OK - but that is exactly the same as those who believe in their eyes and ears when they say that they saw a spaceship, or whatever. Tell me why someone should believe what you believe regarding cable burn in, but not believe people who say that they have seen a spaceship - or that they believe in homeopathy (and that it isn’t a placebo), or crystal healing, or reincarnation - or any of a number of other phenomena which have no proof other than lots of people saying that they believe that it is true?
I’m not belittling you, or your belief in cable burn-in - I’m simply pointing out that no matter how much you believe in it, you haven’t proved that it exists to anyone other than yourself. This is a major part of scientific proof - it does not rely on the reputation or importance or sincerity of the person proposing a theory. They must have proof - a way of obtaining proof - that other people can do for themselves and reliably reproduce the same results. Otherwise it is impossible to know whether the phenomenon really exists, or how it happens, or whether it is something that only the original experimenter can perform or reproduce. In that latter case, at most it might be of some interest, but it is not proven.
But to verify it you’d need to do another test on the before after the test on the after.
Thinking about it, if you did a further bun in after the after, would that make it an afterburner?
And I believe it is worth pointing out that the reason why this is required in science is that hundreds of years of experiments have demonstrated that the anecdotal beliefs and experiences are unreliable even despite the best intentions of people reporting them. I.e., not because science wants to be mean, but because we want to know for sure, and anecdotal evidence cannot satisfy this.
Edit:
IOW, all the scientific apparatus for finding reliable data is a lot of unpleasant work. Scientists developed the apparatus only because it is necessary for progress.
And IOW again, consider a topic that is really important to you, like health. If you are seriously sick, do you consider it sufficient that many people believe in a cure?
Yes.
Good.
Doing scientific research is a matter of trial and error…
It’s always a trial and most of it is in error.
However the experiments that turn out not to be in error and reveal useful information, make up for all the rest!
When you quote something from me, please read until the end.
I wonder finally why you join an audiophile forum, like Naim forum.
The goal of an audiophile forum is essentially to share our experience of audio components, cables, racks, isolation devices……and how they improve or not our experience of the music we are listening.
That experience is based on our ears.
If you don’t trust your ears, or if your ears are not able to differentiate the sound quality difference between components, cables…burn in cables…
why join an audiophile forum?
You seem to favour the discussions related to science, theories…
Why not join a scientific forum?
It’s like saying: The french gruyère cheese has holes. More there are holes, less there is cheese.
Your reasoning is a tautology.
Is there no place for science in hifi? Must it all be purely subjective?
But perhaps you are right - perhaps I should resign from the forum… Only subjective responses should be allowed here.
I trust my ears to tell the difference even when it’s a fairly small difference; but, I don’t trust my memory of sound to retain sufficiently precise information to accurately distinguish two similar sounds weeks or months apart (especially having heard a lot of other sounds in the same context in the intervening period).
Does this distinguish it from Swiss gruyère cheese?
And what about Emmenthal? That’s even worse… BIG holes!
Gosh, this is becoming very sophisticated.
Language constructions are so much more interesting than technical information overflows.
It’s always a pity when people choose to get personal instead of focusing on the actual discussion.
It seems like my contributions are becoming increasingly silly just to balance it up a bit.
All the same. More you eat that cheese, less you eat it.
Particularly if you only eat the holes!
You seem to be suggesting that only you, and people who agree with you regarding cable burn-in, have ears good enough to hear.
It’s not personal, at least not my intention.
Have Beechcomber been personal when he pointed that I probably trust in UFO or Aliens? Not.
The same here. It’s just reasoning and deductions.
Please be aware that being unable to measure a phenomenon does not mean that the phenomenon does not exist.
Hypothesis (rather than theory) generation proposes a phenomenon which is researched in a process which might or might not develop theory.
In the physical sciences, the actual detection of gravitational waves was achieved relatively (pun intended) recently. This does not mean that gravitational waves did not exist prior to that day.