More to the point, I’d bet dollars to doughnuts naysayers and non believers on the thorny issues of burn in and directionality and cables in general have psyched themselves out. Psychologically predisposed, I think the psychologists would say. Uummmm, did somebody say doughnuts? 🍩 🍩 🍩
Do speaker cables need a burn in period?
I have heard some say that speaker cables do need a 'burn in', and some say that its totally BS.
What say you?
What say you?
1,164 responses Add your response
I have read much of these comments (out of total curiosity) since I THOUGHT I HAVE HEARD IT ALL!! WOW, Really? I am aware that some can hear better than other's? BUT! i am also knowledgeable enough to know when i see a Scam being perpetuated on the public! it is a total Psychoacoustic sales tactic! Please people! DOGS CAN'T HEAR WHAT YOUR SAYING! |
dachshund I have read much of these comments (out of total curiosity) since I THOUGHT I HAVE HEARD IT ALL!! WOW, Really? I am aware that some can hear better than other's? BUT! i am also knowledgeable enough to know when i see a Scam being perpetuated on the public! it is a total Psychoacoustic sales tactic! Please people! DOGS CAN'T HEAR WHAT YOUR SAYING! >>>>>Well, dachshunds can’t, but they run down a man at forty paces. |
Hello, Kitty. 🙀👍💩🕰 Is this what you mean? Clean Your Clock Meaning Definition: To defeat someone. Generally, this phrase is used to describe someone who has won in a competition. If someone wins a tennis match without a single point scored against him, it would be said that he cleaned his opponent’s clock. Sometimes, people use this to describe physically attacking and beating someone. So, Kitty, are you threatening violence to me over the internet?🙀👀👮♂️👮♂️👮♂️👮♂️👮♂️Bad Kitty. Please learn to crap in your little litter box. 🚽🐈👍👮♂️👮♂️👮♂️👮♂️👮♂️👮♂️👮♂️👮♂️👮♂️👮♂️ |
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/875 Subsection (c) Whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication containing any threat to kidnap any person or any threat to injure the person of another, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. The statute is disjunctive Kitty. Now is the time to speak up, is it a threat to injure me? If not, you best say so quickly. 👮♂️👮♂️👮♂️👮♂️👮♂️👮♂️👮♂️👮♂️👮♂️👮♂️🔚 |
No, tell me. As I recall, you may have missed large parts of the thread. As I recall, another earlier appeared to have felt threatened, too. 👮♂️ Clearly, he has stated his INTENT to do something. Remember, Kitty, you injected yourself into all this and at the very least you are a voluntary public figure, voluntarily participating in an open debate. In any event, you best clear up your statement of intent. 🐈 |
Musician, Physician, EE degree, Ham, Audiophile. No, cables do not have burn in or have directionality. Many things CAN change such as your listening position, air density and your ears and brain. But for those who do believe in wires with magic properties, it is harmless fun. Unless they talk you out of real money. And you get to decide what that is. This is my thought based on experience physics and physiology. Because the OP asked. Could I be wrong? Of course. And I will be equally surprised if the rapture happens or Atlantis rises. But you never know. If your experience suggest things that violate well established scientific norms I would usually suggest to any student to ponder, hard, alternative explanations, other than "oh all that estblished science is wrong". But IF you really have the chops and the data to PROVE that old science wrong, I assure you the Nobel committee is listening. Nobody on this forum has done so, so you mignt look elsewhere for facts on wire and signal transmisson. Because the OP asked. Many lovely people believe otherwise. |
ganainm “If your experience suggest things that violate well established scientific norms I would usually suggest to any student to ponder, hard, alternative explanations, other than "oh all that estblished science is wrong". But IF you really have the chops and the data to PROVE that old science wrong, I assure you the Nobel committee is listening. Nobody on this forum has done so, so you mignt look elsewhere for facts on wire and signal transmisson. Because the OP asked. Many lovely people believe otherwise.” What well established scientific norms are you talking about? I certainly hope nobody broke any scientific laws. Because if anyone broke Ohm’s law I say we hang him. ”If I could explain it to the average dude they wouldn’t have given me the Nobel prize.” |
ganainm Musician, Physician, EE degree, Ham, Audiophile. No, cables do not have burn in or have directionality. Many things CAN change such as your listening position, air density and your ears and brain. But for those who do believe in wires with magic properties, it is harmless fun. Unless they talk you out of real money. And you get to decide what that is. This is my thought based on experience physics and physiology. Best Appeal to Authority award of the week. Bravo! |
From experience, cables require different amount of burn-in time. Some of their materials require different times. I've found that copper wiring takes much less time than silver wiring to burn-in. Even my phono-cables took a lot time back in 1989 to settle in (maybe 100 hours) despite their small gauge. My speaker cables took a long time but sounded great as soon as they were plugged in. My ICs of all sorts take a minimum of 24 hours before I listen to them as their character changes significantly (I'm a cabling beta tester for a manufacturer so I know how raw a cable can sound brand new). |
@tobor007 If someone gave you a 10 to 1, $ bet that you could pick out the the direction of your cables with a blind listening test, how much money would you risk?Oh poor 23-post dude (or dudet), go back and read from the beginning. Nobody can actually hear the difference in a “blind” or “double-blind” listening test. But, that doesn’t mean there is no difference. Many can hear a significant difference, just not under the confines of actual comparison tests. Besides, a requirement to actually hear a difference would suck the fun out of keeping endless logs of listening notes after changing the direction of each and every fuse and cable one-by-one. |
