Over the years, there have been postings in the various audio forums about the over-cooking of certain items of wiring.
Although I never kept close watch on this topic since I never owned my own burn-in gadget, it is not merely a convenient excuse for a manufacturer to question the effect of a particular gadget on a particular wire.
It is appropriate for each manufacturer to specify ahead of time any home trial ground rules. In this case, the manufacturer did not anticipate every possible contingency, nor were any formal constraints placed on the new user.
Sadly, it is possible audiophiles can still inadvertently alter the meticulously tuned work of a manufacturer. (Each reviewer may have to consider this possibility.)
For example, if during a home trial I were to coat a termination with Walker's Extreme SST, or re-terminate with an RCA connector, or speaker spade lug, of my own preference, then I clearly think of the wire as being altered. And, whether for better, or worse, I am the responsible party.
When the sound heard through a wire is changed by signal processing, this is more of a mystery. Is this additional alteration "better" or "worse," and does it constitute an irreversible alteration for which a manufacturer is justified in rejecting a product return?
In this case, I agree with the manufacturer that his product has been altered, but I understand that there were no specific limitation placed on the home trial.
Just because the manufacturer carries out his own burn-in, and material alteration (such as with cryogenic immersion), does not make it invulnerable to further alteration, either for the better, or for the worse.
This may be the first time this specific question about whether a user's choice to try his own preference in further cable conditioning constitutes damaging behavior during home trial. This situation really pushes at the boundaries of what constitutes correct customer service.
My bias is to side with the manufacturer's reluctance to take back altered products no longer able to serve in the future as typical wire samples of his handiwork for another audio system. Yet, there is no joy having to take sides when both parties are good people.
I have no connection with the manufacturer except as a long ago purchaser, and still satisfied user, advocating for affordable, high quality items on Audiogon.
Although I never kept close watch on this topic since I never owned my own burn-in gadget, it is not merely a convenient excuse for a manufacturer to question the effect of a particular gadget on a particular wire.
It is appropriate for each manufacturer to specify ahead of time any home trial ground rules. In this case, the manufacturer did not anticipate every possible contingency, nor were any formal constraints placed on the new user.
Sadly, it is possible audiophiles can still inadvertently alter the meticulously tuned work of a manufacturer. (Each reviewer may have to consider this possibility.)
For example, if during a home trial I were to coat a termination with Walker's Extreme SST, or re-terminate with an RCA connector, or speaker spade lug, of my own preference, then I clearly think of the wire as being altered. And, whether for better, or worse, I am the responsible party.
When the sound heard through a wire is changed by signal processing, this is more of a mystery. Is this additional alteration "better" or "worse," and does it constitute an irreversible alteration for which a manufacturer is justified in rejecting a product return?
In this case, I agree with the manufacturer that his product has been altered, but I understand that there were no specific limitation placed on the home trial.
Just because the manufacturer carries out his own burn-in, and material alteration (such as with cryogenic immersion), does not make it invulnerable to further alteration, either for the better, or for the worse.
This may be the first time this specific question about whether a user's choice to try his own preference in further cable conditioning constitutes damaging behavior during home trial. This situation really pushes at the boundaries of what constitutes correct customer service.
My bias is to side with the manufacturer's reluctance to take back altered products no longer able to serve in the future as typical wire samples of his handiwork for another audio system. Yet, there is no joy having to take sides when both parties are good people.
I have no connection with the manufacturer except as a long ago purchaser, and still satisfied user, advocating for affordable, high quality items on Audiogon.