Speaker cable burn in is a MYTH and/or a LIE!

shack

Y'all have fun with the rest of this. I've stated what I heard (not imagined). Take it or leave it. I've also found some material (after the fact) that in some form or fashion lends some credibilty to what I heard. Take it or leave it.

My job here is done....I can add nothing more.....I'm out!

jdhdiggs

I think it would be cool if burn-in existed, however materials engineering, EE, and ABX testing have all proved it doesn't exist. The psychological phenomenon has been proven though. It is a hard case to crack.

Shack, if you can really do it (tell burned in cables from non), you would have a hell of a Ph.D. paper for material sceince, not to mention a lucrative career as a "golden ear" tuner. They get between a couple hundred to a couple thousand dollars an hour.

And I am being serious, not sarcastic.

RuSsMaN

Shack, F all the naysayers, let them listen to thier grunt.

A lot of us have spent a lot of time, and shared our experience to try and help others to get the most they can out of their rigs, or at least try some things. Just like most issues, there are some that simply won't budge (and appear not to want to either), or listen to other takes on the subject. Now you've got people telling you essentially, that YOU are lieing, and you heard it first hand.

You and I will move on down the audio road, and have fun doing it. The lunatics are trying to run the asylum here now, and I'm going to let them. I love these guys that were NOWHERE audiowise a year or two ago, have tried a couple cables, and bought a peice or two of low to mid-fi gear, and are now experts on all things audio. How many times can we say the same things over and over?

CP is the like the stock market, and right now it's on a downward trend. It may be time to find something else to do, friend.

Cheers,
Russ

polkatese

Originally posted by RuSsMaN
I love these guys that were NOWHERE audiowise a year or two ago, have tried a couple cables, and bought a peice or two of low to mid-fi gear, and are now experts on all things audio. How many times can we say the same things over and over?
Cheers,
Russ

-AMEN! Part Deux! :cool:

reeltrouble1

Well spoken Russ, I still feel the hardcore members drive the applecart and am most interested in what those posts say.

Shack I am with you, I know there are differences in how wire sounds, most recently I compared MIT Terminator to PS audio speaker cables, I could not hear alot of differnce between the two, however, this has nothing to do with burn in and does not mean their is no difference between speaker cables.

When I sarted using better IC's I was immediately aware of a difference in SQ.

PolkThug

"Let me be blunt: Anyone who claims there isn’t a clearly audible difference between virgin and properly conditioned cables, at least from out of the bunch I tested, is clearly hard of hearing."

Same old arguement. "You can't hear as good as I can!"

Let me guess, the guy that made this statement is well into his 40's or 50's.

The problem I have with this, when talking about home audio, is that good microphones can hear differences in sound better than humans can. The arguement that "My ears are the best measuring device" is, in reality, false. People tend to forget that the album that they listened to was recorded with none other than, a microphone. So, everthing they hear from the album, or that cable X "reveals", was "revealed" by the microphone the first time.

If these differences exist, they can be measured. (I'm trying to do this myself.)


Maybe this arguement isn't in that article, but I can't see it at work because its getting blocked as "Entertainment".:)

Regards,
PT

2+2

I didnt think interconnects made a difference....but they do. Dont know about burn in as I cant say I have experimented with it so I wont say either way.

But those of you saying burn in cannot be measured...can differences in interconnects be measured? The differences in sound of interconnects is very real to me.

Also..what makes people think that we know all there is to know about electicity and material science, and have the technology to "measure" the difference as it impacts sound? This is just silly. Technology continues to evolve and we learn more about nature each year. Humans have much more learning to do....different particles at the molecular level are being discovered etc....sorry...but this requirement of measurement as proof seems to say that we know all there is to know...which is clearly erroneous.

PolkThug

Originally posted by 2+2
, and have the technology to "measure" the difference as it impacts sound? This is just silly.

Not silly at all, this is very old technology. Think of voice recognition. Audio signals can be measured and compared.

dkg999

Even with my non-critical ears (too much loud music and farm equipment when I was younger!) I can hear some differences in speaker cables, and sometimes with IC's. I'm not convinced that burn-in with the actual wire happens, but an associate that is a professor of EE at our local university, and is also into high-end audio, told me once that there are changes that take place at the connections (i.e. the rca plug or spade/banana/bare wire). He seemed to feel that the changes in sound were caused by the properties of the electrical transfer at the connections changing.

Early B.

