The molecular level explanation of "cable burn-in"
According to one cable seller
"The insulation (or dielectric) will absorb energy from the conductor when a current is flowing (i.e. when music is playing). This energy-absorption causes the dielectric's molecules to re-arrange themselves from a random order into a uniform order. When the molecules have been rearranged, the dielectric will absorb less energy & consequently cause less distortion."
So it’s the plastic polymer (as dielectric insulation) to undergo some sort of molecular rearrangements to minimize the distortion. Probably one of the greatest scientific discoveries ever!
“Many premium AC cords constrict or compress the audio transient as their characteristic impedance restricts the transient current.”
We all know impedance restricts current but how possibly “many” premium AC cords constrict/compress the audio transient (when not carrying audio signal)? Then again is it achieved by this molecular rearrangements of the cable insulation?
Unfortunately there are no measurement data or mathematical formulas to be found to back up this amazing scientific discovery. Simply “it happens”. So I came up with a formula for them.
They function because an electromagnetic field is formed around circuitry/a conductor, when a voltage potential is applied, whether an actual circuit is completed, or not.
"I actually want to learn more about the dielectric bias system*.
Review the first paragraphs, of my first post to this thread, for my understanding/postulations, on how *such might work (according to modern electrical theory).
As to whether the MPC wallwarts/system, such as attached to my Main amps' interconnects and power purifier's PC, would make a profound improvement to your listening experience/ears; you're welcome to stop over, if ever in the Indianapolis area.
They're among the easiest things to A/B test on the planet.
Of course I know exactly how it works and I do have one. I got my master degree in EE from one of the best engineering colleges in the nation. Your description is not quite right. Electric and magnetic fields are present around any electrical circuit.Also an electromagnetic field can be formed when charged particles are accelerated. We don't use any "electrical theory" in modern electrical engineering. From their website "by keeping a constant electrostatic field on an insulation material... the molecules of the material are polarized reducing the misbehavior ...the insulation can't absorb new energy" Seriously rodman99999 none of the above makes sense a good example of pseudo-science. Of course if i ever visit Indianapolis... i will be honored.
If the wire is live there will be an electric field around it. That’s all that is needed, plus being held by the person checking for AC voltage. The person, being the ground completing a capacitive circuit.
The insulation covering a wire does not stop an electric field from passing through the outer wall of it. Nor will it stop an EM field from passing through the outer wall of it. A 100% shield around the live insulated conductor will.
I would rather use "electric potential' than "voltage potential".
Certainly understandable.
My own nomenclature choices* are rather based on how our Prof expressed himself (regarding atomic charges), followed by decades of checking for, "electrical potential" differences, IN Volts, with voltmeters/oscilloscopes, between neutrals and grounds, over so many decades.
"none of the above makes sense a good example of pseudo-science"
Interesting that you seem to appreciate Tesla, his innovations and inventions, and yet: fail to recognize that virtually everything he did was based on the theories I've mentioned prior, in this thread and elsewhere on this site (ie: Field Theory, Wave Function, etc).
"pseudo-science" ??
Another rewind, based on some general observations and that should shed further light on the subject of modern (post 1800's) science/Electrical Theory and how we've benefitted from what you choose to call, "pseudo-science".
Cargo cults are religious practices that have appeared in many traditional tribal societies in the wake of interaction with technologically advanced cultures.
Do a bit of research and you'll learn those primitives were limited in their understanding of what they saw with their eyes, based on their prior experience, education and BIASES.
A rewind:
It isn't that the Denyin'tologists are ignorant.
It's they're knowing* so much, that's WRONG.
*heart of the Dunning-Kruger Effect
OR, two:
The Church of the Naysayer Doctrine (like every other faith-based, religious cult) has as many dopes as it does Popes.
Bring up anything resembling SCIENCE/PHYSICS, dated later than the 1800’s and they become apoplectic, not having the formal education to comprehend the concepts, or- possible ramifications. THAT would be hilarious, were it not so pathetic!
Gimme That Old Time Religion, Gimme That Old Time Religion, etc.
At the very first mention of something as simple as Wave Function (a BASIC tenet of Quantum Mechanics), the Cargo Cult will label you a KOOK.
But remember: they can only view/understand you, based on their limited experience, education and BIASES.
They have overlooked the fact that, if not for the hypotheses/theories and experimentation, regarding Quantum Mechanics: a plethora of modern conveniences, medical devices and the gear they so love, would not exist.
Had scientists, chemists and inventors shared the doctrines of the Cargo Cult (Denyin'tologists), there would be no semiconductors, computer chips, LASERs, or Magnetic Resonance Imaging devices (MRIs).
Solid State amps?
OOPS (back to tubes)!
Your Smart Phone?
FA'GET ABOUT IT!
Your car's GPS?
NOPE!
Then too: some may be willfully ignorant and just enjoy being contentious.
Others: obtuse, uneducated*, misinformed?
*Typically, from what's been exhibited here: H.S. STEM, if that, would be a safe inference.
Either way: the result, when the Cult begins its rhetoric, is a classic demo of the Dunning- Kruger Effect.
