cable break in believer
Options
Comments
-
Fascinating. And how is any of that evidence of cable break in? Seems to just be your opinion, no matter how much you claim otherwise.
Thank you William. Unfortunately Dark has completely derailed this thread with a smug attack on my "experience" and a straw man arguement that turned me from saying "different cable constructions sound different but I don't see how a single given piece of cable gets better with age" into "all wire is exactly the same and sounds the same".
This is the sort of attitude which drives people away from audiophilia. "Wire is wire" was meant literally. It has a physical form. I merely question what within the physical pieces of metal and insulation changes so as to drastically and unquestionably alter a signal that passes through it for the better? Why are there not cases of cables becoming worse with break-in? I suggested it was nearly impossible to tell that it was the cable's aging, and not some other factor, that caused a change to the sound. Way to blow things I said out of context and preportion.Current System:
Paradigm Signature S2 v2
Conrad Johnson MF2500
Wyred4Sound DAC2
Audioquest Black Mamba II
For Sale:
3x Wilson Cub's
Conrad Johnson MF2500 -
With no evidence at all, what else can he do? Although Dark does claim to have a peer reviewed article in a food journal! Very convincing.
-
Well, since the normal Polk forum trolls have joined in the discussion and apparently it's going to be one of "those" threads......
......let me play a little devil's advocate here.
When you listened to your cables brand new, you said they sounded not up to par, right? But, when you kept the system on for a while [even on a low volume] the sound got louder and the sound stage improved a bit when compared to your other cables.
Allow me to introduce a metal bar into the spokes of this thread and ask if you are 100% sure that it was cable burn-in or just system warm up? Thing is, I know that certain gear sounds good when you first turn it on. Many of you may have noticed this. That said, many of you [without changing a thing] have noticed a dramatic difference after system warm up to full fledged, rarin' to go, been on for 4 days in a row, all electronics are stabilized, all caps are saturated type deal.
I'll stop right here for now and chime back in a little later. Right now, I have to grab some popcorn and snuggle up to the fire.~ In search of accurate reproduction of music. Real sound is my reference and while perfection may not be attainable? If I chase it, I might just catch excellence. ~ -
Well, since the normal Polk forum trolls have joined in the discussion and apparently it's going to be one of "those" threads......
Well they are certainly all here now. Can't raise a single valid point, then call them trolls. Yeah, that'll work! -
Why are there not cases of cables becoming worse with break-in?
Interesting point. Also, when someone designs a cable, what kiind of allowances do they make for this burn in?? Is this expected by them or ...? How can they judge the sonic characteristics if the sound changes over time?and ask if you are 100% sure that it was cable burn-in or just system warm up?
My system sounds different on a day to day basis and I swear I change nothing. -
With no evidence at all, what else can he do? Although Dark does claim to have a peer reviewed article in a food journal! Very convincing.
come up with more than a sentence or two and get it published and then maybe you'll have some creditability someday. Otherwise I think you really should shut up because all you ever do is whine for proof, yet when something is presented to you, its still not good enough.
I would love to see your publications in peer reviewed journals, until then, you really don't have a leg to stand on do you? Put in the time and the work needed, disprove him. If you think its so easy then do it. -
come up with more than a sentence or two and get it published and then maybe you'll have some creditability someday. Otherwise I think you really should shut up because all you ever do is whine for proof, yet when something is presented to you, its still not good enough.
How can it be good enough? There has been no evidence of cable break in presented. Aking for proof is whining? Really? Is that all you got?
If that's the case, why don't you shut up?Put in the time and the work needed, disprove him. If you think its so easy then do it.
Disprove what? He hasn't proven anything. -
Do you really whine this much in real life or is it because you have a keyboard to hide behind?
You really must really be a hit with anyone you met.
You wanted proof of a double blind blah blah he's posted things before. You wanted peer reviewed, you whine that its not in the "right" journal (this has been discussed more than enough before) and yet you still bring up the same thing over and over again. Your like a broken record and can never move on. -
Wow, what a suprising response. Still nothing.
Maybe you didn't notice, but Dark's article is about blind listening, it provides no evidence of cable break in, or even cable differences for that matter. And yes, it's in a food journal. Why not an audio journal? -
Well, since the normal Polk forum trolls have joined in the discussion and apparently it's going to be one of "those" threads......
