Do speaker cables need a burn in? Yes. If you have a good auditory memory and have listened to a song thousands of times then one can easily tell a difference. The sound is rather thin with a somewhat narrow soundstage and some shrillness present. Next question. Time to rest this post.
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?
1,103 responses Add your response
| Post removed |
In the famous HiFi Tuning measurements of electrical characteristics of fuses of many brands including stock fuses, the lower resistance direction was always consistent with the direction that sounded the best, both for DC circuits and AC circuits. But as noted on the HiFi Tuning data sheets, the rather small differences measured did not account for the relatively significant differences heard in listening tests of “directionality.” And as fate would have it that’s how directionality can be controlled, by controlling the manufacturing process starting with the wire as it comes off the final die. I.e., it’s predictable. Hel-loo! |
I disagree. It’s the right question because electricity is not mumbo jumbo and there must be a physical characteristic that accounts for it. By avoiding the question and calling it wrong (there are no wrong questions, only wrong answers!) you admit there is no such thing as directionality. What do you mean by resistance in one direction is different from the other? Do you mean a reproducible difference in resistance as measured but is within the noise parameters of an Ohmeter? Because if we’re talking thousanths of an Ohm, that’s noise. For single crystal wire, there are very few breaks in the structure along the length of cable that would significantly contribute to DC based resistance, if it does exist at all. For AC, directionality goes both ways. In my research, I can’t seem to find any evidence for directional resistance effects. In microphotographs, is one able to tell the direction the wire was pulled? I’m asking these questions because it’s about time we get to the bottom of things and stop the handwaving and deception. |
That’s the wrong question. The correct question is, why is directionality so audible when the difference in resistance is so small one direction vs the other? I don’t think anyone really knows. Physically, in microscope photos, there does appear to be non symmetrical distortion of the wire crystal structure caused by being pulled through the die. |
Every component in the ac- or signal path will need moore or less of a burn/break-in. some components in the signal-path like condencers might need a long period, while a powercable gets it`s massage a lot faster. Speakercables are somewhere between, it will depend a lot on how much power you give them. And if they are worth your time. A poor sounding cable will stay poor. One hour of serious abuse is enough to get their character. |
The metaphysical and the scientific. Until we have testing equipment that can test things outside the reach of science right now, only our opinions can be our reasoning. Does science know all about the behavior of atoms and electrons? I don't think tbere is a physicist, electrical engineer or researcher that would bet their life on it. Oh well the discussion goes on ^^^ I think there is a member here who sells cables tailor made for this gentleman :) |
One thing you can bet your life on is that atom physics and particle physics are *very* mature sciences. "mature" is a relative term. One cannot be so arrogant to claim human has known everything about nature. Quantum physics is not the final words. For example, dark matter and dark energy : nobody knows anything about it and they comprise about 90% of the universe. One has to be humble what one knows and what one does not know. |
blueranger Does science know all about the behavior of atoms and electrons? I don't think tbere is a physicist, electrical engineer or researcher that would bet their life on it. Oh well the discussion goes on. >>>>Science is not a person so it doesn’t know anything. Scientists are not all the same, some know more about atoms and electrons than others. One thing you can bet your life on is that atom physics and particle physics are *very* mature sciences. So, even if you personally don’t know the answer someone does, sure as shootin’. |
This post is stalemate. We each have passionate beliefs in the ways our stereos sound. The equipment changes and tweeks we believe or don't believe in. Lets keep ourselves in check me included. We seem to have 2 camps here. The metaphysical and the scientific. Until we have testing equipment that can test things outside the reach of science right now, only our opinions can be our reasoning. Does science know all about the behavior of atoms and electrons? I don't think tbere is a physicist, electrical engineer or researcher that would bet their life on it. Oh well the discussion goes on |
