Speaker cable burn in is a MYTH and/or a LIE! [Archive]

shack

03-30-2005, 11:55 PM

BULLS**T!

I don't care how many articles there are by so called experts saying burn in doesn't exist.....

I don't care how many test measurments are taken that show no difference.....

I don't care how many EEs say the science doesn't back it up.....

I don't care how many on this forum may disagree.....

I don't care....I heard it.....so for me burn in is reality.....IT EXISTS!

Based on trying a pair of Ethereal Speaker Cables in the Cable Swap here on the forum, I decided to buy a pair. The ones on my rig were unopened and BRAND NEW when I got them. I now have close to 120 hours on them over the last 4 weeks. Today FedEx delivers my BRAND NEW set that are EXACTLY like the ones I've been listening to. In fact I had been listening to some music when the FedEx guy rings the doorbell. Took one pair off....put the new pair on....sat down and pressed play. Immediately the depth and soundstage were GONE! Treble and mids were thin and bass was weak.....comparitively speaking. Imaging was fine but everything could be pinpointed from the speakers....unlike only 15 minutes before.

For me this disproves "burn in is short term audio memory and you are just getting acustomed to the sound over time theory". I have identical pairs except for the usage.

I understand a little about the makeup and structure of metals. I know that the molecules in metal can change and move at different speeds based on what energy is being applied....but my knowledge is limited to metal working (mainly auto sheetmetal). So I can't explain why I am hearing a difference from a scientific point of view.

I don't care why....all I know is that there IS an audible difference that I can hear.

polkatese

03-30-2005, 11:58 PM

-AMEN! :cool:

PolkThug

03-31-2005, 12:07 AM

You got a Rat Shack meter? This is a perfect opportunity to measure the "weak bass". Then as the new cable burns in you could determine exactly how long the Etherals take to break in, when the bass levels become equal. I'm curious as to how long it takes, a day, a week? Cool stuff.

Regards,
PT

shack

03-31-2005, 12:14 AM

Originally posted by PolkThug
You got a Rat Shack meter?
No. I'm afraid not. Just my ears. It probably is a somewhat unique situation where a user has two exact cables with one being brand new and the other "recently" new. I expected some difference....but nothing close to what I hear.

Frank Z

03-31-2005, 12:14 AM

This oughta be good.....

Heads out to the garage for more cheap wine and favorite, well worn, lawn chair.....

shack

03-31-2005, 12:22 AM

Originally posted by Frank Z
This oughta be good.....

Heads out to the garage for more cheap wine and favorite, well worn, lawn chair.....
Go to bed Frank....No drama here tonight;) . As far as I'm concerned, this is not a dicussion/argument...just an observation on my part. I can't make anyone hear it, I can't make anyone belive it...just reporting what I hear.

Frank Z

03-31-2005, 12:24 AM

I'll stay up for this one!:) You know exactly where this is gonna end up.

shack

03-31-2005, 12:30 AM

OK Frank....you keep an eye on it. It's almost 1:00 AM here in EST and I've still got a few things to do before I go to bed....So I'm OUT!

F1nut

03-31-2005, 02:17 AM

Second the AMEN!

I just got new MIT S3's IC's for the shop today. I have been using some older MIT T2's. Hooked up the new cables and the most notable differences were muddy bass, thin top end and a lack of decay. On the plus side, the separation and placement improved. This echos my past experiences with MIT cables and after about 100 hours I fully expect they will have burned in about 90% with the rest after a few more hundred hours.

Whadyasay

03-31-2005, 02:24 AM

Wouldn't it make sense to build a little apparatus with both rca jacks and speaker terminals for the sake of burning in cables? Like something that will just continuously transmit wide frequency sweeps...maybe even at high enough voltages to speed up the process. And then sell the cables that way?

F1nut

03-31-2005, 02:31 AM

There are devices called cable cookers, however I don't think it's very practicle for cables companies to cook their cables before shipping for a number of reasons.

gmorris

03-31-2005, 07:30 AM

Originally posted by F1nut
There are devices called cable cookers, however I don't think it's very practicle for cables companies to cook their cables before shipping for a number of reasons.

perhaps because they know there is no such thing as cable burn-in? ;)

I'm sorry, I just had to say that. I've never experienced cable burn-in for myself, so I have no opinion on the matter either way. I have, however, experienced a situation when tryrrthg & I swapped out speaker cables on his 2 channel rig, and the differences were huge & immediately noticable. So I do believe cables can sound different.

