 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
77.236.0.10
In Reply to: RE: Hah, you're on! posted by Sebrof on April 17, 2010 at 19:56:41
In my original post I tried to explain how, when swapping the fuses back and forth, I ended up choosing one way over the other based on admittedly somewhat vague impressions. It's the case with any changes that I test. The proof comes in living with the sound for several days or more. Your impression is a far broader one and your more likely to identify the character of sound through the difference in mood, electricity, air pressure and so on.
After installing the first fuse the system was still going through burn-in changes of other tweaks I'd done on the power side, but there came a point where I was really happy. A couple weeks later the fuse blew and I put in another. I gave it time to burn in but, for two weeks or more, I was frustrated by certain aspects. I did the second test and, within several hours of settling on one direction, I was mucho happy, and still am mucho happy 2 weeks down the line.
And indeed it was 'almost unlistenable' because of the constant awareness that, not too long before, I had a sound that gave me much more pleasure and far fewer things to fault. Indeed, a case of audio nervosa it was...
I've just repeated what I'd written in the first post, haven't I? Oh well, guess it can't do any harm to try once again to convey that I, and others who have observed the phenomenon, are not batshit crazy. I've just added somewhere else in the thread that there has to be some crazy voodoo going on here, or at least some aspect of the science of electricity that humans have yet to touch on. All I know is that what I'm hearing is real and whether others choose to argue that point is, well, the reason why I get to repeat myself, hooray!
Follow Ups:
"some aspect of the science of electricity that humans have yet to touch on"
Actually I believe it's the science of how our brains perceive the world around us, and it's very well known. No mystery whatsoever. Entirely ignored in some circles.
This is arrogant and grossly unscientific.
I don't know how that could be perceived as being arrogant.
And I can't think of anything less scientific than swapping a fuse and relying on our memory to make a determination (I thought your post was a joke at first).
I just feel that people on these forums should have an open mind. To totally discount a plausible explanation, actually the most plausible, is to me arrogant. "I don't need to confirm what I heard because I know better than people whose profession it is to study how we perceive things" is the definition of a closed mind.
If Japes said that he closed his eyes and swapped and he heard this or that (like jbcortes did) then it might shed a different light. At least Japes recognizes the fact that it could be something else (voodoo, etc.).
Do you know how a a simple fuse is made?
Consider that the small wire internally is soldered to the end caps which are swedged over a glass cylinder. Obviously they can't solder both ends before inserting the end caps over the glass cylinder. So how do they attach the remaining end to the end cap? Do they let gravity simply suspend the end wire and then apply heat? Do they clamp one end to solder? Think that this may possibly account for the difference? After all, many wire manufacturers and the US military soldering manual insist that a good mechanical connection is crucial to good performance.
In insisting that your explanation is the only one, have you fully explored the possibilities? I believe not, other than a most superficial observation. Accusations of closed minds are often made by those with closed ones.
Stu
But Stu that is my point. I never insisted my explanation is the only one. I do get the (strong) feeling that others here believe there is no way for my explanation to be the reason, and that the only explanation is that the sound is actually different. Is it possible it is the fuse? I suppose so. But you can't expect people to believe it just because someone on the internet says so.
If I did something that simply could not be explained the first thing I would do would be to try to confirm my findings. For this "fuse polarity" thing, I'd prove it and document it and shock the scientific community for crying out loud. I'd be famous, I'd have an "effect" named after me like Doppler. I can see it now - The Sebrof fuse polarity effect. EE students would learn about me in school. The helpdesk guy would say "Hmmm...Sounds like the Sebrof effect - Have you checked your fuse polarities?"
You gotta admit it has a nice ring to it.
started the observational nature of modern science. Taking the ancient words that a heavier object would fall faster than a lighter one was disproved by direct observation by him.
Same thing is occurring here. Dismissing another's observation simply because there is no "logic" to it is simply not part of the modern scientific method. The correct method is to determine if you can duplicate the effect. If you can "hear" the effect, then an investigation into the causality should be mounted.
