Cables Need Burn In?

[Pangaea]

What about amp bags- do they need burn in?

Just kiddin'... wow things got tense there for a moment. I really do appreciate the feedback to my question. What I take from this is... if there is a chance and/or opinion that it will increase sound, why not let it run a couple nights. Even if it is in your head.

Thanks guys!

 

[meat01]

Quote:

I also would like to know if anyone believes that that our current means of electrical measurement are capable of detecting any and all of the changes in a cable which may be audible to certain human ears?

It is the other way around. Measurement tools can measure a lot better than the human ear.

When my company gets a new oscilloscope, they don't let the cables burn in before using it. It is already as accurate as it is going to be. Do you really think they would use it right away if the measurements changed after burn in? Again, we are not talking about 20 khz, we are talking about accuracy in the GHz range. After 100, 500 and 700 hours, the test equipment is still giving the same, accurate measurement, yet, people are claiming that cables in audio equipment change the frequency response after they burn in. How do they do this?

 

[stevenkelby]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gurra1980 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I belive that some people that belive in cable burn in don't understand psycology. Measurements are a lot more sensitive than human ears.

Fair point, just discussing it!

I know what you mean about some measurements being far more more accurate than ears, but do you think that there are, possibly, functions of burn in which may be audible to some ears, yet which we currently have no means of measuring?

I mean, just because we can't or don't measure a certain quality, doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. Right?

Or to put it another way, just because the qualities we can "measure" show no change during burn in, doesn't mean that there are qualities we don't measure, which do change. Does it?

Of course there may be no change, but the evidence so far does not prove that there is no change, merely that we can, with our current technology, measure no change.

 

[Chu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DSlayerZX /img/forum/go_quote.gif to tell you the truth.... to measure the physical property/signal of a cable is not really an accurate test it self, since all the tools have their own built in resister and capacitor. The normal oscilloscope is a built in one mega ohm resistor, and its probe has a built in 9 mega ohm resister and around 36 pf capacitor. who knows if those will actually alter the signal or not.

That's a horrible argument. Assuming both cables behave identically the leads from the Ocilliscope would effect them identically.

 

[Lawrenzini]

I'm sorry Stevenkelby but your stating some kind of "golden ear" hypothesis is beyond a joke. Infact it is acctually in the realms of stupidity.

"What if I can hear something that science can't prove exists"

This is audio, not religion! We have electron microscopes, equiptment to measure magnetic fields, ociloscopes and you are suggesting that there is a change which science can't identify and yet you can hear it?

You seem to have very little understanding of the science behind audio. For a start loudspeakers are a massivly flawed technology, so even if you had a cable which was 100% perfect the minute changes would not be represented in the music, as any speakers no matter how good are not capable of that level of detail.

The human ear is also quite a poor tool in itself, compared to most of the animal kingdom we are virtually deaf.

Finally most Audiophiles are over the age of 40, by which time your hearing is quite terrible. The idea that this bunch of people would somehow have better hearing than anyone else is almost verging on laughable.

You should really read into the work of psychologists such as Leon festinger and consider what you are really hearing.

 

[hciman77]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lawrenzini /img/forum/go_quote.gif You should really read into the work of psychologists such as Leon festinger and consider what you are really hearing.

The work of Irving L. Janis is also relevant here

 

[hciman77]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lawrenzini /img/forum/go_quote.gif Finally most Audiophiles are over the age of 40, by which time your hearing is quite terrible. The idea that this bunch of people would somehow have better hearing than anyone else is almost verging on laughable.

True, however apart from synths there are no musical fundamentals much above about 5.3k and tests (AES) show that it is very hard for anyone to detect even a 16K brickwall filter in musical material which peaks well into the 20K plus range on speakers that can reproduce 35K !!, masking takes care of that very well 99% of the time. Of course if your listening tastes run to 20k test tones you are pretty knackered after 40

, my hearing tops out at about 15k now

 

[Lawrenzini]

Quote:

Originally Posted by hciman77 /img/forum/go_quote.gif The work of Irving L. Janis is also relevant here

Is it me or does "groupthink" sound very Orwellian.

 

[ex0du5]

Lawrenzini wins this topic

.

Yeah I just finished 2nd year Comp Engineering now, and after taking Electricity and Magnetism, it's easy to see how incredibly false the whole cable theory is. Oscilloscopes can't see a difference, science can't see a difference, cables don't pass blind tests, so in my mind, there's only one explanation.

 

[stevenkelby]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lawrenzini /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm sorry Stevenkelby but your stating some kind of "golden ear" hypothesis is beyond a joke. Infact it is acctually in the realms of stupidity. "What if I can hear something that science can't prove exists" This is audio, not religion! We have electron microscopes, equiptment to measure magnetic fields, ociloscopes and you are suggesting that there is a change which science can't identify and yet you can hear it? You seem to have very little understanding of the science behind audio. For a start loudspeakers are a massivly flawed technology, so even if you had a cable which was 100% perfect the minute changes would not be represented in the music, as any speakers no matter how good are not capable of that level of detail. The human ear is also quite a poor tool in itself, compared to most of the animal kingdom we are virtually deaf. Finally most Audiophiles are over the age of 40, by which time your hearing is quite terrible. The idea that this bunch of people would somehow have better hearing than anyone else is almost verging on laughable. You should really read into the work of psychologists such as Leon festinger and consider what you are really hearing.

Your rude and offensive refusal to accept the possibility that science doesn't know something yet it very unscientific! No need to call me stupid, that shows the kind of vehemence a religious fundamentalist would display...

I should have used a

in my first post I guess, I don't hear a difference in cables either, was just having a discussion on the subject but I'm not closed minded enough to ignore and discount the findings of some intelligent, experienced audiophiles. That seems disrespectful to me.

Where did I claim that I have heard the difference? You jumped to a conclusion there, I haven't.

I am well aware that the sonic difference are, in all probability, all in the head. I'm also aware that there are quite possibly some things which science and I don't know.

Respectfully,

 

[stevenkelby]

Also, do you guys "believe" that there are possible audible differences between different cable materials such as silver, gold and copper, which may not be directly measurable?

 

[hciman77]

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevenkelby /img/forum/go_quote.gif Also, do you guys "believe" that there are possible audible differences between different cable materials such as silver, gold and copper, which may not be directly measurable?

Given that some materials are better conductors than others there probably isnt a need to invoke unknown characteristics. What always puzzles me in thse arguments is the physics behind why some materials supposedly alter the frequency signature , i.e how does a cable selectively attenuate frequencies from 16k - 20k and not those below

 

[shigzeo]

i find that if i insert the cable lengthwise into my sleeping clothes at night whilst playing music at moderate levels, the cable produces a much richer high end than otherwise. it is definately NOT psychological

 

[meat01]

Quote:

Also, do you guys "believe" that there are possible audible differences between different cable materials such as silver, gold and copper, which may not be directly measurable?

No I don't and the keyword is audible. There may be measurable differences, but I do not believe they are audible.

 

[Gurra1980]

shigzeo, If such a thing happens it must be messurable!!

hciman77, I agree with you, one thing that bothers me is that people talk about that a cable, can have for ex loudness, or extends some frequencies, as said before if they do, it MUST be messurable otherwise it is such a small difference that no one can hear it.

it would be interessting to see if for ex headroom could meassure HD650 with stock and with cardas, distortion and frequencies

.