IsoClean Audio Grade Fuses

inspiredsports

Last word: IsoClean fuses have appreciated from $25 to $39 over the past 19 months (a whopping 56% gain) while my 401K has plummeted by as much. Need I say more?

hearingimpared

cristo wrote: »

ok

"As electrons move through the circuit, inefficiencies in the circuit would necessarily return fewer electrons to the line than entered the circuit, not to mention the percentage that were removed from the circuit in order to be converted to something else (heat, sound, light, etc.)."

This is wrong on so many levels. If fewer electrons were returned than entered a circuit
by more than an miniscule fraction, a positive charge would build up in the circuit and
cause it to fly apart or cause a pretty impressive static electricity discharge.
Converting electrons to heat, sound, or light isn't going to happen due to conservation
of charge for one thing. They can dissipate some of their energy to do that, however.

I hope xcapri79 was just trying to be funny. If so, he did a better job than I could have.
Otherwise, my reference to the drugs stands.

Something can't "simultaneously exhibit motion in multiple directions" just because you can think of its motion differently
from several different frames of reference.
Well, maybe if you read a lot of Kurt Vonnegut (one of my favourite authors, actually).

As for avoiding making comments, hey, I said I'd try, I didn't say I'd succeed.

I still can't fathom how a high tech fuse in between the leads to a power supply will make an audible difference
in the audio output of a component.
If people want to point bad interpretations of science at the issue, that won't convince me,
and if they want to say it's magic, that won't convince me either.

That's my opinion, and I'm entitled to it.

Those that can only hear a difference when they know what they're listening to (and feel that double blind testing
is fundamentally flawed) are entitled to their opinions as well, but I don't have to agree with them, either.

Hmmm, when I first read this post particularly the statement, "a positive charge would build up in the circuit and cause it to fly apart or cause a pretty impressive static electricity discharge," I was ready to blast you (particularly after reading your wise cracks) about lack of electrical knowledge and was going to use a resistor as an example. However I read it again and realized I missed this statement, "They can dissipate some of their energy to do that."

Fine and well. I respect your opinion and your right to have one. However it goes both ways and making snide on-liners is not the way to do it. IMHO! However I admit the fact that I've done the same so I don't judge.

Now the bolded part: how about the "science" of numerology!?! What are your thoughts on that? My thoughts; well it's science, but do I believe it? Here's where I get hung up on electrical science being infallible when it comes to gear reproducing music in every way. There is only one thing that I know of that is infallible and you and others may disagree but for me I know that to be God.

I've not tried those fuses so I can not comment as to whether they work as described or not. However, it makes sense to me that if the manufacturer figured out a way to have to fuses reduce the garbage and noise in the source coming off the street . . . how is that bad science? You would be reducing the noise introduced to the power supply thus keeping that noise out of the circuitry the power supply is driving thus a reduction in the noise floor. This is the same way I view aftermarket power cords which I HAVE LISTENED TO and have heard, significant in some cases and subtle in others, improvements in SQ. One in particular I know of actually made the SQ worse as noted by my trusted friends Jesse (F1nut) and DK!

quadzilla

cristo wrote: »

ok

"As electrons move through the circuit, inefficiencies in the circuit would necessarily return fewer electrons to the line than entered the circuit, not to mention the percentage that were removed from the circuit in order to be converted to something else (heat, sound, light, etc.)."

This is wrong on so many levels. If fewer electrons were returned than entered a circuit
by more than an miniscule fraction, a positive charge would build up in the circuit and
cause it to fly apart or cause a pretty impressive static electricity discharge.
Converting electrons to heat, sound, or light isn't going to happen due to conservation
of charge for one thing. They can dissipate some of their energy to do that, however.

I hope xcapri79 was just trying to be funny. If so, he did a better job than I could have.
Otherwise, my reference to the drugs stands.

Something can't "simultaneously exhibit motion in multiple directions" just because you can think of its motion differently
from several different frames of reference.
Well, maybe if you read a lot of Kurt Vonnegut (one of my favourite authors, actually).

As for avoiding making comments, hey, I said I'd try, I didn't say I'd succeed.

I still can't fathom how a high tech fuse in between the leads to a power supply will make an audible difference
in the audio output of a component.
If people want to point bad interpretations of science at the issue, that won't convince me,
and if they want to say it's magic, that won't convince me either.

