I can only speak for myself. In my case, in a thread like this, what drives me is to help get all the facts out on the table so people can make their own educated decisions. Well said, Mapman. I would add that, IMO, some progress has been made to that end. Facts have been found, experiences have been shared, and experiments have been conducted. For a discussion about a controversial tweak, I would say that this thread is well above average in its substantive content. As for its non-substantive content, my distinct impression is that the majority of the acrimony has not originated from the Skeptics. Bryon |
Contrariwise, if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic. -Lewis Carroll |
06-06-12: Talk2me
Any professional comparison reviews? My fuse experiment, described here, gave me an opportunity to compare fuses. At this point, I've tried 4 types of fuses in 3 pieces of equipment... Meridian preamp: stock, Hifi Tuning Silverstar, Isoclean Pass amp: stock, Hifi Tuning Silverstar, Furutech Parasound Halo amp: stock, Furutech In ONE case I heard a similarity between two fuses of the same type when used in two different pieces of equipment, and that was the Hifi Tuning Silverstars. When installed in the Meridian preamp and the Pass amp, the Silverstars had the result of making things sound "phasey," as I described in my experiment. Having said that, I suspect that the audible characteristics of fuses are largely extrinsic, and therefore variable from component to component and system to system. Admittedly, that is a speculation. Bryon |
06-06-12: Tbg
Bryoncunningham, I admire your eagerness but think this is largely fruitless as there are too many fuses and too many components.
06-06-12: Geoffkait
Let's say an average system contains 7 fuses. Now, I suspect there are some statisticians here who can do the calculation for how many tests would be required for 7 types of fuses and 7 fuse installations. And how long it would take. A hundred years? I see. So I'm wasting my time experimenting with fuses. I wish I had thought of that. Wait a second. Aren't you the same guys who said... 05-12-12: Tbg
These pseudo-scientists fail to disprove what observations tell them-there is a difference in fuses. Rather than a priori refusals they should GET TO WORK finding what accounts for the differences.
05-16-12: Tbg
Hopefully, there are some who will dismiss the rhetoric and TRY DIFFERENT FUSES and fuse direction.
05-20-12: Tbg
To not offend doubters' sensibilities, I will just say that such an A/B TESTING TO GET IT RIGHT is absolutely necessary.
04-28-12: Geoffkait
Don't you often find a Skeptic to be someone who pontificates from the comfort of an easy chair but who rarely, if ever, GETS DOWN TO BUSINESS AND ACTUALLY INVESTIGATES the object of his pontification?
05-12-12: Geoffkait
Isn't the scientific method, ESPECIALLY INVESTIGATION, the underlying requirement for arriving at the truth?
05-12-12: Geoffkait
As a skeptic, don't you think truth would be better served by ACTUAL INVESTIGATION rather that idle speculation from the comfort of your Barko Lounger? So let me get this straight... 1. You guys say that people's opinions matter only if they experiment with fuses. 2. I experiment with fuses. 3. You guys say that it is a waste of time to experiment with fuses. Did I miss something? Let me check... No, I didn't. Can we just start referring to your position as The Double Bind? Gotta go. My Viagra is kicking in. Bryon |
06-08-12: Geoffkait
Strawman argument alert. You want to go down this road again? How many times are you going to suggest that Im strawmanning you? You have a bit of a fixation, don't you think? So far youve failed to substantiate ANY of your strawmanning accusations. And in an inspired but inadvertent act of irony, the posts in which you accuse me of strawmanning invariably contain a straw man OF ME. I've demonstrated that several times already. You really want to go through it again? I suppose you like the ride. Ok, here we go
When you suggested that I was strawmanning you, it was in reference to my comment that
You guys say it is a waste of time to experiment with fuses. I wrote that in direct response Tbg's comment that... 06-06-12: Tbg
Bryoncunningham, I admire your eagerness but think this is LARGELY FRUITLESS as there are too many fuses and too many components. The phrase "largely fruitless" is of course a metaphor. Its synonymous with another metaphor
a waste of time. So when I said that Tbgs comment amounted to saying that it's a waste of time to experiment with fuses, I was not strawmanning him. I was summarizing him. Q.E.D. That leaves me to address whether I was strawmanning you. Lets retrace our steps again. Tbg said that the reason I was wasting my time was that... ...there are TOO MANY fuses and too many components. In the very next post on the thread, you said... 06-06-12: Geoffkait
