Sorry for the double post, not intentional.
Cable Burn In
I'm new here and new to the audiophile world. I recently acquired what seems to be a really high end system that is about 15 years old. Love it. Starting to head down the audiophile rabbit hole I'm afraid.
But, I have to laugh (quietly) at some of what I'm learning and hearing about high fidelity.
The system has really nice cables throughout but I needed another set of RCA cables. I bit the bullet and bought what seems to be a good pair from World's Best Cables. I'm sure they're not the best you can get and don't look as beefy as the Transparent RCA cables that were also with this system. But, no sense bringing a nice system down to save $10 on a set of RCA cables, I guess.
Anyway, in a big white card on the front of the package there was this note: In big red letters "Attention!". Below that "Please Allow 175 hours of Burn-in Time for optimal performance."
I know I'm showing my ignorance but this struck me as funny. I could just see one audiophile showing off his new $15k system to another audiophile and saying "Well, I know it sounds like crap now but its just that my RCA cables aren't burned-in yet. Just come back in 7.29 days and it will sound awesome."
But, I have to laugh (quietly) at some of what I'm learning and hearing about high fidelity.
The system has really nice cables throughout but I needed another set of RCA cables. I bit the bullet and bought what seems to be a good pair from World's Best Cables. I'm sure they're not the best you can get and don't look as beefy as the Transparent RCA cables that were also with this system. But, no sense bringing a nice system down to save $10 on a set of RCA cables, I guess.
Anyway, in a big white card on the front of the package there was this note: In big red letters "Attention!". Below that "Please Allow 175 hours of Burn-in Time for optimal performance."
I know I'm showing my ignorance but this struck me as funny. I could just see one audiophile showing off his new $15k system to another audiophile and saying "Well, I know it sounds like crap now but its just that my RCA cables aren't burned-in yet. Just come back in 7.29 days and it will sound awesome."
175 responses Add your response
Spent 45 years working on top-shelf military electronics and have been an audiophile for just as long. I don't buy into the cables need to be burned in BS. It's a wire, it won't change tomorrow or next week or next year unless it breaks, shorts or opens. I honestly think that mega-cable vendors want you to hang in there until you essentially get used to their "wonder cable" and have time to talk yourself into believing that it just keeps getting better every day. ........All military grade gear gets "burned in".....usually at high temp, or alternating hot-cold cycles........to find out if it will fail under stress, that's it. The specs don't get better or worse with use..........if anything they get worse over time as components age............Wire doesn't "age", it's just wire.........If you don't believe me, pick up two identical sets of cable. Put one in your system and let it "burn in". Set the other aside during that time. Then have someone else swap back and forth between the burned in cable and the virgin set without you knowing which cable set has been installed or even if they changed anything at all. I'd bet good money that you will NOT be able to reliably and repeatedly tell which one is in the system..............You'll guess right some percentage of the time, law of averages, but you won't reliably be able to tell one from the other..............It's just wire my friend. If you don't like the way it sounds when you first hook it up, it won't sound better a month later, unless you talk yourself into believing it does. |
I just recently bought quite a few brand new Audio Note cables interconnects and speaker cables. I had borrowed the store demo cables prior to ordering and receiving my new cables. I replaced each demo cable with a new cable one at a time. Each new cable did not sound like the one I replaced. I asked the dealer about this. He said give each cable about 50 hours of music playing through them and they will start to bloom and sound like the demo pair. Sure enough after 50 hours they started to bloom. I experienced the same results with every other cable. |
Honestly never bought into the cable burn-in thing. It's a piece of WIRE!! There's nothing to burn in................Try this, take two brand new identical cables. Keep one set aside and run the other set continuously in your system for a week, a month, however long you want, then have your wife or a buddy swap them back and forth, double blind, so that you have no idea which set is in the system or even if they swapped them around. I'd bet you good money that you can NOT reliably tell which is which or even if they've been swapped. You may guess right a few times, but I'd virtually guarantee that you can't honestly and repeatedly tell which one is in the system.......................Dude, it's WIRE.................45 years in electronics.........doesn't make me an expert, but I do understand a few things better than many hobbiests |