I can hear the effect, although admittedly I do notice the fuse must be run for about 15 minutes before the effect can be replicable ( new Buss fuses being used for the test). The effect is independent of the initial orientation, BTW. One orientation has a sharper quicker response, and the other sounds a bit more "euphonic": softer and smoother. Your response will depend on what you are looking for your musical presentation, of course.
I have taken fuses apart carefully examining them for asymmetry. Nothing comes immediately visible, except the questions on how they are assembled. Still there are many questions unanswered in regards to the methodology and materials employed in the construction.
Like you, I do not believe in voodoo effects. I firmly believe there are many small although often audible causalities which can effect sound. It does take a lot of painstaking research and investigate to investigate every facet, however, and sometimes it is easier to simply to accept the fact a certain action can create change rather than to trace it to the nth degree to get a complete understanding.
One of the most interesting items in this respect was the original Mod Squad Tip Toes: the pointed aluminum cones they made. Long ago I walked into Steve McCormack's little house on the Leucadia beachfront and he showed me this little contraption. Originally designed simply to anchor speakers more securely through a carpet, Steve hands me a n couple sets of these cones and says to try it under audio components claiming that it made a difference to many users. I took them hoe and tried it and indeed it made a difference.
The store I worked for ended up selling many hundreds of these cones and later when I revisited Steve, I asked him how it worked. He shrugged and told me that he had taken them up to Caltech and demonstrated to some of the engineering staff, and when asked for an explanation and was told that a grant for maybe 100,000 dollars could yield an explanation. He politely declined their offer and said the fact that worked for him was good enough.
Check the archives. The effect has been written up about many times by many individuals. You can call it a placebo, but have you actually tried it, or better yet gather a bunch of friends together and take off a cover off an amp and experiment with one orientation and then another. That way you could employ truly blind test.
Stu
Your post is interesting and indeed, measurements published by a German magazine show a little difference in fuse polarity.
What I'm saying (and of course I might be wrong) is that there is no way this can be beard.
You claim you can hear a difference and describe it, fine.
But did you blind-test yourself, and did this blind-test prove you could reliably determine which direction the fuse was inserted, say at least 8 times out of ten?
If so I will keep an open mind. If not - and I trust you'll be honest - I will keep saying, based on my own tests, that 1) a fuse, at least in the power supply, where I tried it, cannot be heard and 2) polarity doesn't matter.
JB
What measurements were published, If I may ask? It is not very scientific to post a study and not refer to original documentation. That's tatamount to hearsay.
Many years ago I posted that there is a hierarchy to tweaks. Most fundamental for my discernment is to achieve a speaker system with good phase and time alignment.
Can you hear phase and time alignment? If you can't, most likely you'll not be able to hear very fine refinements in sound reproduction either. Admittedly, it took me a decade to be able to uncover its insidious effects. I've been to many a CES and sat behind notable reviewers and could tell that they could not hear phasing issues either, so there is no shame in saying that you can't hear it.
The truth is, what could be at best a subtle difference, can take on much larger proportions when certain basic system errors are corrected. An Instamatic camera never needed focusing because it never was in sharp focus to begin with. Use a good camera and lens and you can tell a whole host of errors.
Stu
The study I'm referring to is I think available on Hifi Tuning's website. If it's not, it's easily found as I chanced on it while looking up Silver Star fuses, which I ended up buying.I'm not writing a paper on fuses here, I mentionned it trying to be unbiased about the subject. The study did mention a slight difference in measurement depending on polarity but I don't remember what these measurements where.
I totally accept the existence this difference. I'm saying there's absolutely no way one can hear it. And I'll say it until proven wrong by proper demonstration.
As you say, I might not be able to hear the change a fuse produces. I'm totally fine with that and I accept the possibility. That's why I've asked other to try. But not to try the way they like. Only within the confine of a blind test.
All I can say about my hearing is that when I added Rollerblocks2+ under my cd player last week, I heard a very significant and positive difference. I'm suspecting if I can hear little balls under a component I would hear a fuse. Maybe I'm wrong.
So once more, I'll ask the question: did you validate your conclusions with a proper blind test? Within the context of this blind test, could you reliably identify an audiophile fuse? Could you reliably identify its polarity?
