It is real...
Cables after the burn-in or break-in process sounds smoother, but you need a pair of trained ears to notice it. |
Rather than vote negative : haven't we been over this ground enough; and recently at that!!! Those that believe;..believe. And those that don't;no skin off my nose as they used to say>>>>. |
Maybe you "chuckleheads" misunderstood what i was saying, so i'll try and clarify it here. For the record, i DO believe that cables do change sonics with use. I simply wanted to know if others had done anything to "speed up" the process, what they used to do it, the overall results, etc... I didn't post what i've used, how i've done it, the results, etc... because i didn't want to taint the responses or have them lean any specific way. I was hoping for honest responses to the specific questions i asked. Once again, PLEASE try and keep this on topic. Sean
> |
OK Sean you know my answer but for the others...
I bought 2 pair of Synergistics (from Albert) the Resolution Reference MKII's, not exactly cheap. Charactaristics were initialy pleasing, but after several days use the highs were very veiled & I'm thinking "oh no" they're broken in now & I've made a mistake here. Albert says continue playing them so I did that. Highs came back a few days later, then dropped out again days after that. I was driving him nuts over the phone "keep playing them" he insists; I'll even take them back but I want you to wait A MONTH. OK Albert. I even called Synergistic; got the same story from Scott Novak. I got tired of listening to them fluctuate so I connected a pair to my VCR's audio out's & looped back to its' inputs as a dummy load. The other pair went on the tuner's 2nd. pr. of outputs routed into a signal processor's inputs as dummy load. Didn't touch them for 30 days. Finally put them back online & guess what - all was fine it it stayed that way too. Added the active shielding later on which greatly expanded stage & image. |
Hi Sean, I hate breaking in cables in my system so I offer my cables to friends or I will put them in my Moms system without her knowing about it. I also have a duo tech cable break in thingy that does a good job. The difference after break in is like the difference between a cold start and a system that has been warmed up for several hours. It makes a HUGE improvement IMO. |
There was a post (forget which thread) and the individual described a method for making a cheap SE resistance cable break-in device. Half watt, 10K ohm resistor and an RCA plug. Sounded like a reasonable approach. Does anyone know of any similar cheapo methods for making your own balanced device for breaking in cables? Is the described approach okay? Thanks. |
Hi Sean,
I too use the Duo-Tech Cable Enhancer with good results and yes, after using this devices to break in the cables, there is an obvious difference. Even did a comparison on 2 cables, same brand and the ones on the Duo-Tech sounded better overall. Another cheaper product is the XLO burn in cd.
Regards
Ramesh |
I have noticed nothing but improvements as a cable breaks in. Becoming smoother, less bright, more extended at both frequency extremes. I don't have a fancy apparatus for cable break-in. For speaker cables, I simply run them hard. Usually for two to three weeks. At least a few hours a day. For interconnects, I learned a nice little method here on Audiogon(thanks to whoever suggested it, apologies for not remembering their name). I insert the cable between my tuner and integrated amp(preamp for those who have one). I keep the tuner on(which I always do anyway). The amp is off, but the tuner is selected. I have found that this actually works! |
i just bought 2 pair of nordost valhalla interconnects and the nordost CBID 1 (cable burn-in device). after 6 days on the device the difference was astounding. i had demoed some cables broken in on the device by the dealer and was very impressed by the cables so i purchased some. but i had no way to asses the effect of the CBID 1. when i first got the new cables i plugged them in and was underwellemed. the effect of 6 days of break-in on the device was like a clearing a clogged pipe. i have always found breakin of anything effective; but this takes it to a new level. i had also pugged my speaker cables (transparent opus mm) to the CBID 1 so the effect was communelative for the whole system.
|
If you shorted one end of the cable and made an adapter that put a 10K resistor in series with the other end you could just plug the cable into an AC outlet.
But, keep in mind, guys, that all electrons in the universe are EXACTLY alike. And, electric current does not change metal. You can run current thru copper for a billion years it will not change it. There just isn't anything in the copper to change.
