Usually the cable extrusuon and printing is done at the same time and obviously before reeling onto the drum.
And yes with ink jet printers the printing could be printed backwards if required.
A much earlier post by me said directionality was presumably caused -" That when copper is drawn through the die the molecular / crystal structure lines up in a certain way so the signal can either be with or against that flow" you need to test direction for your self but by imagination you could say it would be as it was drawn forward. So maybe that means the signal goes in reverse of the extrusion so as to not rub the fur up the wrong way so to speak.
In any case directionality not relevant to burn-in, I believe. Sorry for the diversion.
I am working now on a specification to get a quote for a crystalographic analysis of a wire.
In any case thank you for the reply, I can relate to this logic.
Does the cable extrusion and insulation happen in one step? I’d imagined they’d extrude the conductors separately and then combine them when applying the insulation. In which case, there’d be added complexity as directionality of either conductor could be reversed as well.
As I said, I don’t know details of the exact manufacturing process (It was not done by Naim themselves), so can’t answer giving detail, just relaying what Julian wrote many years ago when hypothesising about what may possibly make a cable directional, in this case when the insulation is extruded/applied onto the cable.
One line only. Imagine all things at one end of the factory: metal, plastic, ovens, extruder, twister, etc. Each in proper order. Then at the end cutter and drum and storage/shipping area.
All cables are manufactured equal, in lengths of kilometers or rest time between shifts.
Then OUR cables are a bit more artisan: From a drum cut the ordered length, add terminals, etc. Pack and ship.
But I may be wrong.
This makes sense to me as applying the insulation is another thermal treatment on the cable (wire). Even if superficial, it may be the most important part, taking into consideration the skin effect.
Having just had surgery & skin graft for eyelid cancer a few hours ago, my eye is sewn shut for 4 weeks plus i am somewhat drugged for pain this maybe distorts my out look or maybe not?
But when i made reference to the DUO-TEC yesterday which i hope someone read? There was a magnitude of audible burn in shown this was free of bias or psychological ins and outs and strongly audible. Also i am willing to bet Cable Measurement would be identical Pre and Post Burn in. Has this not purely by accident shown a cable can be “burnt in” and also existing Science either because it cant or simply because it has no point need or purpose for it to do so can not measure this effect? I welcome comment from all quarters on this.
@66richard get well and keep us updated.
I will try to follow your reasoning, but I really think it only depends on the precision of the measurement instrument(s).
We must however make sure that we select the right and relevant indicators.
To keep to the spirit and the letter of the OP, I also think we must demonstrate that it can be perceived by ear.
At the end of this process only a few flat earthers will remain that will say cables do not burn in. I will also embrace them, in my quest for diversity and inclusion.
Still in Paris and considering how to get back to Nice, due to CO2 concerns.
Also there is a very interesting article in The Economist this week regarding the precision of new instruments under development. Very soon we will be able to measure the effect of a passing truck in the gravity field.
Why not a cable burn-in detector? Just a question of budget, really.
If there is a difference then it should be easy to measure. And if it can be heard then it should be easier still.
So no chance of confirmation bias here, then…
I am still unsure, I have to double check that the process complies with the scientific method. Then I will confirm.
A fairly simple first step, I think would be:
Have two pairs of burned in cables plus two pairs of not-burned-in cables.
Send the same signal down both a pair of burned-in cables and a pair of not-burned-in cables. At the other end, use an inverting amp to invert the signals for one of those pairs, and then combine the signal from that pair and the burned-in cables. The output of the combined signal should be close to a flat line if the burn-in has no effect, and should be vary from a flat line if there is an effect. To check that the inverting amp is not introducing some artefacts itself, do the same test twice more - once where both cables are burned in, and once where they are not burned in. Again, the output after they are combined should be a flat line - any difference being due to the inverting amp.
My point is that you have decided what the outcome is before running the experiment - and even been somewhat derogatory about those who think that cables do not burn in.
In principle yes, with the caveat that not in all systems and not with all ears.
So your doctor wrote : read 3 times per day the cable burn in thread, outside of the meals.
Just joking of course and hope you a very good recovery.
I would take the night train, open now again. I enjoy the most the night train. You wake up around 6am and can see the sea and beaches during 30 mn before arrival at Nice.