Cable Break-in/adjustment period
Comments
-
hearingimpared wrote: »Here is a fact. I own a Spectral DMC 10 G preamp which doesn't have a power switch because it is supposed to be on all the time (20 years yep). . . all solid state. The engineers at Spectral are some of the finest in the world. I was told by an engineer there that if I power off the pre that when I power it back on I should wait atleast 45 minutes for the caps to reform and the components to stabilize before listening. He also told me that I would get the best sound from it if I wait TWO DAYS before listening.
That is a fact!!!
What does that have to do with cables?
Although I would think that some of the finest engineers in the world could choose components that aren't so unstable, and didn't require two days to sound good. -
What does that have to do with cables?
Although I would think that some of the finest engineers in the world could choose components that aren't so unstable, and didn't require two days to sound good.
Spectral uses the finest materials available in their products. They just know the true science behind dialectrics, carbon, and all the other materials used to make the components.
PS: Spectral is not just an audio manufacturer although they are very high end. William what are your thoughts on Keith Johnson? -
You obviously know nothing about passive components.Although I would think that some of the finest engineers in the world could choose components that aren't so unstable, and didn't require two days to sound good."He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And when you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you." Friedrich Nietzsche -
I agree with this. Also, this may help some:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Placebo
This debate would not be difficult to end. Simply buy the same speaker wire you are currently using (one is new and one is used), and have a friend swap it in and out in a blind test. And you record what cable you think is which.
Edit: I know some of you dislike blind testing and feel it's not valid. In that case, you should complain to these people:
http://www.fda.gov/
They've been using these faulty testing techniques for years!
Another example of arrogance from the scientific crowd. They always provide these 'educational' links like everyone else is too stupid to know about them. Yes...we've never been to college, never taken Psych 101, don't know how to Google, never read about double-blind testing (or it's inherent flaws), never heard of the placebo effect, and the list goes on.2 channel - Willsenton R8 tube integrated, Holo Audio Spring 3 KTE DAC, audio optimized NUC7i5, Windows 10 Pro/JRiver MC29/Fidelizer Plus 8.7 w/LPS and external SSD drive, PS Audio PerfectWave P3 regenerator, KEF R3 speakers, Rythmik F12SE subwoofer, Audioquest Diamond USB cable, Gabriel Gold IC's, Morrow Audio SP5 speaker cables. Computer - Windows 10/JRiver, Schiit Magni 3+/Modi 3+, Fostex PMO.4n monitors, Sennheiser HD600 headphones -
It's All Lies and That's the Truth
-
Most of the latest posts are getting way off topic. No one is arguing anything about break in periods of equipment, or saying the quality of cables is meaningless.
The argument here is whether or not the dielectric of a speaker wire changes over time due to the current, affecting the sound coming out through the speakers. (And then after days of not using that same wire, the sound quality changes back to original quality) Stop bringing up receivers that use solid state technology and so forth. It's about AQ's claim on the speaker wire and breaking in due to a changing dielectric and whether the claim holds any water.
I'm not knocking on high equipment and I am in love with Audiophilia.
Njpolker - You're arguments and input are very childish. You keep making claims without any supporting evidence. Why is it so hard to include a link to anything supporting your claims? -
It doesn't matter, the believers will continue to know the truth and the naysayers will continue their membership in the Flat Earth Society.
Time to move on.Political 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 -
Hey Cpyder,
Thanks to your comments and logic, I just want to let you know that I cancelled my order of MIT Shotgun S3 ICs and Speakers Cables and decided to stick with my Signal Cables. Why waste the money, right? People like me (highly educated but without science degree), whether others admit it or not, depend on people like you to make sure their systems sound good. Thanks for convincing me.
Mike -
The reason I started this thread was when I read this information on Audioquest's web site I knew some will find it educational, I did.
The US Patent and Trademark Office granted AudioQuest’s Dielectric-Bias System a patent (US Patent No.7,126,055) on October 24, 2006. The title of the patent application was "Apparatus and methods for dielectric bias system".
Those interested in the technical details of Audioquest's Dielectric Bias System (DBS) can go to the US Patent and Trademark website and read or download the filing documents (www.uspto.gov).
