IsoClean Audio Grade Fuses

amulford

I would think that would probably be the place you'd get the most benefit....

tonyb

"Audio widgets ?"

Where can I get some ? When will Oppo come out with theirs?:p

Lighten up kids.....

hearingimpared

dorokusai wrote: »

The only piece of gear I use them in is my BBQ. I'm not sure where you think I currently utilize them elsewhere.

I guess in hindsight, if I had the spare change, I'd put them everywhere. I did install them in my Magnepan when owned but again, didn't notice a difference. That doesn't mean the next guy wouldn't find value as I'm a firm believer in Bright Star Audio widgets. Maybe we're all nutty.

Oh my mistake Mark, I thought you stated in an earlier post that you use them in a head phone amp or something along those lines. Sorry about the confusion.

jinjuku

I would like to shout out a thank you to the mods for moderating

pitdogg2

well just thought i would throw that in the new Yamaha avr ad's they are touting their use of premium audio fuses. The ad i seen in sound and vision said " If these fuses didn't make a difference we would not use them we feel that they're that good"

DarqueKnight

Pittdogg, in which issue of Sound and Vision did the Yamaha ad appear?

pitdogg2

just got the new issue yesterday ...october

DarqueKnight

Thanks PD2.

The Yamaha ad is on page 19 of the the October 2010 issue. A PDF scan is attached for interested readers. I found it interesting that they would take out a full page ad just to highlight the fuses used in their "audiophile" Aventage line of AVR's (MSRP range $600 (RX-A700, 90 wpc x 7 ch.) to $1900 (RX-A3000, 170 wpc x 7 ch):

"THE OPTIMUM SOUND FUSE: THOUSANDS TESTED - ONE MADE THE CUT"

"It may not look like much to you, but to our Yamaha engineers, its the difference between good sound and great sound. And it's just one of many examples of the intense attention to detail that led to Yamaha's all-new AVENTAGE A/V receiver series.

Our new line was obsessively tested with one goal in mind: peak performance. No detail was overlooked, resulting in a multitude of engineering enhancements. If we put this much work into a single fuse, imagine what else went into AVENTAGE."

=========================================

It's been a few years since I shopped for a Yamaha audio component of any kind, but I don't recall them being a company given to advertising hype. I wondered if the "THOUSANDS TESTED - ONE MADE THE CUT" statement in the ad is true or if it is just there to grab attention, so I sent Yamaha an email asking about it.

I downloaded a copy of the RX-A3000 user manual and found that there was no externally accessible fuse holder on the back of the chassis and no mention at all of the type fuse used.

megasat16

DarqueKnight wrote: »

"THE OPTIMUM SOUND FUSE: THOUSANDS TESTED - ONE MADE THE CUT"

It got me thinking why Yamaha said "Optimum Sound" instead of Hi-Fi Sounding Fuse. Is it possible Yamaha found the gauge to measure the optimum sound for Audiophiles?

Anyway, I guess Denon using "HiFi Fuse" must have a difference coz Denon uses Hi-Fi Fuses in their FlagShip POA-S1 amps and PRA-S1 preamp.

Flash21

Not everything Mr. Bikezappa says is BS...significant figures are important to an engineer. And so is knowing that pi*d = circumference of a circle. I would think most people who paid the slightest attention in school would know that.

All that aside, my friend has experimented with a couple of brands of audio fuses, and the differences in blind tests were audible between the two brands and stock fuses. Not necessarily better, but audible, to many different listeners. Mr. Bikezappa saying it can't be so, well, he is wrong. And I am a well know skeptic amongst my friends.

It's sort of like the Inquisition prosecuting Galileo for saying the earth is not the center of the universe, because there is just no way God would allow that to be the case. Well there was a way, they just were not prepared to consider the possibility.

DarqueKnight

Flash21 wrote: »

Not everything Mr. Bikezappa says is BS...significant figures are important to an engineer. And so is knowing that pi*d = circumference of a circle. I would think most people who paid the slightest attention in school would know that.

