# Do cables "burn in"?



## I3eyond

Just upgraded the interconnect between my computer and Musical Fidelity V-DAC to an Audioquest Cinnamon USB A/B cable, and was wondering if cables "burn" in like other equipment...?


----------



## Geruvah

No.


----------



## bcasey25raptor

short answer. NO


----------



## Steve Eddy

Will Smith answer: HELL no! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			




   
  se


----------



## Willakan

For extra reinforcement - _*NO*_


----------



## MrProggie

_Don't think so._


----------



## Steve Eddy

Hang on, let me grab my magnifying glass.
   
Don't think so.
   
  Ah, ok.
   
  Me either.
   
  se


----------



## Uncle Erik

I surmise that you haven't noticed a difference yet.

You won't find one.

If you can't hear a difference, return the cable for a refund.


----------



## DaveBSC

Yep. Like any other set of components the time can be quite variable, anywhere from 10s of hours to hundreds. A couple of cables I flat out did not like until they burned in. Silver often takes quite awhile.
   
  "If you can't hear a difference, return the cable for a refund. " - This I absolutely agree with. There doesn't seem to be anything special to me about the AQ USB cables, just the usual AQ nonsense about 1%, 3%, 5% etc silver as you climb the price ladder. I wouldn't be surprised if it can't outperform a Belkin.


----------



## Lenni

Well, it depends what you mean by burn-in. if you mean the same way speakers/HP’s burn in, then I'd say, no.  if you mean as in adjusting to the components their attached to, and the system as a whole (more of a “settling in” than a burn in, imo), then I’d say yes.
   
  One possible way to find out about cable’s burn in could be to get three pairs of the same cable. Use one pair for about a couple of months. Then with the help of a friend randomly swap the three pairs and see if you can single out the burn-in pair.
   
  There are conditions to be met for such a test though:
   
  a) The system should be revealing (low-budget systems will not do)
  b) The person should be very familiar with the system is doing the test on. Only the person familiar with the system should do the test. You can’t ask some random people to take such a test – waste of time.
   
  Given the above conditions I’m pretty sure I would be able to differentiate the burn-in pair of cables, if there were audible differences.
   
   
   
   
  anyway, this answer better than me. comprende?


----------



## n3rdling

No, don't let the lunatics convince you otherwise.


----------



## I3eyond

Yes, you're right---as much as I WANT to hear a difference, I just CAN'T!  At least I didn't spend $100 on the cable or else I'd be highly upset.
  
  Quote: 





uncle erik said:


> I surmise that you haven't noticed a difference yet.
> 
> You won't find one.
> 
> If you can't hear a difference, return the cable for a refund.


----------



## dilpal

NO


----------



## Chris J

Yes, they burn a hole in your wallet.


----------



## Lenni

Quote: 





chris j said:


> Yes, they burn a hole in your wallet.


 


  that's true. there's a permanent hole on mine. I purchased a set of 2M Nordost Red Dawn II Bi-wire speaker cable this very morning from an A'gon member. yay!


----------



## liamstrain

Quote: 





lenni said:


> b) The person should be very familiar with the system is doing the test on. Only the person familiar with the system should do the test. You can’t ask some random people to take such a test – waste of time.


 


  That sort of takes away from the whole, quantifiable, verifiable, objective results aspect of any real test... neh? 
   
  But since listening is a mostly subjective experience, maybe that's a non-issue. If it sounds better to you... who am I to say it's BS.
   
  But short answer seems to be, No. Cables do not "burn in" or change the sound signature over time (barring damage or excessive oxidation).


----------



## Parall3l

OP, ignore those people with their useless actual-scientific-facts. Cables burn in, I can hear it happen


----------



## Willakan

Quote:


parall3l said:


> OP, ignore those people with their useless actual-scientific-facts. Cables burn in, I can hear it happen


  You are being sarcastic, right?


----------



## Steve Eddy

Quote:  





> You are being sarcastic, right?


 

 Rhetorical question, right? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



   
  se


----------



## Prog Rock Man

Those who say 'yes' cannot provide any real proof that the cable itself is having an audible affect on sound quality.

Those who say 'no' cannot convincingly explain why there are credible reports by credible people who say 'yes'.


----------



## liamstrain

Quote: 





prog rock man said:


> Those who say 'no' cannot convincingly explain why there are credible reports by credible people who say 'yes'.


 

 A "credible report" sans supporting evidence, is not credible, imo. Just because someone normally gives great advice about things, if they suddenly state that they can fly, we don't take them at their word... we ask for evidence. 
   
  Seriously. I'll spin on a dime here the moment any verifiable, objective evidence is shown.
   
  Until that time, there is some anecdotal reporting that for some people, maybe there is some burn in that they think they experienced/heard. But nothing I would call actual evidence. It's not that I don't think they hear it - I believe they do... do *think* they hear it. The brain is an amazing thing, and it can let us do, hear and see lots of things that are not necessarily real (placebo effect, for instance - you believe you will get better, and sometimes actually do... likewise, if you believe you will hear a difference, your brain might let you go ahead and keep on believing).  
   
  Caveat emptor, YMMV, and it's your dime to do with as you will.


----------



## gregorio

i3eyond said:


> Just upgraded the interconnect between my computer and Musical Fidelity V-DAC to an Audioquest Cinnamon USB A/B cable, and was wondering if cables "burn" in like other equipment...?




If you mean; "is there some physical change which occurs within the cable due to burn in?" The answer is no. Then the question becomes "do people hear a difference even though nothing has changed?" The answer is that some people believe they do but most do not. So then the question becomes "if nothing has changed how can some people be hearing a difference?" The answer is that they only seem able to hear a difference provided they are not under any kind of acceptable test conditions. Most anyone with any appreciation of science would suggest that those who hear a difference from cable burn-in are suffering from some form of bias or delusion. Those who do hear a difference seem unshakably convinced but cannot provide any evidence or rationale as to why they hear a difference.

G


----------



## Spareribs

The way I see it, if a cable does burn it, it is so subtle that thinking about it is goofy, unless you spent alot of money on it. Go ahead and burn in your cables because it is part of the audiophile fun. If it makes you feel good, then go for it brotha. I have not noticed cables burning in in my experience but then again, I do not try to listen to cables. I just plug in and enjoy. Get a good set of cables and don't worry too much about it.


----------



## jjinh

Burn them in if you like, personally I dont care about doing such things.


----------



## miow

I'm burning in one actually (have never done it before), will let you know if it really changes as I have another one (similar) to compare. And I don't need blind tests, when the difference is pretty obvious as noticed already with different cables/brands.
   
  Interesting reading: http://www.cardas.com/content.php?area=insights&content_id=12&pagestring=Cable


----------



## kskwerl

Quote: 





n3rdling said:


> No, don't let the lunatics convince you otherwise.


 
  this


----------



## BIG POPPA

Cables do burn in. It is the dielectric that burns in more so than the cable. The metal strands, a little burn in to the cable. The more shielding ,tech flex, tubing, will add time to the burn in. Let your cables lay on your carpet.........Suck the life out of them. More dielectric.  All my cables are suspended off the floor. And anyone that knows me well, knows at meets I let my cables lay on a chair and not on the carpet.


----------



## Lorspeaker

http://www.musicdirect.com/p-6971-densen-demagic-reference-demagnetizer-cd.aspx
   
  all my setup/gears/cables have to go thru this laundrywash....before i think they are ready... that makes me happy inside...does it work, i better believe it works...since i already paid for it...
   
  ok ..i do believe cables burn in...?  its a mystery....since we hear music as a SETUP...amps dacs cans cables..
  ""the setup seems to sound sweeter smoother as time goes by"". its hard to localise iti to the cable..or the usb..or the powercord. 
   
  i think u should sent back the cables...and get some wireworld cables...lol. 
  just teasing the gang here.


----------



## BIG POPPA

Here we go again...... Seriously, I have a least 1000 hours to be conservative on the power cables and RCA cables that I use. Made them myself. Can make the same cable and hear the difference from the cables in my system from ones just assembled. I listen to my gear a lot, give lots of time in the evening. Do not change my rig too much. Go to a lot of audio meetings and functions at audio retailers. Refine my opinions regularly.
  Quote: 





active man said:


> Whether I make them or purchase them the physical and chemical properties of the constituent molecules and elements remain unaffected.  Alchemy was debunked centuries ago, you know...


----------



## Lorspeaker

i am siding with bigpoppa.... tweaking the sound with cables has been the FUN in this hobby after i have bought the main hardwares like cans/dacs/amps. i will be adding a pair of DIY silver rca in a few hours to my arsenal 
   
  guess i will be wondering if i need to "burn in " the silvers pretty soon... will report back after 1000hours.


----------



## Lorspeaker

[size=1.6em] Dielectric[/size] [size=0.8em]  From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  

   

   A *dielectric* is an electrical insulator that can be polarized by an applied electric field. When a dielectric is placed in an electric field, electric charges do not flow through the material as they do in a conductor, but only slightly shift from their average equilibrium positions causing *dielectric polarization*. Because of dielectric polarization, positive charges are displaced toward the field and negative charges shift in the opposite direction. This creates an internal electric field which reduces the overall field within the dielectric itself.[1] If a dielectric is composed of weakly bonded molecules, those molecules not only become polarized, but also reorient so that their symmetry axis aligns to the field.[1]


 [/size]


----------



## goodolcheez

Quote: 





liamstrain said:


> That sort of takes away from the whole, quantifiable, verifiable, objective results aspect of any real test... neh?
> 
> But since listening is a mostly subjective experience, maybe that's a non-issue. If it sounds better to you... who am I to say it's BS.
> 
> But short answer seems to be, No. Cables do not "burn in" or change the sound signature over time (barring damage or excessive oxidation).


 

 It doesn't take away. It's called "trained ears".  If you have some dumb schmuck to hear the audio between generic and high-perf cable he wouldn't be able to hear the difference because he doesn't know what to look for.  Plus his ear drum performance is different than our beautiful member Lenni.  Cables make huge difference in sound, especially with analog interconnects.  The difference is still noticeable with USB interconnects as well.  "neh?" my butt.


----------



## liamstrain

Quote: 





goodolcheez said:


> It doesn't take away. It's called "trained ears".  If you have some dumb schmuck to hear the audio between generic and high-perf cable he wouldn't be able to hear the difference because he doesn't know what to look for.  Plus his ear drum performance is different than our beautiful member Lenni.  Cables make huge difference in sound, especially with analog interconnects.  The difference is still noticeable with USB interconnects as well.  "neh?" my butt.


 
   
  I'd be willing to let you have all the trained ears you want in a blind test. Lenni was discussing using a known system known cable combination in the testing - my only point was that it needs to be somehow objective. Either via measurements, or a DBT or other method that mitigates some of the subjective biases we are all subject to. 
   
