We Need A Separate Forum for Fuses
geoffkait ... I thought we already agreed a blind tests proves nothing.I'm not a big advocate of audiophiles conducting double-blind tests, which I think have greater value to designers and manufacturers. I wouldn't say they prove nothing but - for audiophiles - they prove very, very little, which is why I think they are a complete waste of time for most of us. What's interesting is the constant clamor from some who insist upon such testing. Those who are so vocal in their advocacy for double-blind tests should conduct their own and share results with us - rather than insist others do their work for them. Frankly, I doubt the sincerity of these advocates. |
kosst_amojan "Fusers" strike me as the audio equivalent to those religious fundamentalists who insist you must pronounce God’s name in some strange way or else he won’t hear your prayers ...The greatest fundamentalist religious fervor here seems to be from proselytizers such as yourself, who feel compelled to repeat your version of the gospel even as the majority here seem to be disinterested in being "saved" from the devil you call snake oil. |
douglas_schroeder It might be interesting to see how many fuse Skeptics and Adopters own digital or analogue front ends. Could we add this to the survey?I'm a skeptic with both analog and digital front ends, but I'm not a naysayer. I learned long ago not to judge the sound of anything without listening. Similarly, I won't buy a car I haven't driven, or buy a suit I haven't tried on first. I'll probably experiment with a fuse or two sometime. It just isn't high on my priority list. Meanwhile, everyone here should be able to discuss their experiences without some of the acrimony that results, imo. |
georgehifi Geoff enough, it’s about time you stopped insinuating the gdhal is on drugs, otherwise your posts will be reportedActually, gdhal already admitted to this: gdhal04-06-2018 6:00pm geoffkait - Gdhal, would it be safe to say you’re experiencing another one of your Deadhead acid flashbacks? Or are you always like this? 😬 Question. Have you given any consideration to going back and finishing up your GED? 😀 Possible. Admittedly, I suspect my mind isn't always as "normal" as it would have been had I not "experimented"Oddly, this same person is quick to accuse others of being delusional. But I agree that it's really not appropriate to chastise someone who has a brain injury or defect, even if it was self-inflicted. |
gdha ... you should note that my statement regarding drugs refers to the past, not the present.That's probably a good thing but, as you noted, the damage apparently lingers: Admittedly, I suspect my mind isn't always as "normal" as it would have been had I not "experimented"That's why I said people should not chide you for it. I don't think brain damage is a funny topic. |
jetter cleeds, so your one of the high on life guys, or gals. And your busting gdhal’s chops for not being too afraid have tuned in and turned on along with millions of others.You might want to read what I posted more carefully. I actually defended gdhal. I don’t think it’s amusing to mock people with brain damage. You chiding me for not having consumed hallucinogenic drugs is just silly peer pressure. your probably on the wrong forum.Really? You have to do drugs to participate here? |
danvignau I am fascinated by the directionality arguments concerning fuses. Did proponents of this idea forget that our electronics are powered by alternating current?This has been explained by fuse advocates many times in this thread and others. Of course, you're free to reject the reasoning. But to pretend that it hasn't been provided is disingenuous. |
gdhal @cleeds I’d be appreciative if you could/would answer the following questions.I don’t know. I’ve never experimented with wire directionality, with the exception of RCA ICs that have the outer shield connected at only one end. But most reasonable people would probably agree that can make a difference. Please speculate, in what way should someone else, such as myself, expect to benefit if fuses and/or wire is oriented correctly?I’m not sure. If this is something that especially interests you, you might want to give it a try, and then report back. But as you previously acknowledged, your strong expectation bias might color the result. Still, it might be worth a try. |
A primary reason I’ve never experimented with reversing fuses is that I don’t know how to conduct a listening test that would allow me to quickly switch back and forth between the two orientations. I think being able to do that is a prerequisite for a valid listening test. As for cables, most of my ICS are either balanced or have an outer shield connected at only one end, so it’s not practical to reverse those. That leaves me with speaker cables but again, how could I quickly switch between two orientations? I’d need some kind of switcher and then long lengths of speaker cable that I could cut in half, and then connect to the switcher with one option reversed. That’s more work than I’m likely to undertake. |
gdhal I see/hear nothing wrong with the "blinded" Amy > Bob > Amy > Bob test I describe.Understood, but as I explained, a lot of research shows that quick switching is required for a valid listening test. I've already told you: I don’t have a belief. I haven’t switched the orientation of a fuse or wire, so I have no reason to test it. |