I agree that not everything that Mr. Bikezappa says is BS, but a lot of it is. Much of what he says is also extremely pedantic:

Pedant: A person who puts great stress on minor points of learning.

I have held supervisory positions in industry and academia. I frequently need to interview subcontractors in my private consulting practice. I always conduct interviews in a respectful manner and only ask questions pertinent to the job being interviewed for. I think it would be difficult to find a professional manager who would disqualify a job candidate because they didn't remember C=pi*d if such knowledge was not pertinent to the position being interviewed for.

I have been a practicing electrical engineer for over 25 years and there have been very few times when I needed to know how to calculate the circumference or area of a circle. There have also been few times when I needed to use Ohm's law. There are many, many electrical engineering masters theses and doctoral dissertations where Ohm's law does not appear even once. Rather than Ohm's law, I have used, and continue to use, a lot of antenna theory, E-M field theory and conducted noise equations in my work.

Flash21 wrote: »

All that aside, my friend has experimented with a couple of brands of audio fuses, and the differences in blind tests were audible between the two brands and stock fuses. Not necessarily better, but audible, to many different listeners.

I hope that your friend published his results somewhere. If not, I hope he/she will consider doing so.

Flash21 wrote: »

I am a well know skeptic amongst my friends.

Me too. Very early in this thread I stated:

DarqueKnight wrote: »

The jaded skeptic in me wanted not to like these [fuses].

Flash21 wrote: »

It's sort of like the Inquisition prosecuting Galileo for saying the earth is not the center of the universe, because there is just no way God would allow that to be the case. Well there was a way, they just were not prepared to consider the possibility.

Your analogy of the Inquisition is appropriate. The Inquisition was driven by fear and ignorance. Someone going against the teachings of the church was (in their minds) attacking the "infallibility" of church leaders and church doctrines. This was a threat to the control of people's minds. Was there really any need to silence doctrinal critics by imprisonment and death? Yes, because church leaders did not have sufficient knowledge to challenge "heretical" teachings on a scientific basis, so the "heretic" needed to be imprisoned or executed. Some of the modern day equivalents of Inquisition tactics is "shouting someone down", character assassination, questioning someone's intelligence while the questioner has not done a thorough investigation into the matter, and random ridicule.

What is the point of calling people morons and questioning their IQ simply because they are doing something in their hobby (i.e. leisure time activity) that you don't personally agree with? There is nothing wrong with being skeptical or asking why people do a particular thing, but I think such questions should come from a place of genuinely trying to understand rather than seeking opportunity to ridicule.

With regard to audio grade fuses, I decided to try them a year or so after becoming aware of them. After hearing some benefit, I did some quantitative noise measurements which provided some insight into what I was hearing. I was subsequently attacked by "The Inquisition" for using "BS" science to pull the wool over peoples eyes.

Well, I guess the engineers at Yamaha Electronics Corporation saw how successful *I* was at pulling the wool over people's eyes that they decided to go on record saying that they spent extensive time evaluating audio grade fuses and that such fuses made an audible improvement in their audio components. They even made the fairly ballsy statement that a fuse made the difference between "good sound" and "great sound". [See attachment in post #226.]

Such Good Advertising.

Flash21

Anyone who has studied the science of engineering has realized that engineering is not perfect and all-knowing...I have a book called, "To Engineer Is Human" that discusses how spectacular failures in engineering serve to advance the science (collapse of the Tacoma Narrows bridge being one of the most spectacular examples).

Point being, the fact that Mr. BikeZappa engineer doesn't know how to explain a phenomena doesn't preclude that phenomena from existing.

