Believers VS. nonbelievers???? GEEzzzzz

I could not agree more Elizabeth. As I have stated in postings here, my system will never be finished. Once we close our minds to the possibility that something might bring improvement, and never even give it a try, we cease to progress. I think that most of the people that visit here are sincerely looking for knowledgable responses from members who have tested a particular item or idea, and can share that experience. Asking questions is never dumb, what is dumb is to loose the excitement of exploring and adventure that a child has. Age does not have to diminish this joy, sharing ideas helps keep your own mind open to discovery, and in this way, the reward works both ways.

Stevemj, your statement concerning audiophile fuses is a subject that was covered here at Audiogon a few months ago. I myself posted a comment that the materials used in mass production fuses certainly DO represent a weak link in the electrical supply chain. If an audiophile fuse were to be offered, with (say) OFC copper ends and fuse element, I think it would be very successful. I am in good company in thinking that the fuse is an important component. Just this month, I received a $10,000.00 preamp from one of the most respected manufacturers in high end audio. Inside were specific instructions regarding the factory installed fuse provided by the head engineer. I was to neither reverse the position, or wipe off the treatment that had been applied to it. This is the second time in less than a year where an audio engineer has given this EXACT advise concerning fuses. In each case, the manufacturer had conducted listening tests to determine the correct orientation and treatment of the fuse. Considering the value of these engineers time, I sincerely doubt that they would waste their effort on such a project, if did not result in an improvement in performance. As far as your idea about simply gold plating an ordinary fuse. This would most likely provide reduced performance (dissimilar metals) when compared to a super clean stock fuse. It is possible that the performance could reverse (between these two) in the very long term, if the oxidation became more of a problem that the detriment of plating. I can tell from your many posts that you are a true Audiogon non believer when it comes to interconnect and speaker wire. Did you ever consider my suggestion to experiment for yourself? Used product is very little risk, worst case is you sell it for same or near what you paid. Best case is that you learn that there is a difference, and you gain the personal satisfaction of making better music from your system.

[email protected], the explanation given to me concerning the scientific theory of the "green pen" treatment is as follows. The CD, while spinning does not always lie absolutely flat and perfect. This causes some deflection to the beam of the reader laser (scattering of an otherwise precise beam). The green marker is the opposite color of the laser, and therefore is more efficient at absorbing the scattered beam than the reflective silver finish of the disk. I suspect that the performance gains of the green treatment vary wildly, depending on the manufacturer and condition of the CD, the design and type of transport, and possibly even the contractor who provided the laser itself. I hope this takes out the Voodoo. It makes perfect sense that if you can reduce laser scatter, there will be fewer errors for the circuit to have to deal with. I heard the performance gain long before I knew of this explanation, but I am the type of person who does not need an explanation to enjoy the tweak. I ask years later at a CES show, more out of curiosity than anything else. Best to you, good listening!

If all of the CD's and CD ROMs manufactured were totally green, the reflective surface would be significantly reduced, and the ability of the laser to accurately pick up, would be diminished. Another example would be a solid colored filter on the lens of a camera reducing the efficiency of the films ability to record light. Solid green would make no sense, especially when the jitter reduction provided by a small amount of green on the edges of CD's is already debated. In other words, most systems would be much worse with the totally green treatment than what is the standard reflective color.

Asking why all CD's and CD ROMs don't come with green rims is like asking why LP manufacturers never properly cleaned and treated their products prior to shipping. There would certainly be an audible difference, but in what percentage of the pubic would it be perceived or appreciated? Most companies that manufacturer such goods delight in saving even a half a cent in production. This multiplied by hundreds of millions of copies comes out to be significant. Quality of reproduction has never been the goal of music producing companies, it the cash that is the bottom line. As far as the green pen being overpriced at $15.00, yes if probably is. In fact there were several discussions on line at one time, listing the proper color green pen produced for artists available at office supply stores. They were only about a dollar or so, and were supposed to produce the same results. Why then did I choose to pay the additional $12.00? Because the pen designed for audio was formulated so it could be reversed. The green could be removed with warm soapy water, returning the CD to it's original state, unharmed. If the office supply version damaged even one CD, that had to be replaced, the savings would evaporate. Now last, why would you want to do this treatment? My guess is that you would not, as you seem to be more concerned with the philosophy and science of why this does or does not work, as opposed to looking for ways to improve on our very flawed music producing systems. I defend your right to believe as you do, but do not understand why you are so opposed to something that could help, for so little investment. I guess it boils down to the passion and interest level in the whole thing.

