fuse damage

It doesn’t take much effort to find and read what Modjeski has to say about the Hi-Fi Tuning Fuses he examined, and on the design and construction of fuses in general. And after having done so, one is free to dismiss or disregard Rogers findings and opinions. There is no design flaw in the Music Reference RM-9 MK.II amplifier that would result in it being damaged by insertion of the fuses; a Google search will prove that to any skeptics. Again, what harm can come from reading what a very knowledgeable and highly-regarded electronic circuit designer has to say on the subject? I realize Modjeski is not a 'high-end darling" designer (he does not "believe" in audiophile speaker wire), but ya'll do at least acknowledge he is an expert in his field, right? Just one more source from which to obtain information to consider, right? Unless one simply doesn’t want to hear anything that contradicts one's own opinion, or even the widely-held common wisdom, on the subject of "audiophile" fuses!

The following are Roger Modjeski quotes from that bastion of audiophile wisdom, Audio Circle.  

Roger Modjeski wrote,

"Perhaps you are recalling my post about burn-in where I questioned: If burn in is real, how come it wasn't discovered in the 1950s? I can only suggest that people weren't searching so hard to make something out of nothing. I recall Enid Lumely and her little tweaks, one of which was to put the cable against the wall and then put pine boards angled at 45 degrees to cover them. The good thing about people like that is they eventually go away. However if they start to make money from it, that takes longer."

"I am constantly amazed at the willingness of some to try a modification (tweak) that cannot possibly work. That is the whole point of this post. A fuse cannot be microphonic no more than pigs can fly."

"It is a thankless effort (perhaps a fools errand) to explain the science of things to un-scientific people. Yet these people should realize that the best products come from good science. I would not be able to design good sounding equipment using the pseudo science that is bandied about in the industry. Has anyone noticed that the makers of these modifications (previously called tweaks) for the most part make no real products. They do not know how to make an amplifier and many of them cannot even explain how one works yet they feel they can make it better with their "discovery"."

Having taught the scientific method at both the undergraduate and graduate levels, I don't know how "good" science might be defined. Using invalid measures or inappropriate analyses might be part of this. Usually, peer review is used to weed out poor methodologies.

But engineering is the use of science findings to make fullest use of those findings. But science often ignores many issues, such as magnetic wave generated by signals in those cables, or how vibrations interact with them to distort the true signals. I left EE because its myopic view. Physics was more open to discovery.

Geoff (and anyone else who feels Modjeski’s views on the topics Geoff quoted renders his opinion of the Hi-Fi Tuning Fuses questionable, if not downright invalid), allow me to suggest that even if Roger is "wrong" about any other topic (as I feel he is about acoustic room treatment, specifically bass traps), that does not necessarily mean he is wrong about the fuses. It’s easy enough to read what he has said about them, consider what he has said, and make of it what you will. I realize his opinion of some of the "sacred" audiophile beliefs calls into question amongst audiophiles his credibility---if he doesn’t hear evidence of burn in, for instance, how good can his designs sound? (very good; read Michael Fremer's review of the Music Reference RM-200). It reminds me of the reaction owners of the Audio Research SP-3 had to Frank Van Alstine---himself dismissive of "tweaks"---when he dared to find fault in that pre-amp and offer a mod to correct what he claimed were it’s design weaknesses. Bill Johnson was held in far higher esteem by 70’s audiophiles than was Frank. Yet Frank was proven to be correct, and his mod did indeed improve not only the bench test results of the SP-3 (it’s linearity, RIAA equalization accuracy, overload margins at low frequencies), but it’s sound as well. That’s right---a traditional conservative, non-audiophile approved electronic engineer improved on a design by the at-the-time undisputed king of audiophile designers. Hey, even a broken clock is right twice a day ;-) !

More Roger Modjeski quotes on Audio Circle, from a thread on aftermarket fuses.

1. "Quote from: *Scotty* on 14 Jul 2014, 05:29 pm
Did you also test them for suitability as AC mains fuses or speaker fuses?
Scotty

I did not. I have done all I can to inform the public that they are not suitable for tube fuses and that their claims as to microphonics and improved electrical performance are specious. I have no interest to do further tests unless they want to engage my services as a consultant."

2. "There are very few instances when a fuse is right in the signal path. If people hear a difference there I am fine with it and it is explainable. The bulk of these fuses are used in power line and tube fuse applicators where I cannot imagine them making any difference. I would like to hear your thoughts on those applications."

3. "Most likely a design choice for short circuit protection because electronic protection (current limiting) is often a problem with difficult loads. As long as the output devices are protected from shorts I prefer a fuse to current limiting. If it has any effect it is far less than current limiting. It takes twice as many fuses to put them in the power rails outside the signal path, but that is a good place to put them.

The one place a fuse might be audible is in the speaker output. This is widely known and perhaps the reason that premium fuses got a foothold in other applications. It is typical of people with limited knowledge to paint something with a broad brush or generalize. In this case since a fuse in a speaker might be audible then fuses in all applications might be audible. With proper knowledge of the situation one can be more specific."