But, I digress:
Bring up those pesky details, regarding the likes of QED, Dielectric Absorption, Poynting's theorem and possible application/effects, relative to frequency, that our musical signals are carried via photon or wave, outside the conductor and you're a KOOK?
Again: the Cargo Cult can only understand anyone with an actual background, experience and education in Physics/QED, based on their beliefs, education, experience and biases
Remember this?.
One anecdote that some may find interesting: their walks in the woods and how Feynman's father would encourage him to look beyond the fact that something in nature exists, but into why and how.
It saddened him that while attending college, during a visit home and one of their walks: his dad asked what he was learning in college.
At that moment, he realized: if he tried to explain what he was learning, there was no way his dad could understand.
Einstein got that last one wrong (Quantum Entanglement), BUT- I still wish he'd been alive, when the Hubble Telescope proved, what he considered his, "greatest blunder" (his inability to bring symmetry to his field equation, without lambda.
So when the first cable was laid under the Atlantic and people tried to make a transcontinental telephone call, the sound came out skewed in time, noisy and garbled. They checked the cable along the ocean floor and it was in perfect condition and insulated.
They consulted the best physicists out there, including one guy in England (forget his name) who was a student of Maxwell. He proposed that the cable insulation material, not the conductor, was the problem, which turned out to be true. The dielectric was distorting the sound. its the same reason high tension power lines have an air gap between them and the earth.
Most burn-in has to do with the changes that take place between the outer layers of the conductor and the dielectric, changing the speed which result in phase interferences that we hear as noise or resonance. this has been clear to real physicists since the first telephone cable... also, I saw CalTech guys talking about it on YouTube..they know, and have to know when doing ultra high end EE like semi-conductor stuff. There was even someone who talked about their elementary school class where they ran DC current into crystals and observed the changes that occurred over time, something like that.
for the enlightened anecdote about Maxwell and cables...
It is why i proposed the simple experiment above which is way more instructive than raging discussion about electro-magnetic concepts theory ( quantum or not ) for most people😁 :
You put quartz on the connectors : Decompression of sound among other impressions ...
You put shungite on the connectors : it produce more a compressive impression ...
You put the two and the effect can be generally positive and more balanced...
But the effect will be perceived slightly differently function of each system synergy and each cable specs...
i believe in my experiments it is how i learned what i learned not by buying a hundred of gear upgrades...
And i am not an electrical engineer , only someone who spoke with someone who spoke with someone who spoke with someone who spoke with Prof. Feynman... 😉
Interesting story :
So when the first cable was laid under the Atlantic and people tried to make a transcontinental telephone call, the sound came out skewed in time, noisy and garbled. They checked the cable along the ocean floor and it was in perfect condition and insulated.
They consulted the best physicists out there, including one guy in England (forget his name) who was a student of Maxwell. He proposed that the cable insulation material, not the conductor, was the problem, which turned out to be true. The dielectric was distorting the sound. its the same reason high tension power lines have an air gap between them and the earth.
Most burn-in has to do with the changes that take place between the outer layers of the conductor and the dielectric, changing the speed which result in phase interferences that we hear as noise or resonance. this has been clear to real physicists since the first telephone cable... also, I saw CalTech guys talking about it on YouTube..they know, and have to know when doing ultra high end EE like semi-conductor stuff. There was even someone who talked about their elementary school class where they ran DC current into crystals and observed the changes that occurred over time, something like that.
So when the first cable was laid under the Atlantic and people tried to make a transcontinental telephone call, the sound came out skewed in time, noisy and garbled.
This is fiction. For one thing, the first transatlantic cables preceded telephony and were used only for telegraph.
... they consulted the best physicists out there, including one guy in England (forget his name) who was a student of Maxwell. He proposed that the cable insulation material, not the conductor, was the problem, which turned out to be true. The dielectric was distorting the sound ...
Again, fiction. Telegraphs work with dots and dashes, so I’m not sure how you think the sound was "distorted." The insulator did fail but there was nothing exotic about the failure - the material simply couldn’t withstand the environment and it decayed.
The first transatlantic telephone cables were installed in the 1950s and worked reliably well into the 1970s.
The first official transatlantic phone call took place 94 years ago, on January 7, 1927. The call was held between the President of America's AT&T company, Walter S. Gifford, and the head of the British General Post Office, Sir Evelyn P. Murray. The call was not transmitted by wire, but by radio waves.
What we’ve been discussing is molecular explanation of cable burn in.
... which has absolutely nothing to do with the first transatlantic telephone cables, notwithstanding the claims made by clustrocasual. So now we can move on.
It may have been the telegraph. regardless, theres a whole documentary on it that discusses the huge research that went into cables at the time when they designed the transatlantic one, including the papers written by the scientists (the Maxwell guys) trying to solve the distorted signal, photos from meetings they had, and how they discovered it was the material choice used for the insulation and not the conductor that caused the problem. The documentary dovetails into interviewing modern power grid engineers discussing how crucial the cable sheathing is and how they go about choosing it depending on applications for proper transmission. But im sure thats all snake oil because random people on the internet can’t hear a difference in their cables.
