n80 OP
63 posts 07-24-2018 8:06pm
I believe you. I doubt it is anything I would ever notice and it does sound like a very clever way for a cable company to excuse a bad product. I mean, how do you compare what you are hearing right now vs what you’re hearing 7.29 days later? Just sayin’. But I’m an eternal skeptic.
I mean, how do you compare what you are hearing right now vs what you’re hearing 7.29 days later? Just sayin’. But I’m an eternal skeptic.
You could buy a new second pair of the same cable. Listen to both pairs. A/B each pair in your system to see if both pairs of the cables sound the same to your ears. If you cannot hear any difference between the 2 pairs then put one pair up and do not use that pair of cables. Burn in the other pair for 175 hrs, or what ever. Pull out the new pair without any hours on them. A/B that pair against the pair that has 175 hours on them. (If you have a CDP or DAC listen to the burned in pair on your system for at least a week before you preform the A/B listening test. This will condition your ears to the sound of the pair of burned in cables. Play CDs with piano and female vocal. Pretty much any Diana Krall will do. A/B the burned in pair of cables against the new cables without any hours on them.) . |
dopogue
1,747 posts 07-27-2018 7:17am
I have some very pertinent experience with this issue. My long-time balanced interconnects (Clear Day) on the link between my Oppo/ModWright 105 CD/SACD player and Aesthetix Calypso linestage have served me well without complaint over the last 3-4 years. Great cables.
Recently a bat-eared audiobuddy suggested I try Duelund 20g ICs, also balanced, and since they were reasonably priced ($175), I figured, why not. When first inserted in my system they were awful -- flat, closed-in, meh in every respect. Again, the prescribed break-in (200 hours) sounded incredible to me. Fortunately I have an Audiodharma Cable Cooker to speed the break-in process.
So I gave the Duelunds several days on the cooker and compared them again to the Clear Days. Better, but no cigar. It took more days (I lost count), but eventually the Duelunds won the sonic battle and have now replaced the Clear Days. Note that there was absolutely nothing wrong with the Clear Days and a number of other ICs haven’t come close to the way THEY sound. But the Duelunds are now top dog -- sweet.open, clear, musical --and I haven’t an objective clue as to why. Not really.
One thing sure: The Audiodharma Cable Cooker is an incredible product, as anyone who owns one will likely attest Actual listening and comparing experience.... Who da thunk!..... And at the end of the day you clearly can hear the difference between the Clear Days and Duelunds. Jim |
almarg
8,221 posts 07-25-2018 5:50pm
FWIW, over the years I’ve noticed a fairly consistent phenomenon in these forums. Certain members seem to gravitate to threads involving phenomena that are either technically inexplicable, at least when considered in a quantitative manner (if that is even possible), or are particularly controversial, or both.
The usual result being that potentially constructive dialogue gives way to some combination of childish commentary, exchanges of insults, and ad hominem attacks, rather than dialogue which is constructive and potentially useful. Which as far as I am concerned would seem to defeat the main purpose of a forum.
Just an observation, FWIW. Also, BTW, I consider contributions to this forum by Prof and by Analogluvr, among a number of others I could name, to be the antithesis of those I am referring to. I always find their contributions to be pragmatic, thought-provoking, based on extensive experience in many cases, and certainly warranting intelligent discussion.
Also, as usual Jim (Jea48) has provided a constructive input to the thread. The problem, though, is that all too often audiophiles tend not to perform their evaluations in as thorough and disciplined a manner as he suggested, before proclaiming that a perceived difference is attributable to a specific cause. As opposed to being caused by extraneous variables such as ongoing aging or breakin of unrelated system components, differences in AC line voltage or noise characteristics that occur from time to time, changes in ambient temperature and/or humidity (temperature being a factor that is fundamental to the physics of semiconductors such as transistors, diodes, and integrated circuits), differences in equipment warmup states, flushing of internal digital memory that occurs when power is cycled, etc.
My own belief, again FWIW, is that when it comes to controversial audio-related matters more often than not reported perceptions are likely to be accurate, and not the result of "expectation bias." Depending, of course, on the credibility of the particular person who is doing the reporting. But my belief is also that in many cases the methodology that has been used in arriving at the reported conclusions has not been sufficiently thorough to assure that the perceived effect is being attributed to the correct variable.
Regards,
-- Al The problem, though, is that all too often audiophiles tend not to perform their evaluations in as thorough and disciplined a manner as he suggested, before proclaiming that a perceived difference is attributable to a specific cause. As opposed to being caused by extraneous variables such as ongoing aging or breakin of unrelated system components, differences in AC line voltage or noise characteristics that occur from time to time, changes in ambient temperature and/or humidity (temperature being a factor that is fundamental to the physics of semiconductors such as transistors, diodes, and integrated circuits), differences in equipment warmup states, flushing of internal digital memory that occurs when power is cycled, etc. Agree, during a normal listening secession. One day to the next. Early morning, middle of the day, evening, or late at night. Though in the case of an A/B listening test between 2 cables the odds of any of the things you mentioned would be a factor is slim at best. The time, conditions, should, will be, the same for the short time intervals listening for the differences between the 2 cables to the trained ear. Again listening for differences...... For what sounds best at the end of the day dopogue post hits the nail on the head. What he hears is all that matters. Jim |
fleschler
390 posts 07-29-2018 11:40pm
I test cables without electronic testing equipment. I’m sure my high end system is junk to professionals although I’ve appraised 27 SoCal & San Fran recording studios in my former profession. I must say, the recording engineers had hearing deficiencies by the time they were 50 and result in non-flat sounding studio audio setups in many of them. Luckily, I’m friends with some remastering engineers with superb hearing, Kevin Gray, Steve Hoffman and Robert Pincus. I also do recording and remastering for a local orchestra, choirs, chamber orch., etc.
