Skeptic or just plain hard headed


So I purchased a pair of Morrow Audio phono cables. These are the PH3 with the Eichmann connectors. Wanted to start there to see if MA cables will be a viable option for my system.I think my story is not so unique to others who have purchased MA cables. So no need to go into the hu hum of burn-in in regards to MA cables, and how things sound bad at first, then gets better,  then excellent...yada yada yada. I know the story about this product.  I simply am one who is not a believer in electronics break in periods, or battery packs on cables, etc... Regardless of what side of the fence you are on in regards to that Im NOT trying to start that debate again please.. Anyway. After reading several reviews of the MA cables and understanding that most agreed that the cables needed a substantial burn-in time, and that the cables would not sound its best until this happens I decided to give them a try. Thinking ok lets get a jump on the burn-in period (if the concept is true). I paid for the 2 day burn-in service from MA. What I didn't expect is that when I got the cable it would sound as bad as it did in comparison to my existing name brand cable (not getting into that either, not relevant). I thought well the cable might not quite be up to snuff with all this talk about burn-in (if its true) but not that much of a difference.  I mean as soon as I dropped the needle on the record I immediately heard a profound difference in sound stage and clarity degridation. Needless to say this cable was destined to be returned to MA for a full refund and my thinking was "they are crazy if I am going to trade my cable for this cable" So I decided to give MA a call to setup the return. Talked with Mike Morrow (very nice guy by the way) and we had our differences in what I should expect out of his product. Now my Mother always told me that I have a hard head.. I heard that growing up all my life, and when you couple that with skepticism it makes a pretty, well lets just say not a very fun person to have a debate with lol. However Mike insisted that if I return the cable that I would be missing out on the fruit they would bare after 400 hours of break in. 400 hours??? really!. Oh at that point I was really ready to return them. I told all my friends "Mike must be nuts" (no offense Mike) no way am I going to wait a year to hear what this cable is capable of, AND I do not have any way to expedite the process...at least I thought I didn't until I found an old sound bar I don't use anymore with analog inputs. Ok I know you pro MA and  pro cable burn-in folks are chomping at the bit. Im almost done. Take your hands off the keyboard for just a few more lines. 

So here is the deal to be fair I am going to be open minded about this because Mike really made me feel like I would be missing out if I return the cable without a proper burn-in (great salesman), and since he had such conviction I now think I have to test this thing out right??. Now I know that there are testimonials out there about how the MA cable improved over 100s of hours in their system, and that they are now "blown away". However can you really hear a profound difference in a cable you play in your system over 170 hours or so?  I would think a gradual difference would be harder to detect. I mean my system seems to sound better to me everyday without making any changes. Is it because of  continued cable and electronics burn in?? maybe. Or maybe its just my brain becoming more intimate with the sound of my system. Well this test I'm doing should reveal a night and day difference from what the system sounds like today with the cable pre burn-in if there is any merit to the notion. In regards to does it sound better than my existing cable that is yet to be determined. I think my goal now is to prove or dis-prove if cable burn-in is a real thing. This whole idea has evolved from if it's an improvement or not over what I use today. We can discuss that later.

I now have the cable connected between a cd player , and a sound bar with a CD playing on repeat. The disc of choice for this burn-in is rather dynamic so it should be a good test. At the end of 16 days (384 hours) I will move the cables to my reference system and do about another 20 hours of additional burn-in to compensate for moving the cable. This will put a total of 452 hours of burn-in on the PH3. When I put this cable back in my system I sure hope it sings because this is a lot to go through to add a cable to your system. Mike if you are right I will eat crow and will preach from the highest mountain top that you are right, and that cable burn-in is REAL.  For me anyway the myth will be considered busted or reinforce my belief that cable burn-in is a bunch of BS. 

For those who will argue the point of cable burn-in I fully understand the concept, and I don't plan to get sucked down that rat hole and I won't argue that....yet because at the end of this test I may be in your camp and I don't want to have a steady diet of crow so for now I will remain neutral on the subject until the test is complete.  However I will be totally transparent and honest about the results. So not trying to make anyone angry as I know beliefs about audio are sensitive subjects, and rightfully so this hobby is expensive and I like you have a substancial investment in this. Just trying to get to the truth. I also understand that cable burn-in may actually happen when you consider it from a scientific perspective, but the real question is can you actually hear the difference.  

I will report back to this thread in 17 days from today (need at least one day to evaluate) with the results. 

happy listening!!

