Cable Break In for the Naysayers

jafant,

Thank you, my friend.

To me it's all a matter of synergy. Our systems should work as a unit.

ozzy

fleschler,

Thank you for your post. I never claimed to be able to explain cable breakin. But it is apparent to those who care about the final outcome.

Phono cartridges hmmm. Amazing, thank you.

Just to get the deniers more riled up (just kidding) but I found the Critical Mass footers also had a breakin period of about a week.

ozzy

ozzy

Thank You for the follow up. Agreed, You will want to use a full loom of AQ cables/cords with the Niagara Power Conditioner. Synergy is key.

Happy Listening!

As a beta tester for a boutique cable manufacturer, I wouldn't listen to a cable without 24 hours of break-in.  Certainly significant differences can be heard immediately.  There was often a significant change of character between new and broken-in cables, mostly better but sometimes worse, emphasizing a negative change.  Professional cabling less significant, especially balanced cables. 

To those who claim only speakers require break-in, NO!  phono cartridges (maybe other than DC Audio systems) require break-in of 20 to 100 hours to optimize the suspensions, just as in dynamic cone speakers.  My numerous Dynavectors and Benz cartridges-50 hours then, wow!

I don't understand it and therefore the phenomenon of "break-in" doesn't make sense to me, except perhaps with speakers.  But nonetheless, I have perceived a difference between when I first hooked cables up and ran them for 50 or 100 hours.  So who knows.  As with all of these debates, it does seem reasonable to say that if it sounds different, it should measure different, either on a scope or REW or something else.  But I am surprised that no one has formally organized a true double blind test as suggested above, with some from each side of the cable debate and a couple of neutrals. I would be very interested to see the results of that  experiment!

Not sure I have written about this here but I have plenty of experience in test gear use as spent 20 years in the US Navy as first a Data Systems Tech then it was merged with Fire Control Tech and re-titled that. The most complex gear I worked on, one out of two left still in use, no training on it, cannot say to much but it had a large number of critical circuits that the block diagram was 20 pages long. The most important aspect took 4 scope probes to look at and if dialed in according to specs which was very difficult and hugely time consuming to do, the whole system did not work well and it was absolutely critical to the operation of the whole battle group. What did work, tuning it by ear, then it was so good we broke ever record of reliability by a far margin. 

 Testing is good, great in fact, it just does nor cannot measure everything we can hear (or otherwise sense) but maybe someday gear will be invented than can do so.

 Those that refuse to believe we may not yet know everything we think we do might one day be surprised to learn there really are tooth fairies, not saying I believe there are but if so I bet they would not call themselves that:)

Rick

@hce1-

 I await arrival of the day when we can live and let live without derision and ridicule.

                                                    You missed it!

             Critical thinkers are now to be considered, "enemies of the state."

unreceivedogma

And some people believe there are tooth fairies. 

You're just being silly.

I really don’t understand why these arguments continue. Why do the two camps care about the “experience”, “perceptions” or “biases/expectations” of those in the other camp. If you don’t accept cable break in as real, why even open this thread, let alone contribute. If you do accept break in as real, why engage with comments from those who don’t. As somebody said previously, the debate has raged without resolution for decades, though it seems less visceral and nasty nowadays.

RE: this thread and at risk of being “perceived” or “experienced” as nasty, I think it churlish to continue to hijack threads about cables/cable break in with one’s well worn and predictable rejections of the validity of a poster’s observations, or must I say perceptions. We know already that you reject the very possibility of the phenomenon, so you add no value to the discussion when you repeat your incredulity in yet another thread. I wish we could have a discussion of the topic without petty comments insisting, for example, that a post should have used “perceived” rather than “experienced”. Aside from the fact that, in this context, it is a distinction without a difference, it is redundant and tedious.

RE: the suggestion that a blind test with five “believers” and five “nonbelievers” would settle the controversy: I’ve been there. Although the experiment changed one or two participants’ views on cable burn in, most went away surer than ever they were right all along, regardless of whether they arrived as “believers” or “nonbelievers”. Lines have been drawn and few have the will to cross over.

This is a big, complex hobby in which there is room for all of us. I await arrival of the day when we can live and let live without derision and ridicule.

