Another Cable Burn-in Question

Amazing.

personally I'd say if the signal doesn't flow from the source and back to it, you are wasting your time spinning CDs without the peramp being on.

Cables don't know what source is what... use the cable box... or in another rig somewhere.

I've never understood why folks spin their expensive CDPs to burn in cables. A signal is a signal. Use the one which costs less to run... sat box, cable box, tuner... or in a secondary rig.

I've seem more break in time alloted to power cords than to ICs. I've never had ICs which took more than a couple weeks to run in either. 250hrs tops. Most are right on between 100 - 200.

I must be missing sojmething or electron flow theory has significantly changed in the recent past somehow.

Just how is the current/voltage being allowed to return to the source component if the downstream preamp is not powered up?

I am thinking the circuit would be open in that event and no signal, voltage, or current will be conducted in an open circuit. Neither would one be passed in a shorted ckt which could also be the deal without power to the secondary component, again, allowing the signal to return to the source.

???

MrTennis, et al
My take solely is about the 'static' (uphill or down) non energized method mentioned above for cables run in periods vs. energized 'conducting a strong signal' thru them with componenets at both ends being powered up.

Consequently, due to the mention of the Hagerman device, and the philosphy behind it's construction & operation, why is it powered, or even offered at all? Aside from the obvious application for tube saving uses.... if static or non current sending is as good a thing to do for breaking in cables?

I ask only because with the presence of such a device of and by itself, a statement which seems to me to be quite ludicrous is made towards one camp or the other. At the OR very least one of great irony.

I did in fact see the threads writer solved his deal.

I'm simply enthralled with the notion that devices don't need to both be on for cables to be run in.

Seeing the mention of the active cable cooker also makes me think, then, it has to be otherwise.

Then too I thought about power cords. Both cables conduct. Both cables pass signals, one more narrow than the other of course and with far greater amplitude... when active.

Naturally then too, then came thoughts of speaker cables.

Doesn't it seem odd to anyone else that each of these cable types transmit signals yet only interconnects can run in without active components at either end of them being in use?

It just fascinates me. That's all.

how do cable makers feel about the notion of interconnects getting broken in using an active device on only one end of the cabling?

Mrtennis

given these posts and assumptions why bother to do anything other than connect the cables and allow their differing potentials and impeadances to burn them in.... BTW... Do you have to plug the hagerman thingy into an AC power supply?

Imagine that. I'd think Mr. hagerman would be all over this cable burn in biz, huh? Why do you suppose he uses electricity to generate a signal with sufficient values to run in cables, instead of the static approach previously mentioned?

here's a thought... let's have a race. Two folks buy the same cables. one pair each. one goes the static route by merely leaving them plugged into a nonoperational componenet, and the other goes the archaine path of actually turning the components on and sending a signal thru the cables. At the end of 10 days another third party will listen to each cable pair, static and regular, not knowing which is which and report back. thereafter, each of the ones directly involved can try them... again not knowing which or how they were run in.

I'd bet money, in a honest examination, there will be easily descernable diffs... with the hot pair being the more amenable ones.

Good idea? Bad Idea?

MrT
Try reading the previous posts, instead of just the last one.

There are some which say otherwise... alluding to no need for two components to be active in oreder for cables to run in.

Dave_b
uh... yeah... but that's not the thrust of this thread. see above....