Geoff, I have not asserted that the fuse manufacturers assert that their fuses should be oriented in the direction of "current flow." As you say, that might simply be something that has been "repeated a thousand times on the internet," though not particularly by the naysayers. Just take a look at the early posts in this thread, or at the statement in the paper Joe referenced that "both the HiFi Tuning and Isoclean fuses have arrows on their cases which indicate that they should be oriented in the direction of current (energy) flow."
What I have maintained is that the various explanations and measurements that have been offered as rationale for fuse directionality are flawed, and that IMO the explanation of reported differences that has the greatest probability of being correct is failure to recognize and control extraneous variables.
Regards,
-- Al |
Al, hi, yes that's exactly what I mean, that Joe made the statement, not HiFi Tuning or Isoclean. |
Al & Geoff,
My intention wasn't to stir a pot that's already messy.
The review thread I quoted from may have been less than rigorous in terms of design and the question of replication is ambiguous.
If the reader wishes, I recommend going through a research study done by GECOM Technologies GmbH that addresses such areas as resistance, noise, and voltage drops. The section on resistance shows measurements orienting the various fuses tested in both directions.
There are explanation and summary sections for the tests performed although the raw data and testing methodologies will be of interest to some, I'm sure.
Anyway, here's the link to the tests. Please note that you can download a PDF of the tests as well.
http://ultrasystem.com/usfeaturedprodsFUSE_LIT.html
Regards,
Joe |
|
Thank God I don't know much about electronics. If I did I might trust my ears less and not be willing to experiment with fuse direction.
I found with my HiFi Tuning Supreme fuses that they do make a nice improvement. My ears tell me that they do sound better in one direction over the other. Which is good so what I don't know about electronics doesn't interfere what what my ears don't have to understand why one direction sounds obviously better than the other. |
|
Almarg, I remember reading your response. I would take exception to the use of the word, "insignificant." This word does have one quite specific definition in sampling theory, but generally it is just dismissive. Since you are not talking about random samples, I guess you mean it to be dismissive. I see no real way to make it so. |
One basic and apparently irreconcilable difference between the two schools of thought in this and other similar debates concerns the question of wether perceived audible differences in the sound of music can be explained via numbers, specs, and other results of the available test equipment and of electronic theory as we understand it today. The insistence on the part of one camp to rely entirely on these to explain all that the human ear/brain tells the other camp is possible is, in my opinion, flawed and does not honor the depth of the complexity of the sound of music (long-held ideas about things like the frequency response limits of the human ear/brain have been revised in recent times). To my way of thinking this also points to a contradiction and a hypocracy of sorts when one considers how much effort is often spent advocating the sanctity of subjectivity as concerns personal taste in music, or the mistaken idea that "there is no absolute when it comes to accuracy in the sound of music". Some want answers and explanations (I include myself) for these phenomena, but some are also not able to accept the very real possibility (and probability) that we simply don't have the understanding of all the interactions and cause/effect relationships that come into play around these issues; especially, because some of these relationships involve key aspects of the "sound" of music that probably can't be explained via science: emotional content and the relationship between that and those aspects of the sound of music that we do understand more fully; things like frequency response, harmonic distortion etc. If a person is of the mindset that this kind of thinking is a bunch of bs, that science always rules and that there is a clear demarcation line between the realm of science and the realm of human emotion and perception then any debate is pointless. I am always reminded of the monumental effort that some have put, via science, into trying to figure out why a Strad sounds the way it does and they have always come up empty handed. Some will claim that the sound of a Strad has, in fact, been replicated by modern violin makers; and, yet, the supposed "proof" of this can be heard to be false even over the speaker in my IPad.
