What Exactly Does "Burn In" do for Electronics?


I understand the break in of an internal combustion engine and such, but was wondering what exactly "burn in" of electrical equipment benefits musicality, especially with solid state equipment? Tubes (valves) I can see where they work better with age, to a point, but not quite sure why usage would improve cables, for instance. Thanks in advance for your insight.
dfontalbert
An ABX Blind Test
Here is but one example. Half got it right, half got it wrong, between highly rated Nordost Valhalla power cords and the cords that come in the box with the equipment.
I am not suggesting sonic differences do not exist between equipment and cables but, like Jaxwired, I believe it is easy in this hobby to perceive tiny sonic changes when the real reasons may be related to other psycho-acoustical influences.
Audio equipment testing
Wiki also provides some interesting discussion about objectivists and subjectivists.
"Is an audiophiles aural memory infallible? Of course not. Therefore the differences you think you are hearing could easily not be real"

If that's the case I guess you could turn it around and say the differences you think you don't hear could easily not be real...ha ha. Sorry.
Dragon I completely agree with you. My point is not whether or not the sonic differences are real my point is that we don't know for sure and that there is a possibility that we can be fooled or deceived by our ears. Since this is true, I like to consider more than just "did I hear a difference" when evaluating the worth of a product or concept like burn in. For one thing, I throw common sense into the mix. Certain products and concepts certainly are counter to common sense. For instance, cable risers, expensive feet under components with no moving parts, totem beaks, $1000 / ft cable, etc...
"06-16-14: Jaxwired
Dragon I completely agree with you. My point is not whether or not the sonic differences are real my point is that we don't know for sure and that there is a possibility that we can be fooled or deceived by our ears. Since this is true, I like to consider more than just "did I hear a difference" when evaluating the worth of a product or concept like burn in."

Fine. I agree.

" For one thing, I throw common sense into the mix. Certain products and concepts certainly are counter to common sense. For instance, cable risers, expensive feet under components with no moving parts, totem beaks, $1000 / ft cable, etc..."

Common sense has nothing to do with this. There are plenty of things in science that don't make sense to us, but are still correct. If you want to disagree about what kind of differences you can hear with different cables, fine. But just because something like an expensive cable or tweak doesn't make sense to you, that doesn't mean you are right just because you are basing your answers on common sense. So if you want to get to what the truth really is, I think the only way to get there is with some well conducted listening tests. I've done them before and if carefully planned, I don't see why you can't get accurate results.

The only thing I would add is that you can't just lump everything all together. All cables, all components break in, all tubes, ... that kind of thing. I take everything on a case by case basis. Results vary. Sometimes you can hear a big difference, and some things, small or none.
"My point is not whether or not the sonic differences are real my point is that we don't know for sure and that there is a possibility that we can be fooled or deceived by our ears."

No doubt. Especially when the differences are subtle, as is often the case.

I'd say always trust your own ears above all else, but also realize that nobody is infallible and we all have our limitations. Also that some may use this information for less than altruistic purposes, especially when there is money to be made.