This is an excerpt from a press release on the Stereophile.com website which informed that Audioquest prevailed in a patent infringement lawsuit brought by Monster Cable, Inc:
"Monster's suit alleged that AudioQuest's Earth Feature and Circular Array cables infringed upon its mid-1990s cable-biasing system, in which a coaxial cable leaving a component was energized with voltage, which was then removed before the signal entered another component or loudspeaker. AudioQuest's DBS was not similar at all, argued the Irvine, CA–based manufacturer, since it did not employ coaxial cable nor did the biasing charge coexist with the audio signal, being carried instead by the dielectric material within the cables."
The full text of Stereophile's press release can be found here: http://stereophile.com/news/010807aqmonster.
Enjoy.Proud and loyal citizen of the Digital Domain and Solid State Country! -
SolidSqual wrote: »Hey Cpyder,
Thanks to your comments and logic, I just want to let you know that I cancelled my order of MIT Shotgun S3 ICs and Speakers Cables and decided to stick with my Signal Cables. Why waste the money, right? People like me (highly educated but without science degree), whether others admit it or not, depend on people like you to make sure their systems sound good. Thanks for convincing me.
Mike
Can you read? I'm not saying good cables are pointless. I am only saying AQ's claim about the dielectric is. -
DarqueKnight wrote: »The US Patent and Trademark Office granted AudioQuests Dielectric-Bias System a patent (US Patent No.7,126,055) on October 24, 2006. The title of the patent application was "Apparatus and methods for dielectric bias system".
Those interested in the technical details of Audioquest's Dielectric Bias System (DBS) can go to the US Patent and Trademark website and read or download the filing documents (www.uspto.gov).
This is an excerpt from a press release on the Stereophile.com website which informed that Audioquest prevailed in a patent infringement lawsuit brought by Monster Cable, Inc:
"Monster's suit alleged that AudioQuest's Earth Feature and Circular Array cables infringed upon its mid-1990s cable-biasing system, in which a coaxial cable leaving a component was energized with voltage, which was then removed before the signal entered another component or loudspeaker. AudioQuest's DBS was not similar at all, argued the Irvine, CAbased manufacturer, since it did not employ coaxial cable nor did the biasing charge coexist with the audio signal, being carried instead by the dielectric material within the cables."
The full text of Stereophile's press release can be found here: http://stereophile.com/news/010807aqmonster.
Enjoy.
Did you even read the patent? If so go back and read the original post. They are not referring to their DBS system in that statement. They said all audio cables' dielectrics need to break in and that the audio signal will change eventually. This patent is for a system that applies a charge to the dielectric. -
Can you read? I'm not saying good cables are pointless. I am only saying AQ's claim about the dielectric is.
LOL, I'm totally bullshitting you and evidently unsuccessfully illustrating that no one gives a damn about your opinion or your scientific consensus. My Shottys will arrive in a few weeks. -
SolidSqual wrote: »LOL, I'm totally bullshitting you and evidently unsuccessfully illustrating that no one gives a damn about your opinion or your scientific consensus. My Shottys will arrive in a few weeks.
I know you are insulting me in this post but I honestly laughed and took it in good humor.
Let me know how you like your Shottys. -
It doesn't matter, the believers will continue to know the truth and the naysayers will continue their membership in the Flat Earth Society.
I'm pretty sure that the claims of the "naysayers," or in this debate... Scientists,
aren't the "Flat Earth Society" type. Flip it around. -
Damn, I thought I put you on the BOZO list already.....oh well, I'll fix that right after this.
I'm 100% sure that you're a day late and a dollar short again.
Bye.Political 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 -
Damn, I thought I put you on the BOZO list already.....oh well, I'll fix that right after this.
I'm 100% sure that you're a day late and a dollar short again.
Bye.
Congrats on reaching the 18,000 post milestone. You must know everything by now.;) -
If the heart of the matter is about dielectrics changing over time, then that's been settled for about a century!
Ask anybody that's been around the high voltage stuff about how dangerous old capacitors are. When new, it's not the same as the old ones. When you remove one, it's tradition and just plan safety to strap the caps terminals together for storage. But, if you only dissipate the charge and put it away, it can later kill you. It's because the dielectric changes in use!