DarqueKnight

The Lord High Grand Inquisitor is not an engineer, he says he is a physicist.

bikezappa wrote: »

I was in Vocational School for two years in high school and went on to college to get a BA in Physics.

bikezappa wrote: »

I went to Lowell Technological Institute in the 60s. It's now called Lowell U Mass and now has liberal arts courses and degrees.

bikezappa wrote: »

I have a degree in physics and have worked in the ceramic composite field fabricating componets for R&D and commericial applications for 40 years. I have published over 10 papers in scientific journals.

bikezappa wrote: »

The beauty of EE is how every thing can be reduced to a combination of R, resistance, C, capacitance and L, Inductance. ALL circuits are a combination of these three units and there are mathamatical laws that show how R,L,C work together PREDICT how your lights, tuner, amplifiers work.

When people and scientists ignore these laws on the forum I write a rant and get called names.

DarqueKnight

bikezappa wrote: »

The beauty of EE is how every thing can be reduced to a combination of R, resistance, C, capacitance and L, Inductance. ALL circuits are a combination of these three units and there are mathamatical laws that show how R,L,C work together PREDICT how your lights, tuner, amplifiers work.

When people and scientists ignore these laws on the forum I write a rant and get called names.

This type of simplistic under-thinking forms the foundation of the audio naysayer mindset: If some phenomenon cannot be reduced to the few simple equations or simple evaluation procedures that they understand, and in a lot of cases misunderstand, then they write a rant questioning the intelligence of dedicated audio enthusiasts.

One of the primary performance considerations in any communication signal circuit is the NOISE performance. The noise, in all its myriad forms, is what keeps us from hearing everything there is to be heard or seeing everything there is to see in a communications signal.

The mathematical laws pertaining to R, L, and C cannot predict the signal to noise ratio of an audio circuit. They cannot predict the amount of crosstalk in an audio cable. They cannot specify the required twisted-pair cable geometry to cancel crosstalk in an audio cable. They cannot quantify thermal noise, additive white Gaussian noise, shot noise, 1/f noise, EMI, RFI or any of the other forms of audible noise that affect the performance of audio circuits.

Flash21

I think he has forgotten that "laws" of physics are only approximations of reality, just like Newton's "Law of Gravity" was further refined (and in some cases, refuted) by quantum physics (and physicists are working on other theories that might better explain the universe than quantum physics does).

inspiredsports

DarqueKnight wrote: »

This type of simplistic under-thinking forms the foundation of the audio naysayer mindset: If some phenomenon cannot be reduced to the few simple equations or simple evaluation procedures that they understand, and in a lot of cases misunderstand, then they write a rant questioning the intelligence of dedicated audio enthusiasts.

One of the primary performance considerations in any communication signal circuit is the NOISE performance. The noise, in all its myriad forms, is what keeps us from hearing everything there is to be heard or seeing everything there is to see in a communications signal.

The mathematical laws pertaining to R, L, and C cannot predict the signal to noise ratio of an audio circuit. They cannot predict the amount of crosstalk in an audio cable. They cannot specify the required twisted-pair cable geometry to cancel crosstalk in an audio cable. They cannot quantify thermal noise, additive white Gaussian noise, shot noise, 1/f noise, EMI, RFI or any of the other forms of audible noise that affect the performance of audio circuits.

Just perfect! A bit long for a signature, but if we all of use it, we might reduce the contentious nature of some of these threads.

jinjuku

DarqueKnight wrote: »

Well, I guess the engineers at Yamaha Electronics Corporation saw how successful *I* was at pulling the wool over people's eyes that they decided to go on record saying that they spent extensive time evaluating audio grade fuses and that such fuses made an audible improvement in their audio components. They even made the fairly ballsy statement that a fuse made the difference between "good sound" and "great sound". [See attachment in post #226.]

The flip side of that coin is to ask: So Yamaha, you have been putting in the most dirt cheap, get the job done, fuses in your high end receivers all these years?

I think the EE in you will agree that given todays production ability you can produce a really good $1 fuse vs the ones costing pennies that they had been using and reap any possible sonic improvements.

IMO a $25 fuse is simply getting bent over (I am including R&D).

dorokusai

DarqueKnight wrote: »

The Lord High Grand Inquisitor is not an engineer, he says he is a physicist.