......let me play a little devil's advocate here.
When you listened to your cables brand new, you said they sounded not up to par, right? But, when you kept the system on for a while [even on a low volume] the sound got louder and the sound stage improved a bit when compared to your other cables.
Allow me to introduce a metal bar into the spokes of this thread and ask if you are 100% sure that it was cable burn-in or just system warm up? Thing is, I know that certain gear sounds good when you first turn it on. Many of you may have noticed this. That said, many of you [without changing a thing] have noticed a dramatic difference after system warm up to full fledged, rarin' to go, been on for 4 days in a row, all electronics are stabilized, all caps are saturated type deal.
I'll stop right here for now and chime back in a little later. Right now, I have to grab some popcorn and snuggle up to the fire.
Well first off I said that after a few days of break in the cable sounded better than they did at first. I didn't say anything about my other cables.
There is a chance that the system being on for days sounded better because it was fully warmed up. I'll be able to test out that theory shortly after i'm done fully breaking the cables in. I will play it fully warmed up and then another day i'll turn it on and listen right away.
Good point.Onkyo TX NR 5008 modified by The Upgrade Company
Oppo BDP 93 modified by The Upgrade Company
Arcam CD37
Monitor Audio Gold GS 60
Revolver Audio Music 5 towers.(surround)
Vandersteen V2W -
Hmmmmmmmmmm, where to start?
I think I'll start with expressing my appreciation to jayman_1975 for sharing his cable audition results.
And now, down to business.And my point was that there is no evidence it's perceptable to the trained ear either. None.
Ok. Well, it seems that you win. Congrats.With no evidence at all, what else can he do? Although Dark does claim to have a peer reviewed article in a food journal! Very convincing.Maybe you didn't notice, but Dark's article is about blind listening, it provides no evidence of cable break in, or even cable differences for that matter. And yes, it's in a food journal. Why not an audio journal?
Obviously you didn't notice. A section of the article discusses blind testing, but it is not an article on blind testing. The title and abstract specifically state what the article is about.
I never claimed to have a peer reviewed article in a food journal. I do have a peer reviewed article that is scheduled for publication in the premier sensory science journal. The article can be downloaded from the journal's website now.:) A discussion of the article was offered here:
Do you people even realize how foolish you appear spewing this "food journal" garbage when the Journal of Sensory Studies clearly and specifically states that:"The Journal of Sensory Studies is the official Journal of the Society of Sensory Professionals" (not food scientists)
Common sense should inform that, if JOSS was a food science journal, it would not accept an article titled:"A DESCRIPTIVE EVALUATION METHODOLOGY FOR CONSUMER AUDIO EQUIPMENT";)
Most of the research in sensory science is funded by food and beverage companies, hence the emphasis on these areas. However, if it comforts some people to dismiss the article because they rationalize that it is published in a "food" journal, well OK.And yes, it's in a food journal. Why not an audio journal?
The article is about appropriate and accurate sensory evaluation techniques of sound and tactile sensation generated by stereophonic audio systems. The Journal of Sensory Studies is an appropriate journal for such an article. Most of the editorial reviewers are not experts in audio electronics. However, the reviewers who reviewed my article are experts in the sensory evaluation of sound stimuli.
The only peer reviewed audio journal that I know of is the Journal of the Audio Engineering Society, which is a general, rather than focused topic, journal. Many electrical engineers and other scientists working in the audio engineering field prefer to publish their audio related articles in IEEE journals and other scientific journals that are focused on the specific specialized area of their article. This assures the author of having his/her work reviewed by experts in the field of the article and it assures that the article will be offered to a knowledgeable, appreciative audience that can offer informed feedback and who may be inspired to use the article to further their research.
I am working currently working on a revision to an article on power cable evaluation that was submitted to an appropriate, focused IEEE journal. I had a reasonable expectation that my article would be reviewed by people who possessed some expertise and current interest in the topic. My expectation was confirmed when I received my first draft back with appropriate comments for expanding and improving the article.Are you postulating that broken in cables: have better resolution? have better dynamics, better sound stage/depth, better imaging? or are you saying they will simply sound 'different'?
