Cable "burning": Real or VooDoo ???


While i have my opinions on this subject, i'd love to hear from others that have tried various methods of "burning in" cables, what was used to do it, what differences were noticed ( if any ), etc... Please be as specific as possible. If your a "naysayer" in this area, please feel free to join in BUT have an open mind and keep this thread on topic. Sean
>
sean
Jadem6, Just to throw a little more oil on the fire, you state "To do this I went through some of the recordings I personally find to be well recorded with above average sonic achievements." I believe a more accurate statement would read "To do this I went through some of the recordings I personally find to sound good on my system."

I think this is THE huge variable in how systems are evaluated. We tend to use the same recordings to evaluate various components. For instance, I may have a recording that has been deemed to have excellent bass. Perhaps it is a little bass heavy, but on some systems this is just the ticket to sonic excellence. Using this recording, I would judge more neutral systems to be bass deficient.

For this and other reasons, I advocate spending most of your budget on components, and saving the big "cable question" to the end when you are putting on the finishing touches and have a system of sufficient resolution to make these megabuck decisions.

Happy listening
Bruce,

Just so! That's exactly how I've approached it. Am currently looking for a sufficiently resolving IC for CD to pre/pro, having found good ICs between amps and pre. Of course, I should get help because 702 has told me the rules of physics and Ohm's law no longer apply. (Hadn't you heard, 702, that Ohm's law had been repealed after an aroused citizenry was mobilized?) Yep, we're all in wonderland now so you'll have to guide us. Bring on those charts and graphs.
Great points Bruce. First I'm in 100% agreement that cables are a tweak, not a base component. Once the system is created, then is the time to try cables and I.C. to bring out the last potential from the equipment. Assuming that was completed, I'm wondering if you take bass for instance. A recording that sounds tight and full on your system may be the sum correlation to the cables used during the recording process and the cables used on your system. I am wondering if a cable with a strength in bass such as the one used on the tape machine by Mapleshade, combined with a cable in your own system that also accentuated the bass. Would the net result become too much base? Then taking that same recording to a system that didn't accentuate the bass might make the overall result extremely pleasing. Food for thought, and maybe an explanation of why some pieces touted as great reference recordings can be lifeless to some.
Bruce: Nice post. I will soon be in a position where the final addition or tweak to my system will be the speaker cables. I am satisfied with my (very) reasonably priced IC's and will just have to find a pair of speaker cables that sinc with the rest of the system as well as outperform my budget Kimber Kable. I also just finished emails with another member "off" forum in which we discussed the importence of our systems sounding good to very good on a variety of source material. This is something that often gets left to the way side and is one reason that I have had to reject some of the hyper detailed cables for use in my system. If Mitch Ryder does not sound half way decent, then the piece of equipment is not for me.