Not sure? Most of my cables have been purchased used.My speaker cables are new have about 10 hours on them so will I hear a difference in 100 to 300 hours on them I highly doubt it. Speakers yes cables I have my doubts the initial listening session is more than likely how they sound.I may have to eat my words in the future with my speaker cables but I doubt it. |
@audacious The “difference” being discussed is the difference in how a fuse or cable sounds when it is turned around in the opposite direction. The premise being that all wire is directional and having the wire oriented in the proper direction is audibly superior. (Hint: I believe the first statement but not so much the second). My response to @tobor007 was not about the difference between different cables. |
Thing is Geoff, nobody HAS given you a Nobel prize. The "appeal to authority" is not MY authority but say, about a million lbs of EE and Physics texts back to Maxwell and Faraday and hundreds of universities, thousand of recording studios and all those players of Strads who laugh at your directional or burnt in wire. Yeah. Appeal to those authorities. |
I apologize to everyone for posting my tiny little experiment about reversed interconnects here but I thought it may not be that misplaced. Wire directionality has been polluting this thread, via geoffkait’s repeated posts insisting on it, for many days now. csmgolf, I agree with your view of my interconnect trial but a person has to start somewhere. Not to mention that any kind of blind testing is frowned upon so my experiment was as flawed as they get. Still, been there, done that, did not work, good if it works for someone else. For me, suspicion was sufficiently proven by a lousy experiment. |
glubson to self: gee that guy seems like he knows something. I think I’ll ride in on his coattails and scold geoffkait again and brag about my simple experiment (which by the way is discredited by the thousands of other experiments with the opposite result. How unlucky can one person be? Shall we call you gullible glubson? 🤔 |
So, many explain subjectively that they believe so. Can anyone offer an explanation as to why this would make any difference? i am trying to remain open-minded, but cannot see any explanation why this would make any difference. If if there is any difference, it seems to me adjusting to the character of the altered sound seems more likely. again, I just want to hear one fact-based argument for “burning-in” speaker cables. i see the reason for a car’s brakes - to heat treat the rotors evenly and burnish an set the pads, but I have never seen any explanation for speaker cables. |
Sorry geoffkait, millions have not heard that difference. You heard it, I did not. You are wrong, I am right. I have no interest in scolding you. By the way, I noticed you changed your repetitive statements about portable CD player system from "no speaker cable" to "no long speaker cable". I am glad you considered what I suggested. |
koan2, As prof said, do not let it keep you from dinner waiting for an answer. Forget about objective or measurement. That is not accepted. The inconvenient thing is that you are a nay-sayer or some worthless skeptic if you have doubts it works. Then you try it yourself, and, if the result is not "blacker blacks, a little violin player started dancing in the room" or some other poetry, you are no good and your result is worthless. In short, there is no way you can be right, if you just do not say "burn-in and other activities are Heaven's gift". By the way, if you have to look/listen too hard for something, it is probably not there. At least not to some meaningful extent. |
I think that gainainm is asking for hypothesis. Very inconvenient thing in all these discussions is that any kind of testing to support the view, one way or another, is not allowed. Those who ask for measurements get attacked for asking for such a ridiculous thing as measurements. Those who suggest blind tests get ridiculed for such a flawed thing as blind tests. It is puzzling at times, to say it softly. Only quasi-technical babbling seems to be allowed. |
ganainm Thing is Geoff, nobody HAS given you a Nobel prize. The "appeal to authority" is not MY authority but say, about a million lbs of EE and Physics texts back to Maxwell and Faraday and hundreds of universities, thousand of recording studios and all those players of Strads who laugh at your directional or burnt in wire. Yeah. Appeal to those authorities. >>>>Millions and millions? Who are you, Carl Sagan? That’s all just a big Strawman argument. You seem to excel at illogical arguments. Nobody said any EE or Physics texts explain why wires are directional or improve on break-in. Nor do they refute it. As I said no scientific laws have been broken in the process. No need for all the angst. So, in some ways audiophiles are actually smarter than all those millions of lbs of EE and Physics texts and those millions of EE and Physics PhDs who never heard of wire directionality or break in. Or if they have heard of they smugly dismiss it on grounds that it isn’t in their textbooks from school. Do you believe learning stops as soon as you get your diploma? 👨🎓 Let me ask you, you don’t really think science is complete, do you? Do you know everything? From what you say you’re objection seems to be that it “doesn’t sound right” to you. In other words you have no real technical argument in this particular area, correct? I mean other than name dropping. Nobody has given you the Nobel Prize, either. ”Knowledge can be defined as what remains after you subtract out all the things you forgot from school.” |
glupson ... Those who ask for measurements get attacked for asking for such a ridiculous thing as measurements. Those who suggest blind tests get ridiculed for such a flawed thing as blind tests. ...I don't see that happening here at all. What I do think is odd is that those who clamor for others to pursue measurements or blind testing seem so reluctant to undertake the work themselves. |
koan2 i see the reason for a car’s brakes - to heat treat the rotors evenly and burnish an set the pads, but I have never seen any explanation for speaker cables. >>>>We see that here a lot. They frequently say proudly, “I have found no evidence to support their claim.” 😛 Just because you see no reason for it doesn’t mean there isn’t one. There is no apparent reason why a super huge black hole 3 Million times the mass of our sun is in the middle of our galaxy, either. I thought all the world loves a mystery. Ah, sweet mystery of life! |
@glupson In short, there is no way you can be rightThat is sort of the problem with these threads, everyone wants to be "right", everyone believes they are "right", and everyone wants everyone else to acknowledge they are "right". Never gonna get there. Of course these threads would be a lot less fun if everyone simply stated their case objectively and moved on. |
i see the reason for a car’s brakes - to heat treat the rotors evenly and burnish an set the pads, but I have never seen any explanation for speaker cables.I think one of the reason is with real world objects such as car brakes, you can see it with your own eyes. With electrons and molecular structure, it's hard for people to see or understand how things work at that scale therefore one has to have some back ground in electrical engineering. Imagine a molecule and a billiard ball. The difference is the billiard ball is composed of many molecule, but the molecule moves and disturbed in just about the same way as a billiard ball. But most people probably can't visualize a molecule because visually you cannot see a molecule therefore it seems somewhat mysterious. The billiard ball and molecule are both governed by the same principle: F = ma. Once you could see how molecule, electrons and their behaviors are not that different from a billiard ball, then maybe you could understand the effect of break-in. |
I undestand very well science is incomplete and open to progression and change. But the physics of electron flow and signal transmission is extremely well established as to basic principals. These princilals are well measurable by incredibly sophisticated techniques. We also undertand the limits of the human ear. What IS open to much more understanding and theorizing is the human mind and its perceptions of speech and music. As well as its ability to form tribal alliances and belief systems. That is why I think it is probabilistically much more likely that tne explanations for perceptions we are discussing are found there. By many orders of magnitude. These are not perfect arguments, none are, but highly likely ones. Some good reading is by Jonathan Haight, Daniel Levetin, Leonid Perlovsky (who has some fascinating ideas on the "purpose" of music and how it might in turn influence perception). I am trying to advance the principals by which open minded people can parse challenging ideas with many parts, which does include some appeal to authority IF that authority is well grounded. Otherwise we are just living in our own heads. I have no interest in a pissing contest with GK, rather I am making a case for interested parties, like the OP, from the perspective of someone who has looked into many of the overlapping areas in some depth. BTW my personal starting point of thinking about the issues was that different wire would improve my audio listening experience. |
Addendum for Andy2. I respectfully suggest the billiard anology is incomplete for electron flow. Quantum principals come into play, the role of "electron drift" vs signal transmission makes for fascinating reading. For me, the bottom line is that for signal in vs signal out, in the wires we are discussing, the physics is well established and not altered by a few hundred hours of music olaying time. |
+1. @cleeds You said " What I do think is odd is that those who clamor for others to pursue measurements or blind testing seem so reluctant to undertake the work themselves." EXACTLY! If you are appealing to the importance of measurements then supply the data to prove your assertion. One more thing... Do the scientists and electrical engineers here truly believe that all happenings have measurements derived from scientific experiments that explain those happenings? Metaphysics baby....metaphysics. 🧐 |
Hifiman No, at least I, me, this EE, do not believe we have science derived explanations for many things in the universe, and especially in our heads. But for audio frequency signal transmission over several meters of cable, yes, I do. Don't forget that the military and big industry has had huge interest and investment in this exact topic for over 100 years. So they have looked hard at both hypothesis and practicality. |
I think in order to make a valid discussion, ones have to agree on some basic level which is our ears can identify differences in what we here. If you say that all differences are psychological then there is no point to further the discussion. Next, the argument that break-in is mostly psychological only works for the average buyer since he can only purchase a set of cable so he has to rely on his memory to tell the difference. This argument does not work for manufacturers since they have a lot of identical cables some old some brand new so they can listen to them side by side, therefore there is no need to rely on memory. So if they hear the difference then it's not psychological. Now if you say the manufacturers are flat out wrong or they just lie then I guess it's something all together difference. I can't find any reason why they have to lie. Break-in or not I don't see how that will benefit them. |
Not only is there no advantage to a manufacturer for lying about directionality or break in it doesn’t make sense at all to lie about it because directionality and break in are so controversial and would almost certainly be a turn off to a lot of folks, especially sensitive gullible newbies, and mean less business rather than more. Top high end cable manufactures like Audiopquest are *outspoken* on the subject of directionality, whereas other manufacturers might be “playing it safe” by not mentioning it, or don’t know, or dismiss it. The same logic applies to cryogenics, another hot button for naysayers. Most high end cable manufacturers routinely cryo their cables, whether they advertise it or not. They are smart enough to know that if they didn’t cryo their cables they wouldn’t be able to compete. |
