Fuse and Cable Directionality
- Thread starter Geoffkait
- Start date
- Status
Subsets don't count. Your primary argument is about the validity of fuses re sound in general. This topic was recently designated by the Super Moderators to discuss directionality only. General discussion of fuses goes elsewhere. You can verify that by messaging the Super Moderator treitz3.
Just apply it all to directionality and go from there. The points are the same either way.
I thought @Analog Scott was just responding to @SeagoatLeo 's points in this thread? Maybe you should report both of them. And me for this post, I suppose.
Wait, I'll put in an on-topic line: Fuses are not directional. Whew!
Wait, I'll put in an on-topic line: Fuses are not directional. Whew!
He wasI thought @Analog Scott was just responding to @SeagoatLeo 's points in this thread? Maybe you should report both of them. And me for this post, I suppose.
Wait, I'll put in an on-topic line: Fuses are not directional. Whew!
Rob
You are correct. I placed my post in the wrong forum; however, Analog Scott is ..... Such an expert, such a superior intellect and hearing capability. You wish you could produce, master and create music as I do and I'm just a small peg in the music chain but my friends are big pegs. I will copy and delete my posts from this forum and place them in the other forum tomorrow when I return.I thought @Analog Scott was just responding to @SeagoatLeo 's points in this thread? Maybe you should report both of them. And me for this post, I suppose.
Wait, I'll put in an on-topic line: Fuses are not directional. Whew!
Pretty condescending. I think he was arguing the technical merits, listening tests have not been performed except for sighted tests? I too am curious if you have conducted any sort of more rigorous testing to prove your theory? I have done some recording and mastering work, and worked with some experts, but I and they have still heard things that later turned out to be purely our perceived bias. Human senses are pretty fallible, alas.
I wouldn't worry too much about shifting focus a little in this thread; I suspect if every thread and post that diverged slightly was pulled, we'd have a pretty empty forum. Seems to me directionality of wire and fuses goes hand in hand, audible or not, so might as well keep them in one thread IMO.
I have made no such claims of expertise or hearing acuity.
I generally defer to actual experts and try to look directly at actual research when I can.
Arguments from authority are a type of logical fallacy. All of which is why I put such an emphasis on verifiable evidence as a basis for forming beliefs.
This thread has tired legs. If no one has anything better to say than prove it or you can't hear well, it should probably be let lie.
I read a online posting reciently where some people used decent tools and shot a sonic blatt through interconnects and measured them as well as listened. It would be great if someone with skills did the same with a fuse.
Or, sat down with a group and did a thoughtful audio test. Although I don't really know how you do a test people can agree on. I have seen that thread on this forum and it was as big a $#!T show as this one.
I read a online posting reciently where some people used decent tools and shot a sonic blatt through interconnects and measured them as well as listened. It would be great if someone with skills did the same with a fuse.
Or, sat down with a group and did a thoughtful audio test. Although I don't really know how you do a test people can agree on. I have seen that thread on this forum and it was as big a $#!T show as this one.
Is Analog Scott a pseudonym for Amir of ASR (probably not because he isn't as abrasive as Amir who follows my posts on several forums). Following Amir's chain of thoughtlessness would explain the nonsense "prove it to me with measurements or your wrong" and the science is there (really, all of it, he knows that as a fact). On Audiogon, my forum about ASR had about 1200 posts with Amir and I called some of them minions (although there were at least two ASR posters who were reasonable to converse with). Then on manufacturers frequency responses, tests results, another 500 to 600 posts with Amir again berating anyone who disagreed with his superior knowledge. It was about a 70/30 split against ASR/Amir and his acolytes.
I know one thing about Amir, he hasn't done mastering or recording (I've done over 150) in venues like Royce Hall, Disney Hall, Ford Ampitheater, et. al. as well as the compilation and transfer engineer for the Vienna Zeisl Centennial (11 CDs produced from the archives) who owner chose me over a rather famous L.A. remastering engineer who botched the prior remastering by compression, cutting bass, boosting mids (yuk) of the same material. I did a decent job of providing a neutral and balanced sound. Now I am the archivist for another composer as I have done about 40% of the recorded output myself in the past 30 years. So, who are you Analog Scott who knows so much more and can tell me off in so many ways to dilute and dismiss my experiences as total trash?