The psychoacoustic effect of almost always hearing a difference is very real. Cable conditioners are proof of this. |
If the sound of the cable changes over time, why does it always get better? It seems to me that at least some of the time, the sound would get worse. I believe it is because you adapt to the sound of the cable. If I spent big bucks on a cable, I would work hard to convince myself that it was starting to sound better, not worse. My vote is for voodoo. |
Looks like the same old argumentitive attitude is prevailing on this thread regarding those who dismiss perceived changes in components and suchlike. Maybe stevemj would like to further substantiate his remark that all electrons are alike as I am sure he must have a through understanding and grasp of quantum mechanics and how this subject details the random versus orderly nature of sub-atomic particles and their physical attributes. Can he explain this subject to all us simple audio enthusiasts who have decided they just like to listen and enjoy their music via components selected through their own free choice (whilst also taking advice from all sides who have meaningful contributions to make). Apologies if this post appears agressive but I would just like to see this forum provide meaningful and helpful ways of allowing us all to enjoy and further our knowledge of this hobby without replies to posts degenerating into a "p**ing" match at every opportunity. Regards, Richard. |
Th XLO "burn-in" CD reduced my burn in time considerably. From around an average of 150 hours to 90 hours. I run my system around 14 hours a day when breaking in a new cable. |
If interested, go to the www.cardas.com where they have a discussion of cable burn in posted in the "insights" section. I'm not sure I buy into it, but it makes for interesting reading |
Haven't we been through this all before ? And with the same yay and nay sayers? My humble opinion is that it is not voodoo, I think I have heard differences before, during and after burn in again and again, but the sceptical part in me would like cut and dried proof, that what I hear can really be attributed to this process in debate. |
Oh Sean,apaologies, "chucklehead" myself. I misunderstood, no, I did not use anything to speed up the process. Just played music. |
I have nothing new to add but will mention the old. I burn IC's in by runing the cable music station through our VCR to the television (with the new IC's in the link). This way I do not have to listen to them and they can run in most of the day(s). I have also used our second mini system (which is always used as a source only and is piped through either a Musical Fidelity or Audion amp), for speaker cable especially, but also IC's and PC's. This way the main system stays intact and listenable while the cable is being run in. I always do, out of curiosity, try new cables out first in the main system, but quickly tire of the sound (when fresh) and then send them off to the other devices. The only IC that I have used that required little to almost no break in has been the Mapleshade Double Helix digital cable which is a micro wire design. It sounded stable to me after an afternoon's play. I have also noticed that storing IC's (that are not in use) flat and not coiled seems top preserve most of their better sound qualities when they are once again installed. If an electrical current does not change the inherent characteristics of metal, then why does electro plating work? I also have a question about magnets (in this context), but don't know exactly what the question is. |
For the 100th time: It is real |
Wen you by a new pair of shoes are they not stiff at first? Have you read on some product manuals that a breakin period is required(80+ hrs on anthem gear). New ic's and spkr wire are no different-burning them in is a must. I have set my tuner in between stations amd let the white noise do the rest. |
South: Yes, new shoes are stiff. But leather is a very high-resistance conductor, and I find it really rolls off the high end (down, oh, 100 dB or so at 20 hz). YMMV. |
Just using the shoes as a example. Might have been a poor use of words but you get the idea. |
Instead of burn-in there are those that cryogenically freeze their cables. |
Brulee pretty much summed up my feelings and experiences with "wire" burn in. I often use the XLO burn-in CD. BTW, where do you get the wire burn-in devices? I too am tired of running all my electronics 14 hrs. a day to burn in wires. Sean; it's pretty much been my experience that new wires are often excessively bright, sometimes to the point of glaring/smearing of mids and low treble, but smooth out considerabley with use-- bass usually tightens up too. Bob B.-- good story about the Syn. Res. ICs. As Avguy and Richard stated, and I agree, there's no point in trying to turn this thread into another whizzing contest. Cheers. Craig. |
.........should have been more specific-- Brulee, Ramesh where do you get the Duo Tech burn in devices? Re: the Nordost, I'm guessing they have a website? Thanks. Craig |
Sean; just gotta' add: I think your thread is good, but the title-- shall we say "a bit provocative"? IMO. I'll quit now....Craig |
Josler - Leather cables are good for country western music. |
I use Transparent Audio Ultra XL balanced interconnects and they are very much affected by the burn-in process. T/A says 100 hrs. which I now believe. My friend had a well used cable (same as above) and it sounded so good in my system I spent the big bucks to buy one. Couldn't have been more disappointed in the sound of the new cable. After much use in the system, usually with me out of the house, they started to break-in. The change was particularly noticeable in the treble freq. and low level detail.
FYI, I confirmed with T/A that the Cable Cooker is safe for their network boxes and based on my long and painful experience I will try to use one next time to shorten the process.