Early B.

03-31-2005, 08:18 AM

I've switched out lots of cables and never noticed any sort of cable burn-in. I ain't saying it doesn't exist, though. However, I'd like to see this cable swapping experiment repeated in more than one situation before any conclusions are drawn.

PolkThug

03-31-2005, 08:20 AM

Originally posted by Whadyasay
Wouldn't it make sense to build a little apparatus with both rca jacks and speaker terminals for the sake of burning in cables? Like something that will just continuously transmit wide frequency sweeps...maybe even at high enough voltages to speed up the process. And then sell the cables that way?

Step right up! I'll make you a sweet deal, say $700 even.

"Similarly, during routine use, even playing music loudly, the cables of the average system have randomly arranged crystals of metal in the path of the electrons causing collisions at a certain rate. The increased or decreased rate of collisions is inferred from the measurement of lost percentage in the ideal propagation velocity, expressed as percentages of the speed of light. During cooking, which is analogous to "flooding," the signal comes with such force (voltage) and volume (amperage) that the molecules are pushed into alignments that create a path of least resistance, from RCA plug IN to RCA plug OUT, causing collisions at a much reduced rate. "
:D

steveinaz

03-31-2005, 08:43 AM

Shack, I agree---though I can't explain it either. My IC's definitely sounded better and opened up after about 2 hrs; the speaker cables took about 7 days to stop sounding "dry" (for lack of a a better word).

billbillw

03-31-2005, 09:06 AM

Its all in your minds. I'm a material science engineer with more than a dozen courses studying the advanced properties of metalic crystal stuctures and electron flow. The voltages and current in a speaker wire are not enough to modify the structure in any way, shape, or form. Bottom line, if you are convinced there will be a difference, your mind will make it so.

steveinaz

03-31-2005, 09:12 AM

How do you explain people who are skeptical noticing these differences though? I was a serious cable skeptic, and have no problem returning an item that doesn't perform. For instance, I have tried to go back to stranded speaker wires on a number of occasions; it was my mentally desired outcome, yet, everytime I tried them I couldn't stand the sound when compared to my "PITA" high-cost wires that I wanted to get rid of.

This kinda dispels the "pshyco-acoustic" theory, doesn't it?

shack

03-31-2005, 09:12 AM

I don't care how many EEs say the science doesn't back it up.....
I'll expand this statement to include Material Science Engineers.

SDA SRS 1.2

03-31-2005, 09:13 AM

I was skeptical of hearing any differences letting the cable burn in until I got Frank's Ultra Double Run. After getting over the intial surprise of the immediate improvement over the Monster Cable I had been using, I was even more pleased that, like Frank said, there was a slightly noticeable improvement after about 50 hours of burn in.

Robbie

shack

03-31-2005, 09:13 AM

Some other thoughts.....

http://www.soundstage.com/yfiles/yfiles200005.htm

bikezappa

03-31-2005, 09:15 AM

Shack

I beleive you think you hear a differnce.

Would try the ABX test?

Have some switch the speaker wires between lamp cord and whatever wires you love. Do this test ten times without looking at the person changing the wires. Write down what speaker wires you think are connected each time. Have the person switching the wires write down what wires are connected each time.

Compare the results.

Tell us the results.

I couldn't tell any differences. 50%

Have a blast and get the data.

shack

03-31-2005, 09:19 AM

Part II...

http://www.soundstage.com/yfiles/yfiles200102.htm

PolkThug

03-31-2005, 09:20 AM

Originally posted by billbillw
Its all in your minds. I'm a material science engineer with more than a dozen courses studying the advanced properties of metalic crystal stuctures and electron flow. The voltages and current in a speaker wire are not enough to modify the structure in any way, shape, or form. Bottom line, if you are convinced there will be a difference, your mind will make it so.

That would make sense since "differences" in interconnects can't be measured.

billbillw

03-31-2005, 09:22 AM

Originally posted by steveinaz
How do you explain people who are skeptical noticing these differences though? I was a serious cable skeptic, and have no problem returning an item that doesn't perform. For instance, I have tried to go back to stranded speaker wires on a number of occasions; it was my mentally desired outcome, yet, everytime I tried them I couldn't stand the sound when compared to my "PITA" high-cost wires that I wanted to get rid of.