Why there is resistance to acknowledging that what some do hear is very real FOR THEM I find very interesting, and makes me wonder how much of that is a sense of insecurity about possibly not being able to hear what others can; sometimes without even trying to see if they can. As with many things the answer can probably be found in the gray area between the black and the white; some personality types are more comfortable than others being in the gray. I understand the validity in wanting answers and I commend those with an evenhanded viewpoint (like Al's) which seeks to attribute the perceived phenomena to other variables. I found a recent comment by Al particularly interesting:
****All I can say is that it seems conceivable that a magnetic field could affect the signal, although not necessarily to an audible degree.****
That comment goes to a fundamental issue. In my opinion, anything that one does that affects the signal to any degree is potentially audible. Issues of probability or practicality aside the real question then becomes: where does one draw the line? Are we prepared to state that, without a doubt, we have a complete understanding of the capabilities of the human hearing mechanism; that science has taught us all that we need to know about it? Moreover, are we prepared to dismiss the obvious: that some listeners simply have, because of experience, training, or nature, a more acute listening ability than others?
Back to the issue of fuse directionality. As I have said I have no experience with high-end fuses; never mind their directionality. Frankly, I have little interest in trying them at this point in time since I have much bigger fish to fry as concerns the tuning of my system. However, I am comfortable with this (gray) possibility: if we are willing to concede that the tiny impact of "extraneous variables" like changes in contact integrity may be audible and may explain the experience of the believers; if the sound of music is that vulnerable to the effects of such seemingly unimportant physical variables (and I believe it is) then it makes sense to me that the inevitable gray areas in electrical theory would also have an effect. Or are these electrical theories absolutely ironclad; with absolutely no possibility of revision? Al? Logic tells me that they probably are not. |
Frogman wrote,
"Frankly, I have little interest in trying them at this point in time since I have much bigger fish to fry as concerns the tuning of my system."
Now, I'm not trying to start a fight or anything, and I trust you'll forgive me for saying so, but your statement sounds just a teeny bit dismissive, no offense intended. I wish you could have been here to hear my new liquid nano Super Fuse from Audio Magic when I inserted it into my Woo Audio WA6 headphone amp. And I wish you could also have been here to hear it when I reinserted it in the correct direction. |
Dismissive? Not at all. I am currently contemplating purchasing a new phono preamp and possibly new speakers; and, God knows, where those roads will take me cabling-wise. So, yes, I think it's a pretty good assumption that those changes will be more significant than new fuses, and since there are only so many hours in the day and I reserve a majority of those hours for music rather than equipment, well, fuses will have to wait? However, I must say that I find it telling that after several paragraphs of brilliant commentary :-) supporting your point of view, you choose to harp on that particular detail. Gray, anyone? |
05-13-14: Geoffkait
Al, hi, yes that's exactly what I mean, that Joe made the statement, not HiFi Tuning or Isoclean. To be precise, it was not Joe who made the statement, it was the paper he referenced. Regards, -- Al |
05-14-14: Frogman
If we are willing to concede that the tiny impact of "extraneous variables" like changes in contact integrity may be audible and may explain the experience of the believers; if the sound of music is that vulnerable to the effects of such seemingly unimportant physical variables (and I believe it is) then it makes sense to me that the inevitable gray areas in electrical theory would also have an effect. Or are these electrical theories absolutely ironclad; with absolutely no possibility of revision? Al? Logic tells me that they probably are not. I for one would certainly not exclude the possibility that those theories may require revision or refinement at times. And I would go further, in that I would emphasize that even if those theories should happen to be entirely correct as they presently stand (and I do not assert that they are), those theories are inherently incapable of either predicting or explaining everything about how a system will sound. I have often had occasion to say just that in other threads, this recent thread being a typical example. More broadly, I think that my feelings about the philosophical questions you raise are summed up pretty well in a post I made a couple of years ago in a thread entitled "Do You Believe In Magic". I'll quote the relevant post in its entirety: 01-22-12: Almarg
:01-21-12 Bryoncunningham
I honestly don't know if I'm a Believer or a Skeptic. Hi Bryon,
That is a good thing, as I see it, because IMO the positions at both ends of the ideological spectrum are fundamentally flawed in numerous ways (that I wonÂ’t belabor here), and go hand-in-hand with dogmatism and closed-mindedness. If I may make a somewhat presumptuous comment, your intellectual sincerity and open-mindedness are both refreshing and commendable.
