Why!? Please Tell Me Why!

[pkane2001]

2 minutes ago, gmgraves said:

low power audio cables need burning-in to sound their best. I don't know why but it's true.

 

Just like the directionality of a wire is important to keep the same after a break-in. Everyone knows that. Electrons learn the preferred direction through the wire, and then continue to flow better in that one direction. Even though the current is AC and flows in both directions... How do they know??? These mysteries science is unlikely to solve any time soon...

[fas42]

18 minutes ago, gmgraves said:

Only cables carrying audio need burning in in spite of the fact that audio is a low-band signal that puts no particular strain on any component and certainly is much simpler to transmit than is the fly-by-wire information in, say, an airliner or a military jet, and certainly isn't as important as as a life support system in a hospital. None of these cables need burning-in but low bandwidth, low power audio cables need burning-in to sound their best. I don't know why but it's true.

 

It's always about signal to noise ratio - if you're happy to bet your life on any old cable having full integrity in transmitting, say, 120dB dynamic range material then go for it - systems that need guarantees for correct transmission adjust required dynamic range, and have all sort of redundancies to make sure that it always works. No, audio doesn't really need 120dB accuracy, but 70 to 80 down is where things start start getting a bit twitchy for sufficient accuracy; just enough for one's hearing to pick up that something's not right.

 

It's the noise component that just might be significant to one's hearing, and burn in is just a way of altering or stabilising some of the behaviours of the materials in the cable that impact on that noise contribution.

[fas42]

Dup, of course ...

[One and a half]

1 hour ago, pkane2001 said:

 

Just like the directionality of a wire is important to keep the same after a break-in. Everyone knows that. Electrons learn the preferred direction through the wire, and then continue to flow better in that one direction. Even though the current is AC and flows in both directions... How do they know??? These mysteries science is unlikely to solve any time soon...

The directionality of cables is an advantage where there are cables that leave the device and enter the device using RCA cables. If there’s a tape monitor loop, connecting the cable with the away arrow ends up at the recorder is something simple to remember.

 

XLR are no brainers, these only work one way.

 

The rest of directionality claims line up with your post, in jest!

[jabbr]

8 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

Louche ??

 

 

https://www.google.com/search?q=louche&oq=louche&aqs=chrome..69i57&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

 

https://www.absinthefever.com/absinthe/ritual

[pkane2001]

7 hours ago, One and a half said:

The directionality of cables is an advantage where there are cables that leave the device and enter the device using RCA cables. If there’s a tape monitor loop, connecting the cable with the away arrow ends up at the recorder is something simple to remember.

 

XLR are no brainers, these only work one way.

 

The rest of directionality claims line up with your post, in jest!

 

Yes, so how do they know???

 

[marce]

17 hours ago, mozes said:

I leave that to scientists. I know that it does. Just because it can’t be explained, it doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.

Then explain it or find some explanation, because many of us can't find any explanation...

[marce]

11 hours ago, GUTB said:

Everyone knows that burn-in of cables is a real effect. Why?

Only in the audiophile world, because its one of the audiophile myths....

[marce]

9 hours ago, fas42 said:

 

It's always about signal to noise ratio - if you're happy to bet your life on any old cable having full integrity in transmitting, say, 120dB dynamic range material then go for it - systems that need guarantees for correct transmission adjust required dynamic range, and have all sort of redundancies to make sure that it always works. No, audio doesn't really need 120dB accuracy, but 70 to 80 down is where things start start getting a bit twitchy for sufficient accuracy; just enough for one's hearing to pick up that something's not right.

 

It's the noise component that just might be significant to one's hearing, and burn in is just a way of altering or stabilising some of the behaviours of the materials in the cable that impact on that noise contribution.

No.

[mozes]

15 minutes ago, marce said:

Then explain it or find some explanation, because many of us can't find any explanation...

I couldn’t edit, I wanted to say

if it can’t be explained, it doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.

[pkane2001]

2 minutes ago, mozes said:

I couldn’t edit, I wanted to say

if it can’t be explained, it doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.

 

Just as when someone reports hearing something doesn’t mean it exists.

[marce]

Signal transmission has been extensively studies since the 1800's in the case of cables I think we have almost covered all the bases, especially at audio frequencies.

[4est]

16 hours ago, Nordkapp said:

He doesn't know. Like i said-gullible, wealthy, uninformed.......and these people will go to their grave believing this BS. 

And you were the one to say ignore the "haters"... ROLFLMAO

[Sal1950]

On 4/16/2018 at 8:31 PM, GUTB said:

I bet those use multiple bundles of conductors with large air dielectrics. Probably very nice sounding. 

NICE???

Cables don't have a "sound", or at least they're not supposed to.

If they do either the cable or the gear is broken or improperly designed.

But a great scam to separate the naive from their wallets.  ROTFLMAO

[Speedskater]

1 hour ago, mozes said:

if it can’t be explained, it doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.

A better question:

How do you plan to demonstrate that it does exist?

[phosphorein]

2 hours ago, marce said:

Signal transmission has been extensively studies since the 1800's in the case of cables I think we have almost covered all the bases, especially at audio frequencies.