This kinda dispels the "pshyco-acoustic" theory, doesn't it?

Steve,
I'm not trying to say that you won't hear differences between two sets of cables. I'm just disputing the burn-in of cables.

shack

03-31-2005, 09:25 AM

Originally posted by bikezappa
Shack

I beleive you think you hear a differnce.

Would try the ABX test?

Have some switch the speaker wires between lamp cord and whatever wires you love. Do this test ten times without looking at the person changing the wires. Write down what speaker wires you think are connected each time. Have the person switching the wires write down what wires are connected each time.

Compare the results.

Tell us the results.

I couldn't tell any differences. 50%

Have a blast and get the data.

I just did this with a set of AudioQuest Diamondbacks and SC Analog 2s. After I had time to aquaint myself with the SCs and the Diamondbacks at the same time, I had my daughter help me with a blind test. She would swap the cables, play a passage that I used during the demos then ask me which one it was. 8 changes/opportunities....8 correct answers. Sometimes she would change the cable...sometimes not. I COULD pick out the difference every time. Maybe I'm special:D

But then again it could be coincidence or..... I could be psychic....I did originate the term psvchic dibs you know.......

PolkThug

03-31-2005, 09:32 AM

Originally posted by shack
I just did this with a set of AudioQuest Diamondbacks and SC Analog 2s. After I had time to aquaint myself with the SCs and the Diamondbacks at the same time, I had my daughter help me with a blind test. She would swap the cables, play a passage that I used during the demos then ask me which one it was. 8 changes/opportunities....8 correct answers. Sometimes she would change the cable...sometimes not. I COULD pick out the difference every time. Maybe I'm special:D

That's pretty cool. Are the SC's RG59/6 type and the AQ's stranded?

steveinaz

03-31-2005, 09:34 AM

Originally posted by billbillw
Steve,
I'm not trying to say that you won't hear differences between two sets of cables. I'm just disputing the burn-in of cables.

The statement applies to either, I was even more skeptical about burn-in. Bill, believe me----I WANT TO BELIEVE YOU---it would make my life so much less complicated, but I calls them as I hears them...LOL

billbillw

03-31-2005, 09:34 AM

Originally posted by shack
Some other thoughts.....

http://www.soundstage.com/yfiles/yfiles200005.htm

Nothing but a bunch of quotes and opinions from the top snake oil sellers in the business.

shack

03-31-2005, 09:37 AM

Originally posted by PolkThug
That's pretty cool. Are the SC's RG59/6 type and the AQ's stranded?
The AQs are 3 solid wires and the SC is stranded.

faster100

03-31-2005, 09:39 AM

I just listen, thankfully i havent a golden ear' I do practice burn -in with tubes and cables, it's called use.. I never spent much time trying to hear a difference.. If i like the cables/tubes they stay.. if they sound better over time.. more power to them and me.. I'm on the fence with this subject... However i like the better componets and cables and tubes for my own reasons. If they sound better after burn in, GREAT!! I don't not believe in it... Just un sure,

shack

03-31-2005, 09:40 AM

Originally posted by billbillw
Nothing but a bunch of quotes and opinions from the top snake oil sellers in the business.
The reviewer didn't think so.

Let me be blunt: Anyone who claims there isn’t a clearly audible difference between virgin and properly conditioned cables, at least from out of the bunch I tested, is clearly hard of hearing.

shack

03-31-2005, 09:45 AM

Y'all have fun with the rest of this. I've stated what I heard (not imagined). Take it or leave it. I've also found some material (after the fact) that in some form or fashion lends some credibilty to what I heard. Take it or leave it.

My job here is done....I can add nothing more.....I'm out!

jdhdiggs

03-31-2005, 09:48 AM

I think it would be cool if burn-in existed, however materials engineering, EE, and ABX testing have all proved it doesn't exist. The psychological phenomenon has been proven though. It is a hard case to crack.

Shack, if you can really do it (tell burned in cables from non), you would have a hell of a Ph.D. paper for material sceince, not to mention a lucrative career as a "golden ear" tuner. They get between a couple hundred to a couple thousand dollars an hour.

And I am being serious, not sarcastic.

RuSsMaN

03-31-2005, 10:02 AM

Shack, F all the naysayers, let them listen to thier grunt.

