​Cable Burn In?

[4est]

First off, I am sorry that so many feel the need to chime in childishly/negatively. One would hope that others weren't so insecure in their perceptions to feel the need to chastise someone else who has experienced something differently. Be advised that many of them cannot hear differences in most anything -other than speakers perhaps. Sadly, there appears to be a contingent here that would like to evangelize their perspective despite your obvious interest in cables.

 

I agree with Roch/elcorso on this. If after 100 hrs, give or take 95, the cables do not sound inviting, dump them. If a cable actually takes 700+ hours to settle, they should have had more break in at the factory or something, but it seems unreasonable to expect one to wait. With that said, there are occasionally products that warrant such a wait, but I haven't experienced it with cabling. I will freely admit publicly that I have spent thousands on cabling, and do not regret it. The peanut gallery may slay me for this, but my best cable has cryo'd silver wire and Bybee thingies in it. I do not WANT to think it sounds great, as it is single ended, too short and well, has Bybee thingies in it, but hot damn, it sounds great...

elcorso Thank you kindly! You are correct there were improvements after 100 hours and they were minimal however never the less still notable

[wwaldmanfan]

I actually do feel that cables sound different (very possibly due to interactions with the rest of the system), and am open to the possibility of "burn-in."

 

That said, I will tell you that when I compared 4 different USB digital cables, a Furutech among them and the most expensive of the bunch, I liked it the least. It seemed to me to have an artificially detailed sound I thought of as "zingy," but "thin" might also be an apt description. So *if* there is such a thing as cables that sound different, I wonder whether this thin quality is a Furutech "house sound."

I think many of us have experimented with cables, and agree that some cables do sound different from others in a particular system. I don't want to get into that long discussion yet again, but I will say that I tried half-a-dozen different USB cables, ranging from a cheap printer cable up to a $180 custom cable made in Australia which I won't name. That particular cable had no 5v power lead, as my DAC doesn't need one. Some people love them. On my system that cable was clearly the worst-sounding. Of the others I tried, I noticed a difference between the Kimber Kable pure silver USB and the more common copper or silver-plated copper cables. The silver cable had more high end detail, but it was too much for me. I am currently using a $45 Supra into my UpTone REGEN, mainly because Alex and John recommended it. I don't want to dwell on minutae with my equipment as much as others here.

[dtb300]

The best way to know if a cable changes over time is to own two of them. Use one cable for a bit (use it for at least a couple weeks) then swap the unused/new cable in and listen to the difference. My DAC has two outputs so this is/was very easy for me to hear the difference - just switched inputs on the Pre Amp while a song was playing - no waiting to switch a cable.

Not what everyone can afford, but it does demonstrate if a certain cable does change.

[christopher3393]

Hello 2M Mark. Just for some context, here are links to a few of the cable burn-in discussions on this forum:

 

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f8-general-forum/cable-burn-29198/

 

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f8-general-forum/do-audio-cables-require-break-period-17699/

 

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f8-general-forum/burn-permanent-or-do-we-need-re-burn-24309/

 

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f8-general-forum/burning-equipment-just-audio-mythology-26533/

 

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f8-general-forum/breaking-cable-27531/

 

With a little more searching, one could add several more. If you were to broaden this search to include threads about the more general question regarding what sonic difference cables can make, the results would be tripled! The you could break it down into sonic differences of usb cables (and whether or not these exist), speaker cables, etc., and find LOTS more. This might help you to better understand some of the responses you have received and may yet receive.

 

My own sense, for the little it is worth, is that discussions of this topic are very repetitive and usually fruitless. It amounts to the eternal recurrence of the same cable thread:

 

[2M Mark]

Thank you for your response

Jud, thank you for your input. To correctly answer your question you're asking what the cable sounded like on day one in comparison to now?

[r_w]

Buy a soldering iron, some silver solder, some high quality cable and some high quality connectors.