As to your query as to how I conducted my experiment, no one knew which direction I placed the fuse in, only me. I burned in the fuses for 25 hours first. My wife, Robert Pincus, Bob Donnelly, Grover Huffman all have superior hearing acuity and notice sonic anomalies in my custom listening room (Robert and Grover in every room), two of which are remastering engineers (also work with Kevin Grey and Bernie Grundman) and the latter a cable manufacturer with 50 years of electronic design and redesign. Robert knows/knew 100s of musicians, producers and recording engineers-it's his life goal to interact with them. Besides these ears of mine, four other music lover/audiophile friends and an another couple who allowed me to ask them which way the sound was more pleasant for them. With some equipment and SR fuses, the differences were not subtle and everyone chose the better/same sounding choice A or B direction. I knew what I was doing. I've had fuse upgrades for over 10 years now. So what if it were sighted, the listeners didn't know and didn't care, they just offered their preference for a few pieces of equipment. I did not torture my listeners with more than one or two pieces of equipment. (so consistent for and EAR 890, 864, 912, Dynaco ST70, Topping D70s, COS Engineering D1 and D2, a pair of 125w custom tube monoblocks and other equipment I can't recall). This was done over 10 years at various times. It solidified what I already knew but some friends above just wanted to make sure (some have the same equipment and use the same Acme fuses). I really don't care if you agree that this was a "scientific test" or not up to your vaulted standards. It's credible enough for my listeners and me. With the SR fuses, I would recheck a few times up to 150-200 hours.
With inferior mid-fi equipment I used to be fooled/less aware that a change which produced a smoother, less resolving sound that was preferable to a higher resolution but grainier or more distorted sound (digital in particular). Today, with high end equipment, my previously lousy sounding CDs can be tolerable and anything above average is greatly enjoyable. My analog set-up has been excellent since my acquisition of a highly modified Brooks Berdan SME IV arm on a VPI 19-4 table about 1982 and only improved since then. Yes, it's easy to be fooled unless one is naturally drawn to superior sonic perception (not me) or trained over time with ample experience (that's me). There is a well known WBF contributor/high end equipment distributor who considers me acutely aware of acoustic sonic properties and relies on my choices for classical and jazz recordings for his many audio shows. He shows $250,000+ systems using my choices, that's how much he trusts my hearing ability. As to my hearing acuity, last year I tested the limit to 16 Khz of the test with very sensitive hearing to low level sounds. My wife depends on my nighttime hearing her Dexcom blood sugar meter low alarms because she sleeps though them.
Last edited:
We are definitely two different people and have had a few disagreements about audio
Once again you are misrepresenting the scientific method. A method that has already been explained to you at least once on this thread. It’s not “prove it to me or you are wrong.” It’s look at the evidence and let that give us our best understanding of reality. An actual understanding that remains eternally open to new and better evidence as well as better interpretations of evidence.
The rub with many audiophiles is when the evidence tells us something that conflicts with their existing beliefs.
Reality doesn’t care whether or not we like it.
Once again you are making an argument from authority. One that misses a crucial point. It doesn’t matter who you are. You are still human. And like all humans are subject to the human auditory system.
At what point did you study or do research in psychoacoustics? Because *that* is what you are missing here. And nothing in your resume that you just submitted to us would include any real education on that.
Someone who has actually consulted actual scientists who do research in psychoacoustics and someone who has actually read numerous research papers on the subject.
Why try to turn this into a pissing contest. The science is what it is regardless of me personally.
Why haven’t you looked at it?
Which means it was single blind at best. That’s a big problem.
But it’s also not a particularly adequate accounting for your protocols. Which makes it all the more anecdotal. And unreliable.
You personally may be quite content with such levels of unreliability. I’m not. Personally I need verifiable evidence or research that used verifiable evidence.
It’s how science works. And that is the thing. Science works. That’s why it’s the standard for me.
How do you know you all have “superior hearing acuity “? By what objective standard and by what objective measure?
And apparently you do not understand the inherent unreliability in everything you just described.
Unfortunately the veracity of your story is built on personal ego. You use yourself as an objective reference. So long as you are human that is a nonstarter
Is that the only objective basis of your claim to superior hearing acuity? That you can hear an alarm? Not exactly a very high bar.
Thats a pretty good definition of marriage.
Wouldn’t it be nice if @SeagoatLeo could live happily knowing fuses are directional and @Analog Scott didn’t have to convince him he was wrong.
I would only have an issue with fuses and directionality if my father had spent a load of money trying to decide on the issue at great expense, denying me my inheritance. Fortunately he spent the money on women, lots of them. What a relief. “One day all these fuses will be yours (and make sure they point East as they’re directional)” is not something my kids wish to hear.
Quite a few consumers (and a lot of audiofiles) think that the latest scientific discovery, quantum this and graphene that, can have an immediate and positive impact on their audiophile lives. Marketeers are ready and waiting to exploit this human frailty. The classic example is that soon after Pierre and Marie Curie discovered and were able to extract Radium, the marketeers were looking to make money out of it. So you soon had it being used in all sorts of ways, from luminescent watch bezels to toothpaste. These were of little or no benefit, but seemed pretty cool at the time until people started dying, specifically the workers in the factories making the stuff.
This has never stopped. In the 60’s Count Basie went Atomic and Nina Simone waxed about everybody going to the moon. Bowie decided he couldn’t wait for aliens to arrive, so he became one. Glam Rock seemed to revolve about kids wanting to be astronauts.
A doesn’t know more than B about music because A’s cousin once exchanged bodily fluids with Kevin Gray. I just go back to Radium - make sure it’s safe and then believe what you want without paying too much attention to other people’s opinions. And don’t disinherit your kids in the process.
The main reason why lots of people don’t like ASR is because its acolytes are arrogant and condescending, trotting out the same stuff, about folklore, it it ain’t measurable it ain’t there, anecdotes and doubler blind everything.
The irony is that Dr Floyd Toole, who I have a lot of time for, did not believe we know everything and said we should make our mind up by listening. I read one paper by his acolyte Oliver, who ASR types worship, that was so procedurally flawed (and he admitted it in the paper) that it was pure garbage.
The scientific method since ancient times has been to make empirical observations, describe a theory to explain those observations and test the theory to destruction. Until such time as it is disproven, it is likely to remain excepted science. If it is this disproven, someone has to come up with a new theory to explain those observations, or additional observations that disprove the original theory, add infinitum. It is arguable that nothing can be proven with absolute certainty.
When Einstein came up with relativity based purely on mind experiments and mathematics, few academics, let alone the general public, believed it. It was only once Arthur Eddington made observations about 15 years later that proved the theory that Einstein became the most famous scientist in the world. Science is nothing without observation.
What Toole wrote can be applied to the directionality of fuses or anything else.
I’ve got my fingers crossed that I don’t come down with some horrible physical condition, working as much as I do with quantum mechanics. I designed the Super Intelligent Chip many years ago, a quantum mechanical device. The assembly of the chips required me to wear a lab grade chemical gas mask outdoors to avoid wiffing the fumes of Toluene, the toxic liquid that the artificial atoms arrive in from the lab. I would put a drop of the artificial atoms between two shiny metal discs which are sandwiched together leaving a tiny gap around the edge so light can pass in and out.
I don’t agree that words quantum or Graphene are turning audiophile heads. Anymore than words like “directionality,” it’s more of a red flag kind of thing. I was the author of the Definitive Explanation of How the Intelligent Chip Works (2005), referring to the original Intelligent from China introduced at CES 2005. My explanation is quantum mechanical through and through. There’s just no getting around it. The world is changing, there is no longer a clear line separating classic physics from quantum physics.
Last edited:
I have not disassembled this fuse maybe a material mix, I like the sound totally homogeneous with a great bass range. I have the Purple in my tubedac, tubepreamp and tube poweramps.
Using science to sell stuff has been going on for ages, everywhere. From the polysyllabic chemicals in hair shampoo, to the famous "it's biological" punchline used to sell soap power when I was a kid. Being the same age as Kenneth Branagh, he used it recently in his wonderful autobiographical film "Belfast", at which point the audience burst into hysterics (yes, saw it in a real cinema).
From SR website,
“How fuses alter the sound of your system. For over one hundred years people believed electrons flowed like water through a pipe and that once ‘contaminated’ by miles of wire, there was little or nothing that could be done to ‘clean’ the electricity feeding your components. Consider this: the electricity feeding your system’s components first propagates through a single fuse. This is why significant gains in sound quality are possible when you insert an SR Black or Blue Fuses into each of your components.
Today physicists understand electrons don’t flow at all but rather propagate in a wave of energy that moves along a conductor with a multitude of factors that alters this wave at the quantum level. To understand how electricity travels without electrons ever leaving their respective atoms it is helpful to consider the spectator ‘wave’ at a football match. Even though you can clearly see a wave pattern moving from spectator to spectator as fans raise and then lower their hands (without hands jumping from one person to the next), so too does electricity ‘move’ without electrons ever leaving their atoms. At Synergistic Research we’ve isolated key factors that affect how electricity propagates by changing the behavior of electrons through Inductive Quantum Coupling methods we collectively call UEF Tech. In fact, UEF Tech is so powerful even an electrical chain several miles long is fundimentally improved with nothing more than a single fuse engineered with our patented UEF Technology.”
Note to self: Sometimes it’s better not to try to explain things.
“How fuses alter the sound of your system. For over one hundred years people believed electrons flowed like water through a pipe and that once ‘contaminated’ by miles of wire, there was little or nothing that could be done to ‘clean’ the electricity feeding your components. Consider this: the electricity feeding your system’s components first propagates through a single fuse. This is why significant gains in sound quality are possible when you insert an SR Black or Blue Fuses into each of your components.
Today physicists understand electrons don’t flow at all but rather propagate in a wave of energy that moves along a conductor with a multitude of factors that alters this wave at the quantum level. To understand how electricity travels without electrons ever leaving their respective atoms it is helpful to consider the spectator ‘wave’ at a football match. Even though you can clearly see a wave pattern moving from spectator to spectator as fans raise and then lower their hands (without hands jumping from one person to the next), so too does electricity ‘move’ without electrons ever leaving their atoms. At Synergistic Research we’ve isolated key factors that affect how electricity propagates by changing the behavior of electrons through Inductive Quantum Coupling methods we collectively call UEF Tech. In fact, UEF Tech is so powerful even an electrical chain several miles long is fundimentally improved with nothing more than a single fuse engineered with our patented UEF Technology.”
Note to self: Sometimes it’s better not to try to explain things.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