No, I do not believe in magic (although I do like the John Sebastian song :-)).
But my background in electronic design (unrelated to audio) has taught me that many things can occur in a system that are subtle, counter-intuitive, and inherently unpredictable.
Coupling of electrical noise between circuits that are ostensibly unrelated is a leading example. EMI/RFI effects are another example. While those kinds of effects can often be explained in a general sense, once the design has been implemented they can only be addressed by experimentation and trial-and-error. I donÂ’t see anything that is technically implausible, btw, in the experience you described with the particular tweak.
Concerning the broader philosophical questions you raise, my feeling is that each issue and each tweak should be considered on an individual basis, and broad latitude should be allowed for the possibility that subtle and counter-intuitive phenomena may be at play. But that latitude should remain WITHIN FINITE BOUNDS OF PLAUSIBILITY!! A technical understanding of how the elements of a system work and how they interact, and of the theory behind a specific tweak, if applied with a reasonably open mind, can help assure that perceived effects are being attributed to the correct variable, and to better distinguish between the plausible and the implausible, the reasonable and the outlandish, and between pointless overkill and the possibility of significant benefit.
Rather than a believer or a skeptic, I guess you could call me a pragmatist with a technical background.
Best regards, -- Al |
Excellent post, Al. I agree with you on every count, and can only say that it is a shame that you did not pursue electronic design in audio; it would have been to the audio world's benefit. |
Al, as regards the Briancunnungham post, I think it is important to understand he considers himself to be a skeptic. Not that there is anything wrong with that but in the case of aftermarket fuses he would be the type of skeptic not to actually try the fuse but to attempt to shoot it down with skeptic's arguments. Another thing I find fascinating is his use of capital letters when he states, "...within finite bounds of plausibility." Well, give me a break, what might be implausible to one person might easily be perfectly fine to another person. You know, if you start talking quantum mechanics to the guy on the street he will most likely look at you won't those big eyes that look like a deer in the headlights. So, I would not at all define a concept as be feasible or plausible based on some loosely goosey constraint such as the bounds of plausibility. Hell, black holes are "implausible" to probably 80% of the world's population. Cameras are "implausible" to folks living in many remote parts of the world, well, maybe not now with cell phones and everything. LOL. Who is defining what is plausible? |
"the real question then becomes: where does one draw the line"
The answer these days is whenever GeoffKait/Machina Dynamica offers up his support.
But that's just me. |
"Rather than a believer or a skeptic, I guess you could call me a pragmatist with a technical background."
A very healthy and practical perspective for one to have in this arena I would say. |
To paraphrase Marx, who are you going to believe, me or your lying ears? |
I didn't realize Grouch Marx was an audiophile. |
Excerpt from intro to Zen and the Art of Debunkery. Enjoy.
"Seeing with humility, curiosity and fresh eyes was once the main point of science. But today it is often a different story. As the scientific enterprise has been bent toward exploitation, institutionalization, hyperspecialization and new orthodoxy, it has increasingly preoccupied itself with disconnected facts in a psychological, social and ecological vacuum. So disconnected has official science become from the greater scheme of things, that it tends to deny or disregard entire domains of reality and to satisfy itself with reducing all of life and consciousness to a dead physics.
As the millennium turns, science seems in many ways to be treading the weary path of the religions it presumed to replace. Where free, dispassionate inquiry once reigned, emotions now run high in the defense of a fundamentalized "scientific truth." As anomalies mount up beneath a sea of denial, defenders of the Faith and the Kingdom cling with increasing self-righteousness to the hull of a sinking paradigm. Faced with provocative evidence of things undreamt of in their philosophy, many otherwise mature scientists revert to a kind of skeptical infantilism characterized by blind faith in the absoluteness of the familiar. Small wonder, then, that so many promising fields of inquiry remain shrouded in superstition, ignorance, denial, disinformation, taboo . . . and debunkery." |
This is great stuff.