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. |
n80 OP geoffkait said: "When someone recently stated that there have been many blind tests of cables, I asked him to provide links to blind tests. Which someone did. That’s an example of asking for evidence of a bold statement. " And then you dismissed blind tests. That’s my point. Reading over this and a few other threads it typically goes like this: 1. Someone makes a statement you disagree with. 2. In your reply you ask for evidence. And usually throw in some pretentious and snarky dig at them....presumably because they had the nerve to believe something that you don’t. 3. If they produce evidence, which many people won’t because with you there is no point, you then dismiss the evidence out of hand whether it be subjective, measured or blind tested. And usually throw in another patronizing dig questioning their intelligence. 4. If someone has the nerve to point out this pattern you resort to direct ad hominem attacks and in this case, dismiss the rest of the thread as a veiled threat that you won’t grace us with your presence any longer. >>>>If you can’t stand the heat get out of the kitchen. Tip: If I were you I’d lose the attitude pronto. At least you’ve apparently learned the difference between evidence and proof. But we’ll see.... |
geoffkait said: "When someone recently stated that there have been many blind tests of cables, I asked him to provide links to blind tests. Which someone did. That’s an example of asking for evidence of a bold statement. " And then you dismissed blind tests. That's my point. Reading over this and a few other threads it typically goes like this: 1. Someone makes a statement you disagree with. 2. In your reply you ask for evidence. And usually throw in some pretentious and snarky dig at them....presumably because they had the nerve to believe something that you don't. 3. If they produce evidence, which many people won't because with you there is no point, you then dismiss the evidence out of hand whether it be subjective, measured or blind tested. And usually throw in another patronizing dig questioning their intelligence. 4. If someone has the nerve to point out this pattern you resort to direct ad hominem attacks and in this case, dismiss the rest of the thread as a veiled threat that you won't grace us with your presence any longer. |
n80 OP geoffkait said: "Besides, all I was asking for in the example you provided is EVIDENCE. That doesn’t seem too much to ask. 😬 I’m not demanding PROOF. " Okay, change my question to you asking for "EVIDENCE". The result is the same. You ask for evidence but then claim that nothing anyone introduces rises to the level of "EVIDENCE". Same difference. Still specious. And you’re pretty much just parsing words to wiggle out of the trap you set for yourself. >>>>>I’ve already given you my answer. As I suspected, you don’t know the difference between proof and evidence. Nor do you understand why I ask for evidence to support bold statements. Let me give you an example. When someone recently stated that there have been many blind tests of cables, I asked him to provide links to blind tests. Which someone did. That’s an example of asking for evidence of a bold statement. This conversation can serve no purpose any more. |
"But most Electrical Engineers that I’ve seen discuss this over the years, who aren’t part of a company trying to sell boutique cables, tend to dismiss the idea. " What I have learned over the years is that electrical engineers (no matter what experience) talk more rubbish than anyone. I continually hear them say "technically there is no difference" or "there is no reason for that". NEVER take much notice of them. Recently one said "mains cables make no difference - a waste of money - just get a normal cable and stick it directly into the mains". Another one said "single ended MUST be better than balanced as it keeps the purity of the signal". Good grief. We need a joke list compiled of "sayings of engineers"! |
Again...the company he left does not see it necessary to make any such claims. That an engineer who left Belden makes claims about burn-in doesn't mean it's true. Why would the company make such a claim? Their product is used in an industry where they're used as patch cords and made to be inserted and pulled out over and over and hold up to abuse at the hands of those in post production. Just slap them in you'll know they'll work. Mass production, even at a technical level, is still mass production, no matter how one tends to glorify it. You need the equipment to hold up to use and abuse. It has to work at a basic level, again and again. No need to talk down to those who don't work at your level as it's not germane to the discussion: it's a red herring meant to distract. Now take that level of engineering needed to do that and go a step or two further in refinement and you'd have a better cable for home use where you'd set it and forget it. The manufacturer needn't worry about the rigors of industrial use and pass on some sage advice so as to let it (the cable) settle in and do it's thing. The same reasoning you'd have as to doubt someone who worked at that level of expertise would ask the same of you. Who's to say? Tell me truly, is there anyone you work with who feels differently about cables? Do you have discussions about what's good enough for home use? Do you have co-workers who do indeed, use what they feel to be better cables than what you work with? Odds are, there simply has to be and I'm curious to know what they say. Are you in the minority or is what you feel about cables an industry standard? All the best, Nonoise |
