Beware of the cable claiming long burn in period.

I once owned a California Audio Labs Delta CD transport, with both their Sigma and Alpha DACs. Given they were to sit side by side(Delta/DAC) I thought a .5M Kimber Orchid would be a good AES/EBU to try. Couldn’t listen to it, regardless of time in service, or which DAC I tried. Then I remembered something about, "reflections" and, ’jitter", resulting from too short a digital cable length. Purchased a 1.5M Orchid and everything was wonderful(but- still got better, with time). Regarding burn-in time for cables: I’ve always held(yeah: my opinion) that part of it was attributable to the fact that cables are capacitors(actually, an LC circuit, to a degree) and their dielectric’s dipoles need time to align themselves, with relation to whatever voltages/signals they’re going to be dealing, before they sound their best. The better the dielectric(ie: Teflon, Polypropylene, etc) the lower the dielectric absorption, but- the longer the process takes. I suppose, moving cables around, might scramble one’s dipoles, as well. Perhaps that’s why some mention having to re-burn-in their cables, after handling. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dielectric_absorption

@shkong-  What length is that Blackcat?

@prof - "Maybe you can tell me what is happening inside during the 300 hours?" Here’s one possibility, for you to ignore, again: Regarding burn-in time for cables: I’ve always held(yeah: my opinion) that part of it was attributable to the fact that cables are capacitors(actually, an LC circuit, to a degree) and their dielectric’s dipoles need time to align themselves, with relation to whatever voltages/signals they’re going to be dealing, before they sound their best. The better the dielectric(ie: Teflon, Polypropylene, etc) the lower the dielectric absorption, but- the longer the process takes. I suppose, moving cables around, might scramble one’s dipoles, as well. Perhaps that’s why some mention having to re-burn-in their cables, after handling. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dielectric_absorption Perhaps you can tell me, WHY that can’t be a cause(or, "plausible"), SCIENTIFICALLY?

Regarding digital cables and length:  http://www.audiopolitan.com/blog/spdif-does-coaxial-digital-cable-length-matter/

@prof-    1) That cable burn-in occurs, has been established by the manufacturers, as well as those multitudes, that have provided their empirical evidence. The, "dispute" is in your mind(et al). 2) The Scientific Process allows for/depends on empirical evidence, whether that matters to you, or not: https://www.livescience.com/21456-empirical-evidence-a-definition.html 3)  I asked, "Perhaps you can tell me, WHY that can’t be a cause(or, "plausible"), SCIENTIFICALLY?"    You could have just said, you have no valid, SCIENTIFIC reason to doubt the plausibility of my conjecture regarding Dielectric Absorption, only your biases. But, who would expect that?

@prof- "I wouldn’t say that, because I’m not as confused as you are about this conversation." I’m not the least bit, "confused". YOU FIRST ASKED(of another), " What do you think is happening within the cable over those 300 hours that would alter the sound? " I provided a possibility, then asked, "Perhaps you can tell me, WHY that can’t be a cause(or, "plausible"), SCIENTIFICALLY?"
That you, "...quite carefully did not claim your conjecture was wrong or implausible." is what I pointed out. The rest is(of course) subjective, rhetorical and a waste of keystrokes. Yet, regarding the empirical evidence, if you haven’t found any on your own, you haven’t been looking(imagine that). As for my own biases, they’re based on over forty years of making a living, with my ears, Science and Electronics. Yeah, and I’m one of those, "ear truster" types, MAINLY!

@prof- AGAIN: Your initial question, to aniwolfe, " What do you think is happening within the cable over those 300 hours THAT WOULD ALTER THE SOUND?" That question presupposes that THE SOUND MIGHT BE ALTERED. Why would I have to establish whether it WAS or NOT? HELLO(is anybody in there)? That Dielectric Absorption and the attendant oriented polarization of dipoles are a reality, has been categorically established. Let me rephrase my question: Perhaps you can tell me, WHY that can’t be a cause(or, "plausible"), of a POSSIBLE SOUND ALTERATION in a cable, SCIENTIFICALLY(without your obfuscation)? One glaring bit of evidence, when judging whether another is, "dogmatic", is the refusal to even admit possibilities, when in disagreement with their dogma, regardless of how apposite those possibilities might be.

@prof- "It seems to have gone unnoticed by you that even from my first post I admitted the possibility that the OP was hearing something objectively changing in the cables. And I admitted your conjecture was interesting, and did not claim it to be wrong." OK! "Yet I haven’t seen YOU concede anything I’ve said as being possible - e.g. that it could also be due to perpetual bias etc." Conceded! Anything’s possible, regarding opinions/perceptions, given the spectrum of humanity this issue covers!

@michaelgreenaudio -  +1(per paragraph)