gdhal1 I respectively disagree, however, that there is any kind of necessity to do the reversal "quickly".You're free to disagree, but there's a lot of research on valid listening tests that conflicts with your claim. For example, if I play a Bob Dylan song and once complete I then play an Amy Winehouse song, I might say "they sound different" and in fact "they sound overwhelmingly and obviously different". In this case, it wouldn't matter that Amy Winehouse began playing 1 millisecond, 1 year, or anywhere in between after Bob Dylan. I’d tell you, *one hundred percent of the time* - as in never wrong once - whether or not Bob or Amy were the artist being played.I think the changes that might result from reversing the orientation of a fuse would be a lot more subtle than discriminating between Bob Dylan and Amy Winehouse. The test you're describing is nowhere near rigorous enough to reliably reveal such differences, and I suspect you know that. |
gdhal I’d imagine you might consider extending an apology to me for using the word "fraud" numerous times. What we have is a simple disagreement as to how any kind of testing would be performed. No right or wrong per se, just a difference of opinion.Not so. There is a mountain of information about how to conduct scientifically valid listening tests, going back at least as far as Munson’s presentations to the AES in the late ’50s. (Yes, that Munson, the guy who worked with Fletcher.) What you proposed was a process we could politely call "scientifically invalid," but which was essentially rigged so as to ensure that the outcome of your $25,000 wager could be favorable only to you. And this was all to be negotiated in secret, outside of the forum, but somehow legitimized because you’d bring lawyers into it. The moderators concluded that it was a ruse and deleted all of your efforts to promote your "offer." |
amg56 Those that like to waste their money on expensive un-industrial/ un-scientifically proven trinkets like fuses and goo are welcome to waste their money. But DON'T pollute the Audiophile forums trying to sell the stuff to others until the items can and are proven REPEATEDLY by scientific testing to do what is professed they doIf you seek proof, feel free to conduct your own tests and share the results here. Please remember to tell us exactly how you conducted the tests, so that we can determine if they're valid. In the interim, everyone is free to post their opinions here without your approval or complying with your demands. No one here owes you anything. |
geoffkait There is such a thing as placebo effect, probably most applicable to medical applications rather than audio, but I give you that. There is such a thing as expectation bias, also. I’ll grant you that ... those “psychological” effects can be relatively easily eliminated by careful testingAbsolutely 100 percent agreed. It is stunning that those who claim science is on their side don’t also agree. So, it’s illogical to use those effects to explain ALL positive results which is the standard pseudo skeptic line.It’s fair to question positive results. It’s even fair to question all of the positive results. But to reject all such reports based solely on belief and in the absence of any testing is just silly, and certainly not scientific. This is very basic science. |
cleeds - It’s fair to question positive results. gdhal Absolutely. This is why it behooves those who claim to hear an improvement when an ordinary fuse/wire is reversed to be honest with themselves and do a blind test (i.e. a test where ones ears are the only sensory organ involved)I think those reporting what they hear are being completely honest. They have no obligation to provide additional substantiation to you at all. You can continue to repeat your demands that others do such testing, but it's pretty clear they're not going to comply. Of course, you're free to conduct your own tests. If you do, please share the protocol and results here. it could be part of what you call being honest. There are those who think others "owe" them something. In your case, gdhal, you insist others owe you some kind of "proof" that you deem acceptable. It's odd that you think that way, rather than simply just use your judgment to dismiss claims you find dubious. |
nonoise To behoove is to state that it is the responsibility or duty for a person to do something. That is flat out ridiculous on it's face. No one owes you anything save for relating what they hear(d).Exactly. It is no more complicated than that. It is just such a puzzle that those who claim the mantel of science resist conducting themselves a valid test to substantiate their claims, or to even discuss here how such a test might be conducted. It's difficult for me to imagine it's for any reason other than to be argumentative. |
gdhal @cleedsHuh? I’m not the slightest bit offended by you. If offense was your objective, it’s unfortunate that you’ve been disappointed. Perhaps it’s time for you to be honest with yourself, gdhal. |
gdhal Well, I thought I made it clear that I'm not demanding anythingHuh? You have repeated numerous times statements such as this: it behooves those who claim to hear an improvement when an ordinary fuse/wire is reversed to be honest with themselves and do a blind testbe·hoove bəˈho͞ov/verb formal ...
|
kosst_amojan So, if I give you a good dose of LSD ...That isn’t going to happen. Your arguments and illogic here are becoming pathetic. |
