|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
75.71.37.161
In Reply to: RE: Is Ralph Lauren making fuses now? posted by roio on October 02, 2014 at 03:08:50
Measuring R (resistance)might be relatively easy. But what about other factors? I have read claims that vibration contributes to sound--hence that ceramic fuse cases are better than glass ones. Lew has found that the fuse holder makes as much difference as the fuse itself. Is that only an R difference? Subjecting fuses to cryogenic treatment seems to make a difference as well. Is it R, some other legitimate scientific phenomenon or voodoo? The use of silver seems to make a difference in IC's, etc. What about silver in fuses?
That's all I can think of at the moment, but it takes time to turn molehills into mountains--if indeed that's what I am doing.
Follow Ups:
Lew, not me, was hypothesizing audio effect dependence on the intrinsic resistance value. I simply suggested that such hypothesis should be simply tested, before claiming reasonability of hypothesis.
Vibration effects should be stronger on tube electrodes, and it should be quite difficult and, may be not enough reasonable, to try separating the latter from the one supposed to come from fuses.
Roberto
I have been misunderstood by both of you.
Throwback, I did not say I can hear a difference between a hardware store fuse holder and an Acme fuse holder (the only "audiophile" fuse holder I know of). I did say that the idea of spending $50 for a fuse seems ridiculous if one is not also going to upgrade the fuse holder. If one did that, there would still remain the question of whether the fuse/fuse holder ensemble swap makes for an audible upgrade. I have done this experiment: My Atma-sphere amplifiers were built for 6C33C tubes, which, unlike the 6AS7, are not internally fused. Therefore, there is an outboard fuse-holder/fuse for each output tube, built-in. Unlike the typical fuse on the AC side, these fuses are much more likely to affect sonics, since they are in the signal path. In my amps, I replaced each of these fuse-holder/fuses with Acme silver-plated versions of both. The amps sound divine. (You've heard them, I think.) Am I certain that the Acme products contribute to their wonderfulness? No. I would have to go back and replace the Acme stuff with conventional products, in order to have any basis for any claim, which is very tedious and not on my radar screen.Roio, I was playing devil's advocate and trying to imagine why a fuse might make an audible difference; one possibility that came to mind is the business of resistance of the fuse. I am not sure I want to say I have any real idea why a fuse (on the AC side between the wall and the power transformer) would ever make an audible difference to sound quality. Just supposing.
Edits: 10/02/14
Lew: ""It is conceivable that the tiny resistance across a fuse wire..."
Thanks for pointing out that yours is only a vague supposition that would not deserve to be verified.
Roberto
If you don't think it "deserves" to be verified, that's fine with me.
As a scientist, I would say that my idea can be taken as a hypothesis which could be tested by actual experiments, if one wished to do so. Unfortunately, once our instruments (scope, distortion meter, etc) would fail to reveal an effect, then we will be left with subjective judgement. That unknown variable could be somewhat controlled by having a panel of listeners and the use of double-blind testing.
If for you to test the effect of a small resistance connected to the plates of the output tubes of an OTL deserves indeed to be audio-proven, I would do that gladly and accurately, and I will share the report.Far away me is indeed the idea that only considering standard technical prediction that the fuse resistance (and, further, one of ten times higher value) would not alter the sound quality, this would be sufficient for ruling out possible audio differences.
Roberto
Edits: 10/02/14 10/02/14 10/02/14 10/02/14 10/02/14 10/03/14
RobertoI not understand you ,is that your -Yamaha 2010- actually made in 2010 year or 2010 is actually some model Nr.?, or that your Yamaha is from AS1000/AS2000/AS3000 series where SS power amps section use Circlotron concept ?
__
Enlightened Evolution-Astral Projection
Edits: 10/03/14
It is Yamaha model 2010 built at around 1982
"...the further hypotheses proposed for interpreting the aforementioned phenomenon (circlotron sounds better than Yamaha 2010) should be also proven by using the only instrument that matters: your ears and those of your friends."Up to a point, yes. But listening tests have repeatedly shown that humans are not very good at discriminating even between supposed "night and day differences" when the claims are put to the test in double-blind experiments. It is clear that observer expectation plays a huge role in what we think we hear. Further evidence for this can be found on the "Tweakers' Forum," where people make utterly absurd claims of hearing differences supposedly caused by magic stones, flashing lights, and so on. Of course like any good spoon-bender, telekineticist or other charlatan, they express a total disdain for any scientific attempt to confirm the claim by means either of measurement or of double-blind testing.