geoffkait said: "Besides, all I was asking for in the example you provided is EVIDENCE. That doesn’t seem too much to ask. 😬 I’m not demanding PROOF. " Okay, change my question to you asking for "EVIDENCE". The result is the same. You ask for evidence but then claim that nothing anyone introduces rises to the level of "EVIDENCE". Same difference. Still specious. And you're pretty much just parsing words to wiggle out of the trap you set for yourself. And he also said: "You do know the difference, I assume." I know the difference between rational civil conversation verses someone being patronizing and insulting to cover up for the inconsistencies of his posts. And, no, I will not find that "EVIDENCE " for you. It is in black and white all over this forum and stands in stark contrast to almost every other member and post I've read on this otherwise extremely cordial site. |
| Post removed |
Hey, nobody’s ever bothered to measure cables before and after cryogenic treatment. Nobody’s bothered to measure tubes before and after cryo. Nobody’s bothered to measure CD players or amps before and after cryo. Nobody’s bothered to measure tonearms before and after cryo. Nobody’s measured CDs before and after cryo. And nobody’s bothered to measure trumpets and saxophones before and after cryo. |
@nonoise
I don't know. He might be. Again...the company he left does not see it necessary to make any such claims. That an engineer who left Belden makes claims about burn-in doesn't mean it's true. Has he offered anything other than anecdote or opinion on the subject? Like, showing measurable differences between his cables when new vs burned in? @blueranger I have a Duotech cable burner that has a setting for interconnects and speaker wire. Earlier this year I was burning in some new interconnects and after 2 days had realized I had used the speaker wire setting. I hooked them up to my stereo and they sounded horrible. No dimension and flat sounding. I knew they would settle back in like the exact other models in my system and they did. What's the point is that cable burn in does change the sound. I had some silver cables that sounded strident and I finally just burned them a week. When I plugged them in they sounded much better. Yes there are many such anecdotes from audiophiles. But I'm left wondering: what in the world do you think is actually *happening* to the cables to "ruin" the sound in your scenario? What could the technical explanation possibly be? @butch01
But our perception changes too. Many of us have commiserated on how our systems can seem uninvolving or flat one day, but fantastic the next day. The fact is our perception is very elastic and subject to all sorts of factors, from mood, state of mind, our expectations, what we are concentrating on at the time when listening, etc. Your journal may well have simply detailed changes in your own mind, not the wire. The problem is with these anecdotes, these variables are left tangled. |
mapman There are only two paradigms really for how people approach things based on technology like hifi. First is is the one I subscribe to which is try my hardest to understand how things work and use that knowledge to guide the way. That is how all new real technological innovations work. The other is to rely mainly on faith in lieu of actual knowledge to guide the way. Many things in in life are beyond human understanding and best handled by a combo of both. Audio it is not one of those things. It is best handled by acquiring real knowledge. Hearsay alone may not deliver truly great results. Things that cannot be explained essentially translate to happening by magic ie nobody can factually account for what is observed. >>>>>To summarize, a sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. ”If I could explain it to the average guy they wouldn’t have given me the Nobel prize.” - Richard Feynman. ”Knowledge can be defined as what’s left after you subtract all the stuff you forgot from school.” - old audiophile axiom |
Having been addicted to this wonderful hobby since 1965, I have heard all sorts of claims. Some are true, many are just a different brand of snake oil. In my own experiences,component burn-in, warm up time, power supply and matching, all have a seat at the table. As one example, I auditioned a new pair of speaker cables a few years ago. They went through a partial burn-in by the manufacturer. Upon installation, I put a favorite CD on repeat, 24/7. For the next 90 days, I listened to at least 15 minutes of that CD and 45 minutes to 2hrs of others, every day. I kept a daily journal. The change was not to be denied! I returned them, but that's another story. Some of us can hear the difference and some of us can't. My wife can't, but I don't hold it against her. Happy listening |