That's my opinion, and I'm entitled to it.

Those that can only hear a difference when they know what they're listening to (and feel that double blind testing
is fundamentally flawed) are entitled to their opinions as well, but I don't have to agree with them, either.

Electrons carry a negative charge, not positive. You must be thinking of positrons or protons, which carry the positive charge. And that's why electric current flows from negative (excess of electrons) to positive. Most people think if flows the other way, but as usual, most people are wrong about that.

Conservation of energy only states that mass and energy can be neither created nor destroyed, but only change form, and are therefore equivalent. There's nothing in those equations that say that electrons can't be converted to energy. Aside from that, ever grabbed a capacitor right after turning something off? They do tend to store energy for a period of time. It's sort of their function. They way the store energy is via a build-up of electrons on one side of a dielectric.

And any way,

cristo

quadzilla wrote: »

Electrons carry a negative charge, not positive. You must be thinking of positrons or protons, which carry the positive charge. And that's why electric current flows from negative (excess of electrons) to positive. Most people think if flows the other way, but as usual, most people are wrong about that.

Conservation of energy only states that mass and energy can be neither created nor destroyed, but only change form, and are therefore equivalent. There's nothing in those equations that say that electrons can't be converted to energy. Aside from that, ever grabbed a capacitor right after turning something off? They do tend to store energy for a period of time. It's sort of their function. They way the store energy is via a build-up of electrons on one side of a dielectric.

And any way,

I was thinking about (negatively charged) electrons.
If fewer electrons were returned, then the relative lack of (negative) electrons would result in a positive charge.
Mass can be converted to energy, but you still have to deal with conservation of charge.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charge_conservation

"This does not mean that individual positive and negative charges cannot be destroyed. Electric charge is carried by subatomic particles such as electrons and protons, which can be created and destroyed. In particle physics, charge conservation means that in elementary particle reactions that create charged particles, equal numbers of positive and negative particles are always created, keeping the net amount of charge unchanged. Similarly, when particles are destroyed, equal numbers of positive and negative charges are destroyed."

Some other things are always conserved as well:
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/particles/parint.html

And yes, I know to be very careful that the power supply capacitors in my
Fender Pro Reverb are discharged before I get near them so that I don't get
a 500+ volt potentially lethal zap. They can store enough joules to kill someone.

If "inefficiencies in the circuit would necessarily return fewer electrons to the line than
entered the circuit" continuously, something would have to give before long.
A capacitor can only keep accumulating charge up to it's breakdown voltage, then it fails if you
try to squeeze more charge in.

DarqueKnight

cristo wrote: »

I still can't fathom how a high tech fuse in between the leads to a power supply will make an audible difference in the audio output of a component. If people want to point bad interpretations of science at the issue, that won't convince me, and if they want to say it's magic, that won't convince me either.

A reduction in noise, whether mechanical or electrical, will typically have a beneficial effect on audio signal purity. It is a common misconception that audio gear power supplies filter out all of the power line garbage. This is usually not true. Furthermore, the less work a component's power supply has to to do to filter line noise, the more efficiently it can go about the task of turning AC into DC.

I have done some quantitative studies (oscilloscope noise spectrum measurements) on audio grade fuses here:

Link: Studies On Residential Power Line Noise - Part 7: HiFi Tuning and Isoclean Fuses

Link: Studies On Residential Power Line Noise - Part 8: Audio Grade Fuses For Home Theater

In the noise study below, I found that a reduction in power line noise resulted in a cleaner power amplifier output signal (figures 8 and 10) and in a much cleaner output signal from the speaker cables (figures 12 and 14):

Link: Studies On Residential Power Line Noise - Part 2

treitz3

DarqueKnight wrote:

A reduction in noise, whether mechanical or electrical, will typically have a beneficial effect on audio signal purity.

Just a simple observation here.....think about it for a second....if Caig De-Oxit can chemically change the sound of a component or connection without adding anything into the chain, why wouldn't a higher quality fuse built specifically for the application make a change?

In one case, you add nothing. In the other case, you are upgrading the signal path. One would logically think that adding nothing would do nothing. That just isn't the case though, and we all know that from experience.

Instead of chest pounding, try it. What have you got to lose besides possibly gaining better sound in your rig....like those who have tried Caig De-Oxit?