  But this is not a discussion on whether cables affect sound. I've said my piece on that in the Sound Science subforum. This is a discussion whether a cable can burn in and affect sound. And there, the overwhelming evidence and electrical theory says no. It does not and can not. A dielectric does have an effect on a cable, in that it can affect capacitance, and the RLC of a given cable is a fundamental factor in whether and how it works in a given circuit. But there is nothing to suggest that changes in the alignment of electrons, or polarization in a dielectric over time will have any changing effect on the electrical signal or those RLC values as a result of burn in.  And since RLC are the only factors in the "sound" of a given cable, if those do not change via burn in, neither will the "sound" of the cable.


----------



## miow

Well, my Canare L-2T2S has changed already and I do trust my ears ; )


----------



## liamstrain

Quote: 





miow said:


> Well, my Canare L-2T2S has changed already and I do trust my ears ; )


 
   
   
  More power to you. I'm not going to try to tell you that you don't hear what you think you hear... but I will need more than your testimony (objective testing, measurements, a good testable theory so we can experiment) - before I overturn our contemporary understanding of electricity and conductive materials.  
   
  But as always, this is meant to be a debate free forum. So I'll have to leave it at that.


----------



## Lorspeaker

just gotten my diy silver rca....first hour was a "huh" ..kinda mute cotton wool-ed. i was frankly disappointed.
  And then magically the bass tightened..the highs bloomed, piano n guitar took on an airy clarity..heaven.
   
  this is pure magic...nothing to to with science. dun discuss...i am writing just for bigpoppa.


----------



## BIG POPPA

lorspeaker said:


> just gotten my diy silver rca....first hour was a "huh" ..kinda mute cotton wool-ed. i was frankly disappointed.
> And then magically the bass tightened..the highs bloomed, piano n guitar took on an airy clarity..heaven.
> 
> this is pure magic...nothing to to with science. dun discuss...i am writing just for bigpoppa.



Very nice. Im a fan of silver cables. my diys are on my woo.


----------



## miow

Quote: 





lorspeaker said:


> just gotten my diy silver rca....first hour was a "huh" ..kinda mute cotton wool-ed. i was frankly disappointed.
> And then magically the bass tightened..the highs bloomed, piano n guitar took on an airy clarity..heaven.
> 
> this is pure magic...nothing to to with science. dun discuss...i am writing just for bigpoppa.


----------



## justin w.

I once accidentally put cables in the oven and then turned on the oven weeks later.  They burned in alright.


----------



## tinyman392

justin w. said:


> I once accidentally put cables in the oven and then turned on the oven weeks later.  They burned in alright.




Naw, they just roasted. They are burned now  


Sent from an iPod touch with TapaTalk... Autocorrect may alter the meaning of this message


----------



## BIG POPPA

LOL
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




... 
  Quote: 





justin w. said:


> I once accidentally put cables in the oven and then turned on the oven weeks later.  They burned in alright.


----------



## muscular

Notice bass was bloomy when i first gotten my twags.
  After some time, it tighten up.


----------



## Steve Eddy

Quote: 





justin w. said:


> I once accidentally put cables in the oven and then turned on the oven weeks later.  They burned in alright.


 
   
  Accidentally put cables in the oven?
   
  Reminds me of the old joke.
   
_So I was standing on the street using my knife to eat an apple. A friend of mine came running around the corner, bumped into me and I accidentally stabbed him._
   
_Nine times._
   
_In the back._
   




   
  And then there was the time some years ago I had a customer EMail me asking if it would be ok if he put them on his cable cooker. I asked him if it was the Audio Dharma Cable Cooker. He said it was. Alan Kafton, maker of the Audio Dharma Cable Cooker was a dear friend of mine so I asked the customer if he'd be willing to help me play a little prank on him.
   
  He agreed.
   
  So I made up a short length of cable, soaked it with lighter fluid and took a match to it. I took a couple of photos of the charred remains and sent them to the customer who in turn included them in an EMail he sent Alan telling him that he'd just bought these cables from me, put them on his Cable Cooker, left the house for about an hour and when he came back, this is what he found and what was he going to do about it?
   
  Poor Alan never knew what hit him. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



   
  se


----------



## Lenni

have to say my first reaction to Lorspeaker's impression (post #49) was one of slightly exaggeration, but if that's what people experience I sure keep an open mind to it. 
   
  can't say I've experienced cables burn-in. simply because I'm not too concerned about it. I haven't read, or search much info on it either. my pesonal feeling is that cables go through a period of adjustment (or settle-in) into the system. I also wonder if the cables were moved to a new different system they would to go through the whole "burn-in" process again. I would think so.
   
  I usually plug the new cables in place and leave them for at least a few days, then might swap with the former ones and do the same. I find this to be more effective at hearing differences, if any, than quick abx's. simply because first impressions usually  don't tell the whole story. after, the cables "I feel" I enjoy the sound most stay in - regardeless of brand, color, or price.


----------



## Gwarmi

I'm still on the fence on whether cables burn-in or not - I'm currently in a state of contemplation over my new-ish Shunyata Research Cobra.
   
   What I find fascinating is that Shunyata themselves state that even without this device below eg, designed to run them in via
   domestic electrical devices in the home - the customer should run them in on the rig for approx. 100 hours before they
   sound their best.
   
   
   
   Hmm - 5 time grammy winner Rick Rubin appears to be a fan of Shunyata - wonder if he also believes in burn-in 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



   
   Not to get carried away but there are some serious heavy hitters who are happy to have their names listed as users & fans :-
   
   [size=small]Audio: Audio Research, ART Audio, Balanced Audio Technology, Bel Canto Designs, Edge Electronics, [/size]
  [size=small]Grand Prix Audio,[/size][size=small]Halcro, Immedia, Jeff Rowland Design Group, JM Lab, Lamm Industries, Lumen White, [/size]
  [size=small]McCormack Audio, Meridian America,[/size]
  [size=small]Musical Fidelity, Simaudio, [/size][size=small]Tenor Audio, Verity Audio, VTL, Wilson Audio, Wisdom Audio[/size]
   
  [size=small]Recording: *Sony Music (Japan), Sony Music (New York), Lucasfilm Sky Walker Ranch,* [/size]
  [size=small]Philips’ Crest National Studios, Astoria Studio, [/size][size=small]Lout Out Sound Studios, Memory Technology, Lacquer Channel, [/size]
  [size=small]Mastering: Doug Sax and James Guthrie, Peter McGrath, Rick Rubin,[/size]
  [size=small]Tom Durack, Ken Takeshi, John B. Anthony Company, AF Associates[/size]
   
  [size=small]I highlighted those three in particular for one very important reason - these guys don't have a budget and they[/size]
  [size=x-small]don't care about that $20,000 or $35,000 'sweetner' cheque in the mail as far as 'bought endorsements' go[/size]
   
  [size=x-small]Nope - they can use what ever they want on this planet.[/size]


----------



## Steve Eddy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority
   
  se


----------



## liamstrain

Talk to one of the electrical engineers who works for them, and not the president, spokesperson or marketing arm of one of those companies... then we'll talk.


----------



## Gwarmi

Quote: 





liamstrain said:


> Talk to one of the electrical engineers who works for them, and not the president, spokesperson or marketing arm of one of those companies... then we'll talk.


 
   
   Caelin Gabriel is the head engineer, owner and president of the company 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			




   
   He does mention anything about burn-in per se but here's an external engineers view
   on the product. Personally speaking, I could not care less about the burn-in either way
  - the product works and thats all that matters - one way or another given time and use
  it will take care of itself.
   
   "Being an engineer I tend to be a little skeptical when it comes to cables etc, so this was a very pleasant surprise. 
I'm so impressed with the results that I would like to order your _Hydra Model-8_ straight away for my own use which will feed my whole HT ensemble."
_-- Dominic Baker, Chief Engineer: Focal/JMLab_


----------



## liamstrain

The head engineer of a company in the business of selling me cables, isn't who I am really willing to accept the word of. I want to see the science behind the claims. Good theory supported by good experimentation and data. That's all I ask. So far, all I'm getting is testimonials... not evidence. 
   
  And cable burn in is what we're talking about. Nothing more.


----------



## Steve Eddy

Quote: 





liamstrain said:


> The head engineer of a company in the business of selling me cables, isn't who I am really willing to accept the word of. I want to see the science behind the claims. Good theory supported by good experimentation and data. That's all I ask. So far, all I'm getting is testimonials... not evidence.


 
   
  Thirty plus years and counting.
   
  se


----------



## Gwarmi

Hey I did find an interesting article on cable-burn in by a guy who calls himself a 'scientist' by trade ~
   
  "[size=medium]Quantum Tunnel of Love[/size]
  By: Bob Sireno

 Burn-in: The time during the early period of use when a component or cable exhibits measurable changes in performance, that eventually stabilize, resulting in consistent performance for a significant period of time thereafter. Things happen to be more complex than this simple definition of burn-in might lead one to believe. To gain a fuller understanding we must ask: what transpires inside of a circuit that causes it to stabilize? Why, after a period of time, is a device no longer subject to “drift”?  This paper proposes answers to these questions. But first, let me put forth my position on hi-end audio before the technical stuff begins.
 I am a scientist, by trade, and therefore an objectivist. Twenty two years of experience on the job has taught me that all phenomena is measurable, but, not all phenomena can presently be measured. The technology of the measuring tool is not always adequate to measure empirical reality. People tend to accept this proposition in all areas other than audio.
 I am also an audiophile. I hear differences in equipment, and in cables. I hear sonic changes that take place over time. I believe that audiophiles have better aural perception (not the same as hearing!) than the bulk of humanity, and that adequate test equipment needed to verify the subtleties they claim to hear in some cases, does not yet exist. Today we’ll look into the atomic world, where the explanations may exist for the sonic changes that seem to occur in our equipment and cables with the passage of time.

 Atoms and molecules have recently been filmed in motion. PBS broadcast one of the first “;atomic movies”; several years ago. The show was called STEM. I was stunned. Up close, electrons literally look like thinly connected beads of gas. The depth of micro-reality made visible with a Scanning Tunneling Electron Microscope is incredible. The behavior of individual atoms was chaotic. Some appeared lethargic; temporarily bonding to others, while some were constantly moving. All of the atoms eventually paired off, vibrated, and moved on to pair off again, sometimes in groups of three or more.

 What happens to the seemingly content atoms in a conductor when electrical pressure is applied? What happens when electron waves are driven through the circuitry of a new amp, CD player, cable, etc., (going through what we call its burn-in period) that causes some people to claim that nothing occurs because it can’t be measured, or to cause others to claim that a sweeter sound, or at least a different sound, is born over time and use?