Let's see, HOW MANY aftermarket fuses are there...? Tbg says "too many fuses" and you say "how many fuses?" Anyone with a passing familiarity with conversational English would think that you were picking up where Tbg left off. With that in mind, you go on to say... Let's say an average system contains 7 fuses. Now, I suspect there are some statisticians here who can do the calculation for how many tests would be required for 7 types of fuses and 7 fuse installations. And how long it would take. A hundred years? If that doesnt suggest that the comparative testing of fuses is a waste of time, then I need an MRI of my left temporal lobe to make sure that my language comprehension is still in tact. Are we to believe that you're suggesting that a hundred year comparative study of fuses is REASONABLE USE of time? Of course not. And if it's not a reasonable use of time, then it's a waste of time. Q.E.D. Need a sec. Deep breath... ahhh. That was tedious. Time for my favorite part: the part where, right in the same post where you falsely accuse me of strawmanning you, YOU STAWMAN ME. The straw man begins with your comment that... Your opinion matters more than someone who hasn't experimented, but it is still an opinion. I never said, or implied, that my opinion is anything other than an opinion. Here's what I said, for example, about fuse direction... 06-06-12: Bryoncunningham
I could not hear any differences when changing direction for any of the fuses. Make of that what you will. Bad system. Bad ears. Bad method. Bad attitude. I just didn't hear it. Does that sound like I believe that my opinion is anything other than an opinion? No. The straw man continues with your comment that... No one person's experiment is definitive, it's only a data point. We should consider your opinion along with all of the many other published experiments - and our own experiments. I never said, or implied, that my experiment was definitive. Here's what I said... 05-18-12: Bryoncunningham
There it is. My not-particularly-scientific experiment in fancy fuses is concluded. Does that sound like I was suggesting that my fuse experiment was definitive? No. The straw man is completed with your comment that... Simply because you are still sitting on the fence regarding fuses should not mean that anyone else should also be sitting on the fence. I never said, or implied, that anyone needs to share my point of view. In fact, I've gone out of my way to emphasize that it is merely a point of view, as in... 06-06-12: Bryoncunningham
I suspect that the audible characteristics of fuses are largely extrinsic, and therefore variable from component to component and system to system. Admittedly, that is a SPECULATION. Q.E.D. And that concludes my latest Refutation and Reversal of your accusation of strawmanning. By my count, that is the third Refutation and Reversal on this subject. That should be enough for anybody. Why do you keep coming back to this Cycle of Abuse? Bryon |
06-08-12: Geoffkait
Bryon, you're being argumentative again.
06-08-12: Chadeffect
Now we are dissecting arguments & character. Bryon is excellent at keeping things clear. Even so we still have got lost. Gentlemen - I freely admit that my last post was argumentative in the most literal sense. But it wasn't motivated by contrariness. It was motivated by something more significant, as I'll try to explain in this post. Chad - I certainly understand why you feel we've gotten lost. In relation to the topic of fuses, we are lost. But there's another topic woven into this thread, and woven into a great many threads here on A'gon. It's the topic of Truth. I'm not talking about who knows the Truth and who doesn't. I'm talking about how people conduct themselves during disagreements about the Truth... there are people who are inclined to investigate what MIGHT BE true and there are people who are not. From what I can tell, the folks who arent inclined to investigate during disagreements fall into one of two categories
1. People who think they already know the Truth. 2. People who have no allegiance to the Truth. People who think they already know the Truth often resist efforts to investigate it, especially when that investigation contradicts what they know to be true. This is a Dogmatist. People who have no allegiance to the Truth often confound efforts to investigate it, especially when that investigation threatens their agenda. This is an Obscurantist. Dogmatism and Obscurantism are among the biggest obstacles to constructive conversations when there is a disagreement about the Truth. The Dogmatists tactic is the Method of Assertion and requires the use of force. The Obscurantists tactic is the Method of Evasion and requires the use of misdirection. This thread has seen both force and misdirection used in the service of Dogmatism and Obscurantism. Occasionally the Dogmatist and the Obscurantist become allies. They unite against their common enemy: the Investigator. A person who investigates the Truth during disagreements is a threat to the Dogmatists knowledge and to the Obscurantists agenda. So together the Dogmatist and the Obscurantist resist and confound the Investigator, using force to make him back down or misdirection to make him give up. And that brings us back to the subject of argumentativeness. The only way to combat the Dogmatist is to NOT back down in the face of force. The only way to combat the Obscurantist is to NOT give up in the face of misdirection. The inevitable result of either is the same... arguments. Lots of them. THAT is the motive behind my last post, and ones like it. This should come as no surprise to Geoff, at least. He and I have been down this road before. You may be wondering if any of this could possibly matter enough to spend this kind of time discussing it. I believe it does. Im getting tired so Ill just quote myself from other threads. Heres why, IMO, Dogmatism matters