Just when I'd bet Norm can't get any stodgier, he reaches another level of pig-headedness and intolerance.
Way to go old man. |
Frogman, thanks very much for the kind comments, which are particularly appreciated as my perception has been that you have one of the best combinations of musical background and audiophile experience extant.
Geoff, please note that the post which I quoted from the "Do You Believe In Magic" thread was written by me, TO Bryon, who was the originator of the thread.
Regards,
-- Al |
Al, thanks, I did see that when read the post again, please don't take my comments to heart too much. If memory serves the reason for Bryon's rant was something I said in the thread you quoted from. I like Bryon and he definitely has a way with words.
Geoff |
@Mr G- That was Zen! This is Tao(relax/enjoy)! |
Fun reading. No one has made mention of the directionality of wire due to the drawing process. The crystalline structure of copper is aligned a certain way when it is pulled through the die. What I am not sure of, is if the crystalline structure alignment changes when the copper wire is annealed or flexed. This may play some part in the fuse orientation question. The fuse manufacturer buys the wire in spools and so must know the actual direction the wire was pulled through the die. Otherwise, the directional notation on their fuses would be meaningless. |
Mt T- The crystalline molecular structure actually forms in a sort of directional chevron formation(ie: >>>>>>), when drawn. The barriers(between crystals) are subject to oxidation and are thought to have a diode effect. I've been wondering (given the much greater complexity of musical wave forms, compared to the ordinary sine waves, used in testing/scientific experimentation), if this might contribute to a sort of Wood Effect, when the signal is subjected to those boundaries. The differences in ambiance, image specificity, etc., that some people(myself included) are able to perceive when speakers are reversed in phase, are as subtle as what some claim for fuse reversal. Again; I've not played with reversing my fuses. I'm just speculating. |
How that may work in the case of fuses used in the power supply circuitry; I couldn't say. Perhaps, the multitude of minute diode bridges, somehow has an effect of the AC waveform, in one direction, more than the other. I haven't yet heard anyone mentioning OHNO Continuous Cast wire, in their fuses. |
I know this: a few decades ago, I had some Monster Cable ICs with directional arrows. I had changed something on my stereo and had the ICs off of it. These ICs were going from preamp to amp. After reconnecting everything, I sat down to listen; but something didn't seem right. I couldn't put my finger on it; but it was enough to prompt me to get out of my chair and check everything. I found one of the two IC cables was plugged in backwards, ie. the arrow on the cable was pointing the wrong way. I corrected the orientation and sat back down to listen. Everything was good. That blew me away. I became more open minded about cables and other tweaks after that. I have not, however, gotten motivated to trial fuses. |
If the impedance of Cu wire is slightly different in the direction of the draw vs. the other direction, then I would think that this difference is measurable. Perhaps fuse and cable companies know this and measure this; but for the sake of competitive advantage, do not care to reveal it. If wire impedance is slightly higher in one direction than the other, then it could follow that signal noise is slightly lower pending orientation of the wire. Lower signal noise could be perceived as better sound quality.
So who among these esteemed EE's could perform these delicate measurements? And be willing? Or is it nonsense? |
Tony, we have already pointed out that HiFi Tuning provides data sheets on their web site for fuses of various types as well as other fuses, measured in both directions, with and without cryo. |
Tony wrote,
"So who among these esteemed EE's could perform these delicate measurements?"
That's so funny! Woulda, shoulda, coulda.... |
Tonywinsc, Mapleshade use to make power cords that had ribbons whose draw was one way for the hot and the reverse for the neutral. I still have some somewhere in my boxes. Other companies copied them. Kondo use to make both silver and copper wire with the draw known. Synergistic Research zaps their fuses on their Tesla coil and does so both ways. |
Tonywinsc, in the case of the Monster IC's (and most similar IC's) directionality as shown by the arrows has to do with the fact that the shield is only connected (grounded) at one end and not the other. I think we are talking about something else as concerns fuses. |
Yes, I know. I was just sharing an antidotal story about my discovery of the impact of subtle things on the quality of the sound. |
Thanks for explaining. I have had many similar experiences over the years and all those subtle things can add up to something truly significant.