A lot of us have spent a lot of time, and shared our experience to try and help others to get the most they can out of their rigs, or at least try some things. Just like most issues, there are some that simply won't budge (and appear not to want to either), or listen to other takes on the subject. Now you've got people telling you essentially, that YOU are lieing, and you heard it first hand.

You and I will move on down the audio road, and have fun doing it. The lunatics are trying to run the asylum here now, and I'm going to let them. I love these guys that were NOWHERE audiowise a year or two ago, have tried a couple cables, and bought a peice or two of low to mid-fi gear, and are now experts on all things audio. How many times can we say the same things over and over?

CP is the like the stock market, and right now it's on a downward trend. It may be time to find something else to do, friend.

Cheers,
Russ

polkatese

03-31-2005, 10:07 AM

Originally posted by RuSsMaN
I love these guys that were NOWHERE audiowise a year or two ago, have tried a couple cables, and bought a peice or two of low to mid-fi gear, and are now experts on all things audio. How many times can we say the same things over and over?
Cheers,
Russ

-AMEN! Part Deux! :cool:

reeltrouble1

03-31-2005, 10:17 AM

Well spoken Russ, I still feel the hardcore members drive the applecart and am most interested in what those posts say.

Shack I am with you, I know there are differences in how wire sounds, most recently I compared MIT Terminator to PS audio speaker cables, I could not hear alot of differnce between the two, however, this has nothing to do with burn in and does not mean their is no difference between speaker cables.

When I sarted using better IC's I was immediately aware of a difference in SQ.

PolkThug

03-31-2005, 10:20 AM

"Let me be blunt: Anyone who claims there isn’t a clearly audible difference between virgin and properly conditioned cables, at least from out of the bunch I tested, is clearly hard of hearing."

Same old arguement. "You can't hear as good as I can!"

Let me guess, the guy that made this statement is well into his 40's or 50's.

The problem I have with this, when talking about home audio, is that good microphones can hear differences in sound better than humans can. The arguement that "My ears are the best measuring device" is, in reality, false. People tend to forget that the album that they listened to was recorded with none other than, a microphone. So, everthing they hear from the album, or that cable X "reveals", was "revealed" by the microphone the first time.

If these differences exist, they can be measured. (I'm trying to do this myself.)

Maybe this arguement isn't in that article, but I can't see it at work because its getting blocked as "Entertainment".:)

Regards,
PT

2+2

03-31-2005, 10:44 AM

I didnt think interconnects made a difference....but they do. Dont know about burn in as I cant say I have experimented with it so I wont say either way.

But those of you saying burn in cannot be measured...can differences in interconnects be measured? The differences in sound of interconnects is very real to me.

Also..what makes people think that we know all there is to know about electicity and material science, and have the technology to "measure" the difference as it impacts sound? This is just silly. Technology continues to evolve and we learn more about nature each year. Humans have much more learning to do....different particles at the molecular level are being discovered etc....sorry...but this requirement of measurement as proof seems to say that we know all there is to know...which is clearly erroneous.

PolkThug

03-31-2005, 11:20 AM

Originally posted by 2+2
, and have the technology to "measure" the difference as it impacts sound? This is just silly.

Not silly at all, this is very old technology. Think of voice recognition. Audio signals can be measured and compared.

dkg999

03-31-2005, 11:55 AM

Even with my non-critical ears (too much loud music and farm equipment when I was younger!) I can hear some differences in speaker cables, and sometimes with IC's. I'm not convinced that burn-in with the actual wire happens, but an associate that is a professor of EE at our local university, and is also into high-end audio, told me once that there are changes that take place at the connections (i.e. the rca plug or spade/banana/bare wire). He seemed to feel that the changes in sound were caused by the properties of the electrical transfer at the connections changing.

Early B.

03-31-2005, 12:02 PM

This thread is about cable burn-in, not about whether there are audible differences between cables. How did we get off the subject? So allow me to try to get us back on track...

First, any discussion of a scientific means of measuring burn-in is fruitless because science doesn't fully understand how we hear in the first place. There's too much subjectivity to it, so forget about it. Besides, what is heard can also be felt so scientists would have to find a way to measure that, too.