My cable now sounds like my buddy's when A/B even though they didn't when new. If it was all in my head, I could have easily said my $1775 cable was awesome, embarassed to admit I made a mistake. But the fact is it took the 80 hours or so before it sounded like anything I wanted to listen to. I have this argument with a electrical engineer friend (I'm an M.E so what do I know from electrons) and he says the same thing as posted above (electrons don't know the difference). But there are a lot of other factors in play here and I think we still don't understand all the reasons. I do believe it, though, when he tells me he can't hear the difference because a lot of people can't. My old boss once told me he couldn't hear or follow the beat of music (how white do you have to be to say that?!). Anyway, I now accept the fact that some people can't hear the difference, and Circuit City has plenty of fine equipment for them to enjoy. I, however, can hear the difference and am a tortured soul (aka audiophile) as a result. |
Hi Garfish, I bought the Duo-Tech sometime in the 80s. I dont think they make them anymore. I have seen them sold on this site for $50 to $75. Great post Wehamilton! |
Since i started this ruckus, i might as well add my findings to it. Thanks to those that understood where i was coming from and took the time to share their honest comments. As mentioned, i wanted to get "the straight dope" from everyone first-hand before "going to press" with what i had found.
I have both a Duo-Tech and a Mobie. Both of these devices are designed as "cable burners" for interconnects with the Duo-Tech doing double duty for speaker cables also. I purchased the Duo-Tech a few years back from someone here on Audiogon. Quite honestly, i don't know if it ever made any difference at all, but i had continued to use it on occasion. I figured that it couldn't hurt anything as it was simply applying signal to the cable. To get the most from it, i always ran the Duo Tech on the speaker cable setting for everything instead of on the Interconnect setting for interconnects, etc... I'm assuming that the "speaker" setting put out a far higher level signal as the unit would get MUCH warmer in that mode.
As to the Mobie, it makes a HUGE difference that is NOT debatable. The differences are THAT noticeable. Unfortunately, it is only designed to do interconnects with no provisions or adapters for speaker cables. All i can say is that even if you have 10,000+ hours on your interconnects, you've still never heard what they are fully capable of UNLESS you've "burned" them in at a higher voltage. I am THAT sure of this product and its' benefits. While i know that this sounds "controversial" even for the "believers" here, i was literally amazed at the differences that i noted after "Mobie-ing" some cables.
Since i had never gotten real noticeable results with the Duo-Tech, i wasn't expecting much from the Mobie. BOY, was i wrong. Cables that were hard, grainy, splashy, etc... with over 500 hours of actual use on them were WAY smoother and lush sounding after only 36 hours on the burner.
I spoke with one of the guys that helped design the Mobie recently. He told me that 30 continuous days of burning on the Mobie can make cables that were made out of "Bat Guano" sound good !!! While he recommended using the Mobie on cables for a full 30 days of burn-in, ANY time on the Mobie is better than none in my opinion.
As to the differences between the Duo-Tech and the Mobie, i guess that the Duo-Tech produces a sine wave that ramps up and down in intensity. As such, you would be better off using wideband noise or an actual music signal at a constant yet higher signal to burn in the cables as some here have done. The problem with this though is that even at maximum output levels on most line level sources, you've still only got about 2 volts of ouput going through the cables. In contrast, the Mobie uses a square wave that remains at level that is well over 5 times the level that any interconnect would see under normal use. On top of the higher intensity signal, the advantage to using a square wave is that it produces an infinite amount of harmonic energy at great amplitude. To put this into plain English, instead of just having one limited spectrum of coverage within the audio band, it is covering the primary frequency along with a multitude of ranges above it and doing it at a much higher amplitude on a constant basis.
As to the technical reasons why this works or if it can be measured with test equipment, i have NO idea. While i know that there are doubters here, all i can tell you is "don't knock it till you've tried it". I have emailed with some of the "instigators" here and hope that they are not above learning by their own trial and error.
Here's a simple test for some of you that are handy and have test equipment. This would work best if you have two identical runs of cable. This way you could "burn" one set and listen to them and then use the other set that was untreated as a point of reference.
Since some of you might have audio generators, try running a 1 Khz or lower square wave into some interconnects with a high impedance 10K - 50K ohm dummy load ( resistor ) attached. Try using the highest voltage possible, which hopefully should be AT LEAST a good 10 volts or more. Let these cables run for as long as possible and then give them a listen, comparing them to the unburned cables.
