Fuses fuses fuses


Ok, this is about fuses

1- a standard Bussman fuse is UL approved. Are any "high end" fuses UL approved?

2- do any component manufacturers supply their gear with any of the usual suspects of high end fuses as opposed to a standard Bussman?

3- let's say fuses do make a difference. Given incoming power is AC, why could fuses be directional? 

Not meaning to light any fires here- 

thanks in advance 
128x128zavato
Am I getting this right - those who don’t believe in fuse directionality do believe in cable directionality? No, I’m not talking about shielded cables or other special cases. Is it because fuses are so small? 😀

George, take it easy, dude. You might consider cutting back on the Joe.

Sidebar: How small can something be and still make a noticeable improvement? I gather most objections to the proposition that fuses can’t make a difference and that fuses can’t be directional have to do with the idea that fuses are just too small to make any significant difference. The fuse size is too small, the wire is too small. Which leads to my question. How many things can you think of that are very small and yet improve the sound? We can start off with tiny little bowls the diameter of which are around 7/8" or 1" and the PWB Silver Holographic Foil that is a mere 1/8" by 0.75" and Marigo VTS dots that are as small as 1/16" diameter.
Can a fuse sound better than no fuse, as if it was bypassed, and if so, how? Does it somehow filter or organise the electron into a certain orientation?

No.

A fuse has a voltage drop and in the case of fast blow fuses, one that can be pretty variable as current varies through the device. This usually has an adverse effect on the sound if nothing is done in the circuit to deal with the phenomena.

Eliminating it is usually not an option as the equipment can become a shock and fire hazard and may do things like blow up amps and speakers if something goes wrong.
I wrote this just a bit of time ago, on another forum.

This is tied to the fuse issue and who may hear it and who may not. Complexity of systems and how they are assembled, etc can all play into this. Pay particular attention to the last two bits. It is a notable part of the disconnect point in these discussions:

A note from someone who has done many versions of many systems:

Perfect dynamic and level matching of passive and active can be a pain. All active or all passive tends to be the best ’match’ in seamless cohesion, where the bass does not sound disconnected to the given upper main box or transducer.

Powered subs in a set of mains always seems like a good idea, until you hear the dynamic contrasting disconnect. Dynamic contrasting or dynamic linearity (oxymoronic, but hey...) of passive and active are different from one another. Once heard or realized...then it’s over, forever, as you will forever after hear it in...pretty well - all of them.

Home theater, who cares, seamless is a unobtainable dream for most in those scenarios, and it seems the design is for bass emphasis anyway... but in two channel home audio, it can be laid bare, after a time.

We can lie to ourselves as that is literally the design of the ear, in one of it’s capacities...which is to do a form of ’fill in’ work. It has to do with how we decipher spoken word, in real time. Not really a lie to the brain but a form of sped up word deciphering via ’pre-load’ of a word upon hearing the initial aspects of it... and we can overlay that capacity on our musical note analysis.

This is the break point between people who analyze audio signals with their ears (essentially --- learn new languages) and people who mask and pre-load....who call it all snake oil and lies.