Regards. |
Geof,
How does your color based audio "Feng Shui" as it were work?
Feng Shui has been around a long time and has many followers. I'm willing to listen if you are willing to explain. |
MM, happy to oblige but which color based thing are you referring to? I've got a bunch. Colored pens for CDs and Blu Ray, Multi colored light strobe light, CD tray masking and Blu Ray tray masking. Not to mention scattered light absorbers for CD and Blu Ray. My stuff isn't really feng shui, not even close actually. Pretty straight physics, well maybe not the strobe light, I don't know WHAT that is.
Tootles |
Feng Shui is nonesense, although design of interior space is interesting anyway. My next great idea: Tiny (I mean really tiny) damping rubber bands for fuses...only $127.50 each. You want these...I know you do...come on now... |
Wolf Man - rubber bands are really cool, esp. the really expensive ones, however my fuse has a liquid center (I'm not hot dogging you) so a rubber band would probably be way overkill. |
Wolf,
I don't know much about it. Seems like an eastern form of superstition.
I do believe in the concept of Chi force though so I find anything related to that to be of interest usually. I suppose the concepts at the core of Feng Shui have wide appeal, but I do not understand how Feng Shui concepts actually work. Its on my list of things to learn more about, way ahead of teleportation tweaks and yes even fuse directionality. :^) |
Before we relegate Feng Shui to simply superstition it might be helpful to note that the magnetic compass (a verifiably effective and still in use instrument) was developed for use in Feng Shui. Chi is an important aspect in Feng Shui practice. |
I'm listening to WWOZ New Orleans on Internet Radio via my Squeezebox and main rig as I work and type. Love that station and the Big Easy music scene in general. Helps make me actively receptive to things like Feng Shui.... |
Geoff,
Specifically your response to Almarg above regarding color of magnets which I'll copy here for easy reference:
"Al, I realize this next series of comments is beyond the scope of this discussion but I'd thought I'd throw it out there anyway, perhaps to see what you think. As I think I probably mentioned somewhere along the line on this thread, I have been using magnets in audio applications for a very long time. Furthermore, I have found them to have a positive effect on the sound. But the kicker is where I am using magents. I am using them on windows, on doors, on transformers, on cell phones, on TVs, on wood book cases, on mirrors, among other things. See, I told you it was beyond the scope. Lol. Now, having said all that I should also mention that the color of the magnet is quite important and depends on the object on which it is placed. For example, for steel blue, for aluminum red, for glass green. " |
Chinese ain't stupid .
In talking to many Asian peasants I found they are far above average American in general wisdom and mental acuity . |
MM, Oh, that. Well, you might not be aware of PWB Electronics and all of their Morphic Resonance related stuff, like color magnets and Silver Rainbow Foil. Anywho, in case you need a little tutorial on Morphic Resonance and feng shui, here's a neato YouTube clip for your viewing pleasure.
http://youtu.be/yRA3qBhdL4Y |
Penn & Teller did a hilarious expose' of Feng Shui fraud by having a few "experts" (they say it's a science, NOT an art) secretly filmed while applying this "science" to the same room, and all of them were utterly disperate with one even trying to sell exclusive items to help with the process. Great stuff. |
Wolfie, I usually don't point out typos or spelling errors, but in this case I suspect that for your post to convey what you intended "disperate" should be "disparate." Chances are "disperate" would be taken by many to be a misspelling of "desperate," which I don't think is what you meant.
Best regards,
-- Al |
Penn and Teller exposing feng shui is like The Amazing Randi exposing high end cables, no? Give me a break. |
Ack-chew-ally, desperate makes more sense than disparate. IMHO of course. |
****they say it's a science, NOT an art) ****
Does it really matter; assuming it works for some? |
Point the fuses towards ebay to see if someone is crazy enough to waste his money, then put yours away and don't waste it again. |