My findings are that the burned cables will be far smoother, less grainy, have better ( warmer ) tonal balance, etc.... Of course, this could be a BAD thing if your system is already "dialed in" just perfectly or if it is already on the "warm & smooth" side.
An alternative to buying a Mobie or a Cable Cooker ( a high dollar and more versatile version of the Mobie ) would be to simply make up some adapters and use an old receiver to do this with. You can use your interconnects as speaker cables ( with the use of some inexpensive adapters that you can fabricate ) and connect them to some homebrew dummy loads. Of course, you would have to make sure that the dummy loads ( resistors ) were rated for above and beyond the amount of power that you were putting into them. Simply tune in a local "hard" or "classic" rock music station and crank up the volume. Initial cash outlay should be well under $20 for all the supplies needed to do this given that most of you probably have a few spare "boat anchors" ( aka receivers ) floating around the closet or basement. If someone needed help or had questions on how to go about doing something like this, contact me via email and i'll see what i can do about coming up with some directions and a parts list to make your life easier. Sean
> |
Miracle Products:
For swimming pool owners, we have a "water condition". After filling your pool, it stirs up the water for several hours. You would be amazed at how the much smoother it is after being broken in. It relaxes the water molecules.
For your car: Don't use oil that hasn't been broken in! THis new device subjects the oil to real conditions for several hours before your oil change. You would be amazed at how much less grainy the oil is.
Got stiff, lazy, or jerky electrons in your cables? Our cable conditioner will get those darn electrons whipped into shape in no time. Our condition has several hours of specially designed "music for electrons". This special computer generated music will energize reluctant electrons and remind them to behave properly. |
Miracle Cures: Stevemj needs a keyboard break in device. His present model is stiff, and will not respond properly to input no matter how often he gives it the finger. Data that it does transmit, is either out of context or condescending.
Perhaps instead, it is his computers chip set, and the keyboard is not at fault. The processor has never been broken in with sufficient hours of full bandwidth truth, thereby producing answers not applicable to actual human experience.
Or, the last possibility is that the devices are OK, and the operator is not broken in. This situation is very dangerous at an audio site. Postings here are required to be from people who listen to music and realize that dealing with equipment is a fact of life.
In that case, the miracle cure would consist of Stevemj turning off his computer, hooking up a set of cables, and breaking himself in at the same time as the wire. I'll bet that in less than 100 hours, his keyboard would begin to respond as accurately the other posts on this topic. If he resists, he can return to his "water conditioned" pool. I am certain he has experimented with it quite a lot, as he is certainly all wet. |
Like i said, don't knock them until YOU have tried them first hand. Until then, you're simply speaking out of ignorance with a complete lack of experience to support your statements. You have cited NO factual information in ANY of your "tirades" even though you have challenged every statement that some of us have made pertaining to this subject.
As to your "funny" comments and examples, water CAN be "softened" in a pool. Obviously, there are chemicals that can do this job rather rapidly. As you correctly stated in your "example", the other way is via mechanized circulation . This is true if the temperature of the water was such that it was partially frozen. Circulation would raise the overall temperature due to friction, causing the frozen water to "soften", become less "grainy" or
"hard" : )
As to wire and cables, there are differences in the grain or "crystal structure" of specific metals. This is well known and documented. While i can't speak first-hand of whether or not anything is altered in the "break in process" with these using scientific terminology or data, my ears tell me that there IS a difference. Maybe Jack Bybee can explain this to you in the terms that you'd like to see. After all, he is a physicist who has worked in-depth on the subject for the U.S. Government.
On top of that, there ARE chemical changes that take place when different metals are used in conjunction with each other (electrolysis). Who is to say that applying voltage to the junction points, connections, plating or to the cable itself is not "treating" it in some manner ???? After all, we have copper, silver, brass, gold, aluminum, rhodium, tin, lead, etc... making contact with each other in almost all of the wires that we use.
On top of this, a metalurgist WILL verify that temperatures and application of electricity DO alter metals. While this can be demonstrated on a very short term / extreme situation basis, WHO has documented what takes place over a very extended period of time given less extreme conditions ? Please site the specific studies that your referring to and how we can all access these findings.