I have a Duotech cable burner that has a setting for interconnects and speaker wire. Earlier this year I was burning in some new interconnects and after 2 days had realized I had used the speaker wire setting. I hooked them up to my stereo and they sounded horrible. No dimension and flat sounding. I knew they would settle back in like the exact other models in my system and they did. What's the point is that cable burn in does change the sound. I had some silver cables that sounded strident and I finally just burned them a week. When I plugged them in they sounded much better. |
There are only two paradigms really for how people approach things based on technology like hifi. First is is the one I subscribe to which is try my hardest to understand how things work and use that knowledge to guide the way. That is how all new real technological innovations work. The other is to rely mainly on faith in lieu of actual knowledge to guide the way. Many things in in life are beyond human understanding and best handled by a combo of both. Audio it is not one of those things. It is best handled by acquiring real knowledge. Hearsay alone may not deliver truly great results. Things that cannot be explained essentially translate to happening by magic ie nobody can factually account for what is observed. |
Right now I'm burning in a new set of cables that the maker states takes about 75 hours. The guy who designed them was an engineer at Beldin Wire & Cables. The price is very reasonable, the trial period is 40 days so there's really no downside to trying them out, and yes, I'm hearing improvements. Is this "engineer" who used to work for a cable company who all naysayers say is good enough for audiophiles and who appears to make little on his cables wrong? They are an improvement over what I've been using to the degree that I'm keeping them, and they only have about 10 hours on them. Again, they're very reasonable when it comes to cost. I've paid more and gotten less. All the best, Nonoise |
If burn-in valid, then materials cannot be inert. If the materials are not inert, then they must always be affected. If the materials are affected, then a cable that's had thousands of hours of playing should have measurable deltas to its twin that sat on the shelf in the same environment for those same thousands of hours. Technology exists to measure femto values, so it should be possible to measure deltas. It is possible, per Heisenberg, that measuring may negate the change. By the same token, different program must also affect change. In that case, change is constant and therefore indeterminate. Many years ago BAS reported on the results of test at UWatterloo with Linn's Ivor Tiefenbrun who gave rise the 80's single speaker in the room gospel. from https://www.bostonaudiosociety.org/bas_speaker/abx_testing2.htm Someday cable burn-in maybe similarly debunked. |
I believe it is a matter of degree. For sure new speakers and certain crossover capacitators benefit from long term burn-in. Speaker cables vary quite a bit since you have enormous power, current and phase considerations so burn in there is rational. I find that balanced line level (XLR) cables are the least variable interconnects while unbalanced low level cables (phono cables) display more differences. With that in mind then it makes some sense that break-in of sensitive components: Tubes, Capacitators, Speakers and, to a lesser extent, solid state devices, switches and even some kinds of wire is rational. The differences are, however, variable. |
| Post removed |
dopogue Actual listening and comparing experience.... Who da thunk!..... And at the end of the day you clearly can hear the difference between the Clear Days and Duelunds. Jim |
| Post removed |
n80 OP geoffkait, when I said that you were always asking for proof you said: Can you show me an example of what you’re referring to? So I scrolled up a few posts where you said, and I quote: Finally, do you have ANY evidence to support either of those statements? >>>>Exactly what I just got through saying. That is not the same thing as demanding proof of cables, fuses, tweaks, whatever. Besides, all I was asking for in the example you provided is EVIDENCE. That doesn’t seem too much to ask. 😬 I’m not demanding PROOF. You do know the difference, I assume. |
@dopogue, If you want to sell those Clear Day interconnects I’d take them off your hands. I actually need 2 pair. 1 pair for the phono to phono preamp and 1 pair for phono preamp to receiver. I find it ironic that the Clear Day interconnects are not shielded and best many a shielded and more costly interconnect cables. |