 

... and then make your own cables to shortest lengths.

 

Almost nobody on this Earth needs to spend that kind of coin on wires.

[plissken]

I need your thought regarding Cable Burn-In

I've just spent a couple of thousand dollars on cables, the company clearly states 400 hours burn in and Ive done everything I was told to, I'm now on 480 odd hours the sound's thin and boring

I talked with the company and I was informed of The New Burn-In time of 700 hours PLUS

The owner of the company is a good guy and I'm not here to give him a bad name

Your thoughts please?

 

My thoughts are that thousands of $$'s worth of cables is not warranted in any home audio system regardless of price.

 

Cable burn in is audiophiles howling at the moon. Anyone that uses their system for any decent amount of time ends up with 'burned in cables'. We all have 'burned in' systems. Everything from the Romex in the wall, to the breaker, to the pole outside to the speakers and everything in between.

 

Why worry about something that is going to happen.

 

700 Hours? The typical work year in the U.S. is 2000 hours.

 

I wouldn't trust the person you purchased cables from. Even taking the 700 hours at anything approaching face value: Other cable vendors ship the cables 'pre-burned' in. If 700 hours is the case then your vendor should know enough to burn in the entire spool and then terminated the burned in cable and ship it out.

[Jud]

Thank you for your response

Jud, thank you for your input. To correctly answer your question you're asking what the cable sounded like on day one in comparison to now?

 

I didn't have a question, just happy to know you are able to return the cables if you don't like them.

 

 

I saw upthread an idea about swapping in unused cables for new to determine if there's burn-in. I would suggest any test that depends on a memory of sound is undependable.

 

Rather, I would say a better test, either for burn-in or differences between cables in your system, is to take memory out of it entirely for the situation where you have two sets of analog cables (either analog interconnects or speaker cables). The way to do that is to put a cable from one pair on the left channel and a cable from the other pair on the right channel. If you think you hear a difference, swap them to see whether the difference follows the cable or stays on the same side (indicating any difference would be caused by room interaction).

[gmgraves]

Some people (not me) claim that certain dialectric mateials like Teflon improve with current flow. That's why AudioQuest makes those expensive cables with the little battery packs attached. Note that the dialectric theory also admits that the beneficial dialectric effect fades away and reverts to the original state if the current is shut off for several days. Even if it true, you have to have very deep pockets to spend big bucks on cables. Your money is better spent on other components, and there is a steep point of diminishing returns with that, too.

 

I'm well aware of the "claims", but it's pseudo-science like alchemy, astrology. and eugenics. Dielectrics in coaxial cable forms instantaneously because the parallel or "shunt" capacitance is so small. Because of the small value, coupled with the short length used for interconnects in domestic audio situations, that small capacitance has essentially zero effect on the signal at any frequency under 100KHz, or 50 ft in length - whichever comes first. And even then, the frequency affected is is 20 KHz and above; and even then, not by much.

@2M Mark You might as well send them back now. They are not going to change signficantly. If you spent $2K on cables and you don't like them, you will never like them.

 

I second that suggestion! DO IT NOW!

[Ralf11]

cables can sound different because inductance and/or capacitance can differ - the best cable will have neither and cables are not a good way to change the sound of a system, tone controls are what is wanted

 

people made humorous replies because cables are one of the worst rip-offs in a rip-off laden industry

 

if you think you hear a difference, then use blind testing to be sure

 

to add to the comment just above, I object to the use of the word 'theory' in this context; these notions in no way resemble a scientific theory

 

if anything, using the term pseudo-science is being too kind

[gmgraves]

I saw upthread an idea about swapping in unused cables for new to determine if there's burn-in. I would suggest any test that depends on a memory of sound is undependable.

Amen, +1

[wwaldmanfan]

...to add to the comment just above, I object to the use of the word 'theory' in this context; these notions in no way resemble a scientific theory. If anything, using the term pseudo-science is being too kind...