 

Years ago I read about the hype of directional cables and decided to examine the transmission of nanosecond pulses through such cables. I had a state-of-the art monitoring system at the time and could detect sub-nanosecond rise times. I looked at the directional behavior of a number of different types of cables, including a set of Audioquest interconnects which were directionally marked. The executive summary was that I saw no directional influence on transit times of the pulses through the cable (sub-nanosecond resolution), pulse shape or amplitude. If the cable is low capacitance and well constructed then in my opinion directionality in cables is bogus. Disclaimer: I cannot rule out the possibility that labs in New York behave differently than those in the rest of the universe. BTW I heard no difference either when supplying "audiophile grade" signals. 

[Cornan]

Deleted

[gmgraves]

12 hours ago, fas42 said:

 

Overreaching on what I'm saying, and twisting it, isn't very useful ... you fail to comprehend that ordinary playback by rigs is usually flawed; you're falling into the trap of looking at the pricetag, and assessing competence on that basis - it you are unable to accept that poor sound can be result of the playback chain adding audible anomalies to what's on the recording then you will be unable to make any progress, I'm afraid ...

Frank, everything is flawed to one degree or another! You minimize flaws by listening to equipment before you buy it, and buying equipment that is synergistically compatible. Every time you buy a better DAC, a better amplifier, a better pair of speakers, etc, you get closer to the sound of live music playing in a real space - given of course that you have recordings that sound like a live performance in a real space. This methodology depends on BETTER equipment and that doesn't always mean the most expensive. I have found that there is very little correlation between SQ and price as you get into the high-end. For instance, a $2400 DAC might sound better than a $40,000 DAC. A $700 Schiit power amp might sound better than a $5000 Pass amp. It's important to listen before your buy. The rest of this tweaking business is, as I've said many times before in discussions with you, of only tertiary value. It might lower your noise floor a smidgen, but unless you have hum problems, caused by induction from mains leads, dressing cables will likely not do much of anything audible. No tweaks are going to make your mid-fi system sound like a high-end system, but buying the RIGHT components might! 

[GUTB]

Let’s keep this neurotypical. Everyone knows cable burn-in is real. Everyone has experienced this. Why?

[gmgraves]

13 hours ago, pkane2001 said:

 

Just like the directionality of a wire is important to keep the same after a break-in. Everyone knows that. Electrons learn the preferred direction through the wire, and then continue to flow better in that one direction. Even though the current is AC and flows in both directions... How do they know??? These mysteries science is unlikely to solve any time soon...

My response was dripping with Sarcasm and I know that doesn't come across on these Internet discussion boards very well.

[pkane2001]

1 minute ago, gmgraves said:

My response was dripping with Sarcasm and I know that doesn't come across on these Internet discussion boards very well.

 

I've seen enough of your posts, George, to know where you are coming from

 

[christopher3393]

5 minutes ago, GUTB said:

Let’s keep this neurotypical. Everyone knows cable burn-in is real. Everyone has experienced this. Why?

 

False premise.

[jabbr]

4 hours ago, marce said:

Then explain it or find some explanation, because many of us can't find any explanation...

 

 

Perhaps you aren’t understanding the subtle explanation then. It has been verified that if you burn in your cables while drinking absinthe, as the “la louche” develops, the sound mellows. It’s chemistry. The cables which are affected are connected to neurons, frequently referred to as axons. The effect is quite real. ?

[gmgraves]

3 hours ago, mozes said:

I couldn’t edit, I wanted to say

if it can’t be explained, it doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.

That was much more true a hundred years ago than it is now. One thing that many audiophiles seem to not get (or purposely ignore) is that if interconnect cables and mains cables affect the sound of an audio system why do these sonic anomalies not translate into effects on other, more important electronic signals? And face the facts, my friends, audio is a rather simple signal with limited bandwidth and fairly easy to deal-with waveform complexity. Just off-hand, video is more complex, medical scanning is much more complex, the fly-by-wire systems in modern planes are much more complex, as are missile systems radar, long distance multiplexed communications, etc are all more complex. You'd think that anything that would alter the waveform (and thus the sound) of an audio signal would wreck havoc on more important, and even crucial electrical signals, but that doesn't seem to be the case. Were such things the common occurrence that audiophiles assert, I would think that aircraft would be falling out of the sky, people on life support in hospitals would be dying of unknown causes, Radar would be giving false images and aircraft would be colliding with one another in mid air because a cable caused an aircraft's blip to show-up just a soupçon from where it ought to be, etc. But no. Only audio is affected by passive pieces of coax, and the quality of the cord that goes from the wall socket to the component. 

Now, logically speaking, does any of this seem likely?  

[gmgraves]

10 minutes ago, jabbr said:

 

 

Perhaps you aren’t understanding the subtle explanation then. It has been verified that if you burn in your cables while drinking absinthe, as the “la louche” develops, the sound mellows. It’s chemistry. The cables which are affected are connected to neurons, frequently referred to as axons. The effect is quite real. ?

Absinthe? Hell, any good bottle of Kentucky bourbon or single-malt scotch will do the same thing!