We Need A Separate Forum for Fuses

Contact enhancers would thus also make an improvement on a fuse. Creating a greater area of contact.
(I do not own a meter with sensitive enough readings to tell me when a fuse would be rotated to the lowest resistance..)
I like Caig Pro Gold myself. Though the caveat about leaving only a trace to do the job is important to not have the connection degrade over time due to the 'more is NOT better' truth.
I have never tried some of the 'wonder' sorts of contact enhancers.

I would agree with the contact being a part of the equation. Though I would not say it in any way rules out other aspects.
Though some folks would want it to, it really does not negate any other claims. Only points out one side of the problem.

And it leaves nothing for the facts of the way the Magnepan tweeter behaved. Which is IMO still a great mystery...
(I would hope some other brave Magnepan owner would try reversing a 5 ft long tweeter element and report back. Seems folks just do not believe one lone report on it.)

There is no doubt magnetic fields are bad for the sound. That’s why there are low frequency high permeability metal absorbers for large transformers and similar high frequency high permeability metal shields/absorbers for speaker magnets. Fuses themselves can be shielded greatly reducing magnetic field effects on the fuse/sound, but you would undoubtedly find the fuse was still directional so it’s very unlikely magnetism causes directionality in fuses in particular and wire generally. I don’t even have to bring up the self induced magnetic field.

All of the wire in the component is directional, not just the fuse. Cable manufacturers control directionality of cables and power cords for a reason. To remove all the guesswork and to improve the sound. Whereas cables are controlled for directionality and are marked with directional arrows, fuses usually must be tried both ways even when they are marked with a symbol or arrow.

Perhaps fuse holders should be manufactured better, who knows, in any case rotating the fuse in a fuse holder would produce random results so the fuse holder theory cannot be the overriding one. The sonic results are also quite peculiar and notable for fuse directionality and cannot be attributed to the imperfections of fuse holders. In other words there are recognizable and repeatable distortions in the sound of fuses in the wrong direction, unlike a “weak” connection in a fuse holder.

I've posted this link on connector tests where it was determined that connectors are the villain. The author would measure and leave and came back and measure again only to get a different result, all the time. Nothing was touched or changed. Bare ends were determined to be the best way to connect a wire. This was in a military application where it was crucial to have consistency in reconnecting equipment which happens to operate in the same range as audio equipment. 

So can a fuse holder be considered a connector? If so, is it as unreliable in being consistent as other connectors? Could that account for the differences when measured after rotating a fuse in it's holder? If so, it wouldn't account for sounding different when reversed. Just a thought, which I'm sure will be shot down.

All the best,
Nonoise

The key phrase in Al's reprint of Ralph Karsten's post is "fuses are inherently incapable of having directionality in any way whatsoever". THAT'S what sticks in the craw of believers.

If so, then something else is afoot as I’ve clearly heard a better presentation when the fuse was in the correct orientation with three different brands. The odds of just breaking contact and reinserting a fuse on three different occasions doesn’t hold water as I’ve even put the fuses back in the wrong way only to hear the difference and take them back out and put them in the right way (not three times but once was enough).

Maybe Clark’s three laws applies:

1. When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.
2. The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture a little way past them into the impossible.
3. Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

You can add a fourth, which would be a variation on the 3rd, which would state:
     4. Any sufficient advance in audio perception is indistinguishable from
         magic when it can’t be measured.

All the best,
Nonoise