 

We can all always learn something. Today, I learned to keep my big mouth shut. I know only enough to make me dangerous around here (post #24).

[gmgraves]

cables can sound different because inductance and/or capacitance can differ - the best cable will have neither and cables are not a good way to change the sound of a system, tone controls are what is wanted

 

That depends on your definition of "sound" if it's 20 KHz- 1 MHz or higher, then yes. If it's 20 Hz to 20 KHz, then not so much.

people made humorous replies because cables are one of the worst rip-offs in a rip-off laden industry

Now, this is absolutely true!

if you think you hear a difference, then use blind testing to be sure

 

I'm not 100% convinced that DBT (or a SBT, for that matter) is a very accurate test. That's why cable manufacturers get away with selling expensive cable to unsuspecting audiophiles. They start with a false premise - that wire can change the sound of your system, then they count on the facts that people have a poor aural memory, are very suggestible, and that most audiophiles have no real electronic engineering background, and can't tell a half truth about electrical theory when they see (hear) one. Then, knowing that there is no real, foolproof way to test their outlandish claims, they rely on people's suggestibility to propagate the myth that their cables sound better than the competition's. The truth of course, is that once someone has plopped-down big bucks for cables, they expect that there will be a difference in sound from their old cables, and so they hear a difference because they want to hear a difference. Cable makers know this as well.

[Ralf11]

the laity often use the term theory in a way which differs from how scientists use it

 

no need to keep your mouth shut here ;]

[Jud]

cables can sound different because inductance and/or capacitance can differ - the best cable will have neither and cables are not a good way to change the sound of a system, tone controls are what is wanted

 

people made humorous replies because cables are one of the worst rip-offs in a rip-off laden industry

 

if you think you hear a difference, then use blind testing to be sure

 

to add to the comment just above, I object to the use of the word 'theory' in this context; these notions in no way resemble a scientific theory

 

if anything, using the term pseudo-science is being too kind

 

Newtonian laws of motion (in non-relativistic circumstances) are as well- and as long-settled as anything in science. But an exact solution to the three-body problem is still not available.

 

For a single cable under test, properties will be extremely well defined and may be completely described by LCR specs. On the other hand, as anyone who's ever had to resolve a ground hum knows, one or a pair of the little buggers in a *system* can behave in unpredicted ways. In a system you begin to deal with factors such as whether one cable makes a more favorable ground path for noise than another, how a cable reacts to RFI and EMI fields if these are present in the environment....

 

By the way, you keep referring to using blind testing, but just blinded is no assurance of effectiveness. The common A/B or A/B/X formats are subject to the problems of sensory memory, so I'll repeat what I suggested above: simultaneous comparisons (one DUT to each channel) are preferable.

[Ralf11]

not clear if they are preferable or not, tho they would avoid some problems

 

a quick switching should resolve sensory memory issues - based on my limited understanding of cognitive psychology you just keep it in short-term memory

 

I'm not clear on GMGs "very accurate test" comments above

[Jud]

Then, knowing that there is no real, foolproof way to test their outlandish claims,

 

I don't know that it's "foolproof," but I've already suggested (twice) a potentially better method: simultaneous comparison, one cable (or other DUT) to each channel. Would you be able to try this, George, for example with interconnects or speaker cables?

 

The truth of course, is that once someone has plopped-down big bucks for cables, they expect that there will be a difference in sound from their old cables, and so they hear a difference because they want to hear a difference.

 

 

In a trial of 4 USB cables, I liked the most expensive one least, and by far the least expensive one ($25-$30) second best, so I'm not sure how far your model about people wanting to hear a difference from expensive cables actually extends to reality.