Nope. No way. I (and others) am saying that some of the cables I (we) have personally auditioned in my (our) audio system(s) and the systems of others have exhibited better resolution, dynamics, and sound stage characteristics.I have some Belden 5000 (500UE) it all came on a 50 ft loop. I cut two 12 foot runs and terminated with GLS locking bananas. I still have some GLS, also unused, bananas from a same shipment.
I have $100 bucks that says you couldn't tell me which is the zero hour cables and which are the 400 + hour cables. I will even ship them to you. I will not tell you which is which since it should be evident to the trained ear.
Sorry to rain on your parade and be a party pooper, but the honest truth is that $100 bucks is not sufficient incentive for me to slide my 180 pound, hot rodded Polk Audio Signature Reference System Stereo Dimensional Array 1.2TL loudspeakers out of the way so that I can access the rear binding posts in order to disconnect my superlative Audioquest Everest 99.9999% pure silver, 9AWG Dielectric Bias System speaker cables (MSRP $11,700 per 9 foot pair).
If you want to send me a pair of high end MIT cables, then we have a deal, in such case I will waive the hundred bucks and pay shipping both ways.
Since you have the Belden cables right there with you. Why don't you do your own evaluation and then note any differences, if any, in stereophonic performance parameters? Since you prefer blind testing methodology, you could get a friend or friends to assist you in doing the test blind fashion. I, and I think much of the forum membership, would be interested in your results.Thank you William. Unfortunately Dark has completely derailed this thread with a smug attack on my "experience" and a straw man arguement that turned me from saying "different cable constructions sound different but I don't see how a single given piece of cable gets better with age" into "all wire is exactly the same and sounds the same".
Me? Smug? Who said this?:Frankly, I feel wire is wire, and while certainly there are different levels of quality that might make a difference, i've never heard such malarkey as hunks of wire somehow getting better with age and use,...Spend a large portion of your money on something foolish that you can't recoup your losses on and you'll justify it to the end, naysayers and common sense be damned.
Good luck to everyone in their audio travels.Proud and loyal citizen of the Digital Domain and Solid State Country! -
I don't even use cables anymore
"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Benjamin Franklin, February 17th, 1775.
"The day that I have to give up my constitutional rights AND let some dude rub my junk...well, let's just say that it's gonna be a real bad day for the dude trying to rub my junk!!"
messiah, November 23rd, 2010 -
How can I break in a cable? I buy all of them used. Does it mean it's already broken in?
-
Every time I see cables costing over 10k, I think that I should start a company that makes high end cables. The material cost must be like $50, R&D is copying the other guy, and with that cheap asian labor
... -
Audioquest's patented dielectric bias system (DBS) is designed to address the issue of cable break in. Page 9 and 10 of the attached Audioquest Cable Theory paper discuss cable break in.
Some audiophiles and cable manufacturers like to use cable conditioning devices, such as the Audiodharma Cable Cooker to accellerate the break in of their cables.Proud and loyal citizen of the Digital Domain and Solid State Country! -
jayman_1975,
Thank you for posting your findings. I'm sorry that your thread has been hijacked by the likes of cokewithvanilla, sm88, jinjuku, WilliamM2 and jaxwired. Their comments are an embarrassment to the forum collective.
F1Political Correctness'.........defined
"A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a t-u-r-d by the clean end."
President of Club Polk -
I'm sorry that your thread has been hijacked
Had he not posted something about people who don't believe in cable break in, all comments about it would be off topic... but since he did.....
Aside from your little "good job", your post is probably the most off topic in this thread (by off-topic, I mean attacking, or issuing blanket opinions about individuals and their comments without reference to any statements, or mentioning anything remotely related to audio) -
cokewithvanilla wrote: »The material cost must be like $50, R&D is copying the other guy, and with that cheap asian labor ...
There is a lot of copycatting in any successful product area. In the case of my cables, I think a few pounds of silver wiring costs considerably more than fiddy bucks. Then there is the specialized wire cladding, then the specialized winding machines, R&D costs, patent application and maintenance costs, etc., etc...it adds up.
You can locate discussions, going several years back, by some DIY'ers of their attempts to duplicate Audioquest's dielectric bias system in interconnect and speaker cables. No luck yet.cokewithvanilla wrote: »Every time I see cables costing over 10k, I think that I should start a company that makes high end cables.
