Burn in - a myth?

Lol

Why are you hiding your profile?

I don’t have a profile to hide.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts on the topic of audio cable burn-in. We truly value diverse perspectives and open discussions here on the Naim Forum.

It’s completely understandable that not everyone agrees on the concept of audio cable burn-in. This topic has been a subject of debate in the audiophile community for quite some time. While some listeners perceive changes in sound quality over time, others with not very revealing system remain skeptical.

We encourage a respectful exchange of ideas and experiences, and we respect your decision to not share a profile. If you’re interested, you can still follow along with the conversation without actively participating.

Ultimately, the world of high-fidelity audio is full of nuances and subjective experiences, which is what makes it so intriguing. It’s a space where personal preferences and beliefs play a significant role in shaping our individual listening journeys.

Thank you for being a part of our community, and we hope you continue to find valuable insights and discussions here on the Naim Forum.

7 Likes

Absolutely.

As I alluded to in my post No. 506, most of the difficulties seem to arise because of what seems to be a small group of non-scientists who for some reason appear to believe that they understand how science works when, as is easily discernible from the content of their posts, they very clearly do not.

Let us consider Fatcat’s points in his post to me above. Now I will not respond directly to his post as it is rude in tone and therefore does not deserve my time. But to provide clarification for the rest of the community, should they be interested, it is instructive to consider what he has written.

Why should the fact that I am a scientist mean that I should have scientific arguments that ‘prove’ that burn-in exists? Why should I have to prove that burn in exists anyway, scientist or not? I know myself that burn in exists because I have heard it with my ears.

This has nothing at all to do with my scientific qualifications. I can certainly cite scientific reasons that help to explain the existence of the burn in phenomenon, but these don’t ‘prove’ it. It is not possible to prove it in the context of this forum.

I certainly know that the people who have ‘scientific’ arguments that ‘prove’ that burn in doesn’t exist are incorrect. Whether or not that’s because I’m a scientist I’m not sure, but it probably does help.

How do I know this? Because there, quite simply, are no scientific arguments that ‘prove’ that burn-doesn’t exist. Even on an an elementary level this is self-evident, as if there were then there would not be any basis for debating it!

Now there certainly seem to be people here who believe that they can cite scientific arguments why burn-in doesn’t exist. That is an entirely different matter. These people are not scientists and they are and mistaken in their claims.

This is easily demonstrable and if anyone would care to put forward to me what they believe is a scientific argument that ‘proves’ that burn-in does not exist then I shall be happy to explain to them where they are going wrong.

The comments that Fatcat has made above are an excellent example of the sort of instances where non-scientists attempt to erroneously invoke what they regard as the power and authority of science in order to support their mistaken assertions.

I submit that his post is a useful illustration of why people who do not understand science would do better to avoid making such comments. Much better to say nothing when you don’t understand what you are talking about.

1 Like

There are some very interesting articles on this if you do an internet search of “is cable burn in a myth”. Although this thread is entertaining, I’m finding these articles more useful.

Pots and black kettles?

Roger

1 Like

This thread is of zero value in determining if cable burn-in is real or a myth. Some people hear it, others do not. End of story. As an excercise in debating skills it is a pleasant diversion though it is becoming tiresome…

It could potentially be very interesting in hearing people’s experiences with various cables in their own particular systems and whether or not they perceive any changes over time after installing them. I would find that fascinating.

Unfortunately, as always happens with threads like this, it simply becomes a platform for those who do not believe that the phenomenon exists to attempt to constantly redicule and heap scorn on those who either do or remain open-minded. The general rule in these debates appears to be - ‘if I do not believe in something that you believe in then unless you are able to prove to me ‘scientifically’ that it exists I will regard you either as someone prone to flights of fancy or just a plain idiot’.

An interesting point to consider: if someone could prove to them 'scientifically. that cable burn-in was real, would they then start to hear it? Their own frequently employed reasoning along the lines of ‘you imagine you hear it because you believe in it’ or whatever would seem to suggest that they would.

Presumably, if I imagine that I hear it because I believe in it then equally they imagine that they do not hear because they do not believe in it. If they were provided with irrefutable scientific proof that it did exist then they presumably would start to hear it!

Quite fascinating! Along similar lines to ‘if a tree falls down in a forest when nobody is around then does it make any sound?’.

2 Likes

Roger,

I hold my hands up. I’m not proud of it but sometimes I lose my cool. I’m afraid that what I personally regard as ignorance and stupidity always brings out the worst in me. But two wrongs don’t make a right.

Without irrefutable proof either way about burn-in, which we don’t actually have (I don’t consider ‘I definitely hear it / don’t hear it’ as irrefutable proof btw) it’s probably appropriate to have a balanced viewpoint and be open to all possibilities rather than either side of the argument constantly banging a drum to the point where it gets tiresome. I’m not a huge believer but I’m very happy to be proved wrong, it’s a fascinating subject both from the physical and cognitive perspectives. (I should probably add Marketing!!)