[Jud]

not clear if they are preferable or not, tho they would avoid some problems

 

a quick switching should resolve sensory memory issues - based on my limited understanding of cognitive psychology you just keep it in short-term memory

 

I'm not clear on GMGs "very accurate test" comments above

 

Echoic memory lasts about 2-4 seconds (there are some outlier experiments suggesting up to 10 seconds), so you'd have to be *mighty* quick with the switching. And what differences in timbre, for example (because a cable isn't going to change frequency, and we are not likely talking about sufficient difference in resistance to change loudness) do you think you'd be able to gather in 2 seconds' time?

[One and a half]

On the topic of Teflon in this post, you really need to wonder if Teflon is affected by anything hiding behind audio equipment.

According to Wikipedia, Teflon has a dielectric strength of 60MV/m, even down to a millimeter, of insulation, that's still 30kV, 30,000V before the material starts to complain.

Think about moving electrons and breaking in an insulation like that, when the metal conductor is at 2V or a lot less. Not going to happen, Teflon will not move, ever.

[mansr]

On the topic of Teflon in this post, you really need to wonder if Teflon is affected by anything hiding behind audio equipment.

According to Wikipedia, Teflon has a dielectric strength of 60MV/m, even down to a millimeter, of insulation, that's still 30kV, 30,000V before the material starts to complain.

Think about moving electrons and breaking in an insulation like that, when the metal conductor is at 2V or a lot less. Not going to happen, Teflon will not move, ever.

Teflon is one of the most stable materials ever invented. It's the last place I'd expect to see any burn-in effects.

[rando]

How about an oversimplified solution in place of deep philosophical insights. Simply unplug and plug back in the suspect cables. What I'm wondering here is if they are actually fully seated. They may appear to be and yet offer a marginal sound due to some incompatibility that has yet to be addressed.

 

Barring a simple explanation it may be wise to scattershot order a few promising cables. $2 cables are laughable but you might find bliss for 1/10 your current outlay.

[rodrigaj]

Implied by some of the post so far, is an implicit, and in some cases, explicit act of dishonesty on the part of the audio industry.

 

Do you believe that an entire industry is complicit in this coverup? Or do they lack the scientific knowledge and honestly believe their marketing copy?

 

And what about folks like Vandersteen, who do not stand to gain monetary consideration, but who avow cable claims and biwiring claims?

 

So is this a vast conspiracy of like-minded felons or folks that really believe in what they are selling?

 

BTW, my choice of cable is Blue Jeans cables.

[mansr]

Implied by some of the post so far, is an implicit, and in some cases, explicit act of dishonesty on the part of the audio industry.

 

Do you believe that an entire industry is complicit in this coverup? Or do they lack the scientific knowledge and honestly believe their marketing copy?

 

And what about folks like Vandersteen, who do not stand to gain monetary consideration, but who avow cable claims and biwiring claims?

 

So is this a vast conspiracy of like-minded felons or folks that really believe in what they are selling?

 

BTW, my choice of cable is Blue Jeans cables.

I don't think there's a large conspiracy, but I do believe there are numerous independent fraudsters. Of course there's a shared complicity as all involved parties choose to play along. The manufacturers and press clearly profit from it. The consumers probably maintain their position either out of embarrassment or simply because of the bragging rights associated with a $1000 cable. There's also an attitude ingrained in the audiophile community that if you don't own super-expensive everything, you're not to be taken seriously. Peer pressure, in other words. This is the reason I rarely mention specifics about my equipment.

[Ralf11]

more fundamentally, we live in a time of magical thinking when few have even a rudimentary education in basic science (and I am speaking of those who have college degrees)

 

this allows a great deal of woo-woo to proliferate

 

another effect is that the internet is now open to the public - I think I may have liked it better before everyone who could type was able to use it

[mansr]

more fundamentally, we live in a time of magical thinking when few have even a rudimentary education in basic science (and I am speaking of those who have college degrees)

 

this allows a great deal of woo-woo to proliferate

 

another effect is that the internet is now open to the public - I think I may have liked it better before everyone who could type was able to use it

Have you heard the phrase "eternal September"?