DarqueKnight

treitz3 wrote: »

What have you got to lose besides possibly gaining better sound in your rig....

The opportunity to chest pound might be lost.:(

heiney9

DarqueKnight wrote: »

The opportunity to chest pound might be lost.:(

Lotsa chest pounder's here lately. It seems they think many of us haven't been around the block or questioned the same things at one point in our audio journey. It gets tiring dealing with chest pounders. .

H9

quadzilla

cristo wrote: »

I was thinking about (negatively charged) electrons.
If fewer electrons were returned, then the relative lack of (negative) electrons would result in a positive charge.

Wut? Are you saying that a build up of negatively charged electrons causes a net positive charge? Because that's what it sounds like you're saying.

megasat16

Someone please tell me how to charge something negative in nature to negatively charge again? I think Babel fish lost in translation again?

megasat16

I got one more question too. Anyone saying about Electrons and Holes has actually done their 1st year EE class? And what direction current flow, and why holes do not flow and why electrons flow and why AC and DC? Come on, that stuff is a joke! It's in the very beginning of any text book for a freshman EE student.

Or WiKi is helping you with the theory and the pictures so all the electorns, holes and current are losely defined?

megasat16

cristo wrote: »

I was thinking about (negatively charged) electrons.
If fewer electrons were returned, then the relative lack of (negative) electrons would result in a positive charge.
Mass can be converted to energy, but you still have to deal with conservation of charge.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charge_conservation

"This does not mean that individual positive and negative charges cannot be destroyed. Electric charge is carried by subatomic particles such as electrons and protons, which can be created and destroyed. In particle physics, charge conservation means that in elementary particle reactions that create charged particles, equal numbers of positive and negative particles are always created, keeping the net amount of charge unchanged. Similarly, when particles are destroyed, equal numbers of positive and negative charges are destroyed."

Some other things are always conserved as well:
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/particles/parint.html

And yes, I know to be very careful that the power supply capacitors in my
Fender Pro Reverb are discharged before I get near them so that I don't get
a 500+ volt potentially lethal zap. They can store enough joules to kill someone.

If "inefficiencies in the circuit would necessarily return fewer electrons to the line than
entered the circuit" continuously, something would have to give before long.
A capacitor can only keep accumulating charge up to it's breakdown voltage, then it fails if you
try to squeeze more charge in.

I really think you misunderstand Voltage and Current. Current is the charge. We draw conventional current flow as from + to -. But electrons flow is the opposite of the conventional current flow from - to + since holes can't move. Only electrons move in the circuit.

For the charge to flow, there needs to be a pressure apply to it which is voltage. If you charge a capacitor with less or equal voltage than it's specified to handle, there will be no net flow of charge such as electrons when it is fully charged. You can connect a capacitor to a constant voltage source all day long and all yearly long and it will not explode or implode. If there is no where to exit, then, it'll simply not charge. It'll self maintain equilibrium.

But when you are applying more pressure to it which is the voltage than it can handles, it's when you really destroy it. It's the pressure.

Now, what are you saying about circuit goes kaboom? What is an inefficiencies in the circuit causing it to return less electrons then it is entered? I try to think but I am a little lost on the scenario to paint the picture.

treitz3

DarqueKnight wrote: »

The opportunity to chest pound might be lost.:(

Hehe.

cristo

DarqueKnight wrote: »

A reduction in noise, whether mechanical or electrical, will typically have a beneficial effect on audio signal purity. It is a common misconception that audio gear power supplies filter out all of the power line garbage. This is usually not true. Furthermore, the less work a component's power supply has to to do to filter line noise, the more efficiently it can go about the task of turning AC into DC.

I have done some quantitative studies (oscilloscope noise spectrum measurements) on audio grade fuses here:

Link: Studies On Residential Power Line Noise - Part 7: HiFi Tuning and Isoclean Fuses

Link: Studies On Residential Power Line Noise - Part 8: Audio Grade Fuses For Home Theater

In the noise study below, I found that a reduction in power line noise resulted in a cleaner power amplifier output signal (figures 8 and 10) and in a much cleaner output signal from the speaker cables (figures 12 and 14):

Link: Studies On Residential Power Line Noise - Part 2

Honestly, I don't see a significant difference in the figures with different fuses and directions, and I'm not sure what the scales are, either.
Also, the slight change in soundstaging positions is a very subjective observation, in my opinion.
Also, I'm sorry, but I didn't get through all 9 pages of the second link.

quadzilla wrote: »

Wut? Are you saying that a build up of negatively charged electrons causes a net positive charge? Because that's what it sounds like you're saying.