As far as I'm concerned, audiophile fuses are up there with voodoo-ish solutions, only topped by Acoustic Systems resonators, which are celebrated all over the net by reviewers.
None of them having done a blind test, at least not one they mention.
JB
Edits: 04/19/10 04/19/10
In the world of smells, the best "noses" can detect what amounts to a few parts per trillion, as determined by spectrographic analysis of a cubic volume of air. Usually human perception of scents is considered one of the weakest of the human senses. What would parts per trillion translate in terms of sound to such things as distortion, etc.?
So now, we come to that "slight" difference in measurement. I doubt if that magazine uses something like the best Rhode and Swartz test units. Their real time analyzer costs over 6 digits and there are maybe 6 to 8 units in existence worldwide ( US bureau of standards, NASA, and the military have one apiece). So in terms of the parts per trillion that a human, a bit skilled, nose can detect,l what equivalent is that "slight" difference. Accuracy to 6 decimal places is only to the millionth degree.
Stu
When you say "...did you validate your conclusion with a proper blind test" and "voodoo-ish solutions" is where I sharply disagree. It is fine, of course, for you to impose a blind test on yourself (incidentally, did you on the Rollerblocks, which I found of no value?), but you have no right to impose it on others. No one has designated you as the scam police.
I have tried many tweaks that I thought had minor benefit, some that do major harm, and some that I would not do without. But I am not to judge what others prefer. Otherwise I would say that 99 percent are using awful speakers or cannot hear.
Hi,You misunderstand my point here.
I'm not the scam police. I don't even care if people spend millions on audiophile fuses, it's good for the economy.
But this forum is a place for sharing, and I thought it would be useful for people to submit themselves to a simple test. Your resistance to it, and other's, actually speaks volume. What's the risk, what's the downside of a blind test? We would all learn from it. Either I'm wrong or you are. I've said and repeated it: if I'm wrong, then fine.
Re. the Rollerblocks, you're totally right, I make no exception and I should test myself. Except it's much more of a hassle, I would need somebody to help me and it would be time-consuming.
The beauty with this fuse business is that it can be done on one's own. I see NO REASON not to do it, really.
Now if you can't be bothered, if you're looking for peace of mind by having these fuses in, then it's totally fine.
But saying "I hear a difference" doesn't mean anything if you haven't placed a bit more of a challenge on yourself.
JB
Edits: 04/19/10
a
Stu, Great post.
Do you believe that it is possible that what the OP (and you in your example) heard may not have been real?
I have heard improvements when tweaking and changing things, only to find (sometimes) that I could not duplicate the effect.
"Dismissing another's observation simply because there is no "logic" to it is simply not part of the modern scientific method. The correct method is to determine if you can duplicate the effect." This is what's missing. Nobody is confirming except the one poster who said he heard a difference, only to find that he did not.
Regarding the archives - Go to the ghost forum or the UFO forum and I'm sure you'll find that "The effect (the haunting, the abduction, whatever) has been written up about many times by many individuals." Don't mean it's true.
Regarding "You can call it a placebo, but have you actually tried it, or better yet gather a bunch of friends together and take off a cover off an amp and experiment with one orientation and then another." (I assume that you mean a blind test) No I haven't. But as far as I can tell, nobody that believes the fuse has polarity (or that fuses make any difference whatsoever) has done it either. If someone had written that they did this and described the results of the blind test it would give the thing at least a little credibility. To say you changed the orientation of a fuse and the sound changed is so totally incredible and completely disregards what we know about how people perceive the world around them, not to mention electronics.
Is it possible that fuse orientation makes a difference. I guess. But I'm not going to believe it just because some dude, or 100 dudes, write it on the internet with absolutely nothing to back up what they're saying.
you claim to be scientific. You are applying the exact same principles the Church elders held back in Galileo's day, proclaiming the effect impossible without bothering to check it yourself. You have already come to a conclusion without bothering to do the experimentation. That is simply adhering to hearsay and is most definitely not scientific in any way.