Now the flat earth'ers will argue that maybe HV causes that, but the real difference is that they store such a significant charge. The amount of residual charge capability in a jacket can't compare...but it doesn't mean it's not there. I would think it to be fairly well accepted that the insulating material on the wire, the jacket, does have effects. Teflon is pretty well known to impart less effects that the cheap stuff.
I've noticed that the guys that don't hear a difference are usually the ones with poorly setup speakers, don't sit in the sweet spot, use an iPod as a music source and are in audio for the impressive, move the earth spl's...or just use it as background music.
On the issue of double blind and visual biases, I wonder if the reverse isn't more true of the flat landers...they have a bias for cheap and stuggle mightly to determine that everything is all the same...so they don't have to worry about having the commitment to spending money!! And everytime the medical part of it comes up, I have to laugh thinking of all the goofed up drugs on the market and all the advertising claims from them!! Whew...what a model to hold up as perfection!!
CoolJazzA so called science type proudly says... "I do realize that I would fool myself all the time, about listening conclusions and many other observations, if I did listen before buying. That’s why I don’t, I bought all of my current gear based on technical parameters alone, such as specs and measurements."
More amazing Internet Science Pink Panther wisdom..."My DAC has since been upgraded from Mark Levinson to Topping." -
If the heart of the matter is about dielectrics changing over time, then that's been settled for about a century!
Ask anybody that's been around the high voltage stuff about how dangerous old capacitors are. When new, it's not the same as the old ones. When you remove one, it's tradition and just plan safety to strap the caps terminals together for storage. But, if you only dissipate the charge and put it away, it can later kill you. It's because the dielectric changes in use!
Now the flat earth'ers will argue that maybe HV causes that, but the real difference is that they store such a significant charge. The amount of residual charge capability in a jacket can't compare...but it doesn't mean it's not there. I would think it to be fairly well accepted that the insulating material on the wire, the jacket, does have effects. Teflon is pretty well known to impart less effects that the cheap stuff.
I've noticed that the guys that don't hear a difference are usually the ones with poorly setup speakers, don't sit in the sweet spot, use an iPod as a music source and are in audio for the impressive, move the earth spl's...or just use it as background music.
On the issue of double blind and visual biases, I wonder if the reverse isn't more true of the flat landers...they have a bias for cheap and stuggle mightly to determine that everything is all the same...so they don't have to worry about having the commitment to spending money!! And everytime the medical part of it comes up, I have to laugh thinking of all the goofed up drugs on the market and all the advertising claims from them!! Whew...what a model to hold up as perfection!!
CoolJazz
I think you make a good point here, specifically with regards to the money. You don't have to be loaded to have a good system, but I believe some people feel better belittling someone's expensive system so they don't feel inferior about their own. It's basic dick-waving at its best. -
The argument here is whether or not the dielectric of a speaker wire changes over time due to the current, affecting the sound coming out through the speakers. (And then after days of not using that same wire, the sound quality changes back to original quality) Stop bringing up receivers that use solid state technology and so forth. It's about AQ's claim on the speaker wire and breaking in due to a changing dielectric and whether the claim holds any water.
It's all related. -
Where's your backup? Or faces for that matter? All you have stated is "I can hear it" over and over. You do realise that that is not evidence at all, don't you? Give me one link to a successfull DBT, or a single peer reviewed paper that states there are audible differences between cables, let alone break-in of said cables.
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=941184&highlight=speaker+wire+test
http://www.audiocircle.com/circles/index.php?topic=60159.msg539789#msg539789
http://web.archive.org/web/20020214075205/http://www.oakland.edu/~djcarlst/abx_wire.htm
http://www.verber.com/mark/ce/cables.html
http://www.ethanwiner.com/myths.html
Those links prove nothing except for the bias of the controller. Plus it is mostly forum tests. You can find the same tests here on the Polk forum with opposite results. Also there is a Phd in EE here on Club Polk who keeps disproving your "theory" and you keep ignoring him. I'll take his writings over your forum testing links any day.
You keep pulling up the same BS. I'll bet for every double-blind test result there are just as many test results by cable reviewers that disprove double blind testing in the audio world and yes that includes cable.
Come up with something new and real proof for once. -
Where's your backup? Or faces for that matter? All you have stated is "I can hear it" over and over. You do realise that that is not evidence at all, don't you? Give me one link to a successfull DBT, or a single peer reviewed paper that states there are audible differences between cables, let alone break-in of said cables.
