🐑
wolf_garcia
Note that there is no actual engineering or scientific analysis proving that allegedly "better and way more expensive" fuses make a difference relative to a working stock fuse IN THE SOUND OF THINGS. They’re exclusively supported by "claims" of hearing things, which in my experience (extensively testing and comparing the damn things) is just silly when these claims , although possibly sincere, don’t take into account what fuses actually do with their tiny meltable wires. Hyperbole driven opinions don’t do any favors for the often sales driven purveyors of fringe tweaks, a fact lost on many when large profits or insecurity by listeners come into play, "Mom, I spent 150 bucks on this fuse so I MUST hear better cello tone and an expanded soundstage or I’m simply unworthy...schedule a session with my therapist now..."
You probably should have included in your first sentence, “...that there is no actual engineering or scientific analysis proving that allegedly “better and way more expensive” fuses make a difference relative to a working stock fuse in the SOUND OF THING” the caveat, “at least as far as I know.” Since not only did HiFi Tuning provide the evidence in measurements but also subject listening tests that correlated with the measurements. Also, there is the sticky evudebcecwe have that NASA began testing technically advanced fuses as early as 20 years ago. I kind suspect NASA probably did a careful engineering and scientific analysis of various fuse options, at least in terms of technical performance, don’t you? A clever fellow would probably be able to track down some NASA fuse analysis reports, no? How ‘bout reporting back what you find out?
wolf_garcia
Note that there is no actual engineering or scientific analysis proving that allegedly "better and way more expensive" fuses make a difference relative to a working stock fuse IN THE SOUND OF THINGS. They’re exclusively supported by "claims" of hearing things, which in my experience (extensively testing and comparing the damn things) is just silly when these claims , although possibly sincere, don’t take into account what fuses actually do with their tiny meltable wires. Hyperbole driven opinions don’t do any favors for the often sales driven purveyors of fringe tweaks, a fact lost on many when large profits or insecurity by listeners come into play, "Mom, I spent 150 bucks on this fuse so I MUST hear better cello tone and an expanded soundstage or I’m simply unworthy...schedule a session with my therapist now..."
You probably should have included in your first sentence, “...that there is no actual engineering or scientific analysis proving that allegedly “better and way more expensive” fuses make a difference relative to a working stock fuse in the SOUND OF THING” the caveat, “at least as far as I know.” Since not only did HiFi Tuning provide the evidence in measurements but also subject listening tests that correlated with the measurements. Also, there is the sticky evudebcecwe have that NASA began testing technically advanced fuses as early as 20 years ago. I kind suspect NASA probably did a careful engineering and scientific analysis of various fuse options, at least in terms of technical performance, don’t you? A clever fellow would probably be able to track down some NASA fuse analysis reports, no? How ‘bout reporting back what you find out?