There are many other possibilities including the grain of the fusible material, all of which have a rational explanation. I am not claiming any voodoo effect, but simply pointing out simple rational explanations. Neither am I saying that any possibilities I have raised may totally define the issue. The simple fact that there may be a factor which provides room for investigation. (Don't believe in metal grain structure?, ask any knife maker or sheet metal worker).
It is entirely your prerogative to believe or not to believe anything posted on the internet. When it is stated as an opinion, I have absolutely no quibble about your statement. I find it rather preposterous on your part to state your position as a fact, however, when you have not even bothered to try it nor have you even bothered to explore any rational explanations.
Case in point, I very rarely drink so I can not distinguish between various wines. My inability to distinguish between various bottles does not mean that I do not believe anyone else can, and those who claim to be able to distinguish differences are simply liars and deluding themselves (or drunkards, and have had their senses impaired). So while I can not readily detect differences, the fact that 100s if not 1000s can detect differences does not mean that I do not believe that they exist.
The fact that I can not pitch in a major league setting does not mean that others can not either. The fact is that hearing acuity can vary significantly among human individuals much as any specific physical ability or sensory perception. I would not put down any individual's perception unless I have tried it myself and even then may chalk it up to my own inexperience and lack of practice rather than applying my own limited experience to be the measure of every one else.
In the case of the fuses, I went out and purchased a box of five fuses of the same value to experiment with with a bunch of friends. The owner of the system initially could not hear any difference. The four others present could hear a difference. Three proclaimed the difference definitely noticeable, while the other thought the difference slight. we went through several fuses in that box and came to same conclusion.
That fact is, I had noticed fuses made a difference way back in 1984 or thereabouts. PS Audio had just come out with their big 200 watt amplifier with solid copper buss bars and included special gold plated fuses which had a most peculiar lighting bolt shaped fusible element. Replacement of those B plus fuses created a distinct imbalance in sound if only one channel was changed. It was easy to realize the difference in construction was the cause. (Those fuses are still made, BTW, MTX series IIRC).
Your opinion is yours and you have every right to it. Just please do not be so dogmatic and take the view point of the "elders" in the 16th century where they believed so much in the mental process that they never bothered with experimentation.
Stu
If not, read about it here:
http://scienceblogs.com/cortex/2007/11/the_subjectivity_of_wine.php
It'll show you how much your brain will influence your perception. If wine experts can think the exact same wine served in two different bottles is totally different, then you will do exactly the same with fuses. You will be influenced by your knowledge of which fuse you're using and which way you're using it. Your brain doesn't work any differently from mine or those wine experts'.
No matter how one spins it, there is NO WAY one can reliably say fuses have any effect whatsoever if one knows which fuse they're using, and which direction it's been inserted.
Do it blindly and let's see what the results are. As I said, maybe I'm wrong. I just want to be proved I am as opposed to told.
JB
PS: By the way we don't disagree on everything. On top of my list of tweaks is vibration control, which I think is not even a tweak but should be mandatory...
As stated I took a box of brand new fuses and changed the orientation. Did this with two randomly selected fuses from the new box as well as experimenting with the already installed fuse. The observers present could not tell if I had simply removed the fuse and replaced it the same orientation, which I incidentally did, simply to test the hypothesis that the mere removal of the fuse might in some way be cleaning off the contacts from the friction of the removal and thus affecting the sound. The three who could readily distinguish the differences could do so almost immediately every time I changed the orientation. This was in the preamp as the system owner had mono block amps making it more difficult to set up the experiment.
To sum up, the mere fact that you can find studies pointing out that test subjects can be fooled can also be taken the other way: an intellectual block can also create the lack of perception. Logic dictates that the inverse can also be true.
Thus any conclusion drawn without personal experience is void. Taking the stance that I did not do an experiment to your standards and satisfaction, merely points that a simple ten minute experiment is simply too complex for you to try. That in this case is sheer inanity.
To quote Yehudi Menuhin in "The Music of Man" on playing a Stradivarius: "The slightest excess or miscalculation is heard immediately by the player, and if he strays only a shade further off it will be noticed by the audience." Does that mean if the audience doesn't hear any difference, that the sound change does not exist?
