2. tech-talk
  3. 185990-169390

What is the science behind audiophile fuses?

There were many threads on the topic of "audiophile fuses" on this forum, and I sure don't want to open old wounds and trench warfare. The fuse on my preamp blew suddenly two days ago, which prompted me to search for a replacement. That's when I came across the term "audiophile fuse" and the fact that they demand far-out prices. Deeper curiosity brought me to several other fora, where users posted glowing praises about their Zero fuses and other exotica. Now I am a scientist, but not a physicist or electrical engineer: so please enlighten me! How can a fuse have an audible influence on the signal, when the signal does not even pass through it? How can a fuse be "directional" when it deals with alternate current? I mean, if I recall my university physics, a fuse is basically a safety valve and nothing more. Am I completely missing an important point here? My scientific field is drug discovery, and because of this background I am thoroughly familiar with the power and reality of the placebo effect. I that's what I am seeing here, or is it real physics? I need objective facts and not opinions, please. I really appreciate your help!

 
128x128reimarc
barts's avatar
barts
687 posts
 

What you believe comes down to how many Grateful Dead shows you saw in the 60s and 70s.

Although I do wonder what kind of fuses Owsley Stanley used in those Mac 300 monos for the Wall of Sound.

Regards,

barts

bolong
407 posts
 

I have had SR purples in my Primaluna pre and power for a couple of years and loved them, but it took about 20 hours of play to really start to hear what they were doing. At 50 hours the juice really started to come on.

A few weeks ago I added the SR "Master" fuse to my Holo Audio May Level 3 Kitsune DAC. The Holo May came with a "Nano Red" fuse which claimed audiophile level enhancement. The pricey Master fuse had a 30 day trial period, so I thought, "why not?" This fuse takes somewhat longer to break in than the Purples, but it has been worth the wait. There is more "solidity" and tonal accuracy along with sound stage enhancement with an increase in detail - clearer sustain and decay - all the goodies. The Master was played as much as I could within the 30 day trial period. At first the fuse sounded a bit stiff and flat footed, but then opened up after about 20 hours. Now after about 200 hours it has bloomed extraordinarily. Again, make sure you take the time to play it as much as possible within the 30-day window.

These are being played through Cornwall 4 horn speakers, and it may be that high sensitivity speakers show these fuses off better,

thecarpathian
4,185 posts
 

"Science can’t prove the earth is older than 6000 years. "

@tonywinga ,

I suggest a bit of in depth research on radiocarbon dating.

Extreme accuracy up to 12,000+ years. After that, less accurate to 50,000.

tonywinga's avatar
tonywinga
844 posts
 

I researched it.  Perhaps you should research it a little more yourself.  It might open your eyes.  Radiocarbon dating is more art and guesswork than science.

We have the science/engineering that we rely on for our day to day technology- a pretty reliable working knowledge.   But the sciences that are more theoretical, astrophysics, anthropolgy, etc are built on a fragile system of suppositions and yet people build a belief system around these theories as a way to find comfort in their existence.

 

thecarpathian
4,185 posts
 

My eyes are open. If you had researched it, then you would know about dendrochronology and Bayesian Modeling and would know that it’s not art and guess work and wouldn’t have made that statement. It's come a long way since its inception.

Since radiocarbon dating is strictly for organic material, do you also discount methods to date the Earth itself, such as Rubidium-Strontium Dating, Potassium Argon Dating, and Uranium-Thorium-Lead Dating? If so, what is behind your belief?

More to discover