Cable "burning": Real or VooDoo ???

Richard I think your going in a good direction. I too believe we should ask "possible" questions, and rather than simply dismissing them as so often is the case, we need to explore the theory. 70242.241 has asked the question, I believe meant to state the fact that metal has no memory, when bent or pounded or what ever the structure is indeed altered. We know that heating the metal will re-disperse the elements evenly though the material. I think the question of wave flow, and a new question of electro magnetic fields produced when current is passed should be looked at. Maybe there is something there as current rides through the metal moving via electrons it might indeed alter something.

Then again, it could all be immaterial, akin to debating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. It seems to me that it would be very easy to see if cables improve with "burn-in." Directly compare "burnt-in" cables with identical "non-burnt-in" cables. Double-blind test, either ABX or same-different. See if a statistically significant number of trials indicate that there is probably an audible difference between them. If not, I don't insist on accepting the null argument; we can do more testing.

And/or do electrical analyses on cables before "burn-in" and after, measuring the conductance and reactance over maybe 5 Hz up to 100 kHz.

I would love to comment, but I am restricted by my own commitment to myself and others here to just say RHUBARB. But perhaps I am allowed to comment on the wine tasting analogy. I have participated in blind tasting tests of wine and they served to prove nothing I didn't already know from many years of tasting wines - they taste different from each other. The thing is, I have learnt a lot from experience of the world without the benefit of blind tests, such as stopping at red traffic lights to avoid collisions (would be interesting to do a blind test on that wouldn't it)? Next time a sexual conquest insists I wear a condom, perhaps I will insist on a blind test first. I will shut up now in quavering fear of the negative votes I will get for the use of sarcasm. But honestly, what a load of RHUBARB that still pervades these debates.

Redkiwi, again you have saved me considerable aggrivation in my own reply to this. When did this site become one of ABX arguments rather tools needed to make music? Reminds me of a bumper sticker that circulated in my area for a good while, it read, "Shut up and Dance."

Redkiwi, fond greetings: There will be RHUBARB as long as humans debate. As for double blind tests, they DO have their merits. Many of us would not be around any more, if they did not exist. As you know, the pharmaceutical industry must rely heavily on them in the development and testing of new drugs. They seem to work on a biochemical, physiological level. Strangely, they often do not in the psychological field. What we see here in this debate, is just one example for this strange fact, which has bugged experimental psychology just as much as it bugs some of us here.