 Cables are made of metal crystals, typically copper or silver, containing spherically symmetrical positive ions, through which electrons move. The purest metal also contains one ten-thousandth of a percent, or so, of impurities. Each electron passing through a cable makes a series of left and right turns around those atomic impurities until it emerges.(1) What happens during this journey, multiplied by trillions, changes the nature of the cable sufficiently to affect the sound you hear over a period of time.
 Metal crystals contain grain boundaries. A grain boundary is where two crystals meet, oriented so that their atoms are usually aligned in different directions. Researchers at Cornell University developed an x-ray technique that allowed them to probe the internal structure of grain interfaces. The results showed that atoms at grain boundaries appeared to vibrate 50 percent more energetically than non-boundary atoms.(2) Electrons tend toward lower energy levels, so when electrical pressure is applied, the increased energy brings about a slow reorientation of the atoms at the grain boundaries.  Afterwards, any reoriented atoms would vibrate less energetically. The outcome of the reorientation of atoms is less electron scattering resulting in improved electrical wave phase coherence.(3)
 Dr. Robert Frank of Augustana College told me that “ion mobility leads to the migration of atoms over time...and to the movement of oxygen, carbon, hydrogen gas and hydrocarbon impurities” He stated that ion movement in copper wiring would probably occur over several months, creating a change in the filter nature, and a subtle change in the capacitance of the metal. To the extent that all cabling can be described mathematically as a filter device, a change in this aspect could cause a sonic deviation over time.

 I believe the ion transfer Dr. Frank described, along with grain boundary reorientation, results in lower electron orbital levels in many of the boundary area atoms. These changes, induced over a period of time, may very well be the type of changes that are responsible, in part, for the burn-in effects that some audiophiles claim to hear.

 While researching the concept of burn-in, I discovered a book entitled “Quantum Aspects Of Molecular Motions In Solids”. This fascinating, but highly pedantic book, focuses on the various aspects of quantum tunneling In the book there is a paper that describes the influence electrons have on the quantum tunneling of hydrogen atoms in a metal. The same paper also discusses rotational tunneling of methane, a simple hydrocarbon, in metal.(4) In other words, at least two of the common impurities found in electrical conductors, move slowly, by quantum tunneling, when electrical pressure is applied. The result, once again, is less electron scattering and a physical change in the conductor itself at a molecular level.

 Quantum tunneling is a surprisingly common event. It occurs in every electrical connection, where a thin oxide layer has formed over a metal conductor. As long as the oxide layer remains thin, electrons can, and will, tunnel through the layer.(5) I propose that electrons will not always detour around impurities in a wire, but will tunnel their way through impurities that are small enough to allow the activity to occur. In either case pathways of conductivity are established during days, weeks, and months of use through the actual conductor themselves. Like the water reeling down a babbling brook, the electrons go around, or eventually thorough, boulders of impurity, always choosing the route of least resistance.
 It appears that your new components, or cables, do indeed improve up to a point when the system they are in is left on for extended periods of time Obviously, there is a point at which no more perceptible change occurs. Why is that? Well, unfortunately electrons will continue to scatter around the remaining impurities, even after burn-in. Can circuits be designed that will not exhibit electron scattering, or burn-in? Yes, it is possible to design a circuit that is so small that the signal paths are the thickness of a single electron wavelength. The result is called a quantum wire. Efforts to make a practical quantum wire have so far failed. But, once again, theory is fast becoming reality.

 AT&T’s Bell labs is working on a resistor that allows but a single electron through at a time.(6) Researchers at the University of California at Santa Barbara have assembled quantum wires one electron at a time.(7) Japanese scientists at the Optoelectronics Technology Research Laboratory, near Tokyo, believe that before quantum wires can be easily fabricated a deeper understanding of what happens on an atomic level during epitaxial (crystal) growth is needed, and are working toward that goal.( 8 ) An American company, Texas Instruments, has developed a tiny device called the BiQuaRTT, or bipolar quantum resonant tunneling transistor. At only two specific voltages, electrons tunnel through the circuit barriers causing current flow. Integrated circuits will be next. Someday quantum wire production will be perfected, along with the necessary IC’s, and we’ll have an entirely new generation of amplifiers, preamps and such.

 When quantum wires become commercial and are fully utilized, perhaps in 20 to 25 years, the reproduced signal approaching the final amplification stages will be as perfect as possible, and cable burn-in will no longer be a subject of dispute. To fully utilize quantum wires, and minimize electron scattering, the final amplification stage may need to be located at, or in, the speaker. One can only hope that improved recording techniques will match the hardware development that will inevitably occur.

 Scientifically, there is no doubt that the propagation of electrons through a conductor changes with time and use. These changes are minute, and measurable with only the most advanced of devices. But, they exist. And to exist means that claims concerning audibility must be taken seriously. Only a few years ago, audiophiles complained that circuits employing negative feedback affected the sound of amplifiers adversely. The number crunchers denied it because the distortion figures were so much improved with the use of feedback. Turns out the audiophiles were right... that may be the case again.


----------



## Steve Eddy

*sigh*
   
  se


----------



## Gwarmi

I personally find it all rather interesting without taking a strong stance either way 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



   
   It is clear though that what he is suggesting above is that current available technologies for measurements concerning all
   founded and unfounded aspects of cables may be in their nacent stage. Simply looking at it from a measurement of
   capacitance and inductance etc perspective does give us the full picture on what is happening on a more molecular
   level.
   
   This argument is as old as the hills - there was a time in the scientific community when it could not explain
   the Northern Lights - the rationale at the time by the community? That those individuals must be mentally ill 
   or suffering from a hallucinatory disorder.
   
   Not much has changed.


----------



## Steve Eddy

Quote: 





gwarmi said:


> I personally find it all rather interesting without taking a strong stance either way
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
   
  Sorry, but I'm afraid I can't find it anything but sad and depressing.
   
  Quote: 





> It is clear though that what he is suggesting above is that current available technologies for measurements concerning all
> founded and unfounded aspects of cables may be in their nacent stage. Simply looking at it from a measurement of
> capacitance and inductance etc perspective does give us the full picture on what is happening on a more molecular
> level.


 
   
  Except that any effects of the sorts of things he's talking about in the article would be buried well below the thermal noise of the wire itself. Are you suggesting that while you're listening to music at 80-90dB, you're going to be able to hear anything going on well below the thermal noise of the wire? Really?
   
  The author never even states what the supposed consequences are. Just that there's things going on at the quantum level and by golly, that's audible.
   
  As I said, I find it nothing more than sad and depressing.
   
  Quote: 





> This argument is as old as the hills - there was a time in the scientific community when it could not explain
> the Northern Lights - the rationale at the time by the community? That those individuals must be mentally ill
> or suffering from a hallucinatory disorder.


 
   
  You have any citation for that?
   
  While a valid explanation of the Northern Lights remained elusive for quite some time, they have been known to western civilization for millennia and I'm not aware of the scientific community ever explaining then as the result of mental illness or hallucinations.
   
  se


----------



## Gwarmi

Quote: 





steve eddy said:


> Sorry, but I'm afraid I can't find it anything but sad and depressing.
> 
> 
> Except that any effects of the sorts of things he's talking about in the article would be buried well below the thermal noise of the wire itself. Are you suggesting that while you're listening to music at 80-90dB, you're going to be able to hear anything going on well below the thermal noise of the wire? Really?
> ...


 
   
   You can find an on-going argument concerning the Northern lights in respect to sound - some argue that this phenomena produces audible noises like pops and
   crackles
   
   "*Some people claim to hear noises associated with the northern lights, but documenting this phenomenon has been difficult."*
   
 http://www.loc.gov/rr/scitech/mysteries/northernlights.html
   
   But once again the science is still playing catch-up - there is no definitive explanation for why so many personal visiting folk attest to this
   noise and so again ~ personal testimony is disregarded as worthless and meaningless until the tools/analysis are up to task.
   
   I feel that the real sad and depressing aspect here Steve is your stead-fast opinions that are not really open to discussion or possibilities
   that are beyond your very own contemplation and understanding. Hypothetically speaking even if *cable burn-in* could be proven without
   doubt to be real and conclusive. There is another definite conclusion here too
   
   Your opinions would not change ~ that does not really make for interesting conversation.


----------



## Steve Eddy

Quote: 





gwarmi said:


> You can find an on-going argument concerning the Northern lights in respect to sound - some argue that this phenomena produces audible noises like pops and
> crackles
> 
> "*Some people claim to hear noises associated with the northern lights, but documenting this phenomenon has been difficult."*


 
   
  And all they say is that documenting the phenomenon has been difficult. They're not accusing people of hallucinating or having mental illness as you claimed previously.
   
  Quote: 





> But once again the science is still playing catch-up - there is no definitive explanation for why so many personal visiting folk attest to this
> noise and so again ~ personal testimony is disregarded as worthless and meaningless until the tools/analysis are up to task.


 
   
  Yes, because we know how unreliable such personal testimony can be. And since only some people report hearing noises, if it exists at all then obviously it's a fairly rare occurrence and not everyone who experiences it is going to have the tools to document it beyond personal testimony.
   
  But again, no one's accusing anyone of hallucinating or being mentally ill as you stated originally.
   
  Quote: 





> I feel that the real sad and depressing aspect here Steve is your stead-fast opinions that are not really open to discussion or possibilities
> that are beyond your very own contemplation and understanding.


 
   
  I'm plenty open to discussion and possibilities, but the author presents nothing of any substance. He just states A and concludes B without anything in between. That's nothing to base any sort of discussion on.
   
  Quote: 





> Your opinions would not change ~ that does not really make for interesting conversation.


 
   
  I'd be more than happy to change my opinions in the face of a cogent argument. But none have been presented by the author. The article's nothing but one big non sequitur.
   
  se


----------



## Gwarmi

Well its clear that current research and tools will not offer up an immediate definite answer either way concerning this burn-in thread.
   
   One thing that is interesting is that die hard skeptics always point the finger at cable makers as maintaining this snake
   oil illusion of burning in cables for the sheer sake of lining their own pockets. This reeks of a conspiracy theory in a way.
   
   Engineers and other transmissions experts who make their way from company to company, some leaving the industry altogether,
   by now surely their own testimonies would 'out' this apparently well drawn and unified conspiracy theory that suggests
   absolute collusion on the behalf of all cable makers who mention burn-in as a phenomena of their cable product.
   
   It does not seem very plausible.
   