n80 OP So, geoffkait, you’re always asking for people who disagree with you to supply some sort of proof to support their opinions. >>>>>Really? Can you show me an example of what you’re referring to? Oh, is this what you mean by asking for proof? I’m just asking to back up a bold statement. That’s not the same thing at all. 😛 But you’re dismissing blinded studies. >>>>>Yes, but only to the extent that I’ve detailed very carefully in quite a few posts. It’s actually not (rpt not) true I dismiss all blinded studies. It’s not nice to put words in my mouth. And I can’t remember but I think you’re not in the measure-bater camp either. >>>>What is the measure-bater camp? I am not in too many camps, so probably not, whatever camp that is. 😀 So if we can’t rely on blinded studies and if measurement with equipment can’t tell the whole story then what is there? What sort of proof do you want from someone? >>>>>I am not asking for proof of anything from anyone. Where did you get that from? Where do you come up with these questions? Did you leave out listening tests on purpose? 😳 |
| Post removed |
So, geoffkait, you're always asking for people who disagree with you to supply some sort of proof to support their opinions. But you're dismissing blinded studies. And I can't remember but I think you're not in the measure-bater camp either. So if we can't rely on blinded studies and if measurement with equipment can't tell the whole story then what is there? What sort of proof do you want from someone? |
Speaking of John Atkinson, editor Stereophile magazine, he also believes blind testing is unreliable and is prone to error from all sides. He, like your humble scribe, did not fall off the turnip truck yesterday. 🚚 https://www.stereophile.com/features/113/index.html |
Finally, there has been mention of blinded studies. I’m not sure why the audio magazines aren’t full of them. A panel of experts. Same room, same system, equipment not visible. Various songs played at various volumes but only one physical element changed. Experts fill out a check list of important qualities, each one on a 1-5 scale. Then you repeat the whole test 3 times. That’s how you test subjective elements. I’d say panels would need 5-10 experts. Maybe the magazines do this. I suspect most would rather not. It's interesting also that Stereophile provides detailed measurements that you can compare for speakers, amplifiers and digital audio components. But they produce no measurements for any interconnect/speaker cable/ AC cable/power conditioner reviews. I suspect John Atkinson, who does their measurements and generally likes to see how things tick by looking at differences in objective measurements, knows something when he's not bothering to measure those things ;-) |
wyoboy, I appreciate your perspective on subjective evaluations. I think the key here is that when it all comes down to it, it does not matter. That is not to say this or that tweak doesn’t matter, it is to say that if whatever tweak makes a difference to the person that makes it, then bingo! it works. It does not matter what I think about it. When I counsel patients on alternative therapies I make sure given therapy will not cause harm and tell them to give it a try. If it relieves their problem and causes no harm, then I’m happy for them even if I myself do not believe there is any real mechanism for that therapy to have helped. And that is not to suggest simply that "it is all in their heads". In fact I do believe it is all in their heads but not in a negative way. I believe that the mind helps heal. And if the mind is convinced of the healing power of some method, then it acts on the body. (This only goes so far. It does not matter how much you believe taking garlic will help your cholesterol, it is NOT going to unclog a blocked coronary artery). This all puts me in mind of discussions about color. A touchy, though quantifiable variable in the world of photography and printing. In books on the subject there is often an illustration where a hue of red, the same used by Coca Cola, is shown on one page. On the back of the next page there is a scale of red hues and you are asked to pick out Coca Cola red from it. Very few can and most do so by accident (they often can’t do it twice). Some are better than others, but not many nail it consistently. I can help but wonder if there is a similar effect with sound? Finally, there has been mention of blinded studies. I’m not sure why the audio magazines aren’t full of them. A panel of experts. Same room, same system, equipment not visible. Various songs played at various volumes but only one physical element changed. Experts fill out a check list of important qualities, each one on a 1-5 scale. Then you repeat the whole test 3 times. That’s how you test subjective elements. I’d say panels would need 5-10 experts. Maybe the magazines do this. I suspect most would rather not. |