Willful dogmatism, in the sense I intend it, is deliberately obstructionist... I mention this because I think its relevant to a significant number of posts on Agon, in which ideas are presented as undeniably true, without consideration of evidence or the opinions of others. Some of those folks seem to be deliberate obstructionists - in other words, willfully dogmatic. Others seem to be uninformed, misinformed, or anti-informed. The inflexibility that the Dogmatist has toward his own knowledge is typically accompanied by hostility toward the knowledge of others, or even hostility toward knowledge more generally. Quoting myself... Hostility toward knowledge stalls the progress of ideas, stifles efforts to reduce human suffering, and threatens the very survival of our species. Yes, literally. Put simply, Dogmatism breeds ignorance and intolerance. And heres why, IMO, Obscurantism matters. Me again... Obscurantism may be harmless in the audio world, but it isn't harmless in the real world. In the real world, obscurantism thrives in the form of political propaganda and economic deception. If you need an illustration of this, look no further than the recent financial crisis. The world was brought to the brink of economic oblivion by the actions of people armed with Multifactor Derivatives, Collateralized Debt Obligations, Credit Default Swaps, and a host of other financial instruments designed with one thing in mind: Obscurantism.
Obscurantism is used to control what people think, or more to the point, what people DON'T think. That was Orwell's great insight, that obscurantism makes certain ways of thinking impossible, and that effect can be used to any end whatsoever. As he predicted, in industrialized nations of instant communication, obscurantism is a weapon. It may be THE weapon. Put simply, Obscurantism breeds deception and exploitation. The ignorance and intolerance bred by Dogmatism combined with the deception and exploitation bred by Obscurantism account for a vast amount of human conflict, inequality, and suffering. IMO, standing up to those forces is a worthwhile undertaking, even when its only in the very humble form thats possible here. And with that, I would say that we are no longer lost. Bryon |
Thank you Nonoise. You are a gentleman. But I too have a swan song... 06-08-12: Geoffkait
Bryon, congratulations on the most hilarious and deceptive post so far on this thread. Come on, Geoff. You can do better than that. No one here is going to believe that you found my post either hilarious or deceptive. If you think you can trick people with that feeble misdirection, youve miscalculated by an order of magnitude. It isn't just that your misdirection is facile. It's that it's bizarre, as Mapman pointed out. On the bright side, you've provided everyone with an excellent illustration of the Method of Evasion, which is the hallmark of Obscurantism. The Method goes like this
1. Be cryptic. 2. Misrepresent your opponent. 3. Change the subject. Calling my post hilarious and deceptive does all three in roughly equal measure. You also regularly employ a fourth tactic, which is your personal touch on Obscurantism
4. Project your own misconduct onto your opponent. Obviously, Im referring to your suggestion that my post was "deceptive." Throughout this thread, I've proceeded with openness and candor, Ive freely admitted my mistakes and limitations, and I've given no reason to believe that I have the slightest thing to gain by deception. The truthfulness of that statement, and the sincerity of the post you called deceptive, is transparently obvious to other posters on this thread, as evidenced by their remarks. Add to that the fact that Ive never once been accused of deception in the three years Ive participated on Audiogon. In light of all that, your suggestion that I was being deceptive is so implausible that its difficult to imagine that even you believe it. On the other hand, you are routinely accused of deception. Several posters have accused you of it on this thread already. Ive personally charged you with Obscurantism on more than one occasion. Trying to project that accusation onto me is about as persuasive as its elementary school equivalent: Im rubber, youre glue
________________________________________ Chad I agree with you. Whats remarkable isnt that people argue. Whats remarkable is that they cooperate. You mentioned Human Nature in an earlier post. Personally, I believe many of the contemporary sociobiological theories about the nature of Human Nature, which suggest that it is deceptive, aggressive, and self-interested, but also that it can be trustworthy, cooperative, and altruistic. I would add that I believe that there is not ONE Human Nature but MANY. While everyone has all of those traits, we each have them in different proportions, creating a wide variety of Human Natures. That is visible every day in the microcosm of Audiogon. While Obscuratism, Dogmatism, and other antisocial behaviors are easily found, so are sincerity, generosity, and kindness. And that is something to feel encouraged about. Bryon |
Thank you Al, Nonoise, John, and Marqmike for your words of support. Its heartening to know that there are other folks who understand whats happening here. 06-09-12: Geoffkait
