emaidel was right about the Hi-Fi Tuning fuses

[3db]

Exactly. One of the many reasons why Wilson Audio speakers are expensive is they use small precision metal film resistors in lieu of fuses in the signal path for protection.

rw

As long as the metal film resistor is not part of teh crossoer circuit, I cannot understand how this would maek any difference in the quaity of sound.

[E-Stat]

As long as the metal film resistor is not part of teh crossoer circuit, I cannot understand how this would maek any difference in the quaity of sound.

It is and I'm not surprised.

rw

[3db]

It is and I'm not surprised.

rw

Since when is a fuse used in a crossover? The metal film was used in the crossover because of its tighter tolerance of resistance. Its resistance in combination with the other components in the crossover is what defines a crossover...not some piece of metal with almost zereo resistance that burns on the application of too much current. Your logic is flawed with this arguement.

[E-Stat]

Since when is a fuse used in a crossover?

You completely missed the point. Given that crossovers use resistors, Wilson uses low wattage ones that serve a dual purpose and eliminate the need for conventional fuses. Do you understand?

Your logic is flawed with this arguement.

Only to those who cannot see the big picture. The same is true for those with similar myopia who claim that power cords couldn't possibly affect the results after miles and miles of wire!

rw

btw: You need a spellchecker.

[3db]

You completely missed the point. Given that crossovers use resistors, Wilson uses low wattage ones that serve a dual purpose and eliminate the need for conventional fuses. Do you understand?


Only to those who cannot see the big picture. The same is true for those with similar myopia who claim that power cords couldn't possibly affect the results after miles and miles of wire!

rw

btw: You need a spellchecker.

spellchecker or better typing skills

My point on the rsistors in the crossover is that its formost function is of the tighter tolerance of the resistance. That it can behave as a fuse is a side benefit . I'm guessing that Wilson wanted to knock the component count down and saw an opprtunity to do it with the resistor which was already designed into the crossover.

[E-Stat]

I'm guessing that Wilson wanted to knock the component count down and saw an opprtunity to do it with the resistor which was already designed into the crossover.

And your guess would be wrong. I have already stated the reason. Hint: it was not to make the product cheaper via reduced part count. I see you continue to duck my question about your direct experience in this matter. The silence speaks for itself.

rw

[3db]

And your guess would be wrong. I have already stated the reason. Hint: it was not to make the product cheaper via reduced part count. I see you continue to duck my question about your direct experience in this matter. The silence speaks for itself.

rw

I already answered your question....I won't take part in a fuse upgrade unless subjected to a DBT test whihc prooves to me that its worth the money. I don't wnat subjective influence ( i don't necessaitly mean hearing only) sway my decision.

And as I told you, the resistor is used mainly for the tighter tolerance of the resistor and not because its a better sounding fuse.

[bfalls]

You completely missed the point. Given that crossovers use resistors, Wilson uses low wattage ones that serve a dual purpose and eliminate the need for conventional fuses. Do you understand?


Only to those who cannot see the big picture. The same is true for those with similar myopia who claim that power cords couldn't possibly affect the results after miles and miles of wire!

rw

btw: You need a spellchecker.

I understand what you're saying. This means the resistor is being used to set the power limit of the tweeter. Should you exceed the limit, no more resistor. To be prudent, the resistor would need to be running close to it's limit to be effective. Part of a fuse's value is the speed at which it opens when it's limit is exceeded. I don't think it would be as quick with metal foil as with a strand of wire. I hope the owner has a schematic. Most failed resistors I've seem are difficult to read the color-code from. More likely, the owner has to send the speaker in for repair. Let's see, what would shipping and repair run for a Wilson WATT system? Now that's engineering!

Power cords. Another thread, another time.

[E-Stat]

To be prudent, the resistor would need to be running close to it's limit to be effective.

Yes. They are mounted on a heat sink.

More likely, the owner has to send the speaker in for repair. Let's see, what would shipping and repair run for a Wilson WATT system? Now that's engineering!

Is that what you would do? Brilliant! That's the problem with all your speculations because it illustrates the obvious limitations of in-the-box thinking. Fortunately, engineers behind such fine products are far smarter. There is a user-accessible panel in the rear.

rw

[emaidel]

I have never been a proponent of the "if it exists, then it can be measured," or conversely, " if it cannot be measured, then it doesn't exist" mentality. How then would one measure the specific placement of instruments within a stereo image, or the breadth and depth of the soundstage? There's no denying that such a thing as a stereo image exists, and that some equipment is better than others in producing it, yet there's no way at all to effectively measure why one speaker/amplifier/etc. is better than another in reprodcing it. Nor is there a way to measure the soundstage either, yet there are enormous differences in both the width and depth of a soundstage, again depending on many of the different components within a system.

If someone here (myself, or others) claims to hear something as a result of changing a piece of equipment, or even a fuse, why can't someone who has NOT heard what we have, nor has done what we've done, simply accept such, and leave it be at that? I know what I hear, and having anyone telling me that I'm really not hearing what I know I'm hearing is rather pointless, no? What is to be gained by such an endeavor?

[Mygaffer]

I have never been a proponent of the "if it exists, then it can be measured," or conversely, " if it cannot be measured, then it doesn't exist" mentality. How then would one measure the specific placement of instruments within a stereo image, or the breadth and depth of the soundstage? There's no denying that such a thing as a stereo image exists, and that some equipment is better than others in producing it, yet there's no way at all to effectively measure why one speaker/amplifier/etc. is better than another in reprodcing it. Nor is there a way to measure the soundstage either, yet there are enormous differences in both the width and depth of a soundstage, again depending on many of the different components within a system.

If someone here (myself, or others) claims to hear something as a result of changing a piece of equipment, or even a fuse, why can't someone who has NOT heard what we have, nor has done what we've done, simply accept such, and leave it be at that? I know what I hear, and having anyone telling me that I'm really not hearing what I know I'm hearing is rather pointless, no? What is to be gained by such an endeavor?

I know this is a really old thread but I am surprised that you would ask this question. Everyone on this forum should be very familiar with the failings of human hearing and the power of expectations. There is a very good reason people won't just accept what you've heard without some verification.

[Feanor]

I know this is a really old thread but I am surprised that you would ask this question. Everyone on this forum should be very familiar with the failings of human hearing and the power of expectations. There is a very good reason people won't just accept what you've heard without some verification.

What might sound fundamental to you, MG, does allude some people -- though there actually there are few here than some other sites I could mention.

It's still common to hear, "Trust your (own) ears". To be sure, it's better to trust your own ears than some other guy's, but even our own ears need verification. This is most certainly true when it comes to auditioning for smalll changes, including cables of all sorts, tubes, opamps, fancy fuses, and the numerous tweaks that are out there. If objective measures don't work one ought to look for a general consensus pertaining to a component -- on the other had too broad a consensus can be just a self-reenforcing pop trend.

Don't get me wrong: I'm not saying that these items can't or don't make a difference, only that the differences are small and it is easy to delude ourselves regarding their efficacy. (The tweak category certainly includes the astonishing items purveyed by Machina Dynamic, (here) -- let me assure you people actually buy this stuff and insist it makes a difference. What away to earn a living though; why didn't we think of it?)