cable 'break in' ...........

[Mikado463]

Now before you all want to haul me out behind the woodshed for a proper beating allow me to explain.

I know a large segment of the audiofool community believes heavily in 100's of hours required to burn in, break in, what ever. They claim the greater the surface area between conductor and dielectric requires more time and if the dielectric is teflon that even adds more time, etc

What I would like to know from the EE's here, is there truth and relevance to this ? Myself , I don't recall ever audibly experiencing it , but then I don't know that I really tried. I do believe some folks spend more time trying to listen to their 'gear' than enjoy the music.

 

[lovinthehd]

Oh this is going to be good. Can't understand why you'd even entertain this idea but I'm not an EE either. I've never ever heard any credible source give credence to this bs.

 

[Alex2507]

The heavier the gauge the longer it takes for the wire to break in. Duh.

 

[Mikado463]

ok, here's a link to the discussion that made me pose the question here in hopes I would get a no nonsense engineering answer .......

http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?23900-Now-long-do-cables-take-to-break-in

 

[lovinthehd]

The heavier the gauge the longer it takes for the wire to break in. Duh.

Nah, it's the longer the cable, that makes it really take longer.

 

[ski2xblack]

ok, here's a link to the discussion that made pose the question here in hopes I would get a no nonsense engineering answer .......

http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?23900-Now-long-do-cables-take-to-break-in

Wow, that thread is full of easy marks just begging for a buggering.

 

[jinjuku]

Now before you all want to haul me out behind the woodshed for a proper beating allow me to explain.

I know a large segment of the audiofool community believes heavily in 100's of hours required to burn in, break in, what ever. They claim the greater the surface area between conductor and dielectric requires more time and if the dielectric is teflon that even adds more time, etc

What I would like to know from the EE's here, is there truth and relevance to this ? Myself , I don't recall ever audibly experiencing it , but then I don't know that I really tried. I do believe some folks spend more time trying to listen to their 'gear' than enjoy the music.

Here is what you need to know:

Offer to take two sets of cables. Randomly label them. Burn two in for 100 hours and leave the other two virgin.

Create a word document detailing which cable is which. Zip up the word document with a password and post it to the forum.

Bet $100 to theirs and offer to ship out the cables (it's ok JPS Audio Labs sends out burned in cables).

They can evaluate fully sighted, no test administrator, no time limits, as few or as many intervals as they like.

Have them post back which set is burned in and then post the password in the thread.

They'll have a 12.5 % chance of guessing it correctly. I'd throw $100 all day long at 1:8 odds.

Watch them scramble like cockroaches.

 

[TLS Guy]

ok, here's a link to the discussion that made me pose the question here in hopes I would get a no nonsense engineering answer .......

http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?23900-Now-long-do-cables-take-to-break-in

You won't get an engineering answer, because there isn't. There is a psychiatric one though.

 

[mtrycrafts]

ok, here's a link to the discussion that made me pose the question here in hopes I would get a no nonsense engineering answer .......

http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?23900-Now-long-do-cables-take-to-break-in

A Cu atom will have so many electrons, protons, neutrons and all the other smaller particles in them.
Unless you place that atom in the CERN collider, it will have the same everything or it will not be CU.

There are no pathways created, the crystal structure will still consist of Cu. Not sure what those there think will happen. And, they certainly don't have evidence for audibility.

 

[killdozzer]

Those guys are funny. (except when they talk you into throwing money on nothing)

 

[TheWarrior]

I have nothing to add, but to say Thanks for the chuckle this thread provided. That was probably the most efficient take down of pseudoscience I've seen on this forum! And it was done with humor!

 

[shadyJ]

Reading that thread is like watching two flat-earthers argue whether the shape of the earth is square or triangular.

 

[MR.MAGOO]

Reading that thread is like watching two flat-earthers argue whether the shape of the earth is square or triangular.

they'd both be wrong. It's a trapezoid.

 

[Mikado463]

yeah, I tend to agree but the graph that was shown, is there 'any' merit and if so is it audible ? I suspect those that believe will say yes

 

[TLS Guy]

yeah, I tend to agree but the graph that was shown, is there 'any' merit and if so is it audible ? I suspect those that believe will say yes

The only thing that shows, is that his speakers are not very good. The two curves are basically the same. They are a fraction of a db apart as the gain of the system or more likely mic position was very slightly different. Just the mic stand not being full tightened, so there was a little droop from gravity on the mic. In any case that change would be well below the audibility threshold.

 

[Swerd]

yeah, I tend to agree but the graph that was shown, is there 'any' merit and if so is it audible ? I suspect those that believe will say yes

That graph has no merit at all for at least two reasons:

1. I looked closely at the graph, I can read the horizontal axis (frequency response), but I cannot read the label on the vertical axis. What is being measured? This is of major importance. The fact that it's obscured suggests to me that someone may not want us to read it. If the poster wants readers to believe his graph, it should be clearly readable.
   
   
2. The graph shows a red curve (burned in) and a black curve (no burn in) with some differences between the two curves. Are those differences significant or minor? More important, can anyone hear these differences. There is no information about that.

At this point, alarm bells should be sounding off in your head.

 

[ski2xblack]

Mikado, what's going on over there is a self-reinforcing feedback loop of confirmation bias and consumerist audiophool orthodoxy. It doesn't adhere to reason, logic, or empirical reality, so trying to rationalize it will only cause you harm.

 

[Mikado463]

Mikado, what's going on over there is a self-reinforcing feedback loop of confirmation bias and consumerist audiophool orthodoxy. It doesn't adhere to reason, logic, or empirical reality, so trying to rationalize it will only cause you harm.

trust me, no harm being felt at all, all I'm trying to do is see if sensible discussion / rationale can be made of any of it and I know the general consensus is not.

I have for years argued with a lot of the crazy 'umpteen hour break in' crowd that the power of psychoacoustics is at work, but to no avail.

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

I agree, that graph smell like you know what. The biggest gap, just after 10k is one decibel different. Posted by a guy selling a cable cooker? Red flags!!! The only thing cooked are those dudes brains. Im gonna go watch my little pony and find some reality...damn.

 

[mtrycrafts]

Reading that thread is like watching two flat-earthers argue whether the shape of the earth is square or triangular.

They are both wrong. It is round.