-Keith
barnettk

Showing 50 responses by geoffkait

There are at least a few steps for proper cable care and feeding, burn-in is just one of them. E.g., cryogenic treatment - even if already done in-house - is recommended, and if not done in-house then highly recommended. Then there’s contact enhancers for all cable contacts. And of course, determine proper direction for the cables. Demagnetizing and ionizing cables periodically are de rigeur for any serious audiophile. There are other steps, too, but most likely beyond scope.
When using the XLO Test CD burn-in track, it is suggested that track be played continuously for two weeks, but that improvements should be audible after a day or two, which I think is true. The obvious advantage of using a burn-in track is that everything in the entire system gets burned in, not only the cables. So, is anything ever 100% broken in? That is a philosophical question, however all evidence points to NO. So how many hours in two weeks for those who don’t have a calculator handy? 336.
Uh, I’m pretty sure there is a break-in LP for analog systems. If there isn’t there should be.

Whoa! Hold the presses! This just in! I guess the lesson here is NEVER SAY NEVER. I trust no one will accuse me of shooting fish in a barrel. 🐟 🐟 🐟


Clearaudio Cartridge Break-In Test Record

A pickup system requires a certain break-in period to achieve the best reproduction characteristics. This settling time depends on the specific pickup - from construction and from the sampled signals during this time. Usually, this break-in period for a phono cartridge with a music signal is about 40 to 100 hours. This settling time can be shortened significantly, however, when pink noise is used as a signal in an endless groove.

To this end, the Clearaudio Cartridge Break-In Record provides 6 endless grooves with a pink noise signal (tracks 5,6,7,9,10 and 11). In addition, 240 seconds are added Pink noise signals for measurements of the entire playback system available (Track 14).

To test the frequency response of a pickup is a moving (sweep) sine test signal from 20 Hz to 20 kHz (Track 3). The total noise of the playback system can be tested with an empty record without signal "silence" (Track 4 and 13) (duration 300 seconds). Optimization of the anti-skating force adjustment allow Tracks 8 and 12 Both channels include a 316 Hz sine wave signal with a continuously changing phase difference from 0 to 360 grad on the diamond sample movement is repeated this way, changes of horizontal to vertical movement. The amplitude increases from -22 dB to + 8 dB.

Perhaps you should read what I wrote again to ascertain the time required to break in the analog front end using the Clearaudio Test LP. What you need is the Cable Cooker. 
All cables require break in to sound their best. The only real debate is how long break in should be and what the best means of break in are. If you’re not really into the whole sound quality thing I wouldn’t sweat it too much. But at the big shows in the big important systems one just might find some can,e cooking going on all day and night before the show opens. At least if they’re smart.
TG Audio, I.e., Bob Crump, who knew a little bit about sound and whose cables and power cords were among the very best extant, always burned in his cables and cords for 30 days prior to shipping. At that point in time he used the MOBIE, Maximum Overdrive Burn-in Equipment, which I also had back then. This burn in business is not anything new, for heaven’s sake. There’s no substitute for knowledge. Knowledge is what’s left after you subtract out all that stuff you learned in school.
barnettk OP63 posts12-03-2018 11:58pmI hear you. I am not just skeptical I don’t believe it at all. However it’s somethibg about the sencarity of MA that made me take pause and said to myself let’s just see so I can finally draw a line in the sand in regards to the subject.

>>>>>Uh, I’m pretty sure that’s the definition of hard headed. Mystery solved! 😃
Lizzie, actually this is what you said,

elizabeth5,902 posts12-02-2018 2:52pmBryston's James Tanner says, and PS Audio's Paul McGowan burn in the components ONLY so they don't break for the customer in the first few days. PERIOD


I’ve oft mentioned this on similar threads - that it would be exceedingly difficult to determine the sole effects of burn-in of cables or any other audio thing, speakers perhaps especially, since there are simply too many variables that affect the sound, even day to day and week to week. Or to attribute all changes to burn in. Variables include those that aren’t normally considered or aren’t deemed very important. I am quite sure we don’t know all the variables that affect sound quality. If someone says, oh, the sound was better in such and such ways after two weeks does that mean he’s done nothing whatsoever to his system in all that time, just waited around for burn in changes to occur? You mean he just sits there and watches the paint on the wall peel? Who keeps careful logs? Answer at 11.
Wow!! That might possibly be the first time in recorded audio history that a negative of a proposition has been proven.
Ah, I was referring to proving burn in doesn’t exist or is at least way over emphasized.
Innocent question: what does the last post, though well written and informative have to do with the subject of burn in?
Quick interrupt!! The 6 levels of evidence. 

