2. cables
  3. 132249-75518

Opening a can of worms

Here is the can filled with opinions. It's been hashed and rehashed to infinity and beyond with no clear result. Since I am a seeker of truth I'll post my thoughts here for the yea and naysayers to debate over. Question is: Are expensive speaker or any other cable in a system worth the exorbitant cost over a reasonably priced cable loom? I thought I'd  experiment myself to find out. My comparison is between Transparent Ultra cable loom and Blue Jeans cable loom on a pure stereo system comprised of Proceed PAV,  Proceed PDSD,  Krell Kav 250, Musical Fidelity A3cd, Sony Ps4300 TT and B&W 803D2 speakers. All sources were used by this experiment using identical playback material. Cables had in excess of 200 hrs burn time and all were identical in lenght. The only variation were the connector manufacturers.
One change that occurred during this 4 week long endeavor was that I'm firmly seated on the sharpest picket on the fence.
My result is that I'm now a believer that there are audible differences in cables. I also believe that these differences are minute and one has to really listen carefully and for a long time to discern these differences.
Now to the crutch of the matter, $$$$$, As we all know Transparent Cables would reside in the upper tier of Audio Cable expense.  Blue Jeans Cable on the other hand falls into the lowest tier of expense (well maybe not lowest but low nontheless )
One would think then that the Transparent would be far superior to the BJs. Not really! Yes the highs were a little cleaner, mids a little tighter and lows a tad more pronounced but not by as much as one would expect. Soundstage was somewhat more open and airy and depth was somewhat more defined with the higher priced cable but again less than one would expect. 

Now for my personal opinion regarding the cable debate: expensive cable looms are slightly better than reasonable priced looms, if a dollar equals a penny to you then by all means opt for the higher priced loom, if a penny equals a penny don't be ashamed for opting for the best you can do. The differences are so minute that it's not worth going into debt over. BOTH looms sounded superb on my test system and I would be happy with either loom.

Now let the debate begin, just know I'm a fence sitter and not in one camp or the other
gillatgh
kosst_amojan
2,095 posts
 
@hifiman5 
Nobody ages steaks until they rot. Wine goes corked all the time. A lot of things have an optimal aging period, but forever is never it. I think this cable burn in jazz is pure snake oil. I've never heard it. Caps breaking in is extremely subtle. I think a lot of people just hear what they want to. 
dynaquest4's avatar
dynaquest4
368 posts
 
Hearing cables "improve" over time as they "age or burn-in," if sincere, is total expectation bias. Psychologically....that is: "The tendency for experimenters to believe, certify, and publish data that agree with their expectations for the outcome of an experiment, and to disbelieve, discard, or downgrade the corresponding weightings for data that appear to conflict with those expectations."

You cannot convince someone who has already made an investment in cables that need to "age before they reach full potential" because they have already drunk the kool-aide and will never look back. Same dumb stuff as freezing cables and elevating them on little wood blocks. It is all pure slick marketing by very savvy scammers who completely understand expectation bias and use that phenomenon to fill their pockets.

clearthink
672 posts
 
" Hearing cables "improve" over time as they "age or burn-in," if sincere, is total expectation bias. Psychologically....that is: "The tendency for experimenters to believe, certify, and publish data that agree with their expectations for the outcome of an experiment, and to disbelieve, discard, or downgrade the corresponding weightings for data that appear to conflict with those expectations."

Of course this argument has been around for a very long time and is promulgated by those who "believe" that there is no such thing as burn in but this argument is easily dispensed with and summarily refuted because of course many audiophiles who have been convinced of cable burn in were convinced in sprite of the fact they believed it was not possible! So obviously claims of expectation bias do not apply because if they did the audiophile in this scenario would have been convinced that there was no such thing as burn in! The only thing that this objection proves is that the poster himself is suffering the very expectation bias that he claims other audiophiles are suffering this is so obvious to everyone except those who want us to believe that they believe in science. In fact they do believe in science they just don’t know how it works or how to follow scientific protocol to explore a theory and they do mean well they are just confused.

kosst_amojan
2,095 posts
 
The problem cable burn in believers have is ZERO evidence. The evidence suggests it’s snake oil.
geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
14,147 posts
 
ZEEO? Is that where all the aliens come from?
More to discover