It may have been the telegraph. regardless, theres a whole documentary on it that discusses the huge research that went into cables ...
You seem to be very confused about transatlantic cables. Perhaps you should watch your documentary again.
... when the first cable was laid under the Atlantic and people tried to make a transcontinental telephone call, the sound came out skewed in time, noisy and garbled. They checked the cable along the ocean floor and it was in perfect condition and insulated.
That’s not even remotely true. Why are you trying to revise history?
Did you get paid to write the story or what's the purpose? Bizarre... it seems you're desperate to prove 'cable burn-in' is real what for? What really grabbed my attention was " I saw CalTech guys talking about it on YouTube" I tried to find the youtube video but couldn't. Could you please share the video with me with us? Or you just wanted to destroy her reputation? I thought this school motto was corny I never paid attention until now "The truth shall make you free"
I keep getting this question about me being negative and not contributing. Being truthful as an electrical engineer is how I contribute to this forum.
audphile1
"What we’ve been discussing is molecular explanation of cable burn in"
So cable burn-in not only induces molecular rearrangements of dielectric molecules but triggers molecular expansion to absorb less energy. Do you even know the transition temperature for plastic dielectric macromolecules to get transformed into rearrangements and expansion? Cables will burn out! Just more pseudo science nonsense because you don't really know.
it is clear to me not by scientific dogmatic faith or by proven scientific controlled experiments, not even by the cables marketters, but by simple experiment anybody can replicate that some minerals near the end of any connectors affect the sound quality perception ...
i even designed my own protective and filtering devices ....Homemade.... I proposed a simple experiment above and nobody dare to try it by blind faith or deaf indifference ... 😊
Since the many years i came in audio threads i read discussion without ends where all kind of scientists, real one or pseudo one with all variation of experiences , technicians , cables designers , amateurs of cables etc war against one another...
i am not qualified at all to separate the one who knows from those who dont and all in between in electro- magnetism facts ...
But being a grown up i devised the above experiment with shungite and quartz , after few years of others experiments to design my own "tweaks" homemade ...
it taught me that there is something about the audible effects of some minerals near any piece of gear cables or not ...
i even described the effect...
i can even put science litterature article confirming my above statement about sound qualities associated with shungite and quartz , their differences etc ...
it is better to experiment than to quarrel about the greatest electro-magnetic "balls"...
i will lost the contest anyway being a "poet" and a philosopher not a physicist ... 😊
«I always see Poynting vectors in my shower»--Groucho Marx🤓
You think the full history of the world is summarized on a Wikipedia page?? Thats hilarious..talk about gullible!
Not going to bother talking here anymore, tried to have a light conversation and people run around with pitchforks, looking for every typo or slip up to discredit you as if this were a courtroom instead of hobbyists sharing with each other. I'm not here to prove anything, just share interesting things I've come across. What joke.
I guess if you think the whole world is out to get you, you take on this attitude in life. I don't and hopefully won't ever be like that.
Let’s hear from cable manufacturers about "cable burn-in". National Wire and Cable Corporation is one of the few good cable manufacturers in America actually do wire drawing/annealing/stranding/extrusion etc.. All the major brands (cable resellers) buy bulk cables from these manufacturers (or from china) and do cutting/terminating/seasoning with snake oil (extra jackets and all pseudo science magic lamps dielectric bias art console network or other passive RF filters (???) and stabilizers etc..)/packaging them to sell. Ask the actual manufacturers for their opinion on cable burn-in. They will give you an honest and direct answer to the question. "No there is no such thing as cable burn in." And ask about those magic oil lamps.
All my coworkers told me to stop wasting my weekends on this forum. And the weather gets better recently in the bay area.
Back in the 70s I was charged with manufacturing and calibration of microvolemtric lab equipment to the 6th place (microgram by mass). We decided to mold the bodies of these handheld piupetters and dilutors out of PFVD, a remarkably nice, hard, moldable and machinable fluorocarbon with full chemical (except fluorines) inertness. After being in the market across hundreds of labs internationally we found that a percentage of the bodies developed a small but VERY conspicuous crack that, although innocuous, was not acceptable. We found that indeed the PVDF, like its softer cousins, cold-flowed across time. In that sense one could imagine the "rearrangement" of molecules mentioned and derided above. We found that we could accelerate the proicess by simply applying heat and pressure for a few minutes (as in a clinical lab/dentist's autoclave), wherein the PVDF then quickly reset due to the thermal shock...and then remained completely stable for many years (as far as could be ascertained). Is this cold-flow "curing" part of the so-called burn-in (npi) audio process. I doubt it. But still...?
The other aspect I wish to mention is the possibility that break-in is associated with the build-up of statis micro-voltages when handling cables in dry winter rooms. These charges have to quench to ground. My latest experience with my (ArgentPur) cables is that speaker cables may require 0-100hrs burn to fully "open up", whereas folks are saying that ICs do not. This leads me to question whether the delta is correlated with mass or length (spkr cables are bigger/longer), or usually on a static-charged rug!
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.