Until you can provide the proof to deny the findings that THOUSANDS of people will testify to via first hand experience, your argument holds no more (if not LESS) water than the case presented by the "believers" here on this forum and many other like-minded sites around the world. Sean
>
|
Proof, Sean? You don't sound like a guy who's even interested in proof. Obviously, no one can prove that your professed experience with cable break-in is a figment of your imagination. For that matter, you cannot prove it isn't. (Actually, you could, but that would require the kind of test I'm sure you can find fault with.) But there is no known physical phenomenon that would explain this effect (despite your rather strained attempts to suggest such), while there is a known psychological phenomenon that explains it pretty well. And we are all free to use or not use that information as we wish. |
Sean; where are the Mobie and Cable Cooker available from? Thanks. Garfish the Believer. |
Stevemj read this!!!!!!!!
I am sick of your little attitude ,if u do not wish to add A opinion on audio subjects with out sarcasim I will help u.
I will notify Audiogon of your constant harrasment at their site to their enthusiasts and will ask them to remove you from being able to sign in as a user
Thanks for visiting with us Mr. MJ |
I know that the Mobie is available from Music Direct here in Chicago. The phone number is 800 - 449 - 8333 and their website is listed below so that it's easy to cut and paste. Talk to Bes if you need info on it as they don't have much on their website or email me directly / post questions here. For the record, the Mobie runs about $225 - $250 brand new and accepts RCA's, BNC's and XLR's.
The Cable Cooker is being sold by Alan Kafton of Audio Excellence in Arizona. He is the owner of a product line called "Audiodharma", the parent company for the Cable Cooker. It has not been in production real long and i think that it sells for over $600.
As to Jostler's comments, i make my living by repairing / modifying / measuring electronic communications equipment. I have seen equipment that measures poorer in EVERY electrical aspect beat the pants off of another piece of gear that would be a technicians "bench darling". In other words, the unit that measures better in terms of power output ( both rms and peak ), looks cleaner on the scope and spectrum analyzer, etc... gets its' ass beat under real world operating conditions by something that looks like a piece of junk in comparison. It is "testing" like this that tells me that we don't know "jack" about how things really work or how to measure the truly important aspects of electronics operation. Unfortunatetly, everything in life does not boil down to 1 and 0's nor can we explain everything. That's why "theories" are simply "theories" and NOT fact. Sean
>
http://www.amusicdirect.com
PS.... i have NO affiliation with ANY of the products that i mention here or in any of my posts. I am NOT in the audio business at this point in time. |
Play nice Ontario! No need to flash someone if their opinion is different than yours. |
Sean; thanks for the Mobie info. I believe I have a Music Direct catalog, and will check for Mobies-- sounds vaguely venereal: ). Craig. |
Ontario - There is more to my post than sarcasm. Stirring water in a swimming pool and expecting that to change the water's characteristics is a fair analogy to sloshing electrons back and forth in a wire and expecting that to change the electron's (or wire's) characteristics.
Oddly, it seems that the more preposterous the belief, the less likely an explanation of why it is preposterous will be useful. |
Steve, once again you have failed to post ANY information that supports your point of view other than an analogy ( a poor one at that ). While we are all open to various points of view ( that's why we openly discuss different areas of interest here ), making claims with no personal experience or points of reference are typically dismissed as "bullshit", "hype" or "propoganda". As such, both sides of this argument may be guilty of doing all of the aforementioned, but there are FAR more proponents with first hand experience on the "wire DOES break in / cables do sound different" side of the fence.
Once again, we are asking YOU or one of the others that promote similar ideologies to enlighten us and point us in the right direction, i.e. documented evidence of what happens to various metals when low level voltages and current are applied for various amounts of time. We are also asking you to cite data that verifies that, given trained listeners that are familiar with the equipment under test, that sonic differences amongst various wires, cables, etc... could not be detected. Remember, i said "trained listeners" and not "Bubba" off of the street. By doing so, you will not only be supporting your claims but may also recruit more people through the presentation of said scientific research and statistical analysis. Until you or one of your cohorts can produce such evidence, you will simply be viewed as an agitator that is crying wolf by the majority that frequent this site.