It's a risky business...but it could pay off handsomely. I'd rather have a fast food franchise license.:)Proud and loyal citizen of the Digital Domain and Solid State Country! -
DarqueKnight wrote: »There is a lot of copycatting in any successful product area. In the case of my cables, I think a few pounds of silver wiring costs considerably more than fiddy bucks. Then there is the specialized wire cladding, then the specialized winding machines, R&D costs, patent application and maintenance costs, etc., etc...it adds up.
You can locate discussions, going several years back, by some DIY'ers of their attempts to duplicate Audioquest's dielectric bias system in interconnect and speaker cables. No luck yet.
It's a risky business...but it could pay off handsomely. I'd rather have a fast food franchise license.:)
Hah, I guess I haven't really considered it in depth. -
cokewithvanilla wrote: »This really doesn't matter. You were aware of the existence of the brands, you had tasted them before. They taste different, so you were able to identify them, sure.
With the cables, you would not be told what gear and cables you are hearing. There are hundreds or thousands of cables, and the same goes for the rest of the gear. The chances of you identifying the setup is unlikely. The difference would be the break in period of the same cables. It would be "A/B, is there a difference? If so, what?"
The point of the test is to find if break in is real, if it is, you wouldn't so much be identifying the cable as being broken in, but confirming (i use this term loosely) that breaking in is real. And, of course, if break in isn't real, you would hear no difference (and of course they would try to trick you and play the same cable twice).
edit: but to be honest, even if you blind tested 500,000 people, and they all said the same thing, it would still be far from conclusive. Audio is not like getting a new prescription for your glasses... the results aren't always clear.
I believe you missed the entire point of my post (about blind tests). I guess if you believe that all cables sound the same, you would have your viewpoint. If you believe that all cables sound the same, get the cheapest ones you can find and enjoy.
Greg
Taken from a recent Audioholics reply regarding "Club Polk" and Polk speakers:
"I'm yet to hear a Polk speaker that merits more than a sentence and 60 seconds discussion."![:\](https://forum.polkaudio.com/resources/emoji/confused.png ":\")
My response is: If you need 60 seconds to respond in one sentence, you probably should't be evaluating Polk speakers.....
"Green leaves reveal the heart spoken Khatru"- Jon Anderson
"Have A Little Faith! And Everything You'll Face, Will Jump From Out Right On Into Place! Yeah! Take A Little Time! And Everything You'll Find, Will Move From Gloom Right On Into Shine!"- Arthur Lee -
jayman_1975 wrote: »I have been somewhat on the fence about cable break in up until recently with my new set of Merlin Verdi ICs. When i got them hooked up and had my first listen i was quite disappointed to be honest. Lows were sloppy and lacked punch, mids were bloomy and highs lacked sparkle. To be honest i was ready to unhook them and send them back to my dealer. Then i realized that they might need some break in time so i turned the volume down to 1 on my pre(which was only audible if i put my ear right up close to the speakers so i knew it wouldnt bother the wife) and let it run for a few days.
One thing i noticed over the course of a couple days was that "1" on my preamp seemed to get louder as the sound was no longer barely audible anymore in fact the wife ended up turning it off because it interfered with the sound on the TV. all the sound characteristics smartened up and my system is sounding superb.
I honestly cant believe that there can be nay sayers on this topic.
Thanks for sharing your experience with us.
I too have experienced the improvement break in on speakers and cables makes, and an improvement in sound with warm up time on equipment. Kind of like how your car runs better when it's warmed up.
I will say that it's kind of sad that people had to come crap all over your thread and tell the world how burn in doesn't matter. Sad, pathetic little people that couldn't just say "well, I don't believe in that, so I won't be an asshat, and I'll just keep my (never even tried to tell the difference cuz cables don't matter none) opinion to myself.
Whatever. Those who know, know. "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Benjamin Franklin, February 17th, 1775.
"The day that I have to give up my constitutional rights AND let some dude rub my junk...well, let's just say that it's gonna be a real bad day for the dude trying to rub my junk!!"
messiah, November 23rd, 2010 -
Thank you for posting your findings. I'm sorry that your thread has been hijacked by the likes of cokewithvanilla, sm88, jinjuku, WilliamM2 and jaxwired. Their comments are an embarrassment to the forum collective.