So what degree do you need to engage in this conversation? It reads like your mocking him now.

heiney9

jinjuku wrote: »

So Yamaha, you have been putting in the most dirt cheap, get the job done, fuses in your high end receivers all these years?

Yamaha and receivers aren't even close to "high end", so no I wouldn't expect them to use anything more than a 0.10c fuse.

H9

jinjuku

DarqueKnight wrote: »

Thanks PD2.

The Yamaha ad is on page 19 of the the October 2010 issue. A PDF scan is attached for interested readers. I found it interesting that they would take out a full page ad just to highlight the fuses used in their "audiophile" Aventage line of AVR's (MSRP range $600 (RX-A700, 90 wpc x 7 ch.) to $1900 (RX-A3000, 170 wpc x 7 ch):

So will Yamaha be offering this as an OEM upgrade for their current RX line of receivers?

cstmar01

jinjuku wrote: »

The flip side of that coin is to ask: So Yamaha, you have been putting in the most dirt cheap, get the job done, fuses in your high end receivers all these years?

I think the EE in you will agree that given todays production ability you can produce a really good $1 fuse vs the ones costing pennies that they had been using and reap any possible sonic improvements.

IMO a $25 fuse is simply getting bent over (I am including R&D).

IMO if your spending 8K on your amps, CDP, pre ect. 25 bucks is a drop in the bucket if you're trying to make a change in the sound ect. Its called a tweak.

People also will stick 100 bucks worth of tweeters into a speaker that cost 200 to improve the sound quality, per your reasoning that is useless and just being "bent over" again. :rolleyes:

reeltrouble1

jinjuku wrote: »

IMO $25 is simply getting bent over

Oh my!:eek: Perhaps an introduction to BGB would be in order.

RT1

DarqueKnight

jinjuku wrote: »

The flip side of that coin is to ask: So Yamaha, you have been putting in the most dirt cheap, get the job done, fuses in your high end receivers all these years?

Apparently so. However, audio grade fuses are a fairly recent development so I can understand them taking a while to look into them. For a long time, premium grade capacitors, resistors and inductors were not generally available.

jinjuku wrote: »

I think the EE in you will agree that given todays production ability you can produce a really good $1 fuse vs the ones costing pennies that they had been using and reap any possible sonic improvements.

I will agree that a really good $1 fuse can be made. However, the best sounding fuses I have used cost in the $25 to $40 range. It all depends on what level of tweaking you want to achieve. Even for some people who hear an improvement with these fuses, the cost will be prohibitive relative to the amount of improvement gained.

I don't know what goes into making these fuses, so I don't know if the price charged is fair or not.

jinjuku wrote: »

IMO a $25 fuse is simply getting bent over (I am including R&D).

I have paid well over $25 for old, rare audio brochures and didn't feel that I was getting bent over...and this was for something that I was going to put away in a closet on only see occasionally. At least, the fuse will be used every day.

It all depends on what level of tweaking you want to achieve. Even for some people who hear an improvement with these fuses, the cost will be prohibitive relative to the amount of improvement gained.

I am tweak oriented, so paying $25 for a tweak, whether it is a fuse or an isolation cone, is inconsequential. Different strokes.

jinjuku wrote: »

So will Yamaha be offering this as an OEM upgrade for their current RX line of receivers?

That is a good question. Info on reaching Yamaha to submit your question can be found here:

http://www.yamaha.com/yec/customer/reachus.html?CTID=5010110

Enjoy.

jinjuku

cstmar01 wrote: »

IMO if your spending 8K on your amps, CDP, pre ect. 25 bucks is a drop in the bucket if you're trying to make a change in the sound ect. Its called a tweak.

People also will stick 100 bucks worth of tweeters into a speaker that cost 200 to improve the sound quality, per your reasoning that is useless and just being "bent over" again. :rolleyes:

IMO if you buy a $60K Mercedes it should come with leather.

But you actually miss the point I am making: If you are building a top shelf component all these years why the change now?

At least put something better than a run of the mill radio shack quality fuse.

