Almarg wrote,
"Geoff, thank you for providing the thorough recap. However, as I see it those are not explanations, they are assertions. Or perhaps hypotheses would be a better term. To rise to the level of being explanations there has to be some basis (either analytical or empirical) to expect a reasonable possibility that the presumed lack of attention to those factors in stock fuses results in effects that are great enough in degree to be audibly harmful, in a broad range of applications."
Yes, Al, they’re assertions. They’re assertions why aftermarket fuses sound better than stock fuses. Skeptics keep clamoring for explanations, assertions, whatever. As if there is some deep unexplainable mystery here. There isn’t. Sorry to disappoint you and Mopman. Gee, whiz, are we now supposed to have to prove our assertions? Audio forums are built on assertions. You know, like this amp sounds better than that one, or these cables have more top end or this DAC has more transparency. Or this fuse elicits more details than that one. But at the same time, let me ask you, have you ever heard the expression, none so blind that will not see? That is also an assertion. Some folks can never seem to hoist themselves off the old LazyBoy and get to the bottom of these new fangled things. Investigation is the heart of all science.
Geoff Kait
machina dramatica
No goats no glory