Bryon, what is hilarious is that you spend so much time arguing with *me* - geez, I thought everyone knew I was just a dodge and weave troll. Shh. Do you hear that, Geoff? That is the sound of your defeat. Your credibility is gone. And it will not return, so long as your admission to being a Troll exists on Audiogon. I am grateful to the moderators for showing restraint in this thread, because we have arrived at a culmination that was worth 400 posts, and that is your confession that you are a fraud. Has it never occurred to you to ask why, in spite of dozens of posts arguing with you across multiple threads, I've never called you a Troll or a fraud? Because I suspected that, if I persisted long enough, and if I pressed back relentlessly, you would eventually do exactly what you have done: You would tell us yourself. You have taken off your mask, Geoff. What is underneath the mask is
well, Ill let people judge for themselves. Youve made a grave tactical error, one of several lately. The error should be obvious with a moments reflection: The biggest challenge to Machina Dynamica is the allegation that you, and your products, are a fraud. Youve just told us that YOU are a fraud. It's a very short step to the conclusion that YOUR PRODUCTS are a fraud. Speaking of which... Ironically, I have been the number one seller on Audiogon for the past five years with the highest rating, too
This is false. As of this morning, Machina Dynamica has 1156 positive feedbacks, which can be seen here. Underwood Hifi, for example, has more than three times as many, with 3925 positive feedbacks, seen here. In light of your recent confession, I hope you will understand if I interpret your false claim to be not an innocent mistake, but another deception. If so, then you have just provided us with the second Smoking Gun
not only do you use deception in your contributions to the forum, you also use deception in the promotion of your products. Check and mate. Bryon |
06-10-12: Geoffkait
Bryon, another hilarious post....of course I was joking by calling myself a troll. Of course that's the card you're going to play. It's the only one left in your hand. But the hand is over. You went all in and lost. To remind folks... 06-09-12: Geoffkait
Bryon, what is hilarious is that you spend so much time arguing with *me* - geez, I thought everyone knew I was just a dodge and weave troll. Taken on its own, this comment could be interpreted either literally or ironically. You're telling us now that you meant it ironically. If that were true, then why did you go on to say in the next sentence
Hell, I wasn't allowed to post here for four years, even to defend myself, because the threads tended to get a little, uh, out of hand. You are SUBSTANTIATING the idea that you are a Troll. The fact that you werent allowed to post here for four years is EVIDENCE that you are a Troll. It's very difficult to believe that your remark was ironic when you go on to provide an excellent reason to interpret it LITERALLY. And adding to that
all this angst and hand wringing has me a little puzzled. I wonder, IS IT SOMETHING I SAID? HA HA HA[emphasis added] You are acknowledging in that sentence that you find it funny to provoke people with your posts. That is the VERY DEFINITION of a Troll. You are leaving Smoking Guns all over the place, Geoff. It's almost like you WANT to get caught. You radically overestimate the plausibility of your façade of nonchalance. And you underestimate peoples ability to see what's underneath it. You can pretend to laugh this off, but the genie is out of the bottle. Moving on to your latest attempt at misdirection
Now, the real question is who is the troll here, you or me? You have certainly stalked me like one. I'VE stalked YOU? Hmm. Let me think about that. Why don't we take a look at the evidence? Here are our first five interactions on this thread... TOPIC #1: FUSE DIRECTION On 4/27, my first post appeared on the thread. My last paragraph was about fuse direction. Your first post was 2 POSTS AFTER ME. It was also about fuse direction. TOPIC #2: EXPERTISE On 4/28, I said that the intuition of experts, has been wrong innumerable times. In the VERY NEXT POST, YOU SAID: the argument that "innumerable" people, even experts, are wrong is that there only needs to be one person, expert or not, that is right to prove the thing works. TOPIC #3: EXPLANATIONS On 4/29, I listed whatever explanations I could find from the web for the audible effects of fuses. The NEXT DAY, YOU COMMENTED on my list. TOPIC #4: MY FIRST A/B EXPERIMENT On 5/7, in a follow up to my first fuse experiment, I commented that, during my experiment, I could not hear any differences with fuse direction. 2 POSTS AFTER, YOU SPECULATED that masking effects might be the reason I didnt hear it. TOPIC #5: ROGERS COMMENTS On 5/11, I commented on Rogers observations about fuse measurements. 2 POSTS AFTER, YOU DID THE SAME. Im getting bored. Lets just skip ahead to the point where things turned ugly... TOPIC: COMPARATIVE FUSE TESTING On 6/6, I posted a reply to Talk2me about the comparative fuse testing I did during my two experiments. 2 POSTS AFTER, YOU COMMENTED, in effect, that comparative fuse testing was a waste of time. Lets recap... In our first 5 interactions, YOU FOLLOWED ME EVERY TIME. In our most recent interaction, YOU FOLLOWED ME AGAIN. So the suggestion that Im stalking you is patently absurd. No one, and I mean NO ONE, is going to fall for that. On the other hand, if someone were to suggest that YOU are stalking ME