Second, if listening to audio gear is largely subjective, then we can agree that some of us will hear things that others won't, including cable burn-in. Now whether that is psychological or not is irrelevant because the basis of subjectivity is all in the mind. So if Shack says he realizes cable burn-in, then so be it. My only comment was that hearing this difference one time is cool, but it is not enough to formulate any general conclusions about cable burn-in.

dragon1952

03-31-2005, 12:17 PM

As for cable burn-in, I've read/heard that it has to do with the process of the dielectric absorbing and releasing energy which I guess at some point reaches a point of stabilization. If this is the case, the more dielectric the longer the burn-in and vice-versa. This may make more sense than assuming some change in the electrical properties of the wire itself.
I've also heard about the theory regarding the terminations that was mentioned earlier.

2+2

03-31-2005, 12:34 PM

Early B. I only brought in interconnects to make the point that many also say that there is no difference between cables...differences I, and my wife who doesnt care, clearly hear...

PolkThug, all I am saying is that "old technology" is limited to what is known now...which may, or may not be, the complete picture....thats all I am saying..... Science thought that atoms were the smallest component ...but then science says that that is not true, electrons are..now this is not true either....etc. Who knew until Einstein that mass and energy were so related? And by what? Speed of light squared...something out of left field?!?!

Back to the subject. I don't say that burn in happens or doesnt happen since I dont have direct experience...personally, having been converted by my relative short experience with interconnects, I would not be surprised at all with burn in.

..Carry on.....

gmorris

03-31-2005, 01:00 PM

Let me pose this question:

Lets all just get along for a hot minute and assume that cable burn-in is real. This would mean that all cables burn-in. So, that would mean if you hooked up your rig with lamp cord, the lamp cord would eventually burn-in, and make the rig sound better.

But who among us is going to believe someone when he comes trotting along to the forum and claims he hears the effects of cable burn-in with his lamp cord speaker cable????????

For the record, I have not experienced burn-in for myself, and I have no opinion whether it exists or not. But to claim that only high end cables burn-in (I'm aware no one has yet made this claim) would seem to me that burn-in is more a question of perception. Is it real or not? I dunno. But it will be real to those who think it is real, or are expecting it to happen.

dorokusai

03-31-2005, 02:44 PM

Here we go again.....yawn.

pjdami

04-01-2005, 12:03 AM

Originally posted by jdhdiggs
I think it would be cool if burn-in existed, however materials engineering, EE, and ABX testing have all proved it doesn't exist. The psychological phenomenon has been proven though. It is a hard case to crack.

Shack, if you can really do it (tell burned in cables from non), you would have a hell of a Ph.D. paper for material sceince, not to mention a lucrative career as a "golden ear" tuner. They get between a couple hundred to a couple thousand dollars an hour.

As a practicing "real world" engineer myself, I have experienced and firmly believe in cable burn - in. All I have to do is cite the Transparent cables I burned in over the past few months. These cables were a bear to burn in.

I don't care what the computers or graphs say. There is a difference between theoretical and the real world application. I see it all the time at work when the design engineer who sits behind a desk all day in some office somewhere will make a claim that a piece of equipment will work because the program says it will. Not to discredit good engineering practices but I know all too well that other factors (in this case fouling factor incorrect on a heat exchanger design) come into play.

dorokusai

04-01-2005, 12:19 AM

I've seen engineers design a cellsite so well that the coverage on the house and surrounding hillside, that is right in front of it.....since it sits in a terrain hole, is spot on....too bad for the rest of the world. If they had conducted a site visit, it would have been pretty obvious....but noooooo, lets rely on models and propagation charts.

Rock on RF!

This is such an old story.....do you guys who are bringing it up think you are breaking new ground? :D I'm sorry, was this an issue that needed Polk Forum to break it wide open and dispel the myth? :D

I'm all for double blinds, but like another fine Polkie said, it won't change my mind, because I hear what I hear....just because you don't doesn't matter. That will always be the flaw in this type of testing....always, we're all individuals.

PolkThug

04-01-2005, 12:31 AM

Originally posted by dorokusai
....always, we're all individuals.

...and mutual respect would be great too, between those of all beliefs.

Regards,
PT

dorokusai

04-01-2005, 12:36 AM

I respect you, just don't care about your agenda....sorry man, I'm not part of your bandwagon.