I’ve been stuck with junk from Thiel - like Thiel’s last flagship 3.7 speaker that review after review mistakenly took to be world-class in resolution - as well as MBL radialstrahler speakers ( How do they get away with those prices for such a low resolution speaker, let alone fool people like the Absolute Sound who rated the tweeter among the world’s best for many years!), various Audio Physic speakers (if only those speakers could render "detail," they could maybe Audio Physic make a slogan out of it!), Quads, Conrad Johnson amps, Benchmark DACs, Transrotor turntable, Benz Micro ebony cartridge.... I just got a pair of Acoustic Zen Hologram II speaker cables and the difference is night and day. Yes, and I am using Thiel CS2.4. |
djones51, I guess my system is junk. Oh well life goes on. I feel your pain. Drat, someone on an audio forum has declared that if I don’t perceive obvious differences between cables, my system isn’t good enough. What will I do???? I’ve been stuck with junk from Thiel - like Thiel’s last flagship 3.7 speaker that review after review mistakenly took to be world-class in resolution - as well as MBL radialstrahler speakers ( How do they get away with those prices for such a low resolution speaker, let alone fool people like the Absolute Sound who rated the tweeter among the world’s best for many years!), various Audio Physic speakers (if only those speakers could render "detail," they could maybe Audio Physic make a slogan out of it!), Quads, Conrad Johnson amps, Benchmark DACs, Transrotor turntable, Benz Micro ebony cartridge.... And still my system isn’t "good enough." I’ll just have to suffer along with this crap. (It’s ok everyone, no need to raise a finger to your keyboard, I’ll do it for you: "then your ears aren’t good enough." Damn, time to give up my job in sound post production I guess...) |
flashlier: "What cables, stevecharm, have you tested before and after use, to make the profound claim that cable burn-in does not exist?" Audioquest, Synergistic, van den Hul, Anticables, Mapleshade, Harmonic Technologies, Tara Labs and most recently Blue Jeans (which are Belden). No such thing as speaker cable burn in. I’ve been listening to, buying, selling and researching this for about 30 years now. I wanted to believe it, I tried to believe it, but it’s simply a matter of neuroscience, and the power and process of belief. There is no quantitative, measurable physics associated with this. Dielectric formation over time, in a speaker cable?, bah, humbug! It’s the "dielectrics" in your brain! |
robert_1, For most people, instead of learning and understanding science they choose to follow the blind, and have a justification to their foolish (ego trip) quests to brag about their latest piece of equipment. It is mostly about the hardware specs rather than the music. I don't see it that way, and it's always dicey trying to ascribe motivations to other people. Especially when it comes to people's views we don't agree with, we tend to get that wrong giving it the worst spin possible. My impression, not trying to read anyone's mind, is that people buying expensive cables etc are just as honest and motivated by a passion for music/sound/gear as anyone else. They are just relying on a certain method of moving through that space. (And one I tend to use as well - listening, trying things out). I really don't see this rampant "I just want to buy this expensive cable/gear to show off how much it costs" thing happening, at least not in enthusiast forums like this where it seems clear to me we all share enthusiasm for music, sound and the buzz we get from our systems. |
It is all nonsense. Snake oil."I believe that I saw Jesus on a slide of bread; therefore, it most be true". For most people, instead of learning and understanding science they choose to follow the blind, and have a justification to their foolish (ego trip) quests to brag about their latest piece of equipment. It is mostly about the hardware specs rather than the music. Take for example " No one actually knows how to calculate (misspelled Iculate) what speaker cable they need" by b4icu. so much diatribe. To the OP @gawdbless, take some time and read @MorgIII link in the discussion: http://www.roger-russell.com/wire/wire.htm You will learn something there. |
What I have experienced is when you put the new cables you will notice that your amp runs cool some days and warm some days as the cable burns in but once it is properly settled and burned you will notice the music is free flowing and your amps do not run as warm as they did while burn in and stays at normal temperature |
stevecharm - What makes you such an expert? I've been a beta tester for cables for two decades and have had at my disposal a dozen major manufacturers cables to compare. You are correct only if comparing cables which do not have great resolution-I couldn't tell if they burned-in or not. Well made, high resolution cables, burn-in at different rates depending on the materials and design. The high resolution IC cables I've tested take a minimum of 24 hours, A/C and speaker cables longer. I've already stated that I've compared many cables new to cables with 24 hours to one week use on them and concluded there is a DEFINITE, SIGNIFICANT difference in high end cables before and after burn-in. What cables, stevecharm, have you tested before and after use, to make the profound claim that cable burn-in does not exist? |
Burn in of speakers: Much more plausible than what's been offered for cables. Just go to : www.diy.com and you'll see people measure speakers drivers and they changed after burn in. |
blueranger, Do any of the nasayers believe in equipment break in? Tube break in? Speaker break in? To be clear: I'm not a "naysayer" in the sense I claim cable burn in doesn't happen. I've just found the arguments I encounter FOR it aren't very convincing. As well, I've never heard any equipment I've ever bought, cables or otherwise, "burn in." Doesn't mean it doesn't happen. As for burn-in of tubes: I don't know. (I actually have a brand new pair of tubes I'm going to be putting in my CJ pre-amp. Unfortunately, even in as a casual test of burned in vs non-burned in tubes, it wouldn't work in my situation. The reason I'm replacing my tubes in the first place is that the old ones have become more noisy, hiss coming through my speakers, so there ought to be an obvious change when I put in the new ones. I hope there is!) Burn in of speakers: Much more plausible than what's been offered for cables. But there seems very, very little hard data on the subject. And analysis by the people who have tried measuring speaker burn in - e.g. drivers burning in - generally seem to point out if it happens the audible results would tend to be very subtle, and that any likely audible difference in break in happens fairly quickly, vs the hundreds of hours one often hears about in high end audio. |
taras22, Thanks for the invite. I might be at the Toronto show (hope to go). No worries, I'm not a leafs fan (not a hockey fan - I'm a bad Canadian that way). Oh, and I don't take any of these discussions seriously in terms of personalities or holding any animosity at all. Nothing on an audio discussion forum is worth that. Cheers! |
More "brain burn in" is always a good thing. No wonder many sip the etoh or smoke/vape the herb while listening. Looks like someone still behind the time. This has been talked over again and again. Manufacturers have lots of components that they can compare side by side, some old some brand new, so there is no need to resort to "brain burn in" argument. |
Cables - no break in Tubes - once warm, no burn/break in; they just degrade over time from day one and sound best when new. "Burn in" for a day or so is best used to determine that the tube is stable and not about to fail. Speakers - yes; they are motors and some of the materials that flex need to break covalent bonds to perform optimally Cartridges - same as for speakers Turntables - yes, motor/platter bearings need to wear the metal surfaces over time to reduce micro-machined irregularities Electronics (DACs, preamps, amps, CD players) - no, (except for the CD motors, sled and rotational) but the electronics do need warm up to function optimally. People ear/brain system - yes, the biggest single audio component that is the most variable of the recorded/playback/listening experience. More "brain burn in" is always a good thing. No wonder many sip the etoh or smoke/vape the herb while listening. |
Imagine you went to your doctor with a sore throat. The doctor says "Well, obviously you have cancer of the throat!" prof, have you lost it? |
Claims that remain controversial among the relevant experts (e.g. I’ve seen many EEs say why the technical claims made by audiophiles or expensive cable companies are nonsense), and where the explanations are dubious, and the evidence almost purely anecdotal. >>>Two things, professor, claiming that many EEs say technical claims made by audiophiles or cable companies are dubious is not only second hand evidence but it’s also, you guessed it! an Appeal to Authority. What about the many EEs who say the claims are not (rpt not) dubious? You’re just going to ignore those, right? Furthermore, anecdotal evidence is still evidence. It is in fact empirical evidence. Hel-loo! Sorry, professor, care to try again? |
https://phys.org/news/2013-02-human-fourier-uncertainty-principle.html Like I said, human ears are basically transducers like any other sensors but apparently better. And a human brain is the most complex machine by far than anything human has made. Apparently prof don't trust brain but would defer to some ineptitude machine. |
This is fast becoming an audio version of "Groundhogs Day". I've posted something like this before but it bears repeating:https://phys.org/news/2013-02-human-fourier-uncertainty-principle.html Here's an prime example of what our ears can do that an instrument can't. A complex signal is sent but it's our ears that differentiate the information. Measurements can't do that on the fly: they have to deconstruct the signal to analyze it. In that respect, yes, instruments are more exacting than our hearing but our ear/brain relationship can give hoot because they've already heard and deciphered it. That signal can only be measured in a gross manner if put on an equal time footing as our ears. So it is with cables. We listen, on the fly, analyze instantly, and enjoy. Or not. It's our ears that are the final arbiter, and it's cables that can limit it. All the best, Nonoise |
Claims that remain controversial among the relevant experts (e.g. I've seen many EEs say why the technical claims made by audiophiles or expensive cable companies are nonsense), and where the explanations are dubious, and the evidence almost purely anecdotal.Just because somebody made claims you found dubious, does not mean the principal behind it is not true. I think you should stop attacking cable companies and read a bit more about electrical engineering. You know like doing something constructive. |
taras22, And surely you have ample measurements to absolutely and fully prove all those assertions beyond the shadow of any doubt. Or are we going to have to trust hearsay based on information drawn from listening experiences using your, uhhhh, ears ? Which is, as usual, drawn from a mischaracterization of my arguments. I have been voicing reasons for skepticism when it comes to *controversial* claims about audibility - controversial in the sense they do not form a part of generally accepted, well established phenomena. Claims that remain controversial among the relevant experts (e.g. I've seen many EEs say why the technical claims made by audiophiles or expensive cable companies are nonsense), and where the explanations are dubious, and the evidence almost purely anecdotal. Claims like cable burn-in, and even the purported sonic advantages often claimed by manufacturers and users of expensive cables, fall in to that category. That's different from the gross differences in sound well known to be audible, credible both in terms of technical explanation, what we know of human hearing, and what is reliable via our experience. So, for instance, the audibility of sonic difference between various musical instruments would easily fall in to those categories. The harmonic/distortion profiles of different instruments is measurable, and falls well within the realm understood as audible to humans. And we reliably detect these differences all the time. There will be gross physical, audible differences in the audio profile produced by, say, a Fender bass vs an acoustic stand up bass. It's not remotely controversial that we can capture and reproduce these audible differences in the recording/playback system. Nobody is mistaking Paul Chambers' double bass at the beginning of Kind Of Blue for Geddy Lee playing his electric Rickenbacker bass, and for good reasons. That goes for a whole host of audible characteristics that occur between different bass instruments, the way they are played, the audible effects of how they were recorded, placed in the soundstage, eq'd, mastered, etc. All of those differentiating factors exist well within non-controversial, known realms of audibility. Then there are all the audible influences that can be measured in terms of eq, room effects that cause "bloat" or "overhang," and various measurable phenomena that can interfere with bass signals, produce the subjective perception of homogenizing bass - "one note bass" - etc. These are all within the realm of what we know to be audible artifacts. THEREFORE we have an entirely plausible case to stand on when we are discerning between different instruments on a playback system, between different bass instruments, between bass instruments recorded differently, between the qualities we can describe etc. So...no...your "gotcha" relies on a naive look at the problem, not on some internal contradiction or fault in what I've been writing on here. |
There are two impartial listeners as a beta tester for GroverHuffman cables. One is his wife and one is my wife, who doesn't care at all what wire is used or scientific analysis of it. They only compare wire as to whether they hear a difference and whether they prefer/like it or not/dislike/hate. Cable burn-in is a must prior to our testing. As I have previously emphatically stated, we have tried brand newly made I/C and speaker cables against cables with at least 24 hour burn-in through use. A/C cables are subjected to connection to refrigerators for several days to a week prior to testing. So, when we hear very significant differences between the new cables and burned-in cables, we are not "out of our minds" or "foolish" or "wishing it so." As I also previously stated, low end cables such as Monster cable, Home Depot cable and Blue Jean cable that I've heard, do not burn-in with a significance. I couldn't tell the difference either between them new or with 100 hours on them. Their resolution just doesn't allow it. Sure, some of you posters say all cable sounds basically the same. Funny how friends and acquaintances who frequent my music room don't want to leave because they are entranced by the sound of the music as much as the music itself. I say acquaintances because we host Toastmaster speechathons at our home with guests and guest speakers who don't know me or anything about audio equipment. So, if the posters have either inferior audio systems, inferior acoustic environments, or inferior cabling, it is likely that there is no apparent burn-in of cabling. As to directionality, my cabling is only made directional after usage for a significant period. It is not made directional except for phono use (grounding). |