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=941184&highlight=speaker+wire+test
http://www.audiocircle.com/circles/index.php?topic=60159.msg539789#msg539789
http://web.archive.org/web/20020214075205/http://www.oakland.edu/~djcarlst/abx_wire.htm
http://www.verber.com/mark/ce/cables.html
http://www.ethanwiner.com/myths.html
William and others, they have no science back ground and they are ruled by their opinions and what they hear. No amount of testing will show them that ears can be fooled and that salesmen are not scientists. To most people science is boring and to detailed to bother with. VooDoo science is much more easy to quote, explain and requires very little effort especially if you can print a scope trace of a line voltage.
They are happy switching cables and they may infact hear something I or you don't. But the bottom line is that I have audio equipment to listen to music not cables. Don't get wound up trying to explain that, at best, these incredabling small audio differences mean nothing to the musical experience.
Maybe if these people had tone controls to play with they wouldn't need to buy new cables to change the frequency response of the audio equipment.
These dicussions start out well but very quickly circle the drain into name calling, one liners and verbal bullying.
You can't push rope. -
William and others, they have no science back ground and they are ruled by their opinions and what they hear. No amount of testing will show them that ears can be fooled and that salesmen are not scientists. To most people science is boring and to detailed to bother with. VooDoo science is much more easy to quote, explain and requires very little effort especially if you can print a scope trace of a line voltage.
They are happy switching cables and they may infact hear something I or you don't. But the bottom line is that I have audio equipment to listen to music not cables. Don't get wound up trying to explain that, at best, these incredabling small audio differences mean nothing to the musical experience.
Maybe if these people had tone controls to play with they wouldn't need to buy new cables to change the frequency response of the audio equipment.
These dicussions start out well but very quickly circle the drain into name calling, one liners and verbal bullying.
You can't push rope.
You keep ignoring the PHd in EE Darqueknight. -
Took my MIT's out and put in some Signal Cable. Signals sound good, but the MIT's sound better. Didn't take long to put the MIT's back in."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!
-
hearingimpared wrote: »It's all related.
Exactly. But if someone's only interest in audio is arguing with audiophiles, then, of course, such basic information is counter to their goals. To reiterate:DarqueKnight wrote: »
I realize that many naysayers have no real interest in audio (whether high performance, mid-fi or otherwise). Trying to reason with them is futile. Some simply have belligerent personalities. If they weren't arguing about audio, they would be arguing about something else that they know little to nothing about. Audiophiles are just a popular and easy target for ridicule.
I gave the patent number (7,126,055) for AudioQuest's Dielectric Bias System and a link to the US Patent Office in post #131 of this thread. Here is a direct link to the summary page of the patent filing: AudioQuest DBS Patent Summary. The 20 page patent filing can be read and downloaded by clicking on the "Images" tab at the top of the page. You will need graphics software capable of viewing "TIFF" format files in order to read the down-loadable files. You will also need a "TIFF" format browser plugin to be able to read the TIFF format files online.
The following quotes are taken from the description section of the patent summary. It should be crystal clear that the Dielectric Bias System was invented to remove the need for repeated cable break in by keeping a controlled voltage across the cable dielectric.
The "Field of Invention" subsection states:
"The present invention relates generally to methods and apparatus of connecting and communicating signals between electrical devices. More particularly, the present invention relates to biasing a dielectric with an electrical or electrostatic potential to reduce undesirable electrical properties of the material such that signal quality between the electrical devices is enhanced. The invention has special utility within the field of audio and video equipment and signal transmission."
The 7th and 8th paragraphs under the "Background of Invention" subsection state:
"Other design and performance aspects include cable "run-in." Cable "run-in" refers to the process by which a cable eventually comes to a "steady" electrical state (including a relatively "stable" condition of the cable's dielectric material). The cable's transmission properties change as its dielectric material is exposed to various electrical charges. Similar to the charging of a capacitor, transmitting a desired signal over a cable can impose a potential across the cable's dielectric material that changes material properties of the dielectric. The process of "charging" the cable impacts the cable's transmission properties. However, once the cable is charged, it is in a relatively steady or stable electrical state.