Enjoy your music as you will. I’ll do the same.

Evidently...

I am not saying that cables alone will transform a system beyond its capability. But cables that work well with your system, will allow that system to perform to the best as designed. Afterall, we are connecting a component to another through the cabling. Remember the phrase "it is only as good as the weakest link"?

All in all, cabling can only degrade the potential. Keep an open mind and experiment to hear what works best.

ozzy

@unreceivedogma Bingo ! You hit the nail on the head said the carpenter. Some get cranky as they age, some are just plain argumentative, Some are misguided, and many are just plain boring.

Cheers

@amtprod 

Not sure what it is exactly that I nailed but you are welcome! 🤗 🙏🏼 

@raam

And some people believe there are tooth fairies. 
I prefer that which works for myself, so we agree on that much. I will not use that personal experience as a foundational edifice upon which to hang an Abdolutist Audio Ideology that I expect others to adhere to.

I agree absolutely with getting the room right is far more important than cables can possibly be whether they make a difference or not. As for cables, there are things we just do not know and might not for generations to come, real science is a bunch of theories tested until something works out and tested again and again to find improvements. It is a never ending cycle thus we are not at the end of any of it yet and should never assume we know all there is, about anything. It is not a dead end Dogma which happens far to often in nearly all things humans do and it is only a tool to maintain the status quo, not to further enlightenment into the yet unknown.

Are there those that cannot hear a difference, sure, why not, good for them actually. Are those that can, I am sure there are, good for them as well. Are there those that believe there is a possibility of improvement, sure there are, I am one of them and have personal experience to the level I am comfortable in.

Instead of arguing over such a trivial pursuit it might be wise to invest some of that time and energy into things far more critical to the betterment and survival of all things living which includes everything. 

Rick

@unreceivedogma   Nailed it.
 

“…But if you had the audio equipment and ears you would be a believer.…”

This is the giveaway with Ozzy. He just wants to argue his superiority over everyone else. The scientific basis for his assertion is non-existent: his expectation is instead that we bow down and revere his anecdotal experience as A Thing handed down from The Gods at the Summit of Mt Audio, where I presume He Himself fancies he resides.

Now I’m outa here.

“….Sorry, but your system looks like a beginner’s system. Like we all started out with. It may be good for home theater though….”

Who exactly, is this directed at? You are sounding like a troll now. 

Why on earth did I respond to this thread? I must have gotten out of the wrong side of bed this morning. 
 

Carry on. I’m outa here. 

I just got off the phone with my audio engineer. He has 40+ years experience in the industry. Besides building and repairing audio gear and guitar amps, he is also a recording engineer. He is also a guitarist and in the blues hall of fame.

We were talking about other issues but at the end I asked him about The Cable Wars.

it was a good 10-15 minute discussion but the Cliff Note version of his response is this: it’s all about the Benjamins. Make people believe, and you make more money. At the end, he said at best, cables may - may - make 1% difference, if that. The money is better spent elsewhere.

He agreed that far more attention should be put into room acoustics, that is where there is still a relative dearth of knowledge: witness how many times concert halls are redesigned and they still get it wrong.

I will conclude by posing the following question.

Suppose for the sake of argument - pun not intended - that it is absolutely true that cable interconnects make a big difference. Why then, is this philosophy not applied to all the internal wiring through all the components in an audio system: turntables, CD players, amps, preamps, speakers … and I am thinking in particular about those two skinny little braided wires that connect the spider to the cone.

I anxiously await the informed responses.

@atmasphere

BTW, a few years ago I said that I was disappointed in the sound of the recording that you did of the Mikis Theodorakis / Pablo Neruda “Canto General”.

I played it for the first time since I got my amps back from being away for months for refurbishing. My engineer said that due to the 40 year age of the amps, many parts - not just the tubes, which were running at only 60% of full strength - were at the end of their useful life. Without going into details at the moment, other than to say that he discovered an error that Julius Futterman made in his design over 50 years ago that for some reason everyone missed all of these years and that he corrected - it appears that the problem was with my aging - and ailing - amps and not your recording. My bad!

https://www.theaudioatticvinylsundays.com/about

It all starts with the system, and our hearing. If you are happy with the equipment, you have and are enjoying the tunes, then that is all that really matters.