   Not only that but think of the thousands of audio representatives from Hi-Fi stores and distributors who stand by their own
   experiences,  exchanging notes and impressions at Hi-Fi shows around the world on cable performance over time 
   ~ are they too in on this grand octopi of deception and delusion?
   
   I respect your views on this Steve, particularly since it appears impossible to prove or disprove with absolute certainty
   at the present time. However, having such staunch views also suggests that you must hold some beliefs that
   many thousands are somehow keeping this sham under wraps.
   
   Finally - I really do fail to see the brand building benefits or customer satisfaction in actively telling your customers
   to 'burn-in' the product if it really does not need it in the first place. Most folks these days want instant results,
   if anything cable makers should be promoting a 'plug and play' approach. But they don't. Why?


----------



## liamstrain

Quote: 





gwarmi said:


> Finally - I really do fail to see the brand building benefits or customer satisfaction in actively telling your customers
> to 'burn-in' the product if it really does not need it in the first place. Most folks these days want instant results,
> if anything cable makers should be promoting a 'plug and play' approach. But they don't. Why?


 
   
  Cynical answer? I'll provide a sample scenario - when a customer gets a product that doesn't make a difference in the sound of their system - and the recommendation is that the have to use it for 100, 200 or 1000 hours before it "settles in" or "burns in" by the time that period is up, their auditory memory is not sufficient to tell if there is a difference after a week or two or five, and they'd feel silly returning a product well after the 14 day trial period. And heck you already spent the money, and look at all these famous people who claim it makes a difference - there *must* be something to it, right? I guess things *do* sound *bit* brighter than I remember them two weeks ago... surely that's the the new expensive cable... right? 
   
  And of course, I they didn't buy two identical cables to burn one, and leave the other - and don't really want to bother with a blind test anyway (after all, I'd feel silly if I spent that much for no reason), plus look at all these famous people who *swear* by them... surely there must be something to it, right? 
   
  I guess I'll look online at my favorite forum - oh, and look there are so many people there saying it sounds brighter for them too.. I guess I'll chip in with my *impressions* from a few weeks ago... I know there are people asking for evidence, but I trust my own ears... or at least it looks like I should... I mean, science doesn't know everything right? And I spent all this money, there must be something to it, right? the Cable company is started by an engineer it says, and he talks about the changes I should expect, so that's reassuring... I'll listen for that when I plug it in again...


----------



## Gwarmi

Quote: 





liamstrain said:


> Cynical answer? I'll provide a sample scenario - when a customer gets a product that doesn't make a difference in the sound of their system - and the recommendation is that the have to use it for 100, 200 or 1000 hours before it "settles in" or "burns in" by the time that period is up, their auditory memory is not sufficient to tell if there is a difference after a week or two or five, and they'd feel silly returning a product well after the 14 day trial period. And heck you already spent the money, and look at all these famous people who claim it makes a difference - there *must* be something to it, right? I guess things *do* sound *bit* brighter than I remember them two weeks ago... surely that's the the new expensive cable... right?
> 
> And of course, I they didn't buy two identical cables to burn one, and leave the other - and don't really want to bother with a blind test anyway (after all, I'd feel silly if I spent that much for no reason), plus look at all these famous people who *swear* by them... surely there must be something to it, right?
> 
> I guess I'll look online at my favorite forum - oh, and look there are so many people there saying it sounds brighter for them too.. I guess I'll chip in with my *impressions* from a few weeks ago... I know there are people asking for evidence, but I trust my own ears... or at least it looks like I should... I mean, science doesn't know everything right? And I spent all this money, there must be something to it, right? the Cable company is started by an engineer it says, and he talks about the changes I should expect, so that's reassuring... I'll listen for that when I plug it in again...


 
   
   There in lies the quagmire - I'm the first to admit that many 'name brand' companies are peddling interconnects and power cords 
   that are made up entirely by virtue of guesstimates or even blatant deceit in order to make a dollar or two.
   
   That should still not taint the entire industry, particularly those who do hold credentials in their resumes for having worked
   with the military and other government institutions. That's where it becomes rather grey, rather than black and white.
   
   If you check out my thread in this section on the Shunyata ZiTron Cobra powercord you'll note my comments on that
   after plugging it into many pieces of equipment - mid range and high end - ranging from the Luxman P1-u, Ray Samuels
   Dark Star, Burson Soloist, Woo Audio WA22, Violectric V200 - I personally found a range of improvements and in
   some cases - some barely worthy enough of mention over a stock IEC.
   
   It's not quite that simple ~ the very same power cord on two different pieces of gear produce different results,
   stemming mainly from the power supply design inside the unit and how the power cord reacts to it in the
   first place. 
   
   You leisurely omitted a very crucial point that I made earlier ~ there are companies out there like Shunyata
   who *advocate* - please do not use the product out of the box - burn it in. I fail to see any marketing advantage
   by stating this openly to the customer, if anything it remains a hindrance to a sale.
   
   Does that mean that every Shunyata product will provide positive sonic benefits to every customer who
   purchases it for their setup? Not really, the synergy with their gear may not be there - as I found out
   with the Burson Soloist. Not that it really relates to Head-Fi at large in any great sense because by
   percentage few people on here see reason to use anything other than basic interconnects and $4 IEC power cords.
   
   My opinions aside - it is what is holding Head-Fi back ~ you would not demo a $500,000 Focal or other system at the
   Hong Kong Hi Fi Show with $28 worth of power cords and expect to be taken seriously and yet the irony is that
   we gladly expect the finest headphone gear on offer to cope with the same treatment.
   
   It is a grey area with no real absolute guidelines on how any interconnect or power cord will react with any given
   system. So much so that in my opinion - recommendations should be limited to a certain to fellow Head-Fiers
   who more or less own a similar or exact setup. Even then, it is fraught with misinformation.


----------



## Gwarmi

As for blind tests ~ here's one you were not expecting. Just like those blind tests where the material is usually foreign 
   to the end user. I'd bet a very penny or two that your very own rig could have you blind tested against a range of unknown
   sources and amps only for you to fail to recognize your very own rig with a blindfold on.
   
   Back on topic ~ 'if you do not like how the cable sounds out of the box then chances are, burn in or not - satisfaction
   is not coming your way anytime soon',


----------



## liamstrain

Quote: 





gwarmi said:


> That should still not taint the entire industry, particularly those who do hold credentials in their resumes for having worked
> with the military and other government institutions. That's where it becomes rather grey, rather than black and white.


 
   
  I don't see how having a degree, or a resume of note prevents you from using your reputation or ability to write convincing gibberish rather than unconvincing gibberish, in order to sell a public who has shown a historical propensity for lavish expenditures on dubious products something that fits in that wheelhouse. Certainly, they *might* be producing a product that makes an objective audible improvement... why have they so consistently failed to provided data to demonstrate it? Surely they understand (being engineers and scientists of note) the value of that data? Do they think we unable to understand it? 
   
   
   


> It's not quite that simple ~ the very same power cord on two different pieces of gear produce different results,
> stemming mainly from the power supply design inside the unit and how the power cord reacts to it in the
> first place.
> 
> ...


 
   
  Wouldn't it be wonderful, if someone provided specific, testable data and theory to demonstrate clearly what changes can be achieved under what circumstances. That would go a long way towards combatting the misinformation, no? 
   
   
  Quote: 





> You leisurely omitted a very crucial point that I made earlier ~ there are companies out there like Shunyata
> who *advocate* - please do not use the product out of the box - burn it in. I fail to see any marketing advantage
> by stating this openly to the customer, if anything it remains a hindrance to a sale.


 
   
   
  I felt I addressed that... I'm not sure that it has a bearing on the point of sale (which is affected by reviews and testimonials much more than a business practice like this recommendation), but rather the difference is in the number of returns (fewer). 
   
  Anyway - we're not going to convince one another here. Better to break things off while they are still amicable.


----------



## liamstrain

Quote: 





gwarmi said:


> As for blind tests ~ here's one you were not expecting. Just like those blind tests where the material is usually foreign
> to the end user. I'd bet a very penny or two that your very own rig could have you blind tested against a range of unknown
> sources and amps only for you to fail to recognize your very own rig with a blindfold on.
> 
> ...


 
   
  I agree with and am not surprised by either of these statements. I do not find this a failure of blind testing. It is a failure of our expectations for our equipment, our sighted biases, and our own auditory memory. I also fully acknowledge there are a LOT of other reasons to get better than stock cables, and for different audio equipment. 
   
  I certainly agree with the burn in statement as well. Any burn in (for just about anything other than full size speaker drivers) is a very minimal change (if a change at all). Statements of night and day differences are wildly hyperbolic and do nothing to help this hobby of ours.


----------



## Gwarmi

Quote: 





liamstrain said:


> I don't see how having a degree, or a resume of note prevents you from using your reputation or ability to write convincing gibberish rather than unconvincing gibberish, in order to sell a public who has shown a historical propensity for lavish expenditures on dubious products something that fits in that wheelhouse. *Certainly, they *might* be producing a product that makes an objective audible improvement... why have they so consistently failed to provided data to demonstrate it? Surely they understand (being engineers and scientists of note) the value of that data? Do they think we unable to understand it? *


 
   
   Caelin has - infact unless sorely mistaken, he has developed a piece of test kit called the DTCD
   
   http://shunyata.com/Content/DTCD-indepth.html
   
   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CXwRTzJZ7Y0&feature=channel&list=UL
   
   End of the day, I still believe his forte lies in power cords - having not tested his interconnects, I remain
   tight lipped on that front. Measurement machine or not, having personally tested his ZiTron Cobra - it
   works by lowering the noise floor and increasing dynamic impact on some gear yet it does not really offer
   up much improvement on some other gear.
   
   I know that referencing 'experts' as customers may be futile as a case in point, yet let's not be naive
   here - if you can get George Lucas on your product's website then you must be doing something
   right.
   
   Fact remains this 'expert' has an unlimited budget, can afford any product they wish to use and have no desire
   for promotion or affiliation - if your product is snake oil, I fail to see to see how an establishment like SkyWalker
   ranch is going to have any affinity with your product. It does not make sense.
   
   There are experts and then there are experts is what I'm saying


----------



## Lenni

Quote: 





gwarmi said:


> Hey I did find an interesting article on cable-burn in by a guy who calls himself a 'scientist' by trade ~
> 
> "[size=medium]Quantum Tunnel of Love[/size]
> By: Bob Sireno
> ...


 
   
   
  great article!
   
  there should be more objectivists like Bob Sireno who actually look into the phenomena, and try to understand why they happen. instead of being busy trying to prove subjectivists wrong, by either trying to make them look like loonies, or by attributing the phenomena to other external factors such as expectations, colors... and other nonsense, as most objectivists that hang on Internet audio forums seem to spend most of their online time.   
   