I am not sure why Classe, Pass Labs, Conrad Johnson, Levinson, McIntosh would put a $0.02 fuse in. I would hope they wouldn't.

I would agree with you on the sticking a $100 tweeter in a speaker that costs $200 to begin with. Do you have a link to any thread of that nature?

jinjuku

DarqueKnight wrote: »

Apparently so. However, audio grade fuses are a fairly recent development so I can understand them taking a while to look into them. For a long time, premium grade capacitors, resistors and inductors were not generally available.

How recent is recent for audio grade fuses? When it comes to technology nothing ever stays the same:)

My original post was simply to start by removing the fuse entirely and jumper the open contact with a straight up piece or 12/14 AWG OFC and see if that made a difference and work back from there.

That is if it made a difference that you could appreciate then by all means experiment. Experimentation is part and parcel of this hobby. If you want to spend $25 on whatever go for it. It's just a value call. I am not making that call for anyone else, nor alluded to it.

I collect out of print books/magazines. I just paid $110 for an out of print hardback that cost $7.99 in 81'. It's all about value and that I understand. People here shouldn't get their panties in a bundle. I am not making a value judgment for you.

What I don't get is why someone would purchase a $25 fuse w/o first just jumping the fuse block.

jinjuku

DarqueKnight wrote: »

That is a good question. Info on reaching Yamaha to submit your question can be found here:

http://www.yamaha.com/yec/customer/reachus.html?CTID=5010110

Enjoy.

I have a commercial account with Yamaha, I know how to get in touch with them:);)

cstmar01

jinjuku wrote: »

IMO if you buy a $60K Mercedes it should come with leather.
But you actually miss the point I am making: If you are building a top shelf component all these years why the change now?

At least put something better than a run of the mill radio shack quality fuse.

I am not sure why Classe, Pass Labs, Conrad Johnson, Levinson, McIntosh would put a $0.02 fuse in. I would hope they wouldn't.

I would agree with you on the sticking a $100 tweeter in a speaker that costs $200 to begin with. Do you have a link to any thread of that nature?

yet people still take that 60K or even 120K Mercedes and "pimp" their ride and replace leather, what have you. I would also think it should have a decent stereo system but that gets changed out commonly don't ya think?


People will buy a pair of SDA 1C's anywhere from 200-500 bucks and then replace the tweeters and from what I recall they run about 98 bucks to upgrade to the new ones... Search button will reveal the secrets of the night.....ohhh ohhh ohhh...:rolleyes: is it wrong for someone to do this...no..but once again things change, technology changes, research changes things...maybe a better fuse was developed than what a 10 year old amp has in it, why would it be so wrong to change it out?

Once again try it before you knock it.

Flash21

jinjuku wrote: »

I would agree with you on the sticking a $100 tweeter in a speaker that costs $200 to begin with. Do you have a link to any thread of that nature?

There are plenty in the Vintage Speaker category...

jinjuku

cstmar01 wrote: »

yet people still take that 60K or even 120K Mercedes and "pimp" their ride and replace leather, what have you. I would also think it should have a decent stereo system but that gets changed out commonly don't ya think?


People will buy a pair of SDA 1C's anywhere from 200-500 bucks and then replace the tweeters and from what I recall they run about 98 bucks to upgrade to the new ones... Search button will reveal the secrets of the night.....ohhh ohhh ohhh...:rolleyes:

With the Mercedes all components at least hit a certain quality thresh hold where it counts. You can upgrade any component on almost any thing. Whether it is needed or not.

I understand someone taking an SDA and put the $$ towards tweeters. Polk doesn't make the designs like they used too. I wasn't sure what $200 speakers you were referring too so I asked. Nyuck Nyuck Nyuck :rolleyes:

jinjuku

Flash21 wrote: »

There are plenty in the Vintage Speaker category...

That is why I asked for a link. I wasn't sure what speaker was being referred too.

And I happen to agree in the instance of the SDA's. I couldn't infer if it was new speakers (like BIC or some TSi 100's) or something else entirely.