I wish you luck in your testing, hope you find what you are looking for.

pjdami

04-01-2005, 12:37 AM

BTW,

Shack, kudos that you could tell a difference. If you couldn't well that would be fine too.

phuz

04-01-2005, 12:48 AM

Originally posted by PolkThug
People tend to forget that the album that they listened to was recorded with none other than, a microphone.

Oh my gosh, and that microphone had... a... cable attached to it! I bet the whole studio had MILES of cables in it! Man I sure hope they burned in that mic cable before they started recording... :p

PolkThug

04-01-2005, 01:11 AM

Originally posted by dorokusai
I respect you, just don't care about your agenda....sorry man, I'm not part of your bandwagon.

I wish you luck in your testing, hope you find what you are looking for.

I respect you too and appreciate what you've done for the forum. I especially like the cable demo, regardless of what my personal results are.

I don't expect anyone to care about my agenda, after all, its personal. I do like to share my results though, and enjoy constructive criticism.

What I don't like, is the jabs received because the conclusions that I have reached may not be the same as other peoples conclusions (speaking in general here).

Allthough we don't ride one wagon together, I'm sure there are many other wagons that we would share, like the beer wagon. :)

Peace

Toxis

04-01-2005, 01:53 AM

Why must something be proven by a computer to be true? That alone astonishes me. Who said that computers are infoulable and all knowing?

gmorris

04-01-2005, 07:45 AM

Originally posted by Toxis
Why must something be proven by a computer to be true? That alone astonishes me. Who said that computers are infoulable and all knowing?

Bill Gates.....

jdhdiggs

04-01-2005, 08:06 AM

Originally posted by Toxis
Why must something be proven by a computer to be true? That alone astonishes me. Who said that computers are infoulable and all knowing?

Not to restart this fight, but compared to humans, they are infoulable-no psychology involved, no bad days, no chemical imbalance, one computers results will match the next.. All of which is not true with humans. All knowing? hardly, but they can sure know as much as any human when programmed with that information. ;)

Real or not, if your diggin your new cables, good on ya!

I think everyone needs more beer.

TroyD

04-01-2005, 08:15 AM

If you believe that everything comes down to x's and o's and that if some piece of equipment tells you that there is no difference than it must be true....good on ya. Let the rest of us revel in our ignorance and enjoy our hobby.

You've made your point.......however, respect and let those who have different opinions have thier point of view.

BDT

dorokusai

04-01-2005, 09:08 AM

PT - Beer wagon....yea baby!

danger boy

04-01-2005, 09:19 AM

you buy a pair of new shoes... they look and feel good. you break them in say for a month or two. and they feel even better. breaking in your shoes to me is like cable burn in. it relaxes and opens up with more hours of use. to a point of course.

bikezappa

04-01-2005, 09:33 AM

As shoes break in there is the good time when they feel best but then the sole starts to have holes and the tops are scratched. So this comparison means that the shoes wear out and then the cables will also wear out.

Just bustin.

shack

04-01-2005, 11:18 AM

Originally posted by gmorris
Lets all just get along for a hot minute and assume that cable burn-in is real. This would mean that all cables burn-in. So, that would mean if you hooked up your rig with lamp cord, the lamp cord would eventually burn-in, and make the rig sound better.

This comment got me to thinking. Could there really be burn-in for lamp cords? And if so, what better to test it on than…..LAMPS. We bought a pair for our living room a couple of months ago and I swear that the one we have used the most is much brighter now. It is right next to the chair where we usually sit when we read so it gets used a lot and the other one is on a table and rarely gets turned on. One is obviously burned-in and the other is not…an ideal situation to see if lamp cord burn-in phenomenon exists. I enlisted my wife to help with the experiment.

First we tried the double blind test. My wife and I both put on blindfolds and she would turn the lamp on and off I would try to tell which one was brighter and vice versa. No definitive conclusion here. With the blindfolds on we really couldn’t even tell if the lamps were on or off.

Next I remembered that several folks felt that some pre test evaluation was necessary to help recognize the differences during the test. My wife and I both did some critical looking at the lamp (sans shade) for several minutes to better familiarize ourselves with each one. Again, no real conclusion here. The spots made telling the difference a little difficult (they have finally gone away). And thanks for all of the well wishes for my wife. The eye doctor says her eyesight should be 90% as soon as the patches come off and there will only be slight permanent damage to the retinas.