well, the evidence above speaks for itself. There should be a word for a situation where someone attributes his own behavior to another person... Oh yeah, there is: PROJECTION. As for your comments about my system and my hearing, you really are grasping at straws. Its sad. Bryon |
06-10-12: Theaudiotweak
And if you look at a virtual system photo and in that pictorial is displayed proudly and prominently a in wall giant resonance collection chamber [a TV] a virtual time machine of phase errors and noise, a sure cause of time release headaches and in the picture of that TV display you see a mirror image of the proud owner reflecting at his desk, recording his self image at his listening position and behind that hot spot is a row of windows that reside over his shoulders. A picture of science at rest. Golly gee, sure example of someone who should be giving advice and reasoning on the viability of fuses making a marked change in anyone's audio system based on that reflective beam box, laser like and bouncing back between his eyes ....That is a standard of reference to judge what? I'm going to make a suggestion, Audiotweak. Why don't you spend some time in the minor league practicing your swing before you take one at me. The post above is amateur hour. To wit... ...in that pictorial is displayed proudly and prominently a in wall giant resonance collection chamber [a TV] a virtual time machine of phase errors and noise, a sure cause of time release headaches and in the picture of that TV display you see a mirror image of the proud owner reflecting at his desk
You seem to know a lot about me. Has the real stalker been revealed? Quick question: How in the world could you know whether Im the kind of person whos proud of his TV? By the fact that it hangs on the wall, like hundreds of thousands of similar TVs in households everywhere? Talk about a leap of logic. I hope you don't get placed on any juries. Anyone who's read my posts over the years already knows what I'm about to say... Im not the kind of person who is proud of a TV, because I'm not mentally 15 years old. Im proud of my wife. Im proud of my best friend. I'm proud of some of my professional accomplishments. Im proud of the work I did in psychotherapy. Hell, I'm proud of my dog. Oh, and Im proud that I stand up to bullies like you. I am NOT proud that I own a TV and that it hangs on the wall. It's ridiculous that I even have to say that. Moving on... In my system description, where you gleaned your insightful observations about my listening room, the first sentence of the second paragraph reads
A customized sound blanket hangs in front of the TV when listening to music. You can see a picture of it here. In addition to which, the windows at the back of the room have shades of considerable thickness, which are drawn closed when listening to music. I also have 8 large acoustical absorption panels on the ceiling and 2 large diffusors at the back of the room. And there's a thick rug on the floor. Does that sound like the "reflective pinball machine" you described? Most of what I just said is listed on my system page. I suggest you take a moment to prepare before suiting up to play this game. And if you DID see those things on my system page, then your allegiance to the truth is comparable to the person you are implicitly defending. And we haven't even gotten to the real point... Golly gee, sure example of someone who should be giving advice and reasoning on the viability of fuses making a marked change in anyone's audio system based on that reflective beam box, laser like and bouncing back between his eyes ....That is a standard of reference to judge what? I have never, not on this thread or any other, claimed that my room is a model of good acoustics. I have never, not on this thread or any other, claimed that my room, or my system, is a standard of reference. Suggesting otherwise is a straw man of me, and one that wouldn't convince a child. Im afraid youve sacrificed your credibility on your very first move. You have as much chance now as you would sacrificing your queen on your first move. Audiotweak, I suggest you go back to tweaking. This isnt your game. Oh, and one last thing, which should be painfully obvious: Attacking someone for the quality of his system is utterly juvenile. Ahh
it just occurred to me. THATS why you thought I was proud of my TV. You were projecting your own juvenile priorities. This projection bug is going around. I better remember to use my hand sanitizer. Bryon |
Geoff - Your defense of Sophistry was neat. Regrettably, it was also an act of Sophistry.
