dissuade anyone. But I disagree. It's far from that simple.
As I've pointed out numerous times, you don't have to "try something for yourself" to understand when the method is an unreliable one, and therefore to have reasonable doubt about claims made on such a basis.
If I "tried astrology for myself" using the same method people use to read their horoscopes, engaging in the same method of cherry-picking hits and ignoring misses, then sure I can come out with the same result. Astrology works! But, adopting what you know to be a dubious method of inference is hardly the way to establish whether something is true or not.
If I just put aside everything I knew about the type of bias effects humans, and hence I myself am susceptible to, and think "Well, I'm just not going to apply those rules to audio" then sure, I can try out fuses, and green pens on CDs, and tiny vibrating discs and come out thinking "They all make a difference!"
But...if I care about truth...why would I do that? I'd want to make sure I account as best I can for what I know about human bias when making such inferences.
And raising reasonable skeptical doubts is a good thing (outside of church, anyway). It's more information into the pot.
Think of people who are desperately ill who are swayed by reports of nonsense "cures." They will be able to find numerous true believer reports of the efficacy of the cure - but if they don't know these reports are based on a very unreliable sample type - this can have bad consequences. People can and do lose valuable time, e.g. when they have cancer, going for b.s. treatments based only on subjective inference, that fail and allow them to die, vs going for more scientifically established treatments. Being right actually matters.
So if someone is being advised of a dubious "cure" to "just try this cancer cure for yourself" it's a good thing to let them know "actually, there's little basis for that claim." Knowledge is power.
High End audio isn't life-and death. But there are still consequences to being wrong. You may end up spending tons of money that you didn't have to spend - and wouldn't want to spend on something that actually didn't do what it purports to do.
Why would it be good for a newbie, for instance, to only hear one side of the story? Only "THIS tweak works!" If there are good reasons for skepticism, then I think that side should be presented as well, so people get a fuller picture of what is going on. Then they can be in a more informed position to spend their money.
I'm certainly glad to have encountered all sorts of skeptical arguments I encountered early on. They saved me money! Though I could have, and sometimes have, bought tweaks anyway. But at least I did so with a fuller picture of the facts.
And, again, someone doesn't have to "try it for himself" in order to raise reasonable doubts about a claim.
Finally, I saw your next post and agree about the nature of on-line misunderstandings.
Speaking of other fuses, perish the thought 😬, what’s the deal with the new $400 Bussman audiophile fuse? Anyone? I’m giving serious consideration to knocking one off.
Thought we already had liquid filled fuses. At least semi liquid Audiomagic beeswax fuses I believe Oh heck even more moolah than a SR Blue fuse though. Wonder if it matters what type of bee? Maybe it might need to fly backwards for directionality. You know Zzub, zzub
If you can ever step out of your need to caricature, please note:
I do indeed have experience with items like audiophile cables. I've had plenty over the years (and various other tweaks), and still have access to some of the most highly lauded cables available.
I also have some experience attempting to be even more careful about my inferences, using blind testing to weed out my perceptual biases. And those have been educational.
We, as posters, have a huge disadvantage in the communication realm, in that, we cannot see facial expressions, hand gestures, voice inflections, etc.
I post to a Facebook page where a very predominate reviewer posts as well. I won't mention his name, but I can tell you with no uncertainty, he's one of the most vile individuals I've come across in my many years of posting on the Internet. I'm sure he wouldn't think of talking to me face to face the way he does on that site. Perhaps he doesn't even know how disgusting his diatribe truly is. It's a Facebook page started by an audiophile/manufacturer ... and from time to time politics is the point of conversation. I like to discuss/debate politics in a rational, respectful manner. Not this guy. If he disagrees with your position, he just craps all over you and everyone else. Truly disgusting stuff.
I believe there are a FEW who post on A'gon with the same problem as the reviewer mentioned above. THEY were the ones I was addressing in the opening post of this thread.
I'm simply adding my own view: that I'm unconvinced that fuses make the type of sonic differences ascribed to them in the OP. I had been asked to elaborate on my stance early on, which is what I've been doing: explaining why I personally am skeptical.
We all have views on various aspects of high end audio.
If seems that if one's opinion is "X tweak makes an obvious sonic difference" then that is essentially greeted with open arms.
