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 |
I believe it is a matter of degree. For sure new speakers and certain crossover capacitators benefit from long term burn-in. Speaker cables vary quite a bit since you have enormous power, current and phase considerations so burn in there is rational.
I find that balanced line level (XLR) cables are the least variable interconnects while unbalanced low level cables (phono cables) display more differences. With that in mind then it makes some sense that break-in of sensitive components: Tubes, Capacitators, Speakers and, to a lesser extent, solid state devices, switches and even some kinds of wire is rational. The differences are, however, variable.
|
Lizzie, the Air Force never sleeps. 😳
|
If burn-in valid, then materials cannot be inert. If the materials are not inert, then they must always be affected. If the materials are affected, then a cable that's had thousands of hours of playing should have measurable deltas to its twin that sat on the shelf in the same environment for those same thousands of hours. Technology exists to measure femto values, so it should be possible to measure deltas. It is possible, per Heisenberg, that measuring may negate the change. By the same token, different program must also affect change. In that case, change is constant and therefore indeterminate. Many years ago BAS reported on the results of test at UWatterloo with Linn's Ivor Tiefenbrun who gave rise the 80's single speaker in the room gospel. The day began with two brief tests of the Tiefenbrun claim that undriven transducers (digital alarm watches, telephones, headphones,
or other loudspeakers) in the same room audibly degrade the sound quality - a claim which forms the rationale behind their "single speaker"
demonstration demand. Firstly, a digital alarm watch with piezoelectric "beeper" was held about 500 mm behind Tiefenbrun's head while he listened
to the loudspeaker reproduction from his stereo seat on the couch, with the watch either fully exposed or clasped firmly between the palms of my hands.
We were assured that the latter artifice would muffle any deleterious effects. This was thus a single-blind test: The testee did not know the covered/uncovered
status of the watch at each trial, but the tester did know. A random series of 20 trials was conducted while Remington cued up the turntable (playing
a female vocalist) on each occasion, as he did throughout the day. Tiefenbrun's result: 10 correct responses in 20 trials, an outcome which shows no
ability to discriminate between the two situations.
The second test, also single-blind, used a Linn "Kan" loudspeaker as the undriven transducer. Again the female vocalist
was used as source material. The loudspeaker lay on the thickly-carpeted floor behind the listening couch. It was placed either on its side (the "uncovered"
condition) or on its face (the "covered" condition) according to a random series of choices. Ten trials were conducted during which Tiefenbrun
achieved a score of 5 correct out of 10. Again, this demonstrates no discrimination ability beyond what one would expect purely on the basis of chance.
from https://www.bostonaudiosociety.org/bas_speaker/abx_testing2.htmSomeday cable burn-in maybe similarly debunked. |
