Now you're putting words in my mouth - at least to some extent.
(And perish the thought that I should be accused of agreeing with Amir
.)
I
ABSOLUTELY do not agree that numbers or measurements can always, or even usually, tell the entire story.
In fact... let me be more precise about my opinion on that subject.
There are a
LOT of things you can measure... and, collectively, if you know how to interpret the results, they can tell you quite a lot.
However we almost never have even the ability to measure everything that might conceivable affect a given situation...
And it is never a good idea to single out one or two measurements and expect them to tell the entire story.
I would go as far as to say that
ANYTHING THAT IS AUDIBLE CAN BE MEASURED...
The simple reality is that, for anything that we can detect with any of our human senses, there is a more accurate way to measure the same thing.
But that does not necessarily mean that we are currently measuring the right thing to enable us to do so...
Or that, even if we have the necessary data, that we know how to interpret it fully and accurately...
For example, there is no such thing as "imaging" or "soundstage" as a separate thing...
It is an emergent property of frequency response, phase response, directionality, and room acoustics, among other things.
And, if we measure all of those things quite carefully, and analyze the results with the benefit of some experience, we can get a pretty good idea about "imaging".
However, even with a full set of precise measurements, we still don't known enough to make detailed predictions that are consistently and reliably absolutely accurate.
Therefore, to some degree, we are forced to "trust our ears".
HOWEVER, we also know, for an absolute fact, that what we think we hear also
CANNOT be entirely trusted.
We
KNOW that things like expectation bias are real...
And we can even quantify them statistically with some degree of accuracy...
So, for example, in the context of our discussion...
If I were to take two identical pairs of speakers... with totally identical wiring... and identical fuses...
But
TELL everyone in a large group of listeners that "Set A have ordinary fuses in them but Set B have special $100 audiophile fuses"...
I can assure you that
SOME of the people in that group will be quite sure that they hear a difference...
And virtually all of that sub-group will be quite convinced that the expensive fuses sound better...
And, if I were doing a sales presentation, I could skew that result even further by how I describe the situation or word my follow-up questions.
(For example, along with the prices, I would use adjectives like "cheap no-name fuses" and "specially scientifically optimized audio fuses".)
So, if I want to actually know if there is an audible difference, I will instead conduct a blind test...
Where the listeners don't know whether the speakers have different fuses, or which is which, and are simply asked *IF* they hear a difference and, if so, which they prefer.
(And, oddly, when we do it this way, a significant percentage of "subtle differences" seem to disappear...)
It's also worth mentioning that, the smaller the actual difference is, the more likely it is that what people think they hear will be determined by other things.
So... yes...
In the case of something like fuses...
Where all of the actual measurements suggest a very small difference...
And specifically where the measurable differences that do exist seem unlikely to produce an audible difference...
I absolutely
WOULD NOT trust my ears to be able to overcome other biases in the situation.
I should also point out that, in this particular situation, there are some especially strong biases at work.
To phrase it somewhat flippantly....
"If you've just spent hours modifying your speakers, or spent a lot of money on fancy fuses or wiring, you have a
STRONG incentive to
want to hear an improvement."
Specifically because, if you don't hear a difference, then that would mean that "your time and or money had been wasted".
And this, in turn, would tend to make most people either feel foolish, or as if they had been misled or cheated, both of which are feelings we all prefer to avoid.
And, even worse, if you've been telling all your friends about your cool new project, now you're going to have to tell them that you were wrong after all.
(That's the reason why "assertions" work... and you're more likely to successfully do something like quite smoking if you've told all your friends that you're going to do it this time.)
PLEASE NOTE that I am not claiming for an
ABSOLUTE FACT that there won't be a difference...
Merely that this is virtually a textbook situation for
NOT trusting your ears without some sort of blind test to eliminate all of the obvious biases that may be present.
(And, yes, that, in this situation, I definitely
WOULD NOT trust my own ears to be the sole arbiter of "whether it helped or not".)
I would also add that what I would do would be determined by other factors as well...
For example, I find copper jumpers "aesthetically" more satisfying than steel ones...
And there is
almost certainly no "down side" to replacing steel with copper in this situation...
There's not much point in considering silver... because silver is only a slightly better conductor than copper... but tarnishes as badly as copper...
(I say "almost certainly" because there might be issues if and where the jumpers are in contact with the aluminum foil traces.)
(But I might check with Magnepan first... just to make sure there isn't some less obvious reason why they specifically chose to use steel.)
I suspect that copper would probably be OK... although I might go with gold-plated copper, which wouldn't tarnish, and generally won't react with aluminum either.
But I still like to keep my facts straight about the entire project... and so wouldn't necessarily expect to
hear a difference.
Gee. All I said was the best thing do do was try something and listen. But if you don't trust yourself, I understand. I suppose Amir would agree with you.
.)
But I agree with you Keith ... as I usually do!