When you purchased your roller blocks did you demand scientific proof that a change was effected before purchasing the set? Did the manufacturer present numerical scientific data that the sound wave had indeed changed? I do not believe such data exist, and yet you own a set.
Here is something very easily checked on your own in the comfort of your home and the cost is essentially zero and yet, like others you seem to be afraid of even simply spending a few minutes of trial. I find that refusal to try a simple idea rather perplexing. Is it because it is so cheap, and no large sums of money are being demanded that you refuse? Maybe its like the experiment with the same wine in two different bottles here: without spending money or the perception of spending it, you can not conceive that anything free could make a difference.
Too bad: its such a simple thing to do on your own.
Stu
I'd just like to point out I've answered your question re. Rollerblocks in other posts on this thread. I won't repeat myself. I'll just say that: if you think running a blind test on one's own with Rollerblocks is "very easily checked" and "a few minutes of trial", you're seriously delusional.
If I could I would blind-test myself on them, I apply the same rule to EVERYTHING I try. I said they made a huge difference to me, but until I can prove it with a blind test, that assertion is just subjective talk, virtually worthless.
I've made my point on the issue of audiophile fuses (and their "polarity"). People interested in the debate can read your posts and mine, and deduce what they want from my insistence on blind tests and your insistence on avoiding them.
One thing I'll give you is you're a very smooth talker. A very good quality when one has to explain how he can hear a fuse inserted between the power station and the speakers finally turning the electricity into sound... :))
Ciao!
JB
what the issue is unless you don't have friends. I have used roller blocks, I have used far more ungainly feet systems,including the Simply physics stack,. and have had friends over for true blind testing, But the point is moot as I was really referring to the fuse testing procedure: Being relatively small it is quite easy to perform a blind test and best yet it involves no cost to you other than the time: that's zero cost, nada, absolutely free, but you and the others would rather perform an intellectual exercise rather than to take 15 minutes to try it. My point was that you have nothing to lose in trying it. Frankly I do not believe why anyone should be afraid to try it, unless you want to flip the fuses with the power on.
As to the audibility of a fuse in your power line, I assure you that taking it out without replacement will most definitely make a sonic impact. In fact I have experimented with bypassing the fuses completely which gives the best benefit sonically.
Again consider that a fuse is simply a cheap meltable wire which can barely handle the the current rating it is rated at. It has to build up enough heat to break the connection when the current rating is exceeded, which means the fusible link can barely conduct the current it is rated for. It is the choke point by its very function and nature for your entire power supply.
Stu
Hi Stu,I did test myself with the fuse, that's the point. And yes I have friends, but none who have the slightest interest in audio (at least not where I live), which is exactly why I was asking people here if they could try on their own. I'm just doing here what I would do with friends! Asking "can you hear a difference" within more objective circumstances.
My problem is that most people on forums and in reviews claim they can hear a difference. And I believe that: their brain creates it. What I do not believe is that this difference can be heard in a blind test, and that's why I place such an importance on them. "Thence cometh quiet to the mind", as Roger Bacon would've said!
Anyway, if I understand correctly, you did run a blind test with friends then? You changed the fuse orientation and they identified it correctly, several times in a row, with a negligible margin of error?
If so then you did what I was suggesting and I'll keep an open mind about fuses.
If not I'll stick to my views.
JB
Edits: 04/19/10 04/19/10 04/20/10
I do not consider myself to be a scientist, but these were the following factors we checked in our testing on the orientation of fuses. Bear in mind, we initially experimented using a preamp as the system owner had mono block amps increasing the time necessary for the testing.1. Determine if the removal of the unit's cover affected the sound. It did: removal of the aluminum cover definitely increased the upper frequency content, easily checked by simply replacing the cover without even securing the lid with the screws. Capacitance from the metal cover with the parallel circuit board is the speculation. Later fabricating a plexiglass cover gave the same benefits and dust control.
2. Simple removal of the existing fuse and replacement in the same orientation to check if the act of removal was in some way "cleaning" the fuse holder contacts. No differences were heard.