But if someone explains why he is skeptical, then that is taken as an affront to the experience of everyone who believes he hears a difference, and so all these emotional, castigating replies tend to follow.
But the cautions I've alluded to shouldn't be seen as an emotional affront by a reasonable person, no more than if you were to take part in a scientific study it would be a personal insult for there to be experimental controls for bias. It's just acknowledging we can all be fallible.
I remember back in the 90's on the audio discussion groups, I reported what I felt were obvious differences between some CD players. When it was suggested that these differences could be due to bias effects, I didn't get all huffy, calling people "psuedo skeptics" and "negative nellies" and "I don't have to listen to anyone telling me I don't hear what I KNOW I hear!"
Instead I just said "Yeah, fair enough, could be." And I sought advice on how to properly blind test them, did the tests and...came out positive for sonic differences.
And then I've done tests on other items that did not support there being a detectable sonic difference. No biggie. And it's saved me money along the way.
I haven't argued at all for anyone else that they have to do this.
But I have to say I'm intrigued by the question of these tweaks not only on the level of the tweak itself, in this case fuses, but on the level of the type of critical thinking and reasoned discourse that does, and often does not, happen among the audiophile community.
Maybe it's a hopeless effort trying to show why skepticism is reasonable, and why questioning our own subjective inferences is actually a good thing, not a personal insult. But I think it's worth at least trying to get this point across sometimes.
They're wrong, They know they're wrong, and yet they still persist. All of their protests are nothing more than an end around the original intent of the OP. They're dancing madly on the head of a pin, only meaning to distract, to get in some blows. Poor snowflakes.
Prof My sincere apologies! What with the dark tone this thread has taken I assumed the worst and yes it made an ass out of me for sure! I thought your meaning by truncating my quote was something different entirely. Certain "other" members have a very bad habit of committing that offence repeatedly. Now I see you were merely being positive in the correct use of the phrase whereby not employing either a double negative or positive. and butchering it. Reading too much into things can get one in deep doodoo!
"Note that virtually EVERY skeptic here, no matter how careful or nuanced their position, has been castigated in the same vein as being "Negative Nellies" (and "psuedo skeptics" etc)."
Again ... Bull. My attitude has always been that one has the right to express their feelings and thoughts ... as long as it doesn’t entail personal attacks, or demeans the product to the point of failure without trying it/them for themselves.
"So your name-calling of skeptics didn’t offer any obvious reason to distinguish any individual vs just "those who will voice skepticism."
Refraining from calling THE FEW individuals out was done on purpose. Had I called them out, I would have just been opening the same can of worms again. And if you notice, one of the worst offenders posted again here and I said nothing. Why? Because there was no personal attack. I addressed his "concerns" and just moved on.
For you to read anything else into the final paragraph of the opening of this thread other than just asking for civility is making a mountain out of a mole hill.
Again ... tens of thousands of Red, Black and Blue fuses sold to an appreciative customer base with very few returns says tons more than a few skeptics posting here. Same with Tim’s Total Contact ... an amazing product that, as good as the Blue fuses are, is even better ... by far.
Its good to remember The Golden Rule. Do not try to dissuade others from buying and enjoying products that you haven't experienced for yourself. Pretty simple, really.
You have stated you are not arguing that fuses don't make any difference. You have also said you you don't have any intent to try the blue fuse. I accept both at face value, but I am confused about what you are “arguing”, or what position you are taking on this thread?
Sure, there are more important matters in life, but when I log on to the forums, Hi-Fi is important. What I see here among the detractors are folks who dismiss fuses, even cables, as scam products out of long-held beliefs not grounded in experience but in having joined with some decidedly respected authority of the same opinion. This well-entrenched camp protects them from going forth beyond a point of system development they are not willing to embark on, perhaps out of financial constraints or lack of priority on sound quality. These are, perhaps, the mid-fi malcontents, or, just as likely, the happily ignorant defenders of their faith whose mission is to tell us we are deluded. Fine--keep holding forth--we aren't impressed.
Oh, right, except for, you know, this part about skeptics:
Debbie Downers and Negative Nellie’s have hijacked the original RED fuse
thread. A pox on their houses and their Pioneer receivers.
So, yeah, your attitude is all positive for anyone who will share your view that fuses obviously make a sonic difference, but not so much it seems for a dissenting view.