I don't know why tubes and especially SET's are exempt from Jostler's generalized description of all amps sounding the same, but I am pleased that the exception was made. I will agree that similar amp designs sound "somewhat" alike, provided they are constructed with equal care, parts, circuit design techniques and are of near identical power. Unfortunately there are almost an unlimited number of problems that every amplifier must face in a high end system that can, and do make even that statement an exception. These problems substantially effect the sound, and ultimately, what pleases the listener. Just the very tip of this issue in broad terms are; The amps ability to drive non linear loads with a varying impedance. Ability and speed to electrically recover after driving such a load. Ability to reject or be nearly unaffected by a multitude of outside sources such as RF, EMI, brown downs, power surges, electrical noise, digital signals ( on AC from your electric company ), household appliances, and all the ground planes in the system and the house. If this sounds complicated, you are right. It is only a fraction of the reasons well informed and intelligent audiophiles argue about which amp sounds right in their system. Often the conclusion of a well conducted test in two locations with similar equipment will come to two completely different ends. I believe that very often, if the two testers could visit each others location, there may not be any disagreement about the test result in THAT system and THAT location. I believe that most of us are after similar high quality results. The enormous number of factors that effect the result of our tests are so many and so varied, that only listening with the intention of finding the best compromise will resolve the problem. Of course there are the issues of peripherals as well. This includes, but not limited to, all the variables of isolation, Interconnect and speaker cables, room dimensions, acoustics, and software. To illustrate my point. I could give at least six names of Audiogon members, who I have met in person after I began postings at Audiogon. Each have visited my home and listened to my system. Each one of them will tell you that the difference of removing even one isolation foot, changing one single wire or removing one weight off the top of a piece of equipment, is so big that it can be heard without any further discussion or tests. I know Jostler3 will not believe this, and I would be ( honestly!) pleased for he or she to come and listen at my home. I cannot predict in advance what combination of removing and replacing parts in my system would provide the most enjoyable tonal balance of music for this specific visitor, but I can absolutely guarantee that the difference will be so obvious, that there will be no doubt that the change was made. Most posters will probably have no problem understanding my assertions, because they have experienced similar results in their own system. The problem with scientific and numerical argument lies in the fact that the conclusions are correct, only if every minute possible variation can be considered in the test. I do not believe that anyone here has the resources to test in such a manner, which leaves the human ear as the only consistent and reliable tool. After all, it is what must live with your final decision in the end, and it will eventually reveal any mistakes you make that are based on prejudice, short term conclusions, or the numbers that science uses to describe only a single test situation.

[email protected], I have a question, and it is not intended to be a jab at you. You seem to like to quote data, so for the record, what equipment do you use in your own system. Do you have a substantial investment, making an effort to retrieve all the music possible? Or do you have a very simple system?

I had a similar experience as Ken, I too was able to hear an improvement with the Tice Clock. Later on, I replaced the clock with an 8 pack of Quiet Line filters from Audioprism for less money, and better results. I really don't think the effect of the clock or the Audioprism filters are any more bizarre than being able to hear shutting off the fluorescent display on certain CD transports, or unplugging some pieces of electronics that have a standby circuit and/or a remote control. All electrical devices plugged into power outlets cause noise to some degree, whether it is clearly and distinctly audible, varies drastically from system to system. Whatever was in the Tice clock effected the noise on the AC line, much like the Audioprism shunt filters. The simple reason the clock only had to be in the same room, was that in a typical home, there are multiple devices sharing various outlets in the room. The clock did not "send out" any magic, it effected the noise on the electrical service by being plugged directly into the AC. Now for something that I found difficult to believe. I recently visited a high end manufacturer, and in his sound room was a black box, about the size of two shoe boxes, plugged into the wall by a large AC cable. I ask what it did, and the answer was that it drastically reduced the electric bill. This box somehow causes the meter to read more in favor of the customer, even though it consumed power of its own. This to me is just as bizarre as the clock, but knowing this guy, I am certain the story is true. He says it amounts to over $150.00 savings a month, and since the readings are done by the power company, I'm certain that it is not his imagination at work.