3. Listening for audible change when the existing fuse was reoriented ( majority heard a change).
4. Checking out a fuse from a new unused box. This happened to be a different brand of fuses, BTW. Differences were heard by the majority, and the orientation was carefully noted. This involved several changes in orientation and the listeners could not see which orientation was involved.
5. Auditioning was further carried forward with a second fuse from the same new box. Differences were noted and the preferred orientation was confirmed to be the same as the first new fuse inserted.
6. Testing then moved to the amplifiers. A quick initial check revealed one fuse to be oriented one way in one amp and reversed in the other. The fuses used were the same brand we had purchased for testing in the preamp. Armed with the knowledge gained from testing the preamp, we reversed the fuse which was not in our preferred orientation. Center focus increased immediately, imaging improved, and soundstaging took on solidity which the system owner, who initially did NOT hear any differences in fuse orientation, commented upon immediately.
7. new fuses were inserted in the amps and the same conclusion was reached as with the preamp again through various swapping of the fuse orientation.
8. I should point out we also ran the preamp fuses for 30 minutes in different orientations after initial testing to determine if break in was not a factor. Maybe half an hour is not enough, though. Since we had a box of five fuses we also started the testing with the fuses in different orientations to make sure that the initial power on did not somehow "condition" the fuse.
But then you are right: The listener's brain ultimately creates all sound perceived. It also is responsible for not recognizing sounds, also. Oliver Sachs has written several books commenting and making observations of the brain ear interface (Musicophilia is one book I highly recommend).
In taking the position that the brain is responsible for misinformation, ie., that any sonic differences are psychosomatic, if you prefer, then by those terms, measurements are totally useless and irrelevant, because every listener's brain would be slightly different. It wouldn't matter that distortion is measured over 10 percent, as some brains may not recognize it.
The value of a Stradivarius should drop to the level of a Chinese made student violin, because I very seriously doubt if even 1 per cent of the average population can hear the difference using a DBT. Reports of humans with perfect pitch must necessarily be a lie and a hoax by your definition unless each person individually claiming such abilities are rigorously and completely "scientifically" tested, as any such claim must be discounted.
There is no doubt that the brain can be fooled. We see it in optical illusions all the time. At the same time, we know of such conditions as colorblindness and it has been determined that the colors involved can vary from a red green blindness to a state where the viewer only sees black and white ( again read Sach's book he Island of the Colorblind). If you are colorblind, and roughly 10 percent of the male population suffers from it, you can rightly make the claim that color perception is purely a state of mind ( which it really is), and that the colors you can not perceive do not truly exist( which it truly does for yourself).
Be careful of world you create. Imposition of your individual perception may work for yourself, but necessarily for others.It has been my experience that hearing, in particular, requires years, if not decades of training (I'm an old man). Taking music courses in high School and college convinced me of that. Aural training was one of the most difficult classes I ever took, but there were students in the class with near perfect pitch who breezed through the curriculum. My dreams of being a music major was dashed by my poor performance in that class. What is fascinating, though, is that I had practiced listening even though I had switched majors and in the course of over a decade or so my hearing acuity increased tremendously, to the point where my high school teacher was impressed that I could hear certain things he had missed in listening sessions (in high school, we had gone to a local audio store to audition speakers, and on one pair, he exclaimed that the G above high C was way too prominent: knowing the techs at that store, they brought a real time analyzer and did a frequency sweep, and sure enough, there was peak at that frequency level).
It is NO sin not to be able to hear certain aspects of music. The sin is the assumption that if you don't hear it, then it is patently false.Stu
Edits: 04/21/10
I'm not saying "if I don't hear it doesn't exist". I'm saying, "make me believe it does".You are also putting words in my mouth. I never said the brain could not be trusted at all. I said the elements that are likely to influence it should be as limited as possible. In blind-testing fuses, the only thing that influences the brain is the fact that you are blind-testing it , i.e maybe making it work slightly differently. But at least other factors have all been ruled out. Which I why I will mostly rely on blind-tests in this hobby, for the most controversial items like fuses.
If you tell me that people were able to consistently determine the orientation of a fuse without knowing which way it was inserted, I have no reason to doubt you and the test you did, and I'll keep an open, if skeptical, mind about the matter. That's all I've been banging about.
JB
Edits: 04/21/10 04/21/10
Now consider this tweak, as it may: totally free. Why would any sane person spend a lot of time and money to irrevocably "prove" that it exists. What is in it monetarily to justify spending a large amount of time, money, and investigative effort to prove something that you have absolutely nothing to gain from?
Consider that in other posts, I have pointed out that there are differences in fuses. Some details in construction are very obvious and so are the time ratings in the case of Slow blow fuses, so obviously there are differences in how the overload currents are handled. Taking the inverse of your attitude, prove to me that these differences can not alter the current being passed through them and thus affecting sound quality.
Stu
Stu
you're just transposing your experience onto everyone else's. I believe the testing I had conducted was far more rigorous than most experimenters. The fact that I had four other listeners other than myself speaks volumes, particularly when I had already stated one could not hear differences till the very end and another who could hear differences, thought them negligible.
Stu
"you're just transposing your experience onto everyone else's"
Of course I am, Stu.
But then so are you. I can produce as many friends who will swear there is no difference then you can show me people who said there were in your own test.
In any case, as I said above, I consider your test and methodology satisfying, at least enough to make me keep an open mind on the matter.
JB
a
nt
Otherwise, he is full of shit.
Norm let me ask you this:
A co-worker comes to work and tells you that the old addage about a watched pot is true, that he stared at a pot of water and it took way longer for it to boil. He didn't have a timer, didn't boil a pot and not look and then boil a pot and look, nothing like that. What would you do with that information?
I would probably say something like it may have seemed that it took longer only because you were standing there looking at it.
I guess (from your posts) that you would call anybody that didn't agree with him arrogant and full of it.
And btw: I've been posting on these forums for a long time and have never run into anyone with absolutely no information to back their position, nor anyone so quick to call people names and get personal.
Have a nice day, I'm out.
I have spent too much time in research methods teaching and in critiquing research to accept the "everyone knows" argument.
I am strongly of the opinion that your attitude is quite unscientific and hurtful of improving our understanding of what can be done to make audio reproduction better. If direction of a fuse seems to matter and is unexplained by what we know, then the charge is to account for it, not to say that those hearing it are delusional.
I'm sorry to rock your boat, but you deserved it.
... is that nobody in this post has done the most basic thing to back their claims or impressions: a blind test.So it's actually your attitude which I find unscientific, and Sebrof's approach the right one.
Science is observation and THEN proof through repeatable experiments. When I listened to the fuse knowing which one it was, I heard a difference.
When I did it in a blind-test, I couldn't hear any difference. At all. Unless somebody does the same experience and comes up with conclusive results showing the opposite, I will keep considering "audiophile" fuses are a waste of time and money.
No I do not believe we know everything about nature's law and as I said, I'm ready to change my mind. But I do find interesting that people who believe in the "sound of fuses" are actually unable or unwilling to back up their claims by the most basic means available to us, a blind test.
Now if you tell me fuses (or even audio in general) are a religion or something, I'll stop insisting on blind tests. But I thought we were talking about science.
JB
Edits: 04/19/10 04/19/10 04/19/10 04/19/10
I like your definition of blind tests rather than the same/different definition used in some psychology research and most double blind tests in audio.
However, what I object to his Sebrof's rejection without any listening that there can be no impact of fuse direction, which personally I know and many of my friends know is not true. His attitude is what is unscientific, namely that observations can be ignored as "we know what is true."
"Hearing" a difference doesn't mean s*** to me. Of course you hear a difference. I heard a difference too before submitting myself to a blind test. You like research? Wine tasters in the Brochet experiment, presented with the same wine in two bottles (one expensive-looking, one cheap-looking), tasted two totally different ones when it was one. WINE EXPERTS!!!!And sure enough, my definition of a blind test is a loose one in this case and I never pretended it was anything else.
The blind test I offer, nevertheless, is really easy to realize (although considering the number of people who've done it, one wouldn't think so). Plus on such a simple issue, there really is no need to over-complicate things.