A Sophist has no allegiance to the truth. A Sophist teaches people how to manipulate, how to evade, how to deceive. And he charges them for it.
I propose we euthanize this thread and donate its body to Science. It will be our gift to Posterity.
Scratch that. We should charge them for it.
Bryon |
Thank you, Lacee for your kind words. My amazement is that we are arguing about a device that costs less than 100 bucks. That irony isn't lost on me. But as I'm sure you're aware, this thread isn't really about fuses, at least not any more. It's about Reality, IMO, and three entirely different attitudes toward it
1. Reality = the world and everything in it 2. Reality = my mind alone 3. Reality = my mind + the minds of other people
or put another way
1. The Realist2. The Solipsist3. The SophistThese three categories have been around at least as far back as ancient Greece. Don't worry, Im not going to launch into the history of philosophy. Ill limit my comments to what, IMO, is happening on this thread... Whats happening is that The Realist and the Solipsist and the Sophist are at war. It's a fight that started long before them, and that will outlive them. And its not merely academic. These conflicting attitudes toward Reality shape a huge array of individual behaviors and cultural forces. I talked about that at length in this post on 6/8. In it, I framed things in terms of Dogmatism and Obscurantism, but it's easy to see that Dogmatism is a *de facto* form of Solipsism and Obscurantism is a *de facto* form of Sophistry. Whereas the Realist knows that Reality is mostly outside his control, the Solipsist and the Sophist act as though Reality can be controlled by thoughts, hopes, wishes, fantasies. This is the essence of Magical Thinking. The loose connection that Solipsists have to Reality can be seen in the Dogmatists hostile resistance to opposing views on it. The loose connection that Sophists have to Reality can be see in the Obscurantists flagrant disregard for it. The Solipsist needs to convince only HIMSELF to feel vindicated in his sense of Reality. The Sophist needs to convince OTHER PEOPLE to feel vindicated in his sense of Reality. The principal thing the Solipsist gains from his attitude toward Reality is the illusion of control over it, which can be a great source of comfort. The principal thing the Sophist gains from his attitude toward Reality is control over the minds of other people, which can be a great source of personal gain. Because of his inclination toward Magical Thinking, the Solipsist is the Sophist's primary victim. Because of his allegiance to a Reality outside himself, the Realist is the Sophist's primary enemy. This fight happens every day, both here on Audiogon and out there where it counts. Bryon |
Geoff -- Your energy must be flagging, because those were some feeble responses. They're not even interesting enough to analyze and discredit. Coming from me, that's saying something. What I will say is that, if you haven't read my last post, you should, with particular attention to the passages on Sophistry.
By your own admission, Geoff, trouble seems to follow you around. That would make most people wonder if the trouble was somehow coming from themselves. Not you.
You seem to think that the recurring opposition to you, your ideas, and your products is a form of persecution. I would invite you to consider that the force you've been fighting against for years isn't persecution. It's Reality.
Bryon |
Mapman - You don't have to explain how you spend your time to anybody. Except maybe your wife. It's yours to spend.
Happy listening and happy Audiogon'ing.
Bryon |
07-23-12: Almarg
...as I suggested earlier, how do we know that comparable differences would not occur if an extensive and thorough comparison were performed among several different inexpensive garden-variety fuses? Especially given that the technical explanations for the alleged benefits of expensive fuses are not well established, at least in a manner that withstands quantitative scrutiny... I agree, Al. 07-23-12: Nonoise
I just can't deny what I'm hearing. Bryon hears something different. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree until more negative anecdotal evidence builds up. Hi Nonoise - I can't recall exactly what your experiences with fuses have been. Mine were mixed. In my first experiment, described on 5/5, I preferred the stock fuse to the Hifi Tuning Silverstars, both in my Pass amp and my Meridian preamp. In my second experiment, described on 5/18, I preferred the Isoclean fuse to the stock fuse in my preamp, but I could not hear a difference between the Furutech fuse and the stock fuse in my Pass amp. In my third experiment, which I never described in detail, I slightly preferred the Furutech fuse to the stock fuse in my Parasound amp. So my order of preference for each component was... Meridian Preamp: Isoclean > stock > Hifi Tuning Silverstar Pass Amp: Furutech & stock > Hifi Tuning Silverstar Parasound Amp: Furutech > stock Of course, YMMV. All this is just a friendly reminder to Nonoise. To my detractors, please let's not start the argument all over again. Bryon |