So while I would agree that ultimately what matters is which amplifier gives the most enjoyment, I am not convinced that this is particularly correlated with any actual improved quality in the sound. Or indeed of any demonstrable difference between the sounds. In my own case, for example, I build and use tube amplifiers because it is fun, a little nostalgic, and I like the glow of the tubes. And in the case of OTL amplifiers there is the added pleasure of achieving something that seems so delightfully and absurdly perverse. But I don't think I would ever attempt to argue that my tube amplifiers, or indeed any tube amplifiers, are in any sense "better" than a decent solid state amplifier.
Chris
Edits: 10/02/14 10/02/14
Chris: “I am not convinced that the most enjoyment is particularly correlated with any actual improved quality in the sound. Or indeed of any demonstrable difference between the sounds. In my own case, for example, I build and use tube amplifiers because it is fun, a little nostalgic, and I like the glow of the tubes. And in the case of OTL amplifiers there is the added pleasure of achieving something that seems so delightfully and absurdly perverse. But I don't think I would ever attempt to argue that my tube amplifiers, or indeed any tube amplifiers, are in any sense "better" than a decent solid state amplifier”.I don’t refer to “most enjoyments” or generic demonstrations of quality. I try to be clearer.
I have proposed that the problem of audio differences should be approached with a scientific-like approach. As usual with such method, the context of experiment should be defined in order to enable its repetition by who wants to do that.Roberto
Edits: 10/03/14
There is a rather interesting experiment known as the Richard Clark Amplifier Challenge, which has been conducted many times with many listeners. Essentially, Richard Clark, who I think is an audio engineer, challenges the listener to discriminate, under proper A/B/X blind-testing conditions, between their own amplifier, a "standard" amplifier, and a third mystery amplifier X. The basic ground rules are that the listener's own amplifier has to satisfy some basic minimal standards with regard to distortion and frequency response. If the frequency response is too deficient, then Richard Clark mocks up a matching frequency response for his "standard" amplifier with a simple RC network.
Anyway, the upshot from the experiments is that apparently no one has ever succeeded in demonstrating a reliable ability to tell the amplifiers apart. (I think there is a $10,000 prize offered to anyone who succeeds.) Thousands of people, including professionals and amateurs, have tried, apparently.
So my suspicion would be that if the tests were conducted under rigorous blind-testing conditions, nobody would be able reliably and consistently to tell the difference between your Yamaha 2010 and an OTL amplifier.
Chris
The "Tweakers" have two responses to the clamor for double-blind or even single-blind testing:
(1) The switch or switching mechanism itself used in A/B/A or A/B/X testing is obscuring the differences one is trying to discern. It's typically impossible to convince extreme Tweakers that this issue can be overcome, because then they would have to give up or modify some cherished prejudices.
(2) Short term listening, as is typically done in this sort of testing, is insufficient to reveal subtle differences; you have to have the gear in your system for many days/weeks/months to do the comparison properly. This of course usually interdicts the possibility of true blinding of the participant(s). Actually, I am not so sure I disagree with this position.
I would add that IMO, the amplifier/speaker work as a unit. The "sound" of the amplifier will have more to do with how well its operating characteristics suit the speaker's impedance, efficiency, and phase anomalies, and the room acoustics, than anything else. Thus it is folly to test two very different types of amplifiers (solid state vs OTL vs SE) in this manner. Which is why I am an agnostic when it comes to testing and how to do it. I just know what I like, after 40 years as an audiophile.
Case in point to your second point, Lew.
I am experimenting with a speaker that has a series/parallel string of highs/mids crossed over to a series/parallel string of woofs. The impedance of the combination--measured at the speaker terminals--was less than three ohms. Powered by my Atmas the combination was truly struggling: it lacked dynamics and the highs were unacceptably rolled off. Conclusion: bad amp? bad speakers?
When I rewired the speakers such that each string was in series, raising the overall impedance to 18 Ohm or so (thanks, Ralph), both the highs and the dynamics were much, much improved. Conclusion: great amp! great speakers!
Is it real or is it Memorex?
BTW, Lew, you comin' to RMAF?
