So I purchased a pair of Morrow Audio phono cables. These are the PH3 with the Eichmann connectors. Wanted to start there to see if MA cables will be a viable option for my system.I think my story is not so unique to others who have purchased MA cables. So no need to go into the hu hum of burn-in in regards to MA cables, and how things sound bad at first, then gets better, then excellent...yada yada yada. I know the story about this product. I simply am one who is not a believer in electronics break in periods, or battery packs on cables, etc... Regardless of what side of the fence you are on in regards to that Im NOT trying to start that debate again please.. Anyway. After reading several reviews of the MA cables and understanding that most agreed that the cables needed a substantial burn-in time, and that the cables would not sound its best until this happens I decided to give them a try. Thinking ok lets get a jump on the burn-in period (if the concept is true). I paid for the 2 day burn-in service from MA. What I didn't expect is that when I got the cable it would sound as bad as it did in comparison to my existing name brand cable (not getting into that either, not relevant). I thought well the cable might not quite be up to snuff with all this talk about burn-in (if its true) but not that much of a difference. I mean as soon as I dropped the needle on the record I immediately heard a profound difference in sound stage and clarity degridation. Needless to say this cable was destined to be returned to MA for a full refund and my thinking was "they are crazy if I am going to trade my cable for this cable" So I decided to give MA a call to setup the return. Talked with Mike Morrow (very nice guy by the way) and we had our differences in what I should expect out of his product. Now my Mother always told me that I have a hard head.. I heard that growing up all my life, and when you couple that with skepticism it makes a pretty, well lets just say not a very fun person to have a debate with lol. However Mike insisted that if I return the cable that I would be missing out on the fruit they would bare after 400 hours of break in. 400 hours??? really!. Oh at that point I was really ready to return them. I told all my friends "Mike must be nuts" (no offense Mike) no way am I going to wait a year to hear what this cable is capable of, AND I do not have any way to expedite the process...at least I thought I didn't until I found an old sound bar I don't use anymore with analog inputs. Ok I know you pro MA and pro cable burn-in folks are chomping at the bit. Im almost done. Take your hands off the keyboard for just a few more lines.
So here is the deal to be fair I am going to be open minded about this because Mike really made me feel like I would be missing out if I return the cable without a proper burn-in (great salesman), and since he had such conviction I now think I have to test this thing out right??. Now I know that there are testimonials out there about how the MA cable improved over 100s of hours in their system, and that they are now "blown away". However can you really hear a profound difference in a cable you play in your system over 170 hours or so? I would think a gradual difference would be harder to detect. I mean my system seems to sound better to me everyday without making any changes. Is it because of continued cable and electronics burn in?? maybe. Or maybe its just my brain becoming more intimate with the sound of my system. Well this test I'm doing should reveal a night and day difference from what the system sounds like today with the cable pre burn-in if there is any merit to the notion. In regards to does it sound better than my existing cable that is yet to be determined. I think my goal now is to prove or dis-prove if cable burn-in is a real thing. This whole idea has evolved from if it's an improvement or not over what I use today. We can discuss that later.
I now have the cable connected between a cd player , and a sound bar with a CD playing on repeat. The disc of choice for this burn-in is rather dynamic so it should be a good test. At the end of 16 days (384 hours) I will move the cables to my reference system and do about another 20 hours of additional burn-in to compensate for moving the cable. This will put a total of 452 hours of burn-in on the PH3. When I put this cable back in my system I sure hope it sings because this is a lot to go through to add a cable to your system. Mike if you are right I will eat crow and will preach from the highest mountain top that you are right, and that cable burn-in is REAL. For me anyway the myth will be considered busted or reinforce my belief that cable burn-in is a bunch of BS.
For those who will argue the point of cable burn-in I fully understand the concept, and I don't plan to get sucked down that rat hole and I won't argue that....yet because at the end of this test I may be in your camp and I don't want to have a steady diet of crow so for now I will remain neutral on the subject until the test is complete. However I will be totally transparent and honest about the results. So not trying to make anyone angry as I know beliefs about audio are sensitive subjects, and rightfully so this hobby is expensive and I like you have a substancial investment in this. Just trying to get to the truth. I also understand that cable burn-in may actually happen when you consider it from a scientific perspective, but the real question is can you actually hear the difference.
I will report back to this thread in 17 days from today (need at least one day to evaluate) with the results.
Wow. Now that is a process and I thought I was meticulous before I play a record. I always just figured since there is no physical contact happening with the laser that it would not be as sensitive to small amounts of dust. My CDs dont look dirty to the eye so I just live and let live. Dont play CDs that much.. Never have but I do have a collection. Now your making me think I need to at least wipe them off lol.
The reason the ring has to be green is because green is the complementary color of red, which means red + green = black
Baloney! Red + Green = Yellow A green filter of sufficiently steep slope blocks red. The 'filter' characteristics of Green Sharpie are indeterminate and could be 100% transparent to NIR. Any emission not perpendicular to the disk edge would have some percentage reflected back into the disk. However, the laser is focused and the receptor acceptance angle limited, so any improvement from the green edge is on the negative side of ZERO. Just one more of Mr Kait's nonsensical Machina Dynamica scams.
ieales, you’re probably thinking of mixing paints, like red + green = brown. Be that as it may I’m referring to light. Green is red’s complement. Nice try, anyway. And thanks for mentioning my company’s name.
No offense to anyone but the color black on the outer edge hurts the sound. Some folks have even painted the entire label side black for all the CDs in their big collection. Big mistake. However, black and only black should be used for the inner edge. For the student, what color should be used for Blu Ray? This is getting a little edgy. 😛
I was an investor with a company that made cd rings ( does not matter the company or particular product ). I lost some money. I am a believer in green markers on the inner and outer edges of cds and dvds ( dvds were not available at that time ). The engineering team behind the production of these rings claimed 2 specific reasons for the benefits and enhancements heard ( yes I heard them ). Based on memory : ( 1 ) The light of the laser was contained within the boundaries of the cd. Greater intensity of the light created a better " read " of the zeros and ones, eliminating the need for interpolation ( read up on it ). The green markers do the same. And yes, green sounds the best, ime. ( 2 ) The outer edge of the cd was prone to vibration, and the application of this ring minimized this vibration. Again, to maintain a better " read " of the zeros and ones ( the information ). Many after market devices were developed to minimize these vibrations, and the transports from various companies became popular for the same reasons ( Pioneer’s stable platter, and the majority of top loaders with their weights and pucks ). Transports are " significant " in their ability to get the information off the silver disc, and, ime, as significant ( or even greater ) than the outboard D/A converters used after them. Just some information to those who might be interested. Enjoy ! MrD.
Ha. I just ran across a YouTube video where Paul from PS Audio is talking about this very topic. He believes it works but did not know why, or why the color Green was needed.
So why doesn't MoFi, etc produce a CD with the green, black or whatever colors at the right places?
Would the same benefits (using the colors) happen if putting the CD in a computer drive for ripping? Thus, one would only have to mark it once then just replay the "burned" file.
That appears to be Paul’s trademark comment for a lot of controversial tweaks, “I don’t have any idea how it works but works it does.” Guess that’s a pretty safe answer. 😬
elizabeth6,088 posts12-29-2018 4:25pmI would never apply anything to the inner edge. The transport holds the CD via the inner edge... and I do not want to get it gunked up with stuff from the CD. Green, black, on the outer edge... no problem to my ears. (My guess is the real 'problem' is the black marker costs a buck, the official green marker $30. Audiophile approved. LOL)
>>>>I hate to judge too hastily but it looks like you’re in the hard-headed camp.
As to finally putting the ac cable issue to rest, whatever result you get will not lay it to rest. My “negative” results for detecting sonic differences do not settle that AC cables can’t alter the sound in either my or other peoples systems. All I can say is that I failed to find support for the hypothesis that they change the sound (or that the particular ones I tried did not do so).
And if asked I detail the method of evaluation for inspection. Someone else should be wary of just accepting my results - I could be fibbing, or exaggerating, or I could have honestly screwed up somewhere in the method. That’s why replicable results by other parties have a place in empirical research. The same would go for your results.
After condicting tests it’s up to me to situate my experience in the bigger picture so far as I’ve investigated it: for me this fits best with the fishy style of claims made by after market cable sellers, with the fact I’ve seen many with accredited knowledge of electronics convincingly debunk the technical claims, and with the fact that in decades of looking in to the controversies I have not once seen a credible report of someone detecting a difference in controlled conditions - and have seen failure to do so in controlled conditions. I’ve seen a couple times before someone on the net claims to have discerned ac cable differences in blind tests, only to find out after extended questioning that they were exaggerating or naive about how to do blind tests.
One person I believe back in this thread claimed to have easily passed blind tests for AC cables numerous times. As he would be a complete anomaly in doing so, I’d want much more detail and documentation that he did so than just his say-so.
If your results - truly blinded - suggest you hear a difference then it’s reasonable for YOU to use that as a data point in favour of aftermarket AC cables, and it’s up to others as to how strong your case is in terms of adding evidence for audible differences.
Let me re-phrase. it will put it to rest for me for the moment at least. I realize that this is just the tip of the iceberg in regards to this topic. I am trying to keep in mind the objective. So for "if burn in actually improves a cables performance" I think my result will solidify my opinion personally. Now in regards to the other questions that surround the issue Im sure that will remain debatable forever. But for me I will stand firm on one side or the other. Im trying not to allow my bias from the first test I did interfere which is why I agreed to do the bind test to just see how accurate/inaccurate I was initially.
"And if asked I detail the method of evaluation for inspection. Someone else should be wary of just accepting my results - I could be fibbing, or exaggerating, or I could have honestly screwed up somewhere in the method. That’s why replicable results by other parties have a place in empirical research. The same would go for your results."
you are 100% correct. People don't know me from Adams house cat.. lol so asking people to trust that im being honest is a stretch to say the least. First and foremost Im really doing this for "me" however if it sheds any light at all on the subject for those who are on the fence at least its one more thing that they can refer to and consider. Maybe others will perform the same types of test such as yourself and then we can start to build a concensus on some of these highly debated subjects. Now its up to you to trust in the fact that I did the test honestly (which I am) but I know trust is hard to come by :) I get it and I would not be insulted at all if someone called BS.. I tried to set my expectations that would happen before I started this post. I realize how strongly some feel about these things.
In my experience, what DOES make a difference is the balance of the disc. I had several discs modified by the Audio Desk Systeme device and listened before and after. In each case, much to my skepticism and surprise, the sound was smoother with more bass and dynamic punch. Rotational balance puts less strain on the transport so less error corrective action is needed. Makes sense.
"Obviously, it's the quality of those zeros and ones that make all the difference."
yep your right. I can only do what I can with what I have. That will be good enough for me. Hey man im not trying to get the Nobel peace prize here :) . Plus I can't start over and un-burn in the cable to re-do the experiment. Maybe the next new cable I get I will do a re-do. I wish all these suggestions would have come earlier on. Steve I know you don't hold much faith in the tape recording but I thought it was very revealing.
stevecham3,040 posts12-30-2018 1:34pmIn my experience, what DOES make a difference is the balance of the disc. I had several discs modified by the Audio Desk Systeme device and listened before and after. In each case, much to my skepticism and surprise, the sound was smoother with more bass and dynamic punch. Rotational balance puts less strain on the transport so less error corrective action is needed. Makes sense.
>>>>>Eggs ackley! 🐣 Thass what I been saying. It means the whole system is prone to error. Hel-loo! The Audio Deske System also cut the outer edge of the CD at some acute angle, which IIRC was intended to reduce errors due to background scattered laser light getting into the photodetector. Unfortunately, the Audio Deske System came with a black marker for the CD outer edge, which we now know should have been green. 😢
One thing I’ve observed about Lizzie over the years is for just about any subject you can think of whatever she suggests or claims the best course of action is usually to do the opposite. I’m only joking, of course. Seasons greetings! 🥰
As far as the Morrow’s are concerned, it doesn’t matter if the burn in process made an improvement or not. The op was not satisfied how the cables sounded in his system. You can look at all the threads on Morrow or any other maker and you have some who love them, some who hate. My problem with the Morrows is the tedious burn in process as an excuse. So no matter what perceived problem you have with the sound, Morrow can point to something that was not 100% to their burn in method. Sorry....snake oil used car salesman practice. Just my 2 cents.
Say, didn’t Morrow just overhaul his cables? Are these the new revised Morrows? I think Morrow should be congratulated for being up front about cable burn in. They all require burn in. It takes a tough man to make a tender chicken.
LMBOFFF... dude where do you get some of these sayings?? lol
"I think Morrow should be congratulated for being up front about cable burn in"
I agree that they are up front about what to expect, but I also agree with Aberyclark to the extent that you can't win in this situation in the event you don't like them. They will always have a reason. Lets just be thankful that companies allow you to return the product. It could very well be once you use them your stuck with them. So at least they can be returned with 100% of your money back.
Sounding better or worse is going to be relative to what you had before right, and if you can tell the difference. All cable manufactures state that their cables needs time to break in so lets not put Morrow on an island. This would be true with any cable you buy. I don't think Morrow is doing anything any different than anyone else other than being very very matter of fact about making sure you understand the break in process is required. Furthermore Morrow is a small company and I do like the fact that you can call and talk to the owner. When you buy cables from larger manufactures you are not talking to anyone at that company, your at the mercy of the retailer and we all know that is no even playing field. I am overall satisfied with the service I received however I wish they would publish the entire instruction guide that comes with the cable on their website. There are some things in that document that would have saved me some money e.g. They state the cables SQ will degrade after 50 hours of use.. well had I known that I would not have purchased the 48 hour burn in service lol.. So don't half way tell the story if your going to be transparent about the process be transparent. At least I would have had an idea of what to expect other than a crappy sounding cable when I got it. Just saying.
Morrow, from their beginning, was always into burn in. Geoff, yes. After several years, he and his team, this summer, introduced " dramatic and improved " changes in his cable design. Read about it. Once on his website, click the box " About Technology ". Then click " Latest Improvements ". Now read " New vs. Old Design ". Everything has changed, except they have always used the individual stranded wire design. But this element of the design has drastically changed as well. After I read about all of the changes, it made me wonder if the original design had any " rightness " to it, or, were they wrong this whole time, as I do have half a dozen pr. of Morrows, which do sound good, but not the best I have. Enjoy ! MrD.
First up is the A/B on the recording I made to compare pre/post burn in of the MA cable to itself. Going to do this a little different this time.
1. Everyone will listen to the recording. Simply want to get a feel for if anyone can hear a sonic difference between the two. Does it sound better overall? How is the soundstage effected, sheer amplitude, dynamic range.
2. I am going to leave the room and have my friend position the tape on any half he wants, listen, then I will lave the room again and have hime position the tape to the other half listen, and see if I, and the remaining participants can tell which part of the recording they like the best. We will then change so the person working the recording can have a turn. We will do this 6 times and record our findings on paper. Obviously this will take some time so bare with me.
The next test will be to compare my existing cable to the MA cable to see how close they sound. This will also be a blind test.
I think I will post the results of each test separately then give a quick summary after everything has been listed to otherwise this will read like a novel in one post.
Barnettk, I cannot believe you have been " pulled in ". You already observed the break in process. Or, were you imagining it the whole time. Enjoy ! MrD.
I’m sure I missed some previous details. What “recording?” It sounds like you used a cassette deck to record a music signal from....a DAC? Turntable?
So your friend is going to choose which side of the cassette to play?
You can blind test for preference but best when there is question of audibility at all is to test for that. The ABX sequence is best (where you know the identity of A and B as you listen, then next you have to identity if X is A or B). Lacking that you can just try to identify the cables “This is A or B cable.”
10 trials are the usual minimum for any statistical confidence.
Ideally you should minimize communication between you and the switcher. Possible facial expressions can even be clues.
Anyway sounds fun!
If I can swing it I may blind test some more cables soon.
"You already observed the break in process. Or, were you imagining it the whole time. "
Ha. No I was not imaging it, and yes they got me :)
I am basically doing a more thorough listening test. "Prof" made some pretty compelling points that possibly I couldn't actually hear the difference due to the fact that my test was not a blind test so I decided to do that so I would not have any doubt about what in my mind at least that I am hearing the difference. Its a fair question so why not. However for the next person that challenges it....well I will just have to live with the doubt lol.
@prof "Im sure I missed some previous details. What “recording?” It sounds like you used a cassette deck to record a music signal from....a DAC? Turntable?"
yea so to do an A/B comparison between the pre burned in cable and the post burn in cable I made a recording of a song I am very failure with to my reel to reel. The phono stage was connected directly to the deck as to bypass the pre-amp.
After the burn in I rewound the tape to the middle of the song, then dropped the stylus on the same record at about the same place in the song as the recording. This way I could splice in the performance of the cable post burn in. Playing the recording back there was no lapse of time between samples so if there is any difference in the recording I figured I could hear the difference. Doing this I was able to absolutely determine that the cable did indeed improve after burn in.
After that I continued to listen to several other records that I am very intimate with and the cable was a lot better, but still not besting the cable I had previously. So that is what led us to today. results of the first test (tape test) following this post.
Ah, the relentless pursuit by the blind test fanatics. No matter what happens, or how thorough, there’s always the next move. “You didn’t do the test properly,” “There were not enough trials,” or whatever. It never stops. Been there done that. Hey, no offense. I was pursued by the most relentless, ruthless blind tester of them all. He was like a Gila monster! Prof is a teddy bear by comparison.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
