My mind is open, I have just been watching the thread and posed the question based on the banter and the refusal of members to accept any information no matter how it is presented. Almost seems a moot point. But it has been enjoyable to read I guess.
Scott
Perhaps they have exploited ‘Tardis’ technology, mind you that would give rise to big queues at the door.
Dam, I can’t believe it I have been hood winked into posting in a cable thread, Aaarrrg!
I loved this short story by Edgar Allen Poe when i was a bit younger:
This is becoming a bit spooky but I adored this one as well when I was young.
And me too, uncanny 
We should merge the thread « is Melco ripping better than Dbpoweramp? « with the burn in cable thread and also « Ethernet cables sounding impressions ». It would be the longest thread in the Naim forum history.
Yes, and then “What cable are you burning today and why.”
I think you have not completely understood, because you are new here. Or maybe new as poster.
The Ethernet cables and switches mania thread had maybe 3k posts.
And the Melco rips vs Dbpoweramp is one of the most controversial thread here.
If… with speakers, a change in the quality of components in the crossover can measure the same (in terms of frequency response) but sound audibly different, how can you be sure that the measurement you use to assess your cables will be the one that will confirm the effect of burn in?
To me, this indicates that we can change sound but not always measure what changed.
How about Naim’s resistor leg bend tweaks…. I would say they measure the same but they have been found, in listening tests, to sound better.
I am sure there would be some type of measurement that could tell what is going on but it simply might not exist yet.
What??? You mean that yellow thing in the sky isn’t spinning around us, we the static centre of the universe, on our flat piece of rock, with a round bit of cheese that also circulates…
I don’t think there is any such refusal. I am sure everyone would be delighted by any reliable information, repeated and repeatable measurements, plausible explanations - and either way. Essentially, the normal standards that everyone expects in any other topic before something is accepted as truth. And trying to challenge hypotheses and arguments is a good thing, no? It’s the way of progress
Good point.
Incidentally, speakers also burn-in or break-in or change sound in the first weeks of use, do you think this is more from the mechanical part (drivers) or from the electrical part (crossovers, condensers, coils, cables)?
Really first time I think about it, but this could be another case of cable burn-in.
Good morning all, today I will send some pictures of instrumentation and equipment that I plan to use in my experiment.
My intention is to keep it simple, answer any question you may have, avoid any bias and have fun.
This is the Classic described on this Forum and elsewhere many times and certainly by myself
as i can not think of a reason would not be aware of this it is open to conclusion you are jesting
As i sit here in my confines nothing to do but write. I return to My Post. Even after i clearly explained the extent of the DUO-TEC change, people can NOT understand it is too large to be a Bias or Psychological effect - REALLY you can not grasp this?? Or is the question i posed at the end of my post - so unanswerable that you can not go there as that would be the collapse of the Citadel! Your ideas of 2 cables the same etc (there is no such thing It Simply Does Not Exist ) Show a total misunderstanding of what would be required for Subjective testing at this level let alone the Scientific testing that would be required at this level and are flawed beyond belief.
Your view is to narrow and doomed to failure you are as children playing in a sand pit while the Universe goes on around you.
I also think that even IF a number of ground breaking conclusions were reached the result would not advance any further than what i wrote recently under “Burn in-Reality Check”
As a warm up for the next challenge we can discuss “How do Flying Saucers Fly”
which as everybody knows (well they do now) is because there is a Gravitational grid pattern covering the Entire Earth and locking on to that allows you to accelerate at great speed then turn at a right angle without loss of speed.
Meanwhile i am off to find another pass time.
HAVE FUN!
It is absolutely true that components, typically passive components using certain chemical constructs, change and loose performance as they age… in fact these parameters are often quoted in manufacture notes.
Now to what extent this is audible will depend where the component is used… also whether this actual decaying performance ‘improves’ audio performance or not is possibly a bit down to design, system but largely subjective.
As far as cables are concerned, certainly small signal cables such as interconnects, any chemical reaction and resultant electrical change with respect to changes in audio performance will be entirely down to the source and load impedances characteristics as these are passive components verging on being inert. Therefore any changes are as likely to do with the changes in the connected equipment, physical connection as much as the wire itself… and the extent of any change will be dependent on the make and model of connected equipment.
So my point is one can only assess at a system level not at a component level with audible changes, and whether ‘burn in’ improves or decays the performance may be dynamic and possibly be subjective and be dependent on the system.
I do notice in audiophile circles such as this, many look at point interactions rather than necessarily looking at system or the holistic interaction… you see this a lot on discussion on network leads and switches as well… resulting in a huge amount of variability and loss off meaningful assessment… all in my opinion of course…
I’ve been pondering this for a few days. A few people have noted that, statistically, it wouldn’t make sense that any change in a component is almost always described as an improvement.
However, I think I can accept this position. Assuming most people audition a component (and assuming that’s already a well run-in demo unit), they will form a perception of its character based on that run-in state.
It seems reasonable then that as their brand new component settles in and develops the character of the demo unit, that this would be considered an improvement.
Yes I think this is where the subconscious bias and familiarisation comes in…
Now components with mechanical elements such as loudspeakers, spring suspension units for circuit boards, Burndy leads, and physical contact connections, I accept and have experiences that there is a clear audible dynamic here to an optimum state as the mechanical components reach their quiescent physical elasticity… ie ‘run in ‘ to reach an improved state… and in these regards used products can have an advantage… albeit Naim soak test and ‘burn in’ their products after manufacture before being shipped… the main reason is to tease out any component early fail scenarios… ie the bath tub performance failure curve .