Not convincing at all
Mildly interesting
Very interesting
The preponderance of the evidence
Beyond a reasonable doubt
Overwhelming (almost a certainty)




barnettk OP88 posts12-06-2018 11:25am@geoffkait in regards to what?

In regards to test results. The evidence levels of test results. Example: negative results for a single test would be level 1 - not convincing at all.
There is a potential issue with “auditioning” cables or anything before the burn in period is complete, assuming that the cable is ever completely burned in. That issue is that the burn in process can sometimes be a non linear one, with up and down swings in performance. Thus, when someone takes a peek prematurely he might be disappointed in the sound. But I digress.
ieales235 posts12-06-2018 2:21pm
There is a potential issue with “auditioning” cables or anything before the burn in period is complete, assuming that the cable is ever completely burned in. That issue is that the burn in process can sometimes be a non linear one, with up and down swings in performance. Thus, when someone takes a peek prematurely he might be disappointed in the sound. But I digress.
@geoffkait ROTFLMFAO!
Systems change for well known and enumerated phenomena, ignored by the fuse, direction and burn-in proponents. If my system sounds better after recommend N hours of cable burn-in but worse due to other ignored factors after 2N hours of use, then what?

Cable burn in is fraud.

>>>>>You seem mighty sure of yourself. But can you prove it? Some folks are just as positive there was no holocaust. This is probably a case of whatever ieales insists, it’s best to do the opposite.
The main problem with getting a 100% improvement to the sound is being able to translate what you think you’re hearing into percentages. But if you can measure 3 dB higher dynamic range or 3 dB higher SNR at the listening position would that satisfy you? I suspect the reason for most of the nervous Nellies and skeptism is the inability to get oneself up out of the noise floor.
This is one of those sticky subjects where it’s not really that there is no AGREEMENT about cable burn in but really more of a whack a mole game type of subject where you have those WITH experience with cable burn in and those who do not, but who engage in the time honored game of Whack a Mole. And there are also those who might be curious.

The subject of burn in not new and this is not the first rodeo for the more advanced audiophiles on this thread. Not to diminish measurements, which can certainly have their place. Good luck with that. In any case, it’s hard to generalize test results of just about any audio related thing. It’s a tough nut to swallow.
Fortunately there isn’t much music below or above what the hearing test showed. Rejoice! Revel in your time! 😃 If you could hear what I’ve heard with my ears.
Speaking for myself, I’m not impressed when people say I’ve got umpty ump years of sales experience and.... or I’ve been in this hobby for umpty ump years and you can believe me when I say.... In fact, I generally don’t read any further after they say it. 😀

ieales240 posts12-07-2018 1:31pm
Cables can be overcooked
There are many MEASUREABLE phenomena which account for system changes. Why ignore them and ascribe to cooking?

>>>>>OK, Mr. Smarty Pants. Name one. Betcha can’t. Besides, everybody knows you can eliminate other phenomena, whatever they might be, by thorough and careful testing. Hel-loo! If you couldn’t we would never get anywhere.
This is all getting kind of silly. You can test for any hypothesis or proposition you want to, whether it’s whether cable burn is audible or whether lifting cables off the floor is audible. Or whether cables are directional. Or whatever. But it helps a whole lot to know what all of the variables are, the variables that affect the sound, even the ones not related to the audio system per se. At a minimum as many variables as you can think of. That way you can at least try to CONTROL the variables whilst you test whatever hypothesis you wish. It’s like the dude in 12 Angry Men yells, but we’ve been through all that already!

Starter kit of variables

Time of day
Day of week
Weather conditions
Temperature/humidity
Solar flares
Traffic conditions
Apparently nothing you’d be interested in. Nevermind. 😛

An ordinary man has no means of deliverance. 
I had the M.O.B.I.E. Maximum Overdrive Burn In Electronics burn in device, the very one that John Curl and Bob Crump used to burn in of all their Throbbing Gristle TG power cords and interconnects fir the two shows I participated in. Alan Kafton’s Cable Cooker was used to burn in all Jena Labs and Shunyata cables for the monster Tenor Audio-Rockport system I participated in. Playing music through cables will never really get close to the performance an active device or burn in track provide. If you could hear what I’ve heard with my ears.

your friend and audio insider
Jitter is a very bad man. Or boy. Or girl, whatever. Jitter never had it. He’s still looking for it.  🥰

barnettk OP
114 posts12-08-2018 11:51am@geoffkait soooo your not using cables now?