This thread is about cable burn-in, not about whether there are audible differences between cables. How did we get off the subject? So allow me to try to get us back on track...

First, any discussion of a scientific means of measuring burn-in is fruitless because science doesn't fully understand how we hear in the first place. There's too much subjectivity to it, so forget about it. Besides, what is heard can also be felt so scientists would have to find a way to measure that, too.

Second, if listening to audio gear is largely subjective, then we can agree that some of us will hear things that others won't, including cable burn-in. Now whether that is psychological or not is irrelevant because the basis of subjectivity is all in the mind. So if Shack says he realizes cable burn-in, then so be it. My only comment was that hearing this difference one time is cool, but it is not enough to formulate any general conclusions about cable burn-in.

dragon1952

As for cable burn-in, I've read/heard that it has to do with the process of the dielectric absorbing and releasing energy which I guess at some point reaches a point of stabilization. If this is the case, the more dielectric the longer the burn-in and vice-versa. This may make more sense than assuming some change in the electrical properties of the wire itself.
I've also heard about the theory regarding the terminations that was mentioned earlier.

2+2

Early B. I only brought in interconnects to make the point that many also say that there is no difference between cables...differences I, and my wife who doesnt care, clearly hear...

PolkThug, all I am saying is that "old technology" is limited to what is known now...which may, or may not be, the complete picture....thats all I am saying..... Science thought that atoms were the smallest component ...but then science says that that is not true, electrons are..now this is not true either....etc. Who knew until Einstein that mass and energy were so related? And by what? Speed of light squared...something out of left field?!?!

Back to the subject. I don't say that burn in happens or doesnt happen since I dont have direct experience...personally, having been converted by my relative short experience with interconnects, I would not be surprised at all with burn in.

..Carry on.....

gmorris

Let me pose this question:

Lets all just get along for a hot minute and assume that cable burn-in is real. This would mean that all cables burn-in. So, that would mean if you hooked up your rig with lamp cord, the lamp cord would eventually burn-in, and make the rig sound better.

But who among us is going to believe someone when he comes trotting along to the forum and claims he hears the effects of cable burn-in with his lamp cord speaker cable????????

For the record, I have not experienced burn-in for myself, and I have no opinion whether it exists or not. But to claim that only high end cables burn-in (I'm aware no one has yet made this claim) would seem to me that burn-in is more a question of perception. Is it real or not? I dunno. But it will be real to those who think it is real, or are expecting it to happen.

dorokusai

Here we go again.....yawn.

pjdami

Originally posted by jdhdiggs
I think it would be cool if burn-in existed, however materials engineering, EE, and ABX testing have all proved it doesn't exist. The psychological phenomenon has been proven though. It is a hard case to crack.

Shack, if you can really do it (tell burned in cables from non), you would have a hell of a Ph.D. paper for material sceince, not to mention a lucrative career as a "golden ear" tuner. They get between a couple hundred to a couple thousand dollars an hour.

As a practicing "real world" engineer myself, I have experienced and firmly believe in cable burn - in. All I have to do is cite the Transparent cables I burned in over the past few months. These cables were a bear to burn in.

I don't care what the computers or graphs say. There is a difference between theoretical and the real world application. I see it all the time at work when the design engineer who sits behind a desk all day in some office somewhere will make a claim that a piece of equipment will work because the program says it will. Not to discredit good engineering practices but I know all too well that other factors (in this case fouling factor incorrect on a heat exchanger design) come into play.

dorokusai

I've seen engineers design a cellsite so well that the coverage on the house and surrounding hillside, that is right in front of it.....since it sits in a terrain hole, is spot on....too bad for the rest of the world. If they had conducted a site visit, it would have been pretty obvious....but noooooo, lets rely on models and propagation charts.

Rock on RF!

This is such an old story.....do you guys who are bringing it up think you are breaking new ground? I'm sorry, was this an issue that needed Polk Forum to break it wide open and dispel the myth?

I'm all for double blinds, but like another fine Polkie said, it won't change my mind, because I hear what I hear....just because you don't doesn't matter. That will always be the flaw in this type of testing....always, we're all individuals.

PolkThug

Originally posted by dorokusai
....always, we're all individuals.

...and mutual respect would be great too, between those of all beliefs.

Regards,
PT

dorokusai

I respect you, just don't care about your agenda....sorry man, I'm not part of your bandwagon.

