Cable Burn In

I have been a cable tester for about 15 years for a small manufacturer.  I've heard maybe 100 different cables, most never making it into production.  Before I test them, I burn them in for 24 hours, minimum.  I have found that a new pair of ICs versus a 24 hour used pair of ICs can sound very, very different.  

I've also tested Monster Cable 300s series years ago and found no appreciable difference after 100 hours burn in.  I found a slight difference using Belden low capacitance ICs.  Then again, I found that High Fidelity brand cables sound terrible on any system I've heard, generally, very expensive systems of $300,000 to $1 million.  I'd rather listen to Monster 300s than High Fidelity cables for musical enjoyment.

Since comparing newly manufactured audiophile cables to burned in cables is so obvious to me as well as to others, may I suggest that some or many professional based balanced cables do not have a significant burn in change in sound.  Note that so many great recordings were made using cheap professional cabling back in the 50s to 70s.  Could they have been better with more advanced design and metallurgy cabling?  I don't know.

When I purchased my SME IV arm in 1989, the dealer said listen for a while, then bring it back for modifications.  He shot closed cell insulation in the arm to remove the low mid/upper bass hump and installed Cardas phono cable with an RCA junction box.  It took about a month (100 hours) until I found great enjoyment using my new arm.  I am still using this arm in 2018.  

shadowcat2016  You sound just like an electronics engineer who looks at the numbers only and applies commercial products specifications to all audiophile gear.  Audiophile gear is not a by the numbers application.  Violins can be made exactly the same on an assembly line to mimic a Stradivarius, yet never sound as good as a Strad.  Why is that?  You are so certain that audiophiles are stupid or deaf that we believe what we hear is make believe. 

I'm a part-time classical musician and recording engineer.  My time with hearing differences in cables is critical to the sales of one manufacturer. I KNOW that his newly made cables sound different than a burned-in cable of at least 24 hours (after I get his new cables, I burn them in for five days, minimum).  They can sound better or worse after burning-in, but not the same.  He uses a very complex design and materials that are altered over time/stabilize including a mastic encased mesh copper shielding with tungsten, nickel and carbon powder.  

As I previously mentioned, not all cable requires or is effected by a burning-in process.  I have found that cheap and balanced cables are not as effected.  

I test cables without electronic testing equipment. I’m sure my high end system is junk to professionals although I’ve appraised 27 SoCal & San Fran recording studios in my former profession. I must say, the recording engineers had hearing deficiencies by the time they were 50 and result in non-flat sounding studio audio setups in many of them. Luckily, I’m friends with some remastering engineers with superb hearing, Kevin Gray, Steve Hoffman and Robert Pincus. I also do recording and remastering for a local orchestra, choirs, chamber orch., etc.

Back to my testing. I receive up to four versions of a cable, differing sometimes as little as having a 26 gauge versus a 30 gauge conductor or return wire or a copper, silver or rhodium connection difference. I won’t seriously compare them to the current, burned in version until I’ve cooked them as they generally (90% of the time) sound worse to start with. Sometimes, the newest version is better sounding than the current model due to significant changes in the design, such as when the new version reduced capacitance by 50% through additional teflon shielding over conductors and/or returns.

I don’t care that a machine will tell me that they all test the same other than for capacitance, inductance or resistance. The manufacturer tests for the basics. What we do is determine if sonically, we prefer the current version or the new version, usually its the current version. When multiple changes have occurred in the new version and it is significantly better, the manufacturer renames it. This has happened a half dozen times in the past 15+ years. A high percentage of the time, the cables do not meet up to the current version. The manufacturer is continually tinkering with his formulas, design and materials to produce the best cabling he can (although his speaker cables have only seen three or four versions in 20 years and A/C cables maybe three versions in 10 years).

We also test other upscale cables to his cables to see how they compare on at least two systems, mine and his. We’ve tried High Fidelity, Magnan, Kimber, Furutech, Nordost, Audioquest (not all of their cables but a selection over the years) as well as others he has tested on his own. He also take his cables to shows and upscale audio systems locally to compare to their current cabling. Never have compared them to Transparent Audio cabling which retails for 50X more for speaker cabling or Masterbuilt at 100X more. I heard them replace Siltech, Triode Wire and Shunyata as well as shows.

I don’t know what the manufacturer finds as far as the three electrical testable variables in his cables before and after he burns them in/tests them. I or the both of us compare the cables at my house and at his factory for a sonic evaluation. I don’t have any other relationship with the manufacturing of the cabling.

I don't care why it works technically.  Just like I don't care why SR duplexes, fuses and HFTs work, or Stillpoints or Omega E-Mats.  They work for my system and my friends systems.  My cable manufacturing friend doesn't use SR tweaks or stillpoints or E-Mats.  However, he heard the difference between SR blue fuses and his stock fuses and decided to eliminate the fuse with a breaker instead which resulted in a sound similar to the effect of an SR blue fuse.  His system and room are diametrically different acoustically (mine-live, high vaulted ceilings, windows and large room with flat walls with 4.5 way large high sensitivity speakers/his-damped room, low flat acoustic tile ceilings, small room with two way high resolution, low sensitivity speakers).  Two different rooms and systems to address the cabling effects for different systems.

I don't know what cooking cables does.  Same with components in equipment (like capacitors) and speaker cones and panels.  The latter two I've heard change over time, breaking in so to speak without regard to their technical changes.   

What I think is happening is an electrical circuit or field is changed while the cable or capacitor is charged.  Speaker cones and panels vibrate and become less stiff.  One's electrical and the other is mechanical.  It's just the way it is.  I buy into the burning in concept because I can hear it.  

jea48  Thanks, that's exactly what I said.  Monster cable=no burn in noticed.
butch01  Right, it's not a contest.  It's a pleasure to hear music well reproduced.
Room acoustics are 50% of the sound.  I used to use multiple sound panels, room tunes, bass traps.  I have replaced them with Synergistic Research HFTs (32 of them).  They are great for slap echo in a too reverberant room.