Speltz Anti-cable needs break-in period?


I received a pair of Anti-cables a few days ago, and I have been using it for about 10 hours now.

It's obviously less bass, less soundstage, and a bit harsher sound while many ppl say anti-cables sound awesome right from the box.

What do you guys think?
I used transparent music link before.

I hope it gets better soon..
realprober
This is kind of a "point-counterpoint" post. I have not noticed any difference with my anti-cables over time. Maybe it has to do with the absence of a dialectric (just guessing here), but even when I disconnected it to move the speakers I did not notice a difference. Maybe it's just me.......
11-05-06: Mrtennis
the speltz interconnect and speaker cables need a minimum of 300
hours and preferably 500 hours before critical evaluation.

since the cable has virtually no dielectric, the cables need a re-breaking
in whenever they are moved from one link to another.
Everything I have ever read regarding cable break-in attributes the
break-in one hears to the dialectric material on the cable, and not to the
wire itself. With this in mind, MrT's comment above makes no sense to
me whatsoever.

Please educate me.
Certainly it's Paul Speltz's contention that the think dielectric of his cable means much less break in required.
Tgrisham sez:

"With my Von Schweikert VR-4JRs, I use the Speltz anti-cables. I have tried twisted and untwisted and found the bass more defined and quicker using untwisted."
This would seem to jibe with the recommendation for twisting to achieve max bass response, but apparently with your speakers, in your room, the other is preferrable for your tastes. At least it's nice to have the choice. I still wonder about the guys who posted before who found the Anti-Cables too weak in the bass, but I believe the Speltz website makes this topic pretty clear.

Of course, using cables that roll off the treble as a reference (something I believe many 'garden hose' and/or networked cables do) will make a cable that doesn't do this sound less bassy by comparison. (And the opposite effect could possibly have something to do with why Tgrisham finds the extreme treble "more natural" with the cables untwisted, although that description doesn't tell us in what way the HF sounds less natural when the cables are twisted.)

I agree with Tgrisham and Tvad on the point about 'break-in' and dielectric; the use of the relatively sparse dielectric seems like it should be a mitigating -- not exacerbating -- factor in this area.
it makes sense to me that a conductor needs hours of signal before it sounds its best.

the 300 to 500 hours of signal required for break in is based upon the experience of another person who owns the interconnect and speaker cable.

paul speltz will tell you his cables sound somewhat "edgy" when they have no hours on them. he will suggest that they need break in. perhaps you can ask him for an explanation.