I wish you luck in your testing, hope you find what you are looking for.

pjdami

BTW,

Shack, kudos that you could tell a difference. If you couldn't well that would be fine too.

phuz

Originally posted by PolkThug
People tend to forget that the album that they listened to was recorded with none other than, a microphone.

Oh my gosh, and that microphone had... a... cable attached to it! I bet the whole studio had MILES of cables in it! Man I sure hope they burned in that mic cable before they started recording...

PolkThug

Originally posted by dorokusai
I respect you, just don't care about your agenda....sorry man, I'm not part of your bandwagon.

I wish you luck in your testing, hope you find what you are looking for.

I respect you too and appreciate what you've done for the forum. I especially like the cable demo, regardless of what my personal results are.

I don't expect anyone to care about my agenda, after all, its personal. I do like to share my results though, and enjoy constructive criticism.

What I don't like, is the jabs received because the conclusions that I have reached may not be the same as other peoples conclusions (speaking in general here).

Allthough we don't ride one wagon together, I'm sure there are many other wagons that we would share, like the beer wagon.

Peace

Toxis

Why must something be proven by a computer to be true? That alone astonishes me. Who said that computers are infoulable and all knowing?

gmorris

Originally posted by Toxis
Why must something be proven by a computer to be true? That alone astonishes me. Who said that computers are infoulable and all knowing?

Bill Gates.....

jdhdiggs

Originally posted by Toxis
Why must something be proven by a computer to be true? That alone astonishes me. Who said that computers are infoulable and all knowing?

Not to restart this fight, but compared to humans, they are infoulable-no psychology involved, no bad days, no chemical imbalance, one computers results will match the next.. All of which is not true with humans. All knowing? hardly, but they can sure know as much as any human when programmed with that information.

Real or not, if your diggin your new cables, good on ya!

I think everyone needs more beer.

TroyD

If you believe that everything comes down to x's and o's and that if some piece of equipment tells you that there is no difference than it must be true....good on ya. Let the rest of us revel in our ignorance and enjoy our hobby.

You've made your point.......however, respect and let those who have different opinions have thier point of view.

BDT

dorokusai

PT - Beer wagon....yea baby!

danger boy

you buy a pair of new shoes... they look and feel good. you break them in say for a month or two. and they feel even better. breaking in your shoes to me is like cable burn in. it relaxes and opens up with more hours of use. to a point of course.

bikezappa

As shoes break in there is the good time when they feel best but then the sole starts to have holes and the tops are scratched. So this comparison means that the shoes wear out and then the cables will also wear out.

Just bustin.

shack

Originally posted by gmorris
Lets all just get along for a hot minute and assume that cable burn-in is real. This would mean that all cables burn-in. So, that would mean if you hooked up your rig with lamp cord, the lamp cord would eventually burn-in, and make the rig sound better.

This comment got me to thinking. Could there really be burn-in for lamp cords? And if so, what better to test it on than…..LAMPS. We bought a pair for our living room a couple of months ago and I swear that the one we have used the most is much brighter now. It is right next to the chair where we usually sit when we read so it gets used a lot and the other one is on a table and rarely gets turned on. One is obviously burned-in and the other is not…an ideal situation to see if lamp cord burn-in phenomenon exists. I enlisted my wife to help with the experiment.

First we tried the double blind test. My wife and I both put on blindfolds and she would turn the lamp on and off I would try to tell which one was brighter and vice versa. No definitive conclusion here. With the blindfolds on we really couldn’t even tell if the lamps were on or off.

Next I remembered that several folks felt that some pre test evaluation was necessary to help recognize the differences during the test. My wife and I both did some critical looking at the lamp (sans shade) for several minutes to better familiarize ourselves with each one. Again, no real conclusion here. The spots made telling the difference a little difficult (they have finally gone away). And thanks for all of the well wishes for my wife. The eye doctor says her eyesight should be 90% as soon as the patches come off and there will only be slight permanent damage to the retinas.

Well, as you can see the testing for lamp cord burn-in was generally inconclusive. I will say that I CAN tell a noticeable difference between the brightness of the 2 lamps with the burned-in one being much brighter. I’m sure there are computer programs that could be utilized here….but all I can say is “Trust Your Eyes”.


**EDIT** – Never mind. I just found out my daughter put in a 100 watt bulb in the reading lamp and the other has a 75 watt bulb. I think this may alter the findings somewhat.

F1nut

WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

Gold Jerry, Gold!!!