No more cables, no more power cords
No more ICs, no more fuses
No more big transformers
No more giant capacitors
No more house AC or AC GROUND
No more pencils, no more books
No more teacher’s dirty looks 🤓
Thanx, eels, I sometimes feel a twinge of remorse whenever I boost my own products here. Much appreciated. I’m given serious consideration to putting you in my stable. But first try to make your sentences grammatically correct.

barbettk, there’s no reason to use foul language here. Is this your first rodeo, cowpoke?
I suspect the chances are Good to Excellent you didn’t notice the break in because they’re in the wrong direction.
I have a funny feeling he won’t be ordering any more Morrow Cables or burning in any more cables. Just a hunch. Besides, analog tape - even with its limitations, whatever you want to come up with - still sounds considerably better than digital under normal conditions. I’ll grant you CD looks great on paper. No argument there.  I won’t address the whole double blind test issue here again. You know....
Question, what makes you think Morrow cables are the only ones that require a long break in. It sounds like Morrow is brave and honest enough to at least explain the facts of life to you. Haven’t  you been paying attention to all the capacitor burn in and fuse burn in threads and other cable burn in threads? As I mentioned somewhere recently when bob sold TG Audio cables he burned them in for 30 days on a burn in device. That’s 24x30 or more than 700 hours according to my calculator. 
OK. Did MA ever explain why their cables do not sound good out of the box? People often complain things don’t sound good out of the box, I have noticed it many times including at CES where you really hear when the entire system needs burning in. I mentioned somewhere recently how some exhibits use burn in devices all day and all night trying to get sound that doesn’t suck by the time the doors open. More specifically, people complain things sound strange, lifeless, bass shy, fooled off, flat, honky, sour, irritating, lackluster, threadbare, or like paper mache. Maybe you just weren’t paying close attention because at that time you didn’t think about burn in, or your system wasn’t as revealing or there is something very unusual about MA cables. I will stop now. 😬
I enjoy trying to get to the truth of the matter. Is there something that’s a mystery there worth pursuing? That’s the full extent of it. Over and out.
Proposition: A scanning electron microscope will reveal changes to cryo’d metal conductors or other metal items but won’t reveal changes to metal conductors resulting from burn in most likely because burn in of cables doesn’t involve the conductor. It’s an excellent example of measuring the wrong thing. If there were differences in the crystalline structure on the surface of the wire due to burn in a scanning electron microscope would be able to observe them. Agree, disagree?
Reversing cables does not (rpt not) diminish the effects of burn in. Do it today! Question - how do you know both cables are in the same direction as regards the wire directionality? In other words, one cable have been put together reverse of the other, you know, if Morrow doesn’t control directionality? That would complicate things if true.
I only ask good questions. 😛 Why would MA suggest reversing the cables if he controls the cables for wire directionality? Sometimes arrows on cables indicate direction as regards *shielding*. Maybe he is not on board the directionality train. I don’t know.

If a cable is unshielded and has arrows the arrows indicate direction of wire. But many cables don’t control directionality durIng the manufacturing process so for any cable the odds are 50% the cable will be in the correct (best sounding) direction when you hook it up. If the cable is not controlled for wire directionality but is directional due to shielding that is a conflict. I am saying all wire is directional, thus all cables are directional whether the manufacturer says so or not.
elizabeth6,002 posts12-18-2018 7:22pmYou know Geoff, you could start a service to help with direction on cables..For a fee folks send you their cables and YOU figure out which way they go...

If you were able to hear you could do it yourself. It’s not rocket science. 🚀 God helps those who help themselves. 
barnettk

"Why would MA suggest reversing the cables?" I assume that he thought maybe it would improve the way the cable sounded since in our conversation I did not feel that the cable sounded that good from the start.

>>>>If MA controls his cable for directionality and labels the cables for direction why would he suggest reversing them to see if that would improve the sound? It doesn’t make sense. I realize I’m retreating myself. Unless the cables are shielded, then I couid see why he would say that.

The reason Audioquest and some other cable companies *control directionality* during fabrication of the cables is so the customer will know a priori which way to hook up the cable for the *best sound.* When ANY cable is not in the “correct direction” the sound will suffer relative to the other direction. That’s why fuse direction is important, too. It’s the same issue.
I will not be deleting my posts on the chance someone can figure out my answers.
I am getting to have an understanding that when stevecham suggests something or makes a statement the best course of action is usually to do the opposite. No offense.
@geoffkait Why would anyone pay $1500 or more to burn-in $300 Cables?  Why not by $1800 cables and not have to bother burning in.

>>>I’m sure I have no idea what the heck you’re talking about.