2. cables
  3. 137172-115924

Cable Burn In

I'm new here and new to the audiophile world. I recently acquired what seems to be a really high end system that is about 15 years old. Love it. Starting to head down the audiophile rabbit hole I'm afraid.

But, I have to laugh (quietly) at some of what I'm learning and hearing about high fidelity.

The system has really nice cables throughout but I needed another set of RCA cables. I bit the bullet and bought what seems to be a good pair from World's Best Cables. I'm sure they're not the best you can get and don't look as beefy as the Transparent RCA cables that were also with this system. But, no sense bringing a nice system down to save $10 on a set of RCA cables, I guess.

Anyway, in a big white card on the front of the package there was this note: In big red letters "Attention!". Below that "Please Allow 175 hours of Burn-in Time for optimal performance."

I know I'm showing my ignorance but this struck me as funny. I could just see one audiophile showing off his new $15k system to another audiophile and saying "Well, I know it sounds like crap now but its just that my RCA cables aren't burned-in yet. Just come back in 7.29 days and it will sound awesome."
n80
geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
14,147 posts
 
n80 OP
geoffkait said:

"Besides, all I was asking for in the example you provided is EVIDENCE. That doesn’t seem too much to ask. 😬 I’m not demanding PROOF. "

Okay, change my question to you asking for "EVIDENCE". The result is the same. You ask for evidence but then claim that nothing anyone introduces rises to the level of "EVIDENCE". Same difference. Still specious. And you’re pretty much just parsing words to wiggle out of the trap you set for yourself.

>>>>>I’ve already given you my answer. As I suspected, you don’t know the difference between proof and evidence. Nor do you understand why I ask for evidence to support bold statements. Let me give you an example. When someone recently stated that there have been many blind tests of cables, I asked him to provide links to blind tests. Which someone did. That’s an example of asking for evidence of a bold statement. This conversation can serve no purpose any more.



analogluvr
800 posts
 
Geoffkait said "And if you keep chuggin’ em down before you know it your crap system starts to sound pretty freakin awesome."

Now that you've told us your approach it really explains all your moronic posts
n80 OP
1,227 posts
 
geoffkait said:

"When someone recently stated that there have been many blind tests of cables, I asked him to provide links to blind tests. Which someone did. That’s an example of asking for evidence of a bold statement. "

And then you dismissed blind tests. That's my point. Reading over this and a few other threads it typically goes like this:

1. Someone makes a statement you disagree with.
2. In your reply you ask for evidence. And usually throw in some pretentious and snarky dig at them....presumably because they had the nerve to believe something that you don't.
3. If they produce evidence, which many people won't because with you there is no point, you then dismiss the evidence out of hand whether it be subjective, measured or blind tested. And usually throw in another patronizing dig questioning their intelligence.
4. If someone has the nerve to point out this pattern you resort to direct ad hominem attacks and in this case, dismiss the rest of the thread as a veiled threat that you won't grace us with your presence any longer.

analogluvr
800 posts
 
 If only we could be so fortunate! I'd like to say ignore him and he'll go away, but he won't… 
analogluvr
800 posts
 
And yes, there is no point in debating with him, he just keeps moving the goalposts.
More to discover