It’s refreshing to wake up after a good night’s sleep and see the same flies in the ointment. What Ted Denny said:
"I now have a new point to argue with."
Geoff has been saying, in a different way, that there’s no way to validate a A/B/X test as there’s too many variables inherent in the test (which is another way to state Ted Denny's statement) and like I’ve always said, it’s a parlor trick.
And something has to be said about false equivalency. One side is trolling as best they can while the other can only point to the obvious remedy: try the fuse for yourself. It appeares to be just a tactic to get the thread shut down.
And one more thing: there’s nothing in the book that states that a fuse can not effect the sound of one’s system. There’s nothing in "electronic engineering" (as one here loves to say) that says the same. There are no "engineering laws" that say that either. It’s merely the understanding of those with an appreciation and understanding of those rules and laws who surmise, for themselves, that it can not be. They’re just guessing. No body has ever bothered to consider it before someone discovered that a fuse can be of benefit.
There’s no way in hell that something which is a part of design can not impart a sonic signature of it’s own, since the design can not work without it’s presence. It’s function is small but that doesn’t mean it’s sonic impact isn’t. Just because no one thought enough to give due consideration to something for a long time doesn’t mean that it’s some kind of electronic engineering law.
All the best,
Nonoise
NO OBJECTIVE CRITERIA OR TEST THAT EXISTS TODAY THAT CONCLUSIVELY PROVES ANY PRODUCT TO BE BETTER THAN ANY OTHER.is not a repudiation of his product and even the ones with half a brain here know that, yet they immediately jump on it as such. It’s like after having your head buried in the sand for so long, they stand up, bend over backwards, and reinsert their heads in the sand, proclaiming,
"I now have a new point to argue with."
Geoff has been saying, in a different way, that there’s no way to validate a A/B/X test as there’s too many variables inherent in the test (which is another way to state Ted Denny's statement) and like I’ve always said, it’s a parlor trick.
And something has to be said about false equivalency. One side is trolling as best they can while the other can only point to the obvious remedy: try the fuse for yourself. It appeares to be just a tactic to get the thread shut down.
And one more thing: there’s nothing in the book that states that a fuse can not effect the sound of one’s system. There’s nothing in "electronic engineering" (as one here loves to say) that says the same. There are no "engineering laws" that say that either. It’s merely the understanding of those with an appreciation and understanding of those rules and laws who surmise, for themselves, that it can not be. They’re just guessing. No body has ever bothered to consider it before someone discovered that a fuse can be of benefit.
There’s no way in hell that something which is a part of design can not impart a sonic signature of it’s own, since the design can not work without it’s presence. It’s function is small but that doesn’t mean it’s sonic impact isn’t. Just because no one thought enough to give due consideration to something for a long time doesn’t mean that it’s some kind of electronic engineering law.
All the best,
Nonoise