  I would welcome some objective data more than anybody - and not just about cables but for everything else still debatable. mostly because I think if we could measure the phenomena we might pinpoint where the weaknesses are. as it stands we have to rely pretty much on trial and error trying to find what works best in our system.
   
  at the risk of going slightly off topic, let's look at upgraditis for example:
   
  I believe that upgraditis has mostly do with weaknesses in the system. I see this happening all the time. there's someone receiving their expensive pair of headphones, and they're very  pleased with them. however, after a while they start asking thing like, 'what's the best dac for these 'phones?' so they buy a new dac and they're ok for a while. then it's, 'what amp?' or 'cables?' etc.. it goes in circle... until they remove the weakness in the system. their brain tells them something isn't quite right with the sound, but they fail to work out where's the problem is. I speak more of a personal experience, but I think it applies generally to others too. I always knew that the PC was the weakest link in my system, but didn't know what to do, other than getting a CD player. then I got a good music server and all was revealed to me. I wouldn't call my system perfect, but I could live with it as it is - everything I'm going to upgrade next it's just a bonus. doesn't mean I not going to upgrade the speakers - but that's another kind of upgraditis.


----------



## Lenni

Quote: 





goodolcheez said:


> It doesn't take away. It's called "trained ears".  If you have some dumb schmuck to hear the audio between generic and high-perf cable he wouldn't be able to hear the difference because he doesn't know what to look for.  Plus his ear drum performance is different than our *beautiful* member Lenni.  Cables make huge difference in sound, especially with analog interconnects.  The difference is still noticeable with USB interconnects as well.  "neh?" my butt.


 
   
  you're too kind, sir...


----------



## Steve Eddy

Quote: 





lenni said:


> great article!
> 
> there should be more objectivists like Bob Sireno who actually look into the phenomena, and try to understand why they happen.


 
   
  Problem is, he assumes there's something happening when no one has ever demonstrated that there is. That's not objectivism. That's how religious and other cults get started.
   
  se


----------



## Gwarmi

Quote: 





lenni said:


> I believe that upgraditis has mostly do with weaknesses in the system. I see this happening all the time. there's someone receiving their expensive pair of headphones, and they're very  pleased with them. however, after a while they start asking thing like, 'what's the best dac for these 'phones?' so they buy a new dac and they're ok for a while. then it's, 'what amp?' or 'cables?' etc.. it goes in circle... until they remove the weakness in the system. their brain tells them something isn't quite right with the sound, but they fail to work out where's the problem is. I speak more of a personal experience, but I think it applies generally to others too. I always knew that the PC was the weakest link in my system, but didn't know what to do, other than getting a CD player. then I got a good music server and all was revealed to me. I wouldn't call my system perfect, but I could live with it as it is - everything I'm going to upgrade next it's just a bonus. doesn't mean I not going to upgrade the speakers - but that's another kind of upgraditis.


 
   
   Agreed Lenni - it distorts a lot of impressions and it ends up being regurgitated on some thread. Reminds me of a time when a friend of mine
   first auditioned the RSA Dark Star with his LCD's - it was during the day with road works taking place just across the road.
   After a few minutes he took them off and remarked that the amp was faulty. I seemed a little surprised. He pointed out that the
   left channel was producing an audible pinging noise particularly when the music was not playing. He was ready to pack-up for the day
   - to him it was all too simple - this $3500+ amp was faulty. Of course he planned to post up some impressions reporting the very
   fact.
   
   Some quick thinking took place and I put the DS on an aging Nordost Blue Heaven power cord we had lying around - pinging was gone.
   He appeared shocked since cables, particularly power cables were in the same realm as 'Dungeons and Dragons' according to him
   - just to make sure we reverted back to the stock IEC as the workmen ran their gear from the mains outside. Sure enough the pinging
   returned - more shock and awe on his behalf.
   
   It is interesting that you bring up the 'music server' as a grand weakness in many systems - one that remains with me currently
   for sure. The discussion is for another thread but we can draw tangents here over in this thread - this phenomena of latency
   and noise from the PC is also barely understood - you do not have to travel far to encounter objective views that suggest
   it is pure nonsense that a silent, fanless music server has any advantage over a software laden notebook well beyond its
   use by date.
   
   @ Steve Eddy
   
   Hate to be the bearer of bad news but anyone with 1000+ (never mind 3000) posts on here is already deep in cult country according to
   the views of any casual observer outside of Head-Fi


----------



## Steve Eddy

Quote: 





> Originally Posted by *Gwarmi* /img/forum/go_quote.gif
> 
> @ Steve Eddy
> 
> ...


 
   
  Well let's see...
   
  I've made 3,648 posts over the course of 9 years on HeadFi. You've made 3,399 posts over the course of a little over 1 year.
   
  For me that comes to about 1 post per day. For you, about 9 posts per day.
   
  I'll leave it to others to decide who's deep in cult country here. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



   
  se


----------



## Gwarmi

Quote: 





steve eddy said:


> Well let's see...
> 
> I've made 3,648 posts over the course of 9 years on HeadFi. You've made 3,399 posts over the course of a little over 1 year.
> 
> ...


 
   
   Hah - Touch-eeeh Mr Steve! That's the average over time, but I find that my input comes in bursts these days


----------



## miow

*== Do cables burn-in? ==*
   
  In 3 words: Yes they do.


----------



## thelion

I am a materials scientist, as well as an economist, serving in executive capacity. Hopefully the digression that follows is useful to end this argument.
   
  I cannot _a priori_ agree, on the one hand, that changes purely to cable composition or design (assuming you're already using reasonable pure copper or silver cables) would be audible over thermal noise, _and more importantly_, over differences caused between otherwise identical cable due to large tolerances during manufacturing or base material structure. Tolerances being large means that the result will vary sometimes as much plus or minus 200% in some parameter (although we are talking about small numbers), whereas technological improvement would only gain 50% to the parameter. And so, the benefits of a "better" (and more expensive) design are often swallowed up in tolerances. 
   
  On the other hand, I must object to the idea that "measurement" = science => "can't measure" = non-existent. Such reasoning was in the past very often misleading. FAPP (for all practical purposes), very often the measurement of the state of some aspect of the system in question is not possible. But that does not mean that such a parameter does not exist or has no contribution to the complete state of the system. 
   
  For instance, back in the 1900's - 1950's "behaviorists," "logical positivists," and "radical empiricists," declared many absurdities and engaged in much pseudo-scientific thought simply because the phenomena they originally wanted to investigate proved impossible to measure for practical absence of ability to carry out controlled experiments.
   
  Some of them declared, among other things: that consciousness does not exist (e.g., William James), and preferences do not exist (e.g., whole list of prominent professors back then), and so purposeful behavior does not exist (and so, according to those people, the laws of economics do not exist), because consciousness and preferences are very difficult if not usually impossible to measure. And so, these observers, preferred to consciously argue that they are not conscious and have no preferences ... 
   
  Norbert Wiener claimed the mechanical dog, which follows the program of the engineer who built it, so long as it looks like a dog and barks like a dog to an outside observer, is alive, just like a real living dog. Why? He said, since what distinguishes living from non-living was not know, and difficult to measure, he takes a behaviorist approach FAPP. Of course, such an approach is false to facts (by hypothesis, the robot was programmed to imitate a living dog without actually being alive). This statement in the 1940's led to much science fiction, but not much science.
   
  Long story short. As far as cable performance goes, I trust FAPP what 6moons audio reviews report (http://www.6moons.com/). They actually do in fact get several pieces of an identical cable and try it out on the best equipment (which I do not have), and for varying periods of time on different samples. _A priori_, nothing can be said otherwise about what contribution (or lack of contribution) different cables of already reasonable quality make to final audio output. If you hear a difference (a) it exists, or (b) centrifugal control of peripheral sensory organs (your ears not only send input to your brain, but your brain also sends input to your ears, and often, what you expect to hear is what you literally hear, even when it does not exist).


----------



## goodolcheez

Quote: 





gwarmi said:


> Hey I did find an interesting article on cable-burn in by a guy who calls himself a 'scientist' by trade ~
> 
> "[size=medium]Quantum Tunnel of Love[/size]
> By: Bob Sireno
> ...


 
  Good post. Good man....
   
   
  Quote: 





steve eddy said:


> *sigh*
> 
> se


 
  This is a good learning curve for you.
   
  Quote: 





gwarmi said:


> You can find an on-going argument concerning the Northern lights in respect to sound - some argue that this phenomena produces audible noises like pops and
> crackles
> 
> "*Some people claim to hear noises associated with the northern lights, but documenting this phenomenon has been difficult."*
> ...


 
   
  Good post.
   
  Quote: 





thelion said:


> I am a materials scientist, as well as an economist, serving in executive capacity. Hopefully the digression that follows is useful to end this argument.
> 
> I cannot _a priori_ agree, on the one hand, that changes purely to cable composition or design (assuming you're already using reasonable pure copper or silver cables) would be audible over thermal noise, _and more importantly_, over differences caused between otherwise identical cable due to large tolerances during manufacturing or base material structure. Tolerances being large means that the result will vary sometimes as much plus or minus 200% in some parameter (although we are talking about small numbers), whereas technological improvement would only gain 50% to the parameter. And so, the benefits of a "better" (and more expensive) design are often swallowed up in tolerances.
> 
> ...


 
   
  The jury has approved. I'm speaking to both you and Gwarmi.  This is the set standard for cable burnin.  This has gone official.
   
  You see, I know some people will hate reading this, but I am getting big difference with my full solid silver analog cable ($1200, 1.5m long) after about 500+ hours of use, or burn-in.  The sound is more *controlled*. The music now has "smoother" transition.  Edginess / harshness is almost gone.   When I first got this cable it was edgy... bit harsh.  Sort of like your body wasn't warmed up for exercising.   50 hour burn-in didn't cut it.... it needed several hundreds, for the silver cable that is.


----------



## Steve Eddy

Quote: 





> Originally Posted by *goodolcheez* /img/forum/go_quote.gif
> 
> This is a good learning curve for you.


 
   
  No, it's not.
   
  When someone demonstrates that they can hear the thermal noise of the wire itself, then we'll talk about what might be going on below that level.
   
  se


----------



## lovleylady

Quote: 





goodolcheez said:


> ...
> 
> You see, I know some people will hate reading this, but I am getting big difference with my full solid silver analog cable ($1200, 1.5m long) after about 500+ hours of use, or burn-in.  The sound is more *controlled*. The music now has "smoother" transition.  Edginess / harshness is almost gone.   When I first got this cable it was edgy... bit harsh.  Sort of like your body wasn't warmed up for exercising.   50 hour burn-in didn't cut it.... it needed several hundreds, for the silver cable that is.