But don't claim all cables sound the same and breakin is just a myth.

I felt that way when I had Radio Shack equipment.

ozzy

@ozzy 

"The Naysayers opinion on cable breakin is probably due to the system that is used (and perhaps the ears) is not revealing enough.

And/if you progress through this hobby with better equipment, cables and the breakin will be more apparent."

Really Ozzy, you want others to hear you and believe that cable break-in exists yet anyone who doesn't hear/perceive/believe in cable break-in is a "naysayer" who doesn't hear well enough and/or doesn't own a capable system, and who apparently has not progressed through the hobby to the point of enlightenment?  Seems pretty one-sided. No wonder these threads are divisive.  You can do better.

Sorry, but your system looks like a beginner’s system. Like we all started out with. It may be good for home theater though.

If you like it, then enjoy it!

ozzy

“…I just experienced cable break in firsthand…”

Good for you! Some of us ascribe that to the placebo effect. I’m one of them. In my 55 years experience since building a Dyna70 at age 14, I have had plenty of time to experiment with dozens of cables. In all that time, I perceived differences in only a few, and that perception could be ascribed to my mood as much as any concrete material quality of the cable, and certainly nothing that justified the outrageous sums that were being asked for them. I do have brand name cables, but they are only because they are the least expensive of the ones that I settled upon after all the experimentation. I cannot tell you what they are because I settled this question for myself decades ago.

Imo those sums of money are instead better on room treatment. If 1/10 of the time was spent discussing the science of room acoustics instead of cables, we would all be better off.

@ozzy

I will put my system up against any out there and I’ll bet that it comes out as equal to far better than any out there 99% of the time, at any price point.

I will also say that once you arrive at the quality level of my system, it’s mostly subjective: what sounds good to me may very well sound like a crapper to you and vice versa.

Please note in the link below that I do not bother to include cables in my list of system components. I do include the room designer. If people only spent 1/10 of the time discussing room design as they do cable design, they might find themselves getting some genuine improvements to the sound of their system.

Ozzy - if that's what you hear then go for it.  The mind can do incredible things that feel very real.

The Naysayers opinion on cable breakin is probably due to the system that is used (and perhaps the ears) is not revealing enough.

And/if you progress through this hobby with better equipment, cables and the breakin will be more apparent.

ozzy

I am not here to argue this point. However, I do wish one of the cable makers or some audiophile physicist would explain the science behind cable break-in.

I would say for any naysayers buy anything with rhodium. If you want an example of extreme break in, all naysayers should buy a Furutech rhodium NCF outlet. 

When it comes to break-in I will quote Dug and say, "I'm having two feelings."

I have some balanced Morrow Audio MA4 interconnects.  I didn't focus much on the break-in, but here's how I would describe my experience:

The expectation bias was set by their cable owners manual that essentially says that the cables start out sound good, then go through a period where they sound bad, and then they get great.

When I first hooked them up they sounded amazing and I spent quite a bit of time listening.  Then there was a couple of days where I wouldn't describe the sound as obviously bad, but I would just listen for a couple of minutes and then walk away.  After even more time I started getting sucked into listening again.  I can't say that I could tell a difference between. new and broken in with absolute certainty, but I can say that there were a period of time where I didn't find my system engaging when before and after that time I had to pull myself away and this period of time aligned with what Morrow Audio described.

I try to identify a scientific reason for the things that I experience and I've got nothing for cable break-in.

I’m not going to settle this debate, but I can tell you this with 100% certainty

If you google this topic you will find hundreds of threads over many years where you get the exact same arguments on both sides and it always ends right where it started... nowhere.

like all the threads before this one and all that will come after they are  and always will be a complete and utter waste of time

I would be interested to know if anyone has ever done a blind or double-blind test with cables. Two sets of identical cables, one broken in for 500 hours, and the other with no hours of use.  The test would consist of the same amp, source and speakers - just toggling back and forth between cables A and B.  Would anyone be willing to bet $5000 that they can consistently tell which cables are being played?  I am guessing that answer is NO.  Or, I suppose the mysterious "broken-in phenomena" suddenly disappears after you disconnect the wires from the source and speakers?