Test yourself say 10 times, alternating stock fuse and audiophile fuse.
Write down which one is which on a piece of paper. Then see how many times out of ten you get it right.If you make it to 8, then we'll discuss fuse "polarity". If the difference is real, 2 off is already generous.
The truth is, when you look at your little piece of paper, you'll realize you're far off the count... And if you're not, well then I will have learnt something.
JB
PS: on another cynical note, I find it interesting that Hifi Tuning, who's always declared fuses are not directional, suddenly discovered they were! Lol. Come on guys.
Edits: 04/19/10 04/19/10 04/19/10
One of the basic principles of scientific research in hypothesis testing is that your measures have to validly assess the concept to be tested. Other researchers may question the validity of your measure. I have on several occasions participated in double blind tests. Once it was a valid test where we listened to several preamps and did our own rankings. I did not agree with the most commonly highest ranking unit. Afterwards, I borrowed the highest ranking unit for an extended listening. I still did not like it. I have no objection to such blind tests, but also see no value in them.
The other was a same/different testing. I could not accurately tell whether it was the same or different. Afterwards, I listened to the two amps for an extended listening where I still did not know which was which. I greatly preferred one. My conclusion here is that 30 sec. same/different testing is invalid.
Finally, you say if I guess right 7 or 8 times in 10, "we'll discuss fuse "polarity"! Go to hell! You have no basis for such a statement.
As posted somewhere above, I recommended to take three days if needed before changing the fuse. I never told you to do it in 30 seconds.Your anger-fuelled reaction, I'm afraid, is not helping the cause of the poor audiophile fuse!
To a lot of people the word "blind test" is anathema and I understand only too well why that is... I would also like to add, re. methodology of testing, that one of most significant factors of distortion in a blind test is, to me, stress. By doing this at home, the way one wants, stress is as removed from the equation as it can be. The simple blind test I suggest is perfectly valid and a good start. There's nothing else at stake than to try to understand how a component and/or our brain work. It doesn't matter who's right or wrong, it's not a competition.
These fuses are not a huge amount of money so prospective readers, by all means try them, just be intellectually honest and try to reduce subjectivity to a minimum.
I stand firmly in the camp of those who think so-called audiophile fuses are a total waste of time and money. But I will change my mind if a brave soul from the other camp has the intellectual honesty to test himself and comes up with different conclusions. I really, really don't see how that can be seen as unreasonnable but hey, seems there's some weird thinking going on in the other camp...
Any volunteers?
JB
Edits: 04/19/10
You don't yet understand why I find them invalid, but the concept of validity is one of the most difficult to teach in research design.
I think you would also be best served by studying selective perception and other studies of what is wrongfully called the placebo effect here. It works both ways, if you are a person who thinks "..audiophile fuses are a total waste of time and money" you will tend to not hear their benefit.
I must admit that I don't understand why those so interested in blind tests are so proselytizing. Not many have any concern with them. Furthermore I don't know why any of you weird guys think anyone owes you "proof" that they find x improves the sound. You made you God?
Live long and prosper!
You still fail to explain why the blind test I suggest, which I would just call common sense, is flawed or not a good start.For your information, I wasn't biased against fuses when I bought my Silver Star! I don't have the luxury of spending $40 just to prove I'm right. I bought it because I thought it'd work. I thought I heard something, until I did a blind test.
You don't want to run a simple test, fine. Enjoy your fuse and its "sound". Let's not wonder how from the power station to the speakers that turn your electricity into sound, your fuse can be "heard".
JB
Edits: 04/19/10 04/20/10
a
Not ignored by me at least. Perceptions are a fascinating subject and something I wrestle with all the time to try to get through to the objective truth. I've got better at it with practice. The method is a most important life lesson and is what makes this hobby particularly 'deep', in my view.
Edits: 04/18/10 04/18/10
Agreed. I just read a book titled This is your brain on music. Fascinating book that talks about the history and evolution of music, music in different cultures, how our brains perceive music, stuff like that. I highly recommend it. iTunes also has the audio book for $10.
Post a Followup:
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