 
   
       Quote:


lorspeaker said:


> just gotten my diy silver rca....first hour was a "huh" ..kinda mute cotton wool-ed. i was frankly disappointed.
> And then magically the bass tightened..the highs bloomed, piano n guitar took on an airy clarity..heaven.
> 
> this is pure magic...nothing to to with science. dun discuss...i am writing just for bigpoppa.


 
      
  Quote: 





big poppa said:


> Cables do burn in. It is the dielectric that burns in more so than the cable. The metal strands, a little burn in to the cable. The more shielding ,tech flex, tubing, will add time to the burn in. Let your cables lay on your carpet.........Suck the life out of them. More dielectric.  All my cables are suspended off the floor. And anyone that knows me well, knows at meets I let my cables lay on a chair and not on the carpet.


 
   
  For those who claim cable-burn-in, do you ever experience burn-in that *degrades* the sound?
   
  (I have no experience with cable-burn-in myself)
   
  Cheers!


----------



## BIG POPPA

ROFL............ to some it seems the world is still flat. I crack up each time se dismisses something without trying it out for himself like everbody else has with success. 

[/QUOTE]

No, it's not.

When someone demonstrates that they can hear the thermal noise of the wire itself, then we'll talk about what might be going on below that level.

se
[/quote]


----------



## goodolcheez

Quote: 





lovleylady said:


> For those who claim cable-burn-in, do you ever experience burn-in that *degrades* the sound?
> 
> (I have no experience with cable-burn-in myself)
> 
> Cheers!


 
  No, not yet.


----------



## liamstrain

Quote: 





thelion said:


> _A priori_, nothing can be said otherwise about what contribution (or lack of contribution) different cables of already reasonable quality make to final audio output. If you hear a difference (a) it exists, or (b) centrifugal control of peripheral sensory organs (your ears not only send input to your brain, but your brain also sends input to your ears, and often, what you expect to hear is what you literally hear, even when it does not exist).


 
   
   
  Agreed. This is why we need objective testing. To determine the difference between (a) and (b). That's all I'm asking for. 
   
  Too many people here assume that if they hear something it is (a). Frankly, knowing what we know about our brains, we cannot make that assumption. Especially if the item in question already has very little reason to support that it can make an audible change. Controlled experimentation and testing is required to know either way. Thus far the data that has been done, supports (b). Show me good data to suggest otherwise, and I'll revise my position.


----------



## Steve Eddy

Quote: 





big poppa said:


> ROFL............ to some it seems the world is still flat. I crack up each time se dismisses something without trying it out for himself like everbody else has with success.


 
   
  Because simply trying something for yourself doesn't necessarily tell you if there's anything actually going on.
   
  Using that criteria, then putting photographs of yourself in your freezer improves the sound of your system (as well as every other system you listen to).
   
  Do I really need to put photographs of myself in my freezer before I can dismiss such a thing as beyond silly?
   
  se


----------



## BIG POPPA

steve eddy said:


> big poppa said:
> 
> 
> > ROFL............ to some it seems the world is still flat. I crack up each time se dismisses something without trying it out for himself like everbody else has with success.
> ...



Um that is how we find out if something works or doesn't. We try them by ourselves ,in a group or have what ever we are trying sent to another person. Great hobby to be in.

You crack me up.


----------



## Penarin

OK, most people can't even agree if cables make a difference or not.  Now there are arguments of just the burn-in aspect of cabling...
   
  If we say that cables make a 10% difference in the overall sound of a system, wouldn't burn-in of the cables be like 10% of that?


----------



## BIG POPPA

To me it is more than 10%.


----------



## goodolcheez

Quote: 





penarin said:


> OK, most people can't even agree if cables make a difference or not.  Now there are arguments of just the burn-in aspect of cabling...
> 
> If we say that cables make a 10% difference in the overall sound of a system, wouldn't burn-in of the cables be like 10% of that?


 
   
  Based on my experience, more like 1:1 ratio, not 10%.


----------



## Steve Eddy

Quote: 





big poppa said:


> Um that is how we find out if something works or doesn't. We try them by ourselves ,in a group or have what ever we are trying sent to another person. Great hobby to be in.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
   
  Depends on what you mean by "works."
   
  If you simply mean it sounds better subjectively, fine, but again, that doesn't tell you whether or not there's actually anything going on as things can "sound better" even when there's nothing going on, such as with the case of the frozen photographs.
   
  se


----------



## BIG POPPA

We are just talking about "burn in" in this thread. Silver IC's with Silver connecters are a good example to use. They will sound different from NIB to about 300-500 of burn in. That is from experience in listening to them. Was not referring to sounding better or worse just stating that there is burn in.
  Quote: 





steve eddy said:


> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## goodolcheez

Quote: 





steve eddy said:


> Depends on what you mean by "works."
> 
> If you simply mean it sounds better subjectively, fine, but again, that doesn't tell you whether or not there's actually anything going on as things can "sound better" even when there's nothing going on, such as with the case of the frozen photographs.
> 
> se


 
   
  How do you know there is nothing going on?  Do you have proof? You are just making things up, or making wrong assumption.  I suggest you re-read what has been said about burned-in cables as it is a good learning curve for you.  Personal hands-on experience is first.  Second is the reference from the engineers and professors that are specialized in this field.  Next.


----------



## miow

lol


----------



## goodolcheez




----------



## BIG POPPA

Now you know why se cracks me up. First one to dismiss and or discount but will not find out on his own to see if it happens or not. Se doesn't have proof to back up his claims that there is no "burn in" or what ever else he discount's.
  Quote: 





goodolcheez said:


> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## miow

It does happen ; )


----------



## TrollDragon

I just love these threads...
  Not just cables, get them started on little glass fuses too...
   
  Quote: 





> [size=x-small]For best performance, the HiFi Tuning fuses should be installed one way, listened to, and then reversed the other way to determine best sonic orientation.[/size]


----------



## Steve Eddy

Quote: 





goodolcheez said:


> How do you know there is nothing going on?  Do you have proof? You are just making things up, or making wrong assumption.


 
   
  I'm speaking of specific instances where listeners are presented with the exact same thing, but the listeners have some expectation of a difference. In those cases, listeners tend to perceive a difference in spite of nothing having changed. Expectation bias is a well known and well established phenomena and is one of the reasons that makes subjective listening alone unreliable. And that's why blind testing protocols have been developed in order to control for such biases.
   
  Quote: 





> I suggest you re-read what has been said about burned-in cables as it is a good learning curve for you.


 
   
  I've been involved in the high-end audio industry and have been designing and building cables for going on 30 years. I know what people have said about burned-in cables.
   
  Quote: 





> Personal hands-on experience is first.  Second is the reference from the engineers and professors that are specialized in this field.


 
   
  Except in this case, all you have is a naive magazine writer cobbling together one big non sequitur because he has absolutely no understanding of the stuff he's parroting in an attempt to "prove" his case. In the end, it's just a bunch of gibberish.
   
  se


----------



## Chris_Himself

Ahh this thread again.


----------



## Pingupenguins

After reading through this thread, I think I'm personally going to stop the quest to change people's mind. The argument goes both ways (to some people not to me), and everyone is choosing sides. I'm pretty sure this is never going to end, and it's not worth getting frustrated over, and definitely not worth arguing. No body is going to change sides in this argument. I thought I'd just throw my two cents in as I sign off trying to convince people one way or the other.


----------



## miow

I have no doubts after hearing my burnt-in cable and a NIB one. Pretty noticeable difference, you don't need to have "golden ears" to notice it immediatelly. It's also so obvious that no blind test is needed.


----------



## liamstrain

Quote: 





pingupenguins said:


> No body is going to change sides in this argument.


 
   
  For what it is worth, I've already stated I'm willing to revise my position. I just require actual evidence before I'll do so. But I fear, generally speaking, you are right.
   
  *shrug*


----------



## liamstrain

Quote: 





miow said:


> I have no doubts after hearing my burnt-in cable and a NIB one. Pretty noticeable difference, you don't need to have "golden ears" to notice it immediatelly. It's also so obvious that no blind test is needed.


 
   
  A blind test is needed precisely because it seems obvious. Blind testing is not to look for miniscule differences, it is to eliminate unconscious biases that can lead us to hear big differences when there is a very good chance that we really should not.


----------



## Pingupenguins

Not to but in, but isn't this thread Blind testing forbidden?


----------



## liamstrain

Probably. I'm just posting that once to counter the statement that it isn't required because the differences were obvious. Which seems to me a misunderstanding of what it does and why.


----------



## goodolcheez

Quote: 





big poppa said:


> Now you know why se cracks me up. First one to dismiss and or discount but will not find out on his own to see if it happens or not. Se doesn't have proof to back up his claims that there is no "burn in" or what ever else he discount's.


 
   
  He's probably afraid to hear the difference, like not wanting to find out what he is getting.  And of course, in order to do that, he will have to pay a large sum of money on cables but I doubt he would even try...


----------



## goodolcheez

> > Originally Posted by *Steve Eddy* /img/forum/go_quote.gif
> >
> >
> > I'm speaking of specific instances where listeners are presented with the exact same thing, but the listeners have some expectation of a difference. In those cases, listeners tend to perceive a difference in spite of nothing having changed. Expectation bias is a well known and well established phenomena and is one of the reasons that makes subjective listening alone unreliable. And that's why blind testing protocols have been developed in order to control for such biases.
> ...


----------



## Steve Eddy

Quote:  





> What is the proof of being the two "exactly same thing" between burned-in and fresh outta the box cable?  That is what I was questioning you. You haven't yet provided any proof of being the two exactly the same.


 
   
  But your question had nothing to do with what I had actually said.
   
  However to answer your question which had nothing I actually said anyway, some years ago I enlisted the help of Burno Putzeys to make some high resolution cable measurements. Among the cables that I sent him was one that had been in use for about five years and another was the same cable, unused, new right out of the box. There were simply no differences to be found. Even when looking down to -170dB.
   
  Quote: 





> Good that you have some experience with audio system and have post counts.  But should I rely on you or the engineers, scientists / professors who are deep in this field?


 
   
  What engineers, scientists / professors who are deep in this field are you referring to exactly?
   
  If you're referring to the "Quantum Tunnel of Love" article, it was written for a consumer audio magazine by a hack who didn't have a clue what he was talking about and misrepresented most everything he referenced as being relevant to an audio cable. It was a joke.
   
  Quote: 





> Oh, and my own personal experience.


 
   
  One's own personal experience doesn't necessarily prove anything with regard to what may or may not actually be going on with an audio cable. If it did, it would also prove that putting photographs of yourself in your freezer improves the sound of your audio system. Or do you believe in that as well?
   