@willywonka : At last a sane voice among the nut cases!​​

@liquidsound 

@ghdprentice 

+2

I guess everyone has an opinion on this subject and I would like to hear it. For those of you who believe all cables are the same, please can you describe the sound quality you have experienced before or after the scientific measurements; do they agree with the sound quality?

Have you ever tried other cables? Did any of them sound different?

And most important, share with us the type of audio equipment you are using, including cables, amps, speakers etc.

ozzy

Oh, did you not hear - he found that cable break-in is true and have started comparing different cables. Lets wait to hear from him about his findings.

I’m kind of concerned about @jasonbourne52 anyone seen him around lately? Shouldn’t he be here complaining?    : )

Sorry Jaygilb but there is no way my ears made good with what was coming out of my speaker cables when I first used them. There were times when the signal was so garbled was completely unlistenable. To each his own.

I had a new power cable put into my system this week. It sounded immeditately better, but also had introduced what seemed like a phase issue for the first 2 days of 4-5 hour listening sessions. On day 3 listening session it settled into what it's supposed to sound like.

How there is even a question about cable break-in is beyond me. I have to presume either their room/ listening environment is less than ok, no enough resolution in the gear/system/ system not setup properly, or ears aren't up to par. It's real. No tin hats or flat earth BS here. 

I also believe, not know, that once past a certain point, break in, design, cost....the law of diminishing returns hits pretty hard, mostly what we start getting into is differences and those can be quite profound and enable that synergy so often talked about. I choose to do so strictly DIY as can save a fortune on it, even when I had ten times the income as I do now I still practiced that way of doing things.

Anyone who thinks if cannot be a possibility if it cannot be measured has a bit of a head in the sand(or a darker place)issue as we have barely begun to even design test gear capable of such measurements, let alone fully understand some of the most advanced things we actually use. We are in the dark ages compared to where we will be going in all things and I believe this particular civilazation is going to make it, unlike at least 4 before us.

Imagination is a powerful thing. 

@liquidsound 

+1

Yeah, you can believe the true Audiophiles who actually listen to music not measurements.

Earbuds probably measure pretty well too.

ozzy

I heard it with my own ears is the least believable response that one could give.
The human brain is very dynamic and is the most reasonable explanation to why it’s not cable burn in, but brain adaptation.

Electron flow doesn’t change in cables after time and no one has ever given a truly scientific explanation on what could possibly happen to create an audible difference
in the molecular structure that could be attributed to people’s claims.

I’ve done analysis of ultra-high speed cables used in super computer interconnects and never did we have to worry about metallic cables changing properties after use. Electro-migration in semi-conductors is a real phenomenon, but we’re dealing with tiny areas of metallization where a difference of a small percentage of material can have a real world effect.
 

I have heard the difference between new and broken-in cabling nearly all my audiophile life.  Even when I had my first real audiophile system I was able to tell the difference between the new and broken-in cabling.  I recently purchased Iconoclast speaker cables and while they sounded good right out of the box, after about 100-hours of music played, they really smoothed out.  It's challenging to describe the differences in sound, however it improved notably from first listens.  I believe that is true for components as well.  I remember changing the output capacitors in my preamp from Jenzens to Duelund CAST and boy I didn't care for the initial sound !  Hard and cold is how I'd describe it but after a good deal of playing, the transformation was amazing.  I'm glad the designer said to just wait.  The sound will change.  He was right.  I don't think it was the metallurgy but break-in of the dielectric that I believe made the difference.  So, I'm a definite believer of the effect of break-in on the sound.  

Yeah, the measurement thing can be a real dichotomy in that it would be nice for both measurements and listening experiences to match, either both good or both bad, but alas, that too often doesn't seem to be the case with this audio stuff.

I have not owned Topping gear but I have owned Benchmark's linestage and their top DAC (still own) and I agree, no matter how well Stereophile says they measure, to me they sound neutral to the point of being sterile.  The don't do anything "wrong" but they also don't engage me.  However, I had similar thoughts about Mola Mola's Tambaqui, which I would describe as sounding "perfect" but not as engaging as two other DACs I have here (not the Benchmark).