I can't believe they haven't kicked you out permanently yet. You contribute next to nothing beyond nasty snide comments. Worthless...2 Channel
NAD C545 -> Benchmark DAC1 -> Bryston BP6 -> Bryston 4B SST2 -> Dynaudio Contour S1.4 -
I can't believe they haven't kicked you out permanently yet. You contribute next to nothing beyond nasty snide comments. Worthless...
And you contribute better how?? Not everything contributed within this forum is posted for the world to see.. Some of the best help and advice I have got has been off these pages from members here. -
DarqueKnight wrote: »
Sorry to rain on your parade and be a party pooper, but the honest truth is that $100 bucks is not sufficient incentive for me to slide my 180 pound, hot rodded Polk Audio Signature Reference System Stereo Dimensional Array 1.2TL loudspeakers out of the way so that I can access the rear binding posts in order to disconnect my superlative Audioquest Everest 99.9999% pure silver, 9AWG Dielectric Bias System speaker cables (MSRP $11,700 per 9 foot pair).
If you want to send me a pair of high end MIT cables, then we have a deal, in such case I will waive the hundred bucks and pay shipping both ways.
^^
Didn't I tell you William?
Name your price DK. N will go up with price. That is out of N two cables will be 'broken' in.DarqueKnight wrote: »Since you have the Belden cables right there with you. Why don't you do your own evaluation and then note any differences, if any, in stereophonic performance parameters? Since you prefer blind testing methodology, you could get a friend or friends to assist you in doing the test blind fashion. I, and I think much of the forum membership, would be interested in your results.
Already have, couldn't tell a from b.
From they way you were talking it would be the easiest $100 you made plus the added bonus of publicly proving the objectivist wrong. -
The $100 is open to all: I will send you 4 cables. Two that have hundreds and hundreds of hours on them and two that don't. Hell statistically you have a random 25% chance of making $100.
We pick a member that will hold $200 in escrow and send to the prevailing party. You have a week with the cables. Listen, evaluate, measure in any fashion of your choosing.
The only thing that you will not know is which cable is which. I am assuming that the laws of physics are in effect here. -
Till you decide to step up your game you will never know.....
-
Larry let these asshats go. It's the same trolls always arguing, if they are that stupid to think cables don't matter then put them on ignore and ignore them. This crap is so tiresome because it's always the same ridiculous arguments against gear/cables/caps, etc.
To the OP, congrats on your system and revelation that EVERYTHING matters.
H9"Appreciation of audio is a completely subjective human experience. Measurements can provide a measure of insight, but are no substitute for human judgment. Why are we looking to reduce a subjective experience to objective criteria anyway? The subtleties of music and audio reproduction are for those who appreciate it. Differentiation by numbers is for those who do not".--Nelson Pass Pass Labs XA25 | EE Avant Pre | EE Mini Max Supreme DAC | MIT Shotgun S1 | Pangea AC14SE MKII | Legend L600 | BlueSound Node 3 - Tubes add soul! -
Larry let these asshats go. It's the same trolls always arguing, if they are that stupid to think cables don't matter then put them on ignore and ignore them. This crap is so tiresome because it's always the same ridiculous arguments against gear/cables/caps, etc.
To the OP, congrats on your system and revelation that EVERYTHING matters.
H9
I take it my $100 that you would win wouldn't put a smile on your face for the rest of your life every time you think about it.
Put up or shut up. -
I'm still new to this game but I came to the following conclusion. Can it be that some people equipment isn't as revealing as others? Meaning if someone is listening to a $200 receiver vs MBL tube amp, the details are lost by the equipment and not in the cable? So the person in the lower quality gear never had a chance to hear the difference from the cables. While I can't comment on cable break in, I did notice s significant difference in SQ in Audioquest cables and my current Signal cables.
-
TOOLFORLIFEFAN wrote: »And you contribute better how?? Not everything contributed within this forum is posted for the world to see.. Some of the best help and advice I have got has been off these pages from members here.
Well, it's a shame you can't tell the difference between my post and his. Odd really. My post was on subject, made a point, and contained no personal attack against anyway (no specific names). F1's post had nothing to say on the topic, and was only a personal and specific attack on other members. Very different to the unbiased clear thinking person...2 Channel
NAD C545 -> Benchmark DAC1 -> Bryston BP6 -> Bryston 4B SST2 -> Dynaudio Contour S1.4
This discussion has been closed.