  Quote: 





> What good is your excuse when you can't even provide proof of burned-in cable and out of the box cable being exactly the same?  Do they look the same outside?  Yes.


 
   
  And by the research that has been done so far, they perform the same electrically as well.
   
  Now if you have some objective evidence to show that a burned-in cable behaves electrically different than the same cable out of the box, I would be happy to look at it.
   
  se


----------



## Lord Soth

Quote: 





big poppa said:


> We are just talking about "burn in" in this thread. Silver IC's with Silver connecters are a good example to use. They will sound different from NIB to about 300-500 of burn in. That is from experience in listening to them. Was not referring to sounding better or worse just stating that there is burn in.


 
  +1 on cable "burn in".
   
  I'm using silver ICs for my audio chain.
  When I initially replaced my well used copper ICs with brand new silver ones, my entire audio system sounded like it had taken 10 steps backwards. Everything sounded overly compressed and just plain awful.
   
  However, after about 200 hours of burn-in, not only did my silver ICs reach the same audio standards as my copper ICs, they surpassed the old copper ones at about 400hrs of burn-in.


----------



## goodolcheez

Quote: 





> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## lovleylady

Still want to know why we never hear reports on burn-in causing a degraded sound.
  All we get is reports on "sound opening up", "smoother sound", "controlled bass", etc, etc...
   
  What's the theory behind this? Why doesn't it go both ways?
   
   
  Cheers!


----------



## Steve Eddy

Quote: 





goodolcheez said:


>





> It may depend on the cables too. You probably sent him some cheap monoprice-grade cable.


 
   
  Radio Shack "Gold" series to be precise.
   
  But why should the price of the cables matter? What is it about cable burn-in that depends on the price? While more expensive cables may use arguably better materials, then shouldn't the effects of burn-in be the least noticeable in the more expensive cables and most notable in the less expensive cables?
   
  Quote: 





> The difference may vary.  Plus as mentioned earlier, there is no proof that measurements your friend attempted may not apply, or invalid too.  How do you know that measurement is the only and best way to find out how the sound will be affected?


 
   
  Because in order for the sound to be effected, there must be some difference in the way the burned-in cable affects the signal passing through it relative to the non-burned-in cable. And instruments allow for the measuring of those effects to levels far far below any human's ability to hear.
   
  Quote: 





> What equipments were used and what measurements were used?


 
   
  An Audio Precision System 2 Cascade. Measurements included harmonic distortion, intermodulation distortion, and phase distortion using single tone, multi-tone and multi-tone derived from music.
   
  Quote: 





> I'm talking from various articles from the audio engineers and professors, including the ones listed here in this thread.


 
   
  Ok. Could you cite one specifically, and more importantly the argument presented that would have any differences due to burn-in be of a magnitude that's at least greater than the thermal noise of the wire itself?
   
  Quote: 





> I would still trust from the engineers and professors, rather than some user who played with audio equipment for years and has a lot of post counts.


 
   
  So because I don't call myself an "engineer" or "professor," that somehow inherently makes my arguments less valid? What if I called myself "God"? Would that trump "engineer" and "professor"?
   
  Quote: 





> For me it was a clear difference. As I said before, it sounded harshy / edgy with my silver cable.  Now, after 500- 600 hours there is smoother transition in the music.


 
   
  If it's a clear difference, then it should be trivially easy to demonstrate it. Nice thing about something like burn-in is that it lends itself very well to easily administered controlled listening tests. If you'd like to move over to the Sound Science forum, we could discuss the details.
   
  Quote: 





> What research?  And of course the electricity will flow from point A to point B. We know that.  But *how* does it get through the cable is the question, which was already mentioned here in the thread.  The timing plays important role...


 
   
  How it gets through isn't so important. It's what happens to the signal between point A and point B. And unless you're going to suggest some supernatural means of signal transmission hitherto unknown, the signal is ultimately nothing more than a change in current and voltage over time. And we can measure changes in voltage and current over time to vanishingly low levels, both in the time domain and the frequency domain.
   
  se


----------



## Steve Eddy

Quote: 





lovleylady said:


> Still want to know why we never hear reports on burn-in causing a degraded sound.


 
   
  What I'm curious about is why cables didn't seem to burn in 25 years ago. Not even platinum ears like Enid Lumley, who recommended against having a digital watch in the listening room because it screwed up the sound didn't notice it.
   
  My pet theory is that one day someone was wanting to return some cables that they didn't particularly care for an a quick-thinking sales guy said "Oh, well they haven't burned in yet." 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			




   
  se


----------



## BlackstoneJD

It depends. Are we talking about USB or HDMI cables? No, I kid. This thread should die.


----------



## grokit

Rhetorical question: Aren't circular arguments supposed to be confined to the Sound Science subforum?


----------



## Steve Eddy

Quote: 





grokit said:


> Rhetorical question: Aren't circular arguments supposed to be confined to the Sound Science subforum?


 
   
  I know it's a rhetorical question, but the circular arguments are being made by those who stay away from the Sound Science forum. Or did you mean circular arguments to mean something other than circular arguments?
   
  se


----------



## Lenni

in before it dies...
    
  Quote:


i3eyond said:


> Yes, you're right---as much as I WANT to hear a difference, I just CAN'T!  At least I didn't spend $100 on the cable or else I'd be highly upset.


 
   
  here's also something that one would think goes both ways: doesn't this comment made by the OP, which seems to be conveniently ignored, throw these expectation bias theories that some objectivists like to hang on to dearly down the drain?


----------



## Nebby

Quote: 





lenni said:


> in before it dies...
> 
> here's also something that one would think goes both ways: doesn't this comment made by the OP, which seems to be conveniently ignored, throw these expectation bias theories that some objectivists like to hang on to dearly down the drain?


 
   
  Brains are very unique from person to person. Just as placebos are effective with some people while completely ineffective with others, biases are stronger with some people while others, less so. It doesn't invalidate the theory.


----------



## liamstrain

Expectation biases are also unconscious, as a rule - which is why we have to control for them. Wanting badly to hear something, doesn't mean your brain will let you.


----------



## Lenni

still, the OP was clearly expecting to hear a difference, that's why he bought the cable, probably after reading reviews and comments. I'm not expert in these matters, but according to what I read in comments about the theory he should have heard a difference. personally I think that these theories are being used to describe something which doesn't apply to it. no offence...


----------



## BIG POPPA

liamstrain said:


> Expectation biases are also unconscious, as a rule - which is why we have to control for them. Wanting badly to hear something, doesn't mean your brain will let you.




That is why I used Silver ic's with silver connectors as my example. Those cables are so easy to hear the difference from nib to burned in 500 hours.


----------



## Steve Eddy

Quote: 





big poppa said:


> That is why I used Silver ic's with silver connectors as my example. Those cables are so easy to hear the difference from nib to burned in 500 hours.


 
   
  If it's that easy, then this matter should be able to be put to rest once and for all just as easily. So I'll extend the same invitation to you that I did to goodolcheez to move on over to Sound Science to discuss setting up the test.
   
  se


----------



## pompon

Over time came magnetize and this have an effect on the sound.
  When you demagnetize your interconnect, the sound is quite different after and remagnetize slowly after.


----------



## Steve Eddy

Copper is not ferromagnetic.
   
  And how are you magnetizing your cables in the first place? Are you running DC through them?
   
  se


----------



## BIG POPPA

A better idea se......... Get out of your chair and go to a local DIY meet or gathering? You have a standing invitation to any Seattle meet
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




Share your knowledge face to face, it is an awesome experience. Forums don't even compare my friend!
  Quote: 





steve eddy said:


> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Steve Eddy

Didn't think so.
   
  se


----------



## BIG POPPA

Easy test Buy Silver cable, Buy silver or rhodium connecters, hook it up to your rig and listen to it. take notes from new in box, 20 hours, 50 hours, then every 100 hours or so or if you hear something different for several hundred of hours. Not too hard really.
  Quote: 





steve eddy said:


> Didn't think so.
> 
> se


----------



## sfoclt

For folks who have heard burn-in, what controls did you put in place to isolate that it was your cable contributing to the difference in sound, as opposed to the burn-in of your source, DAC, amp or headphones (not to mention other possible changes)?


----------



## Chris_Himself

Quote: 





sfoclt said:


> For folks who have heard burn-in, what controls did you put in place to isolate that it was your cable contributing to the difference in sound, as opposed to the burn-in of your source, DAC, amp or headphones (not to mention other possible changes)?


 
   
  I discovered it a long time ago, I had a well-loved HD580 silver dragon cable and I compared it to a brand new one. We had an HD650 on-hand to test it with and the results were consistent. There is a difference based on just those two cables that passed through my hands. It doesn't require that much of a controlled environment. You just need a cable with a few hundred hours, and a brand new one..


----------



## BIG POPPA

I haven't changed my rig for years. It is in my sig. Good question.


----------



## sfoclt

I understand that if you have a system that's very familiar to you, that changing something in the signal path is _most likely_ to be the source of a change in sound, but with respect to burn-in, all the other pieces of the chain are still "burning in" as well.  It seems difficult to pull the cable contribution out of the morass of everything else going on.  For instance, what reasons are there to prioritize burn-in from t=0 hours to t=200 hours over t=1000 hours to t=1200 hours?


----------



## Chris_Himself

Quote: 





sfoclt said:


> I understand that if you have a system that's very familiar to you, that changing something in the signal path is _most likely_ to be the source of a change in sound, but with respect to burn-in, all the other pieces of the chain are still "burning in" as well.  It seems difficult to pull the cable contribution out of the morass of everything else going on.  For instance, what reasons are there to prioritize burn-in from t=0 hours to t=200 hours over t=1000 hours to t=1200 hours?


 
   
  If something had a burn-in of 1200 hours, I would never buy new equipment. Even 200 hours seems a bit off for me, I think burn-in usually is like 50-100 hours tops.
   
  As of a few years ago we didn't even think headphone burn-in was real.. even though car audio installers are taught from day one that driver burn-in is real.


----------



## lovleylady

Quote: 





chris_himself said:


> You guys are putting him in a tricky spot. Take it easy. We're not allowed to discuss our findings with our own equipment. Being that I can pretty much guarantee the bulk of any members of the trade's experience is going to be using their own gear, it's sort of futile to put him on the spot and forcing Steve to provide answers within Head-Fi's terms of use.


 
  I think "you guys" are being mangled by Steve Eddy, debatewise(is that a word?).
  Quote: 





steve eddy said:


> What I'm curious about is why cables didn't seem to burn in 25 years ago. Not even platinum ears like Enid Lumley, who recommended against having a digital watch in the listening room because it screwed up the sound didn't notice it.
> 
> My pet theory is that one day someone was wanting to return some cables that they didn't particularly care for an a quick-thinking sales guy said "Oh, well they haven't burned in yet."
> 
> ...