Cable "run-in" is often mistakenly referred to as "break-in." However, "break-in" is more properly used to describe a mechanical change, e.g., engines, loudspeakers, and phono cartridge suspensions "break-in" during their initial periods of use. In contrast, cable "run-in" may be somewhat analogous to engine oil that warms during engine use to more efficiently and effectively protect the engine from damage cause by heat and/or friction. Just as that oil warming can reoccur every time that the engine is started, cable "run-in" (the gradual forming of the cable's transmission properties) can recur every time a signal is imposed on the cable."
I use AudioQuest DBS interconnect and speaker cables in my two channel system. They work very well.Proud and loyal citizen of the Digital Domain and Solid State Country! -
Patents mean nothing and are not required to be scientifically sound.
For example, there are many patents on perpetual motion machines. Does anyone want to buy one?
If some one has a PHd in EE that doesn't mean they are telling the truth or know what they are talking about.
This applies to me and every one else on theis forum.
If however you site a scientific publication or text book then you are giving valid data for information. -
I still wonder about this.No one has come up with a logical answer regarding the reason the cable manufactures state a need for an adjustment period needed till the cable performs to its fullest. When the customer is not properly informed about the adjustment period they return them hurting the bottom line of the manufacture. If there was no need for that period of time do you really think the manufactures would make that statement? Seriously, think about it.
-
FWIW, the issuance of a patent in no way is proof that a concept, idea, or design works, it is simply saying this is a new and unique idea from all other registered with the Patent Office.Steve Carlson
Von Schweikert VR-33 speakers
Bel Canto eVo2i integrated amp
Bel Canto PL-2 universal disc player
Analysis Plus Oval Nine speaker cables and Copper Oval-In Micro interconnects
VH Audio Flavor 4 power cables
Polk Monitor 10B speakers, retired but not forgotten -
I never said it was a double blind test, I quite clearly said it was a blind test. If you can describe a feasible way to conduct double blind test on cables in my house I'm all ears.
So you think it's a DBT when a friend switches the cables? Not hardly.I have done plenty of blind testing where a friend switched the cables and I did not know which was in play...it wasn't hard to hear the differences, discuss them, and then find out which was which.
"Expectational bias" works both ways, you know...
The single-blind test is quite adequate to remove bias. If you think my friend switching cables without uttering a word prior to and during the test, with no visual as to which cable we were listening to, introduces bias into the test...well I think you are wrong.
And not just a little because I hate spending money on cables, my bias is against it if anything.Steve Carlson
Von Schweikert VR-33 speakers
Bel Canto eVo2i integrated amp
Bel Canto PL-2 universal disc player
Analysis Plus Oval Nine speaker cables and Copper Oval-In Micro interconnects
VH Audio Flavor 4 power cables
Polk Monitor 10B speakers, retired but not forgotten -
FWIW, the issuance of a patent in no way is proof that a concept, idea, or design works, it is simply saying this is a new and unique idea from all other registered with the Patent Office.
You are absolutely right.
One of the first lessons I was taught in engineering school was that I must learn to critically evaluate scientific literature. Science, technology and engineering is based on mathematics. If the mathematics of a piece of scientific literature is valid, then you can have some confidence in the veracity of what is written.
Textbooks, scientific journals, patent filings, etc. are all produced by human beings and are subject to human error. I have had many professors tell me that one of the most tedious parts of their job is combing through a textbook looking for typos and other errors before they adopt it for a course.
Much, perhaps most, of the technical journal literature is produced by tenure track professors who are just publishing to get tenure or tenured professors who are publishing to maintain their employment status ("publish or perish"). There is a entire commercial publication system to facilitate this. It's one of academia's dirty little secrets. Many journals will publish an author's work simply upon payment of a "review" or "publication" fee. Out of all the tens of thousands of technical journal publications produced each year, how many can realistically contain something that is actually worth reading?Proud and loyal citizen of the Digital Domain and Solid State Country! -
I still wonder about this.
- NJPOLKERNo one has come up with a logical answer regarding the reason the cable manufactures state a need for an adjustment period needed till the cable performs to its fullest. When the customer is not properly informed about the adjustment period they return them hurting the bottom line of the manufacture. If there was no need for that period of time do you really think the manufactures would make that statement? Seriously, think about it.
Why do we have to determine AQ's motive in order to falsify their claims? That seems like faulty reasoning.