The Sound Labs 845PX speakers with OEM crossover and toroidal treble transformer (about a nominal 6-ohm speaker above 100Hz) vs the same speaker panels with only a low-pass filter on the bass transformer and a full-range transformer driving the treble (a 20-25 ohm speaker up to 5000Hz). Night and day.One RMAF seems to have been enough for me. I don't feel the urge or the need.
Edits: 10/03/14 10/03/14
" challenges the listener to discriminate, under proper A/B/X blind-testing conditions, between their own amplifier, a "standard" amplifier, and a third mystery amplifier X...."Accordingly to my indications, these comparisons enabled concluding that any significant difference would not occur in the amplifiers under exam. So, I don't see the problem.
Edits: 10/03/14
"However, I did not propose generic tests of musics, but experiments using pieces of classical music that, in my opinion, should better put in evidence differences (better if using a good CD player as source), from recordings of natural source (e.g., violins), whose real image everybody cold have as reference from concert halls."
As far as I recall, the listener was free to provide the sound source and the musical recording.
"If your suspect is too strong to led you to neither ascertain if the phenomenon occurs, I would only encourage you to try."
It's quite a lot of trouble to set up a proper double-blind test. I've never felt strongly enough about it to want to do that. But I'd be interested to hear of any other proper double-blind tests that have been conducted. Anecdotal reports of differences heard under less controlled conditions don't really tell us much at all. The human ear and mind are too susceptible to other influences for those kind of reports to mean much.
Maybe Richard Clark is still offering his challenge. In which case there's $10,000 waiting for the person who can actually demonstrate the ability to tell the amplifiers apart.
Chris
I don't like to play with the three cards like in Naples, because there is always a trick.
Roberto
Edits: 10/03/14 10/03/14 10/03/14
"I don't like to play with the three cards like in Naples, because there is always a trick."
I don't think Richard Clark is trying to trick anybody. He has simply realised what others should have done also, that the audiophile talk is sometimes lacking in solid backing. He is (or was) offering $10,000 to anyone who could prove him wrong. And thousands tried, and failed.
Anyway, if you could conduct some true double-blind tests of the Yamaha vs a tube circlotron, it would be very interesting to hear the outcome. My own impression of the various OTL amps I have built is that they sound great, but also that they are rematkably close in sound to a solid-state amp. (Perhaps because they have very little colouration from output transformers.)
Chris
"I don't think Richard Clark is trying to trick anybody. He has simply realised what others should have done also, that the audiophile talk is sometimes lacking in solid backing. He is (or was) offering $10,000 to anyone who could prove him wrong. And thousands tried, and failed."Chris,
do you really believe that if one wants offering $ 10000 for noting, he would not be sure of not trowing away money and, in the same time, supporting his interest? Who participated has only supported the idea that, in this play, differences are not perceivable. Should such a constant outcome attributable to sonic identity of amplifiers? You would say "yes". My interpretation is, instead, that these differences exist, but they are masked by the effect of the same tools that are claimed to be exploited for producing more objective results. Lew argued already on that.
Roberto
Edits: 10/04/14 10/04/14 10/04/14 10/04/14 10/04/14 10/04/14 10/04/14 10/04/14 10/07/14
"My interpretation is, instead, that these differences exist, but they are masked by the effect of the same tools that are claimed to be exploited for producing more objective results."
The trouble is that this kind of response sounds hauntingly reminiscent of the response of a spoon-bender or a mind-reader when a scientist's investigation fails to confirm the occurrence of the claimed phenomenon.
I think there is a serious point here, which cannot be simply brushed aside, namely that without the benefit of the visual and other cues one normally has, it can be astonishingly difficult to hear the differences that one believes exist between different amplifiers.
Chris
"...this kind of response sounds hauntingly reminiscent of the response of when a scientist's investigation fails to confirm the occurrence of the claimed phenomenon."I would say better: "...when a scientist's investigation succeeds in falsifying the occurrence of the claimed phenomenon".
I simply said that, however and for sure, I would give the same answer that Ms Clark expects by his tests. Why are you not happy for that? But you should concede that in science it matters to interpret the phenomenon that occurred during these tests, i.e, that no differences were perceived. You repute a spoon-bender or a mind-reader who hypothesizes that other causes would explain the sonic identity. But, why are we forced to eat the meal that Mr Clark (and you) are offering?
Roberto
Edits: 10/05/14 10/07/14
Sorry, Lew. I read too much into your remark about fuse holders. And yes, your amps sound fantastic.
I'm still wondering if resistance constitutes the whole picture, however.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: