Do speaker cables need a burn in period?

@andy2,

Your analogy to a Ferrari and a Toyota is begging the question. (There are obviously gross physical differences in design and well-attested technical reasons why a Ferrari can outperform a Toyota in various ways - and since we are talking about the real-world, they are measurable. If you suggest high end cables outperform belden cable in an analogous way, can you tell us how this occurs, and provide or point to any measurable data for the claim?).

But I don’t see how we can get anywhere the way this is going because you just keep asserting claims when I’m asking what justifies your claims.

Maybe one more try:

Do you think the "higher end" cables, such as your QED, transmit sonic information that the Belden cable is incapable of transmitting?

pcrhkr  If you think I am out of my mind for believing cables require burn in (some more, some less), look at yourself first!  Big expert you are. 

I've had 20+ years experience as a beta tester for a cable manufacturer (high end cables).  Maybe Belden or Monster cables are so limited in their sound capabilities/materials that burn in doesn't exist for them.  I've tried Monster 300 and 400 series (about six varieties) cables decades ago and couldn't hear a difference after 50 to 100 hours of use.  However, testing out high end, complex design and exotic material cabling requires burn in to extract their stable sound capabilities as well as directionality.  

Why don't the high end cable manufacturers pre burn their cables before sale? Seems that would be a great selling point.  

Being able to hear “sheen” from Teflon dielectric but not being able to hear cable direction is an excellent example of WTF? 😛

prof

But I don’t see how we can get anywhere the way this is going because you just keep asserting claims when I’m asking what justifies your claims.

Most users here base their observations on listening. Beyond that, no one is obligated to provide scientific theories for what they hear, or provide the results of scientific listening tests they've conducted, or measurements they've made of the equipment under evaluation. This isn't a scientific group. This is mostly a hobbyist's group and if you seek hard data, this simply isn't the best place to find it.
Of course, every reader is free to accept - or not - whatever claims are made here to whatever extent he likes. But the seemingly endless demands that posters provide upon request some set of scientific data to accompany their listening observations isn't going to get anyone anywhere.

In addition, I suspect most members of this group don't even know how to set up a scientifically valid listening test. I base that on the claims by those who say they have conducted such tests but - upon being questioned - reveal that the test was flawed from the onset ... which makes it probably worse than no test at all.