I am NOT trying to confront you as an individual. I am simply trying to clarify that NEITHER of us can PROVE our points of view. As such, neither SHOULD be presented as fact. Most here are wise enough and have enough first hand experience to draw their own conclusions without the need for anyone else to tell them what is wrong or what is right. As such, your presentation does not put us on the defensive, as there are more believers than non-believers. Quite to the contrary, it puts your "team" in the corner. Until your "team" can demonstrate to the majority that we are all "deaf goofs with more dollars than sense", the majority here will continue to trust their ears and first hand experiences. Sean
> |
There have been numerous testimonials at various Audiogon chats regarding the "conversion" of staunch opponents to the "cables make a difference" group. Every story always goes something like, "For 20 years I did not believe that...... until I heard..... and could not believe my ears.....I apologize to all I may have offended..... and now happily enjoy my system more than ever". To all the "blinded by science" group, why not accept that there are significant improvements to be had by choosing a cable that synergizes with peoples systems, and find the science to prove why, instead of denying the experience of thousands of audiophiles who really have no axe to grind, but simply know what they are hearing? |
Very straightforward and honest post Bmpnyc. Thanks for summing up all of my ramblings : ) Sean
> |
There have been numerous testimonials at various Audiogon chats regarding the "conversion" of staunch opponents to the "cables make a difference" group. Every story always goes something like, "For 20 years I did not believe that...... until I heard..... and could not believe my ears.....I apologize to all I may have offended..... and now happily enjoy my system more than ever". To all the "blinded by science" group, why not accept that there are significant improvements to be had by choosing a cable that synergizes with peoples systems, and find the science to prove why, instead of denying the experience of thousands of audiophiles who really have no axe to grind, but simply know what they are hearing? |
Excellent posts just above by both Sean and Bmp, IMO. But really, I don't think that Stevemj has either the psychological or intellectual character to get weird enough for this audiophile, or for most others with open minds. Was it Emerson who said "consistency is a hobgoblin of small minds"? Cheers. Craig. |
Yes, it was Emerson. But let's be fair. Steve espouses his point of view with consistency and tenacity. I categorically do NOT subscribe to his "wires is wires" point of view, but I do think it's a bit unfair to demean his "psychological or intellectual character". He's asking for hard data and, to be fair, we haven't yet given such. What we have given is anecdotal evidence. That such evidence is not yet quantifiable does not nullify it; rather it means there are physical properties to this whole business that aren't yet mapped. But namecalling solves nothing. Let's try to stick with facts.
Sean's approach makes some sense from the scientific point of view; perhaps we can undertake to push that kind of empirical testing to see where it leads?
Really hope everyone here can keep this confined to "quietly asking and answering in turn". (Some Greek fella wrote about that quite some time back; Plato or something like that.)
|
Uh-oh-- seems like I stepped on some toes without even meaning to. Adamanteus, if you'll look at my post again, you'll see that I said "Stevemj does not have the psychological or intellectual capacity TO GET WEIRD ENOUGH for this audiophile". Actually, although I too disagree with Steve, he makes very well written and civil posts. I would say that I complimented him by saying that he cannot get WEIRD enough for me-- straight out of HST's best works. But if I offended, my apologies. Craig. |
Getting back to the topic-- can Stevemj demand that we prove our contention, ie that there is a difference in music character with "burn in", but we cannot demand that he prove his, ie that there is no difference with "burn-in"?
Personally, I have no particular "need" to explain the phenomenon as I trust my own senses. But if he wishes to prove his case, I would love to see the results of his study(s) with peer reviews, publication-- the whole works. And I surely do wish him the best of luck. Cheers. Craig |
Yes, sloshing electrons through a cable changes it: the cable heats up. Temperature changes mean physical changes. Physical changes can change electrical characteristics--work hardening is an example. |
Sean - My opinion, for what it is worth, is that most people here are probably better listeners than I am. I would not want to be in a listening contest with anyone here where we were trying to distinquish between signals with measureable differences. I am pretty sure the folks here have ears that are as good as ears get.
I would not hesitate, however, to bet a huge amount of money that, in a true double blind test, no one could tell if a cable had been "conditioned".
If it really would mean something to you I will try to dig up evidence that electrical signals won't change the property of metals. I hear over and over again the argument that science doesn't know everything therefore what one hears is real. This makes it pointless to give scientific evidence. |
KD - Let say that we run a 10 volt square wave, that's 10 volts RMS. Say cables have .2 ohms resistance and the load is 10K. Current is E/R or 10/10000 = 1/1000 amp. Power (watts) is current squared times resistance so Watts = 1/1000 X 1/1000 *.2 =1/5000000 or one five millionth of a watt.... I think we can rule out heat as a factor.
If this doesn't make any sense, here's another way to look at it. If electricity cost 10 cents a kilowatt/hour, you will have to leave a cable on the conditioner for 57,000 years to get 1 cent worth of electricity heating the cable. |