Well, as you can see the testing for lamp cord burn-in was generally inconclusive. I will say that I CAN tell a noticeable difference between the brightness of the 2 lamps with the burned-in one being much brighter. I’m sure there are computer programs that could be utilized here….but all I can say is “Trust Your Eyes”.

**EDIT** – Never mind. I just found out my daughter put in a 100 watt bulb in the reading lamp and the other has a 75 watt bulb. I think this may alter the findings somewhat.

F1nut

04-01-2005, 11:20 AM

WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

Gold Jerry, Gold!!!

dragon1952

04-01-2005, 11:26 AM

**EDIT** – Never mind. I just found out my daughter put in a 100 watt bulb in the reading lamp and the other has a 75 watt bulb. I think this may alter the findings somewhat.

AhhhhhhhhhhHH! LOL! great post :D

PS.....hope your wifes feeling better ;) It's great when they 'participate' in our hobbies :D

boltaction

04-02-2005, 04:23 PM

Burn in doesn't exist, but the placebo effect does.

dragon1952

04-02-2005, 05:08 PM

I would normally choose to argue with you, but since I'm going to be moving to Oregon, and, considering you probably own guns, I'll restrain myself this time. :D
BTW, the Trailblazers suck! oops :(

RuSsMaN

04-02-2005, 05:13 PM

dragon1952

04-02-2005, 05:33 PM

Yes, i was going to mention that too but I'm trying to be nicer these days. There was a certain lack of substance though.

F1nut

04-02-2005, 06:12 PM

Boltaction, another member of the "Those that don't know, don't know that they don't know" club.

Answer this. What cables have you tried and on what gear?

dorokusai

04-02-2005, 08:37 PM

He has signed up for the program, and demo'd, so at least he's making an informed opinion.

F1nut

04-02-2005, 08:56 PM

Ok, but were they brand new cables?

boltaction

04-02-2005, 09:45 PM

Originally posted by F1nut
Ok, but were they brand new cables?

Not to be rude in any way, but are you denying that wanting something to happen generally makes it happen? Audio is extremely subjective and many different factors must be considered to truly make an informed opinion, and I assume you already realise that.

But this argument is nearly on a factor of religion versus atheism. You have scientific reasoning that is testified against by belief. I have exhibited my opinion on the matter.

dragon1952

04-02-2005, 11:15 PM

but are you denying that wanting something to happen generally makes it happen?

I'll certainly deny that. I've wanted to get into Nancy Souzas pants for 36 years and it ain't happened yet. :(

F1nut

04-02-2005, 11:42 PM

Your first question is a bit opened ended, but I'll take it in the context I believe you meant it in. No, I do not believe my wanting something audio related to happen will make it so. Here's a easy example. I really wanted to be blown away by a pair of 23k speakers, it didn't happen the first time, nor the second and believe me I wanted them to sound great. On the other side, I've heard gear that, in my mind, I though would be bad actually knock my socks off. So, no I do not believe in the placebo effect as it may relate to me. Your mileage may vary.

I do agree that this hobby is very subjective and that is why I am curious as to what gear and brand new cables helped you form your opinion.

boltaction

04-03-2005, 01:51 AM

My subjective listening was done using a Yamaha CR-640 Amplifier, Polk 5jr+ mains and M&K VX-4 sub. Audio was a wide assortment of genres from vinyl to digital audio outputted from a computer at 192khz.

F1nut

04-03-2005, 04:13 AM

Ok, thanks. Now, did you run rca interconnect cables (what brand) between the computer and the receiver or are we talking about speaker cables? I have no personal experience using a computer as the source, but my gut feeling is that it isn't the best way to test cables.

F1nut

04-03-2005, 04:20 AM

Ah, I just read your review of the Anti-Cables, well written. I'm still not getting what you based your comment about burn in on, but I digress. We'll just have to agree to disagree about that subject.

boltaction

04-03-2005, 06:54 AM

The computer cables were originally done using some very, very cheap and unshielded RCA's, about 15 feet long. I mean, the plug ends were rusty.

When I picked up my subwoofer I found some gold plated interconnects that didn't have a brand name but were thickly shielded and braided so I can assume they were much better.

The sound was better between those cables, but we are talking about rust to gold. I agree with you in some respects, my point is that $200 cables are probably going to sound exactly the same as $800 ones and at that point you would be wasting your money. Which could go into my tuition :)