I meant to say that a lack of electrons causes a net positive charge, as fewer electrons were presumably returned to the circuit.
I thought that's what I did say, but realize I've been on call for the last 120 hours consecutively so far.

treitz3 wrote: »

Just a simple observation here.....think about it for a second....if Caig De-Oxit can chemically change the sound of a component or connection without adding anything into the chain, why wouldn't a higher quality fuse built specifically for the application make a change?

In one case, you add nothing. In the other case, you are upgrading the signal path. One would logically think that adding nothing would do nothing. That just isn't the case though, and we all know that from experience.

Instead of chest pounding, try it. What have you got to lose besides possibly gaining better sound in your rig....like those who have tried Caig De-Oxit?

Trietz3,

I do beleive Caig De-Oxit can change the sound of a connection, as a badly
oxidized connection can introduce significant resistance and noise that can
degrade the performance of a component.

I think the difference between a stock fuse (provided it's not oxidized and is
making a good connection) and a gold plated fuse is going to be minimal at
best, and please explain how turning the fuse the other way around is going
to change its performance.

The last two paragraphs remind me of someone who is touting brand x spark plugs as being way better than stock,
because when they changed the old worn out plugs to new brand x plugs,
performance improved, whereas if they compared new oem plugs to new
brand x plugs, very little if any difference in performance would be seen.

ohskigod

this thread encompasses why my wife refers to Polkfest as "nerdfest"

this thread has a high correlation to a collective lack of sex being had........


carry on people

megasat16

megasat16 wrote: »

I got one more question too. Anyone saying about Electrons and Holes has actually done their 1st year EE class?

Oh yeah, I almost forgot exclusion applies to my question. I know there are some EE and some PhD. in here. That question is meant for you.

cristo

megasat16 wrote: »

I really think you misunderstand Voltage and Current. Current is the charge. We draw conventional current flow as from + to -. But electrons flow is the opposite of the conventional current flow from - to + since holes can't move. Only electrons move in the circuit.

For the charge to flow, there needs to be a pressure apply to it which is voltage. If you charge a capacitor with less or equal voltage than it's specified to handle, there will be no net flow of charge such as electrons when it is fully charged. You can connect a capacitor to a constant voltage source all day long and all yearly long and it will not explode or implode. If there is no where to exit, then, it'll simply not charge. It'll self maintain equilibrium.

But when you are applying more pressure to it which is the voltage than it can handles, it's when you really destroy it. It's the pressure.

Now, what are you saying about circuit goes kaboom? What is an inefficiencies in the circuit causing it to return less electrons then it is entered? I try to think but I am a little lost on the scenario to paint the picture.

I was trying to be simple about charge, as the potential energy or "pressure"
of the charge can be thought of as voltage and the flow of the charge as current.

The nonsense about "inefficencies in the cicuit causing it to return less electrons than it is entered?" was a quote from quadzilla's post, and
I honestly am bafflled as to what that is supposed to mean as well, and was trying to illustrate how it
would lead to an unstable situation if it continued.

cristo

While we're talking about fuses, power cords, etc. ...
What about the wiring inside components (and speakers), the printed circuit copper paths,
the leads on the resistors, capacitors, inductors (and the proximity of inductors to each
other on crossover pc boards), semiconductors, integrated circuits, etc.
These aren't quite in the same league as expensive interconnect and speaker cables, are they?
Should we be painting silver solder on the pc copper traces, or will that cause worry
about the electric potential between the solder and the copper. Should we apply a
low dielectric insulating film between circuit paths? And what about the fuse holders, are they good enough?
There is actually a reason to be concerned here in some cases.
Think about good old fashioned tube guitar amps with point to point wiring.
One has to be careful about lead dress (position and length of wiring), for if you choose
your route from a preamp tube to a volume control and back poorly, you can set up
parasitic ultrasonic oscillations that can completely silence the amp.
The wires to the tube filaments (heaters) need to be twisted and in some cases, alternated in polarity
from one tube to another to minimize hum (I converted the filament supply in my pignose guitar amp
from ac to dc to get rid of objectional hum inherent in the design of this amp).