5 Likes

I agree. I believe it because I believe I’ve heard it. I have never, and would never, try to convince anyone that they do or should hear it when they don’t.

That is the difference between myself and the majority of those here who do not believe. They spend an awful lot of time and effort attempting to convince me that they know what I am hearing better than I do myself.

The only drum that I have ever banged is that I know what I am hearing myself and that you, whoever you are, do not know what I am hearing.

PJL, by all means state your case, but please try to steer clear of making judgements of others here. Thanks.

2 Likes

to be fair I think most people are merely suggesting there might be other explanations and having a dogmatic approach is perhaps not being balanced and open minded as to what is actually going on, it’s good to be curious.

2 Likes

I don’t think my mind is burnt-In sufficiently for this thread

1 Like

If properly burned in. :wink:

IMG_8083

2 Likes

Thank you for confirming my assessment of your position.

I can say I am 99.99999% certain I have never suggested burn in doesn’t exist.

In fact three days ago I posted.

I personally think, weighing up all the arguments, coming to my own conclusions, cable burn in is more likely to be a phenomenon than not.

Just remember.

A forum is not just a place to talk. It’s also a place to listen.

I’ve read through your perspective on the concept of audio cable burn-in, and I’d like to take a moment to explore this topic with a focus on the diverse range of opinions that exist within the audiophile community.

It’s evident that you hold a firm belief in the existence of audio cable burn-in, and I respect your conviction. Many audiophiles share your viewpoint and have reported experiencing changes in sound quality over time. These changes are often attributed to various factors, such as the alignment of microstructures within the cable, stabilization of electromagnetic fields, and other complex interactions.

At the same time, it’s important to acknowledge that the topic of audio cable burn-in isn’t universally accepted, and skepticism also has a place in these discussions. While some listeners perceive audible changes, others might attribute these differences to psychological factors or the brain’s ability to adapt to new sound signatures. This doesn’t negate the experiences of those who believe in burn-in but adds to the complexity of the conversation.

The audiophile community is a fascinating blend of science, technology, personal experience, and subjective perception. While empirical evidence can provide a foundation for our understanding, it often struggles to encompass the full spectrum of human perception. This is why even topics like cable burn-in, which might not have definitive scientific backing, continue to be debated passionately.

It’s worth noting that differing viewpoints enrich our discussions and challenge us to critically examine our own beliefs. While you hold a steadfast position on the matter, there are others who approach this topic with an open mind and are willing to explore alternative explanations.

As we navigate the world of high-fidelity audio, let’s embrace the diversity of opinions and experiences that make this community so vibrant. By engaging in respectful conversations, we can learn from one another and broaden our understanding, even on topics where there might not be a clear consensus.

11 Likes

I think you’re mistaking me for somebody else.

See my last post.

I believe that I’ve heard cables run in. I’ve also purchased a new cable that didn’t seem to change after use.

I’ve made my own pure silver litz interconnects in the past which seem to be a bit bright when new, and then that settles after a few weeks of use.

Ive heard hifi components run in and change. Although I must admit I’ve never heard the ups and downs in performance that some people suggest, just more of a gradual improvement in weight and spaciousness mostly. I heard this with my atom as I purchased it new but not with the second hand nova.

I’ve heard a difference in upgrading crossover component quality in diy speakers. I can also hear the difference between attenuating the tweeter resistor by 0.3 ohm. I’m very picky about the brightness of my speakers which is one of the reasons I like building diy speakers so much. I can adjust the tweeter level and get the perfect balance. Not too bright and not too dull.

This last point in particular makes me believe that what I have heard in terms of “burn in” is real. If I were to adjust my tweeter to be brighter, even only marginally, I do not get used to it, even over weeks. I know it’s not right. I’ve tried, thinking that it’s better. Eventually it grates on me and I change it back.

When I first purchased some NACA5 it was too bright. Like the change I’ve experienced with adjusting a resistor, but it settled. I know the resistance of the cable won’t change and that it’s likely not measurable with the tools we have but I do think something happens. I have no idea what though.

I can’t really decide if bass improves or treble mellows. Whatever it is, I think you have to be sensitive to high frequencies to hear it. I find a lot of commercial speakers on the bright side. Anyway, maybe I’m hearing things.

An interesting test I conducted once was to purchase some twin electrical cable from diy store. Big chunky 4mmsq stuff. Hooked it up, sounded great. Really nice and balanced. Big spacious and punchy. I thought I’d scored jackpot. Then a week or two later it started to sound dull and lifeless. The treble had mellowed or the bass increased. I don’t know but it had to go.

To be honest I don’t really care either way on the debate. It’s very entertaining to read and I admire everyone’s stamina in going round and round in circles.

Just thought I’d share my experiences.

Mark.

4 Likes