Back to my testing. I receive up to four versions of a cable, differing sometimes as little as having a 26 gauge versus a 30 gauge conductor or return wire or a copper, silver or rhodium connection difference. I won’t seriously compare them to the current, burned in version until I’ve cooked them as they generally (90% of the time) sound worse to start with. Sometimes, the newest version is better sounding than the current model due to significant changes in the design, such as when the new version reduced capacitance by 50% through additional teflon shielding over conductors and/or returns.
I don’t care that a machine will tell me that they all test the same other than for capacitance, inductance or resistance. The manufacturer tests for the basics. What we do is determine if sonically, we prefer the current version or the new version, usually its the current version. When multiple changes have occurred in the new version and it is significantly better, the manufacturer renames it. This has happened a half dozen times in the past 15+ years. A high percentage of the time, the cables do not meet up to the current version. The manufacturer is continually tinkering with his formulas, design and materials to produce the best cabling he can (although his speaker cables have only seen three or four versions in 20 years and A/C cables maybe three versions in 10 years).
We also test other upscale cables to his cables to see how they compare on at least two systems, mine and his. We’ve tried High Fidelity, Magnan, Kimber, Furutech, Nordost, Audioquest (not all of their cables but a selection over the years) as well as others he has tested on his own. He also take his cables to shows and upscale audio systems locally to compare to their current cabling. Never have compared them to Transparent Audio cabling which retails for 50X more for speaker cabling or Masterbuilt at 100X more. I heard them replace Siltech, Triode Wire and Shunyata as well as shows.
I don’t know what the manufacturer finds as far as the three electrical testable variables in his cables before and after he burns them in/tests them. I or the both of us compare the cables at my house and at his factory for a sonic evaluation. I don’t have any other relationship with the manufacturing of the cabling.
nonoise
3,675 posts 07-29-2018 11:54pm
Works for me. 👍 ME TOO! |
prof
1,139 posts 07-30-2018 12:10am
fleschler,
Right, so you listen to cables. Ok.
I don’t care that a machine will tell me that they all test the same other than for capacitance, inductance or resistance. The manufacturer tests for the basics. What we do is determine if sonically, we prefer the current version or the new version, usually its the current version.
So what puzzle me here is:
If the cables need burn in, how are the manufacturers determining what is causing this phenomenon? As we aren’t talking about magic, presumably manufacturers identify some "pre-burned in" state they can measure, vs post burn in, where the measurements change. Otherwise...how do they know what’s going on at all?
That’s what I’m not seeing yet in this thread, including in your post.
What exactly do you think is technically happening to cables when you "cook" them, and have you, or the manufacturers you work with, any actual data showing these differences? What exactly do you think is technically happening to cables when you "cook" them, and have you, or the manufacturers you work with, any actual data showing these differences? Why don’t you take the time and research what may be the reasons. Try looking beyond the wire itself and look at the dielectric used in the construction of the cable. Could the answer to your questions be there? How does a signal travel down a wire? di·e·lec·tricˌdīəˈlektrik/Physicsadjectiveadjective: dielectric- 1. having the property of transmitting electric force without conduction; insulating.
nounnoun: dielectric; plural noun: dielectrics- 1. a medium or substance that transmits electric force without conduction; an insulator.
Originmid 19th century: from di-3 + electric, literally ‘across which electricity is transmitted (without conduction).’Translate dielectric toUse over time for: dielectric Not everything can be or is measured using test equipment that exists today. The final test ARC uses for a new piece of equipment is the Warren Test. If it doesn’t pass the Warren Test it goes back out on the bench to find out why. I would be willing to bet every High-End audio equipment manufacturer uses a Warren Test for the final test of a new piece of audio equipment. Only an idiot would rely on test equipment measurements. Will test equipment measure exactly how equipment will sound to the human ear? NO! Two different manufacturer amps may have the same specs but will they sound the same? NO? WHY NOT? According to the test equipment they should sound identical. Equipment measurements should always tell us why. REALLY? BS! Can a tube tester tell us why an early 1960s Amperex white label PQ 6922 tube will sound better in a typical preamp that a later 1970s Amperex orange label PQ 6922 tube? The tube tester says both tubes measure the same. Therefore they MUST sound the same. How about how different tube manufacturers 6922 used in the same preamp sound. If they all measure the same then they must all sound the same. Right? My ears tell me otherwise. How about capacitors used in the signal path? If the capacitor manufactured by one manufacture is of the same value as another manufacturer’s and measures the same on test equipment then Both will sound exactly the same. Right? The test equipment can’t lie. . |
|