 
  Love the watch paranoia.
   
  ---
  Still like to get an answer to this --> /img/forum/go_quote.gif
   
  Cheers!


----------



## goodolcheez

Quote: 





sfoclt said:


> For folks who have heard burn-in, what controls did you put in place to isolate that it was your cable contributing to the difference in sound, as opposed to the burn-in of your source, DAC, amp or headphones (not to mention other possible changes)?


 
   
  Uh no you don't want to test your cable with all the rest of hardware (DAC, amp, headphones / speakers, etc) being brand spanky new.  Because the rest of the hardware are taking burnin in place.  We ain't stupid.  But of course, good point you bring up.


----------



## Steve Eddy

Quote: 





lovleylady said:


> Love the watch paranoia.


 
   




   
  But you missed the best part. The ugly ass double negative on either side of the watch comment. I just now noticed it. OUCH!
   
  Quote: 





> Still like to get an answer to this --> /img/forum/go_quote.gif


 
   
  I'm afraid you may be waiting a while on that.
   
  se


----------



## goodolcheez

Quote: 





big poppa said:


> Easy test Buy Silver cable, Buy silver or rhodium connecters, hook it up to your rig and listen to it. take notes from new in box, 20 hours, 50 hours, then every 100 hours or so or if you hear something different for several hundred of hours. Not too hard really.


 
   
  Better yet let him play the list of songs and let it run for several days and come back.  Check and see how it sounds.


----------



## ExpatinJapan

Well I tried burning in my cables now the sound is messed up!


----------



## TrollDragon

That poor little L9... It burns... It burns...


Sent from my HTC Desire HD using Tapatalk 2


----------



## pompon

Quote: 





steve eddy said:


> Copper is not ferromagnetic.
> 
> And how are you magnetizing your cables in the first place? Are you running DC through them?
> 
> se


 

 It's maybe not magnetic then ... static ? Something seem to add over time ... I cable that was in a box for a long time seem to take a certain time to setup. The jacket of the wire can have an effect too.
   
  While I am not a scientist, I can only trust my ears and when I buy something new, I have impression it's not ok before put at least 50-100 hrs on them.


----------



## Mad Max

I still feel cable burn-in is negligible.  If you don't even like it out of the box, don't bother with burn-in, just sell it or return it or something, go back to your old cable(s) or try a different one.
   
  Or buy a used one with plenty of use and not worry about burn-in, lol!


----------



## mjock3

Has anyone tried Morrow Cables? They need lots of burn in. And if lets say taken out of the system and moved around they require some more settle in time. Rather touchy. However I think they are some of the best I have heard, just leave them alone once in the system.


----------



## x838nwy

With genuine interest in the subject, i'd like to ask a few questions if I may. Some have been asked previously, but not (at least in my opinion) answered. Here goes and sorry for the resurrection:

1.) If cable burn-in exist, surely an additional 100 or 300 hours burn-in by the manufacturers themselves would help in many ways, including returned cables and othe customer satisfaction related issues. So why do manufacturers not burn-in their cables? To me it does not sound like a mechanical thing (like driver/diaphragm "settling in") so it should not significantly affect the life of the cables. So why not?

2.) I assume the "source" of the burn-in is the signal passing through the cable. Does the amplitude/frequency of the signal together with the geometry of the cables affect how quickly a cable burns-in? Would a smaller cable burn in quicker than a larger one with the same signal, for example? If i play my music louder, will my headphone cable burn-in faster?

3.) how do we separate the possibility of our ears/brains adjusting to the relatively small changes in the sq or the possibility of us mis-remembering what our gear sounded like from the (small) changes brought about through our cable burning-in?

4.) how come burn-in only contributes positively to the sq? It seems the theories involved are beyond manufacturing controls so why is it not simply 50:50 either way?

Personally, i think cable "burn-in" exists but imho has nothing to do with the cable. I feel most people expect to hear big changes once they plug in their new cables and are usually disappointed. The "burn-in" thing comes in when the have some more time to listen and hear the more subtle changes (which once noticed are hard to ignore afterwards) and for a number of reasons these newly noticed changes/improvements are falsely connected to atoms shifting, quantum fields and so forth.

But that's just me.


----------



## goodolcheez

Answer to question #1, due to labor costs.  It will cost the manufacturer more to go through all that process and time.  As for the rest of your questions, I didn't read them so don't bother me i'm busy
   
  The solid silver core cable took me good 500- 700 hours before it started to shine and get me analytical metallic sound.   Try not to move these cables around too much or bend it or stress it. The sound can change, negatively.  You'll need burn-in again for it to thaw out again.
   
  As for the Wireworld Oasis-6 RCA cables ($109), it didn't seem to need much burn in at all. Sounded incredible right out of the box.  Still sounds good.
   
   
  cheez


----------



## x838nwy

goodolcheez said:


> Answer to question #1, due to labor costs.  It will cost the manufacturer more to go through all that process and time.  As for the rest of your questions, I didn't read them so don't bother me i'm busy
> 
> cheez




As far as i'm aware, it' only a matter of plugging the cables to a machine and switching it on. Surely if cables as selling at high 3 figures US (even 4 figures in some cases) then surely this would not add significantly to the selling price. Moreover, they can simply offer a "factory burn in" option for a price or something?

I must say I'm with se on this - he sells cables and has done so for a while, so i guess he knows his stuff. I use his cables on my lcd3 - unaware of his views prior to yesterday, mind - and hi cables work very well imo. So i think he knows what he's talking about.

As for not bending the cables or whatever, i see how one can easily damage some cables by over-flexibg them and so forth, but surely just moving them around?? What about headphone cables or even mic cables in studios? I'd think it's important not to put i/c's near power cables or transformers (?) but that's about it(?) if the sound changes when one moves cables, why are only negative changes observed? Were they optimally arranged to start with? How was this arrangement achieved? Pls. Let me know; i'll arrange mine and report on results.


----------



## goodolcheez

^ I donno man. The analytic and metallic sound signature was lost on those same songs after moving the cable and some flexing. I really loved that sound. Incredibly good.  For solid cores, especially the silver, BE CAREFUL WITH IT.  Don't do any bending. Leave as is f-o-r-e-v-e-r.  I don't know about headphone cables... as I have experience with Mini and RCA interconnects for my source and speakers.
   
   
  cheez


----------



## Bob Sireno

I wrote the article for Bound for Sound. The difference in cable-influenced sound is measureable as long as one measures the frequency response where they listen and don't fool themselves into thinking that measuring the electrical signal of the cable is what they need to do. You need to have a high end system capable of reproducing sound accurately. I used a pair of Legacy Focus speakers, a pair of Parasound HCA-2200 mk.II amps, and a Joule Electra LA-200 preamp. A $1000 Best Buy stereo won't be sufficient to hear any subtle differences or to measure the air movement. You can use a hand held dB level meter mounted in a spot close to where you normally sit. Do not move this as doing do would invalidate the comparison. 
  
 My favorite comparison was to replace a pair of Kimber Kables between the preamp and amps with other cables. Try it. Borrow some cables from your local audiophile store and test this for yourself. No need to theorize on how stupid or gullible other people are. You can become your own voice of authority.
  
 Get a frequency response CD, DVD or generator and play it trough your system at a level of about 85 dB (pretty loud). Record the reading at each octave starting at 20 Hz, up to 20,000 Hz. You can add more frequencies' to make the test more accurate. Record the results. Then change a pair of cables to a different brand, or different price range  Repeat. Look at the results.
  
 If you don't have access to a high end stereo ask various store owners if you can test using their equipment. I never met an audiophile shop owner that wasn't interested in sonic truth.


----------



## Speedskater

bob sireno said:


> I wrote the article for Bound for Sound. The difference in cable-influenced sound is measureable as long as one measures the frequency response where they listen and don't fool themselves into thinking that measuring the electrical signal of the cable is what they need to do.
> .....................................


 
 So while the electrical signal to the loudspeakers stays the same, the sound at the listening position changes. Either that's magic or poor measurement technique. I'll go with a poor, low resolution, hard to repeat measurement technique.


----------



## Bob Sireno

I'm saying that if you want to measure the sound you do it in air, with pressure level meters. You measure what you are actually hearing, If you hear a difference you can measure the frequency response at your ear. If you really want to be a scientist, act like one.


----------



## liamstrain

bob sireno said:


> I'm saying that if you want to measure the sound you do it in air, with pressure level meters. You measure what you are actually hearing, If you hear a difference you can measure the frequency response at your ear. If you really want to be a scientist, act like one.


 
  
 Measuring the signal as Speedskater suggests doing is less error prone than SPL meters and microphones - which vary widely with placement, angle, and any other number of factors (and typically have a wider margin of error). He is right in that if the signal is identical (and there are no LCR differences in the cable), then there is no reason for the speaker to produce different sound. 
  
 But certainly you could record the two signals at the listening position and compare them as well. You would just have to be very careful and use well calibrated equipment. Several ways to skin this cat. 
  
 There are also many many threads devoted to this topic in the "Sound Science" sub-forum.


----------



## bfreedma

bob sireno said:


> I'm saying that if you want to measure the sound you do it in air, with pressure level meters. You measure what you are actually hearing, If you hear a difference you can measure the frequency response at your ear. If you really want to be a scientist, act like one.




Sorry, but that is simply incorrect. Open air vs, electrical measurement brings along a bevy of environmental issues that can impact open air. Most of these including temperature, air pressure, and altered room acoustics are highly variable.

Additionally, an SPL meter is generally no where near accurate enough. If you want to attempt something even marginally relevant scientifically, you need a calibrated microphone and a log of the environmental conditions that you can later use to evaluate any differences in the readings between sessions.

Or you can measure correctly by using the signal.


----------



## Bob Sireno

Cables "burn in", the extent of which depends on the cable build. The insulator can have capacitive effects unless it is pure air, the wire itself may have few or many crystal junctions, where electrical pressure works to create the shortest pathway over time, leading to a longer burn in. Ion impurites in the wire can cause jitter.


----------



## bfreedma

bob sireno said:


> Cables "burn in", the extent of which depends on the cable build. The insulator can have capacitive effects unless it is pure air, the wire itself may have few or many crystal junctions, where electrical pressure works to create the shortest pathway over time, leading to a longer burn in. Ion impurites in the wire can cause jitter.


 
  
 I completely disagree with everything in that post in regards to audibility but I'll leave it there.
  
 Would be happy to discuss it more in the Science Section where it's possible to have such discussions without violating Head-Fi rules.


----------

