Beware of the cable claiming long burn in period.

Don't cable burns in at the speed of light?

@rodman99999

It’s amazing how much exception you take simply to the obvious questions of how you would turn your conjecture in to a testable hypothesis.

Why does this cause you to run around in circles, and shift the burden to me as if I had to somehow disprove YOUR hypothesis??? I mean, do you think it works like this?  You float a hypothesis, and if SOMEONE ELSE doesn't prove it wrong....then you may as well be right and asking for evidence for your claim is just being mean?

You claimed burn-in was a settled question among manufacturers. Again....I dared ask for evidence and I get the X-Files response: "The Truth Is Out There."

Ok. Guess I’ll trust you on that, as you seem to have a good handle on these things.

I agree he does not have to prove anything TO YOU. Clearly no amount of blabber is going to change anyone's mind on anything about cables. All it can be is a pissing contest, generally into the wind... And then the contestants wonder why they end up smelling bad?  Some of it is kind of fun.. mainly to clarify one's own position. But to think it makes any difference? you are plain deluding yourself.Though for the popcorn crowd I am sure it makes for entertainment.

prof1,714 posts02-18-2019 4:32pmaniwolfe,

"It took over 300 hours to really sound great."

What do you think is happening within the cable over those 300 hours that would alter the sound?

>>>>Unbelievable.

Believable. 

No, what was unbelievable I thought, was someone who has been through these burn in discussions many times, asking “what’s causing the long burn in times?” since, you know, it’s all been covered ad nauseam. Yeah, I know what you’re thinking, “what’s been covered ad nauseam?” 😛