Yes, I did dis-invite the worst of the lot.
There was no way to know who YOU think to be the "worst of the lot" or any suggestion that one can reasonably be a skeptic about fuses. Given this, your "dis-invite" looked suggestive of a general swipe against people who would voice skepticism of your claims. As in "Stay out if you aren't going to agree with my view that fuses cause obvious sonic differences!"
Note that virtually EVERY skeptic here, no matter how careful or nuanced their position, has been castigated in the same vein as being "Negative Nellies" (and "psuedo skeptics" etc).
So your name-calling of skeptics didn't offer any obvious reason to distinguish any individual vs just "those who will voice skepticism."
Those who argue against the SR fuses or who argue for more stringent proof of efficacy are, again, missing the OP’s intent: He opened this thread upon first trying the SR Blue fuse. He found remarkable improvements over the SR Blacks. He invited those who are about to try the SR Blues to comment on their impressions. His is a simple invitation to an audience who is trying or is about to try the new SR Blue fuse. He is also warning the usual trolls--those who ruined his prior thread on fuses--to stay away. Why? Because those who ridicule have degraded the discourse of his previous topics. We have that same crew here again--the corporate-conspiracy crackpots, the phony-tweak prophets, the double-blind bloviators, the mid-fi malcontents. None of you will ever hear the higher fidelity of the SR Blue fuse---not one of you.
Not "viscous," but it was you who started off in the original post "poisoning the well" by name-calling skeptics.
^^^ Bull. Read the entire opening thread. Nothing but positivism. Yes, I did dis-invite the worst of the lot.
shadorn ...
Its when members use terminology like "hogwash," or "scam," that's the problem. What's wrong with that? Plenty. For starters, none of them tried the product for themselves, so they were pulling their comments out of their butts. Secondly, its not up to you, or anyone else to tell strangers how, when or why to spend their money. A bit presumptuous, don't you think? Third, Tim Mrock, with his TC, had a start-up company and his initial success depended upon positive input, not attacks on his product by a bunch of misinformed people using him as a whipping boy for their infantile egos.
And that type of attitude was adopted or continued by others here who fall back on name calling and negative characterizations of anyone voicing even reasonable skepticism.
Yup. But in all fairness, only a very few as I recall. One in particular but nothing new there. Just another day at the office..... I feel bad I got sucked into it but sometimes the only way to check bad behavior when needed is more bad behavior. Sad but true. I'll be good again now.
Not "viscous," but it was you who started off in the original post "poisoning the well" by name-calling skeptics.
And that type of attitude was adopted or continued by others here who fall back on name calling and negative characterizations of anyone voicing even reasonable skepticism.
I’ve always been cordial to those expressing a legitimate, opposite viewpoint
Yup. I agree and hat tip to you! Your cordiality expressed to “disgusting individuals” is much appreciated.
The totally legitimate, opposite view is that TC and special fuses are a bunch of hogwash. If some folks here like to take the time to warn others about parting with their money on a scam then where is the harm in that? In fact the warnings are intended to prevent the harm caused when folks get duped into mucking around with fuses and fuse boxes for no good reason. That anyone believes this nonsense to begin with is testamount to how easy it is to spread misinformation on the worldwide web.
No Frank that is not vicious nor do I consider you to be. However I do see it consistently tolerated in certain others as long as it helps tow the line. I won't mention names.....
My reply to you was meant as a good-matured quip: that I was happy to see someone use "I could not care less" (instead of the horrible "I could care less").
Are you seriously complaining about that now too?
How did I change any "meaning?"
Otherwise I have no idea what post you are referring to.
I'm neither defending nor dissing all supporters nor all detractors. The only way to learn is to have open discussion. Turned out that way here and in fact I learned a lot.
"If you read the original post you’ll see that ’ naysayers, the Debbie Downers and Negative Nellie’s " were dissed from the start."
They deserved every bit of it ... and more. In fact, in a few instances, especially in the Total Contact thread, they deserved to have their asses handed to them in court.
By the way, mapman, this is from the original post:
"Seems the naysayers, the Debbie Downers and Negative Nellie’s have hijacked the original RED fuse thread. A pox on their houses and their Pioneer receivers."
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