DarqueKnight

Your concerns about figure differences and plot scales were addressed in the thread:

cristo wrote: »

Honestly, I don't see a significant difference in the figures with different fuses and directions,...

DarqueKnight wrote: »

The differences in the plots are easier to see if you save them to your hard drive and step through them.

The above statement is particularly relevant to the 60 Hz area in the plots.

cristo wrote: »

and I'm not sure what the scales are, either.

DarqueKnight wrote: »

The y-axis is the magnitude in dB and the x-axis is the frequency in Hertz. FFT measurements were taken with a Tektronix TDS 2012 digital oscilloscope. Starting at the y-axis and going from left to right the five large red spikes are: the DC component directly on the y-axis, the next and largest spike is the 60 Hz power signal, next is the 3rd harmonic at 180 Hz, next is the 5th harmonic at 300 Hz, last is the 7th harmonic at 420 Hz.

cristo wrote: »

Also, the slight change in soundstaging positions is a very subjective observation, in my opinion.

You are correct. However, subjective observation has some scientific relevance to audio:

Link: A Survey Of Early Stereophonic System Subjective Evaluation

Link: A Historical Overview of Stereophonic Blind Testing

cristo wrote: »

Also, I'm sorry, but I didn't get through all 9 pages of the second link.

That's OK. The important thing is that I did.;)

hearingimpared

ohskigod wrote: »

this thread encompasses why my wife refers to Polkfest as "nerdfest"

this thread has a high correlation to a collective lack of sex being had........


carry on people

Well I'll go along with lackanookieitis but collective!?!:eek:;)

BTW this thread is really starting to give me a headache! NOT!

cristo

DarqueKnight wrote: »

Quote:
Originally Posted by cristo
Honestly, I don't see a significant difference in the figures with different fuses and directions,...

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarqueKnight
The differences in the plots are easier to see if you save them to your hard drive and step through them.

The above statement is particularly relevant to the 60 Hz area in the plots.

But the 60 Hz spike is exactly the same amplitude on all the tracings!

inspiredsports

Cristo, does that spike mean they sound better or do not sound better?

If your answer is yes, why?

If your answer is no, why?

DarqueKnight

cristo wrote: »

But the 60 Hz spike is exactly the same amplitude on all the tracings!

Sir,

Notice that I said "60 Hz area" and not "amplitude of the 60 Hz spike".

The whole point of my noise measurement exercise was to investigate the difference, if any, in conducted power line noise with the use of various noise filtering devices.

We would hope not to see any attuation in the 60 Hz power signal, since that is actually the only thing we want to conduct. Everything else is NOISE.

What is desirable is a reduction in the amplitude of the major odd order harmonics at 180 Hz, 300 Hz and 420 Hz. It is also desirable to obtain a reduction in the amplitude and density of the low level "background" noise that runs the length of the lateral axis.

We are particularly interested in seeing a reduction in the amplitude and density of background noise around the base of the 60 Hz main power signal.

inspiredsports

Cristo, does that spike mean they sound better or do not sound better?

If your answer is yes, why?

If your answer is no, why?

Dang DK, you kind of beat him to it

hearingimpared

Now I really am getting a headache!:D

cristo

Oh, I thought you were going to measure the residual noise at the output of an amp, or at
least the at the output of the power supply portion of the amp.
A well designed power amp is supposed to convert 60 Hz ac power (and its first few harmonics)
to dc. In fact, since the filtering after the rectification is a low pass filter, higher
harmonics are suppressed even more efficiently than the fundamental is.

No, really, I'm fascinated. Tell me more.:rolleyes:

quadzilla

hearingimpared wrote: »

Now I really am getting a headache!:D

I think people just need to agree to disagree. This is like any other argument between those who know something to be true and others who know it not to be true.... especially when one side has stated that no amount of evidence will ever change their mind.

cristo

or if one side will provide no amount of convincing evidence.

DarqueKnight

cristo wrote: »

No, really, I'm fascinated. Tell me more.:rolleyes:

You seem to already know all there is to know, so I will politely decline your request for further instruction.

Good luck.

cristo

DarqueKnight wrote: »

You seem to already know all there is to know, so I will politely decline your request for further instruction.

Good luck.

hearingimpaired, your headache should get better very soon now,
and mine as well.
Goodnight.