aalenik. And one you get guys like Prof & Clearthink going, forget a logical straightforward conversation. If you are implying my posts are "illogical" I haven't seen you demonstrate that. (Unless I'm misunderstanding what you meant there). . If the "burn in" claim has not been used to mitigate your or anyone’s expectations or impressions of a piece of gear, you have somehow led an amazingly fortunate audiophile life. Burn in is used all the time by, for instance, high end audio salesmen to mitigate either the impressions, or the expectations, of people auditioning gear. I have auditioned plenty of speakers over the last couple of years and, especially if the speaker was new, I was often cautioned "now, we’ve just got these this week, so they aren’t BROKEN IN, so keep that in mind." In other words, if you hear something you don’t like...hey...maybe it’s not that you don’t like the speaker...it’s just not broken in yet, so don’t give up on it. Similarly, similar statements may come after the audition. When asked "what did you think?" I will usually, politely, say what I heard. And if anything like "bright" or other issues come out of my mouth, often enough THEN I’ll be told "Well, the speakers ...(or some other component being used in the audition, cables, amp, DAC or whatever)...were not broken in yet. (This was the case just this month - I mentioned a few issues with a speaker I was interested in during an audition, and the "well of course but we just got the speakers and they aren’t broken in, so you shouldn’t write them off because of that" response came right back). I doubt many here, who have frequented high end audio dealerships, would never have encountered anything like the above, where the "break in" issue isn’t brought up by salesmen. Secondly, every manufacturer who claims to the consumer their product requires a "break in" period is, de facto, setting up an excuse for why the consumer may be dissatisfied upon initial set up. That’s the POINT, otherwise there wouldn’t be a point in mentioning it. They may not declare "no, KEEP the item longer, past the break in period" (though in fact, I’ve had one or two speaker manufacturers tell me that), but they ARE setting up an excuse to explain any initial dissatisfaction - "well, the people who wanted early returns hadn’t got past the break-in period, so this discounts their assessment to some degree." That’s the spoken or unspoken scenario set up. And it’s often given voice by audiophiles all the time, even here "Did you allow X to break in? If not...then you didn’t REALLY have a valid assessment of that gear." As to your own listening tests, if you did indeed to blind testing of burned/not burned in cables and reliably detected a difference, well done! And I can understand why that experience informed your own decisions. Unfortunately we can’t really determine from here how well your tests were conducted. It’s the same for my own claims for blind tests. They shouldn’t be definitive for anyone else, especially as they weren’t there to oversee the process. (That’s one reason why replicability of results is an important tool in science). If I could see a report of cable burn in trials, showing objectively measurable differences between a new and burned in cable, with a variety of subjects, the blind test procedure documented and seemingly well run, and if the results were positive for identifying between the cables, I’d certainly take that on board as some evidence for cable burn in claims. But what we tend to get, even from the Big Cable Manufacturers, are examples like Nordost’s pages on cable burn in. They say it’s required, make some technical claim about what happens...but (as far as I’ve seen) provide NO objective, measured evidence of this happening. But, nonetheless, once they’ve prayed on your audiophile worries about your cables and endorsed the issue of burn in....the DO have a cable burn in device to sell you to "fix" this. Lucky us! ;-) |
Hi N80 and welcome to the crazy world of audiophilia. My all-time favorite post here was the very first one from Nonoise. Yes, you've (re)opened a very familiar can of worms. And one you get guys like Prof & Clearthink going, forget a logical straightforward conversation. I was wondering when somebody would mention a cable-cooker, and Geoff (and others) finally did. Someone advised buying 2 pair of the same cable, breaking one in and then comparing it to the new unused set. That'll work, but... If you have access to a cable-cooker, you won't have to wait so long. Put one set on the cooker for 48 hrs. and THEN compare them. Have a friend swap the cables out so that you, the subject, has no idea which is which. Go back-and-forth several times. If you hear no difference, perhaps you're right that this is all negligible to you. One last point; the notion of burn-in as a marketing ploy is nonsense. In 40+ years of this hobby (obsession?), I've never heard a dealer or mfgr. tell any dissatisfied customer to "wait for burn-in". Now OTOH, I know of a few cable mfgrs. who burn their cables in before selling them and do not advertise that fact. That IS a marketing ploy, in that they know their cables will sound better than many 'right out of the box'. (It's also a nice convenience for their customers who do not ave access to a cable-cooker.) You can tell that I'm not a skeptic on burn-in. Why? Because I've done what I described above many times with different cables and other 'subjects' listening as well. But each to his own; The only things that counts are what you hear and whether it brings you some joy. Happy listening! |
| Post removed |
