Cable Burn-In - Myth or Fact?

[Vacceo]

Of course they are. Is that the only thing open for discussion here?

I'm not sure exactly how to test for haze, clarity, openness, transparency, dynamics, smear, etc. It would be great if we could (similar to distortion and noise). What I have learned is that the human ear / brain is a fantastic measuring device that can pick out things our instruments cannot (so far). When I design equipment I start with pencil & paper, move on to simulations(optional), then prototypes, doing as many measurements as possible. I pretty much tune everything by oscilloscope. Once that is done I use my ears, as it is the quickest and best way to hear if a capacitor brand or type substitution (or any other circuit change) offers any benefit.

For cables we can check dielectric absorption, permittivity, capacitance, ESL and ESR, field coupling (electric and magnetic). Also, what changes occur over temperature and humidity? Perhaps a TDR would give some interesting results? All of the above parameters could affect sonics. Clearly, a well designed silver / teflon cable might sound better than lamp cord?

Shoes break in as well as speakers. A diamond stylus can wear out. It is easy to understand mechanical changes (leather becomes softer with use). Why not electrical? Tubes fade and weaken as emission and transconductance drops.

For dynamic range, it's super easy: there is a massive database where you can check records.

For clarity and openeness, those are categories that only people who listen to Diana Krall understand.

 

[vicenzo_del_paris]

Extract from your website testimonial:

your process of treating the cables takes the sound to another dimension a higher level of audio quality, almost like another world. Much clearer and detailed with more depth and realism and with much less straining and fatigue

"Clearer, more details, more depth, less fatigue".
All of these terms correlates to known and explainable metrics within measurements.
So a simple measurement should be enough to validate and backup this kind of testimonial that you present as proof (which is anything except an evidence).

I am not against you nor fighting you.
I just cannot blindly accept your claims when they do not make sense and not proven true.

If I were asking you to trust and believe me if I was telling you earth is not a sphere, but rather a flat board, would you believe me ?

 

[voodooless]

Why do you assume these testimonials are biased? They are real customers who have actually tried it out. What are you afraid of? Is that not evidence?

Once again back to this. You said:

Like "put this crystal in the other room", "put a chocolate chip on top of your tonearm and everything will sound better but it's a $300 chocolate chip". It's a lot of bullshit and they don't back it up with anything but complete gobbledygook.

I can assure you that all these products have the same kind of testimonials. So again, what makes you not accept these testimonials, but do accept yours? Why is one evidence, and the other not?

 

[Jim Hagerman]

Wow, a retired keyboarder with probably damaged ears

Thank you for your confidence. You know nothing about me. I do not deny what you hear or not...

And yet one of us has four patents. One of us has made the Stereophile Recommended Component Class A List. Twice. One of us got a lasercomm system working at 3.125Gbps, created a hyperspectral airborne imaging LIDAR, designed a video amplifier good to 17,000V/us, invented a family of absorptive RF filters (S11 better than 14dB), created a tunable RF bandpass filter for SINGCARS (hopping), came up with an I2C level translator using only 2 transistors, developed the best vacuum tube curve tracer since the Tek 570, and produced a smart socket running custom ZigBee operating at 2.48GHz (including firmware). I could go on...

 

[antcollinet]

Why do you assume these testimonials are biased? They are real customers who have actually tried it out. What are you afraid of? Is that not evidence? And yes, I am absolutely pretending this pace should be open to discussion. Or am I wrong about that?

In a world where we know subconcious cognitive biases - over which we have no control - can alter sound between our ears, and concious brain in exactly the way described by your customers :

Why on earth should we take those testimonials as any sort of evidence.

Why do you?

Why don't you validate the evidence by organising some properly controlled (and in this case properly supervised by someone who knows what they are doing) blind tests.

Otherwise you are probably just ripping off your customers. You don't want to be one of those guys, do you?

 

[vicenzo_del_paris]

Thank you for your confidence. You know nothing about me. I do not deny what you hear or not...

And yet one of us has four patents. One of us has made the Stereophile Recommended Component Class A List. Twice. One of us got a lasercomm system working at 3.125Gbps, created a hyperspectral airborne imaging LIDAR, designed a video amplifier good to 17,000V/us, invented a family of absorptive RF filters (S11 better than 14dB), created a tunable RF bandpass filter for SINGCARS (hopping), came up with an I2C level translator using only 2 transistors, developed the best vacuum tube curve tracer since the Tek 570, and produced a smart socket running custom ZigBee operating at 2.48GHz (including firmware). I could go on...

And with all of these talents, you cannot provide any measurements?
Come on.
Please do!!

 

[voodooless]

And yet one of us has four patents. One of us has made the Stereophile Recommended Component Class A List. Twice. One of us got a lasercomm system working at 3.125Gbps, created a hyperspectral airborne imaging LIDAR, designed a video amplifier good to 17,000V/us, invented a family of absorptive RF filters (S11 better than 14dB), created a tunable RF bandpass filter for SINGCARS (hopping), came up with an I2C level translator using only 2 transistors, developed the best vacuum tube curve tracer since the Tek 570, and produced a smart socket running custom ZigBee operating at 2.48GHz (including firmware). I could go on...

Yet one of us believes cable burn-in is real. Frankly, given all the above, it's quite incredible that you actually believe the nonsense.

 

[Jim Hagerman]

So again, what makes you not accept these testimonials, but do accept yours?

I get it. You are right. I am only ask you to accept unsolicited customer testimonials, not those from the manufacturer.

 

[voodooless]

I get it. You are right. I am only ask you to accept unsolicited customer testimonials, not those from the manufacturer.

Doesn't matter what the source is. I'm sure you'll find similar stories on various audio forums of these products. The same question still applies.

 

[Thomas_A]

Jim,

please go on developing high-end phono stages with many functions and low-capacitance phono cables. But not this. Please.

 

[antcollinet]

One of us got a lasercomm system working at 3.125Gbps, created a hyperspectral airborne imaging LIDAR, designed a video amplifier good to 17,000V/us, invented a family of absorptive RF filters (S11 better than 14dB), created a tunable RF bandpass filter for SINGCARS (hopping), came up with an I2C level translator using only 2 transistors, developed the best vacuum tube curve tracer since the Tek 570, and produced a smart socket running custom ZigBee operating at 2.48GHz (including firmware)

Do any of that stuf without measurements?

Did you just throw components together without "actually knowing, or never being able to figure out" how they work, until something just happened to seem to do what it was supposed to, validated only by a bunch of random people who also were ignorant of the physics and engineering, having a look at the pretty boxes?

Or did you use well honed design skills, backed up by ongoing measurement both during development and during product validation to prove they were working correctly? And including design and qualification reviews by peers (if there was any professionalism in these endeavours).

Can't you see the difference?

 

[Jim Hagerman]

all testimonials are biased.

Then I should just ignore them all?

 

[TonyJZX]

i would

you know this place worships the church of dbx?

 

[voodooless]

Then I should just ignore them all?

Yes! It just makes life so much easier.

 

[vicenzo_del_paris]

I am afraid that without any evidence (and it seems that you have a skilled team that can produce some in no time and at no cost), your claims are just speculations and marketing stuff.

What I find highly disturbing it is the fact that you don't want (and dispute the reason) to provide evidences and instead only present client testimonials.

 

[Jim Hagerman]

Why don't you want to do it ???

Frankly I don't have the equipment, nor can I afford it. I'm not sure Amir is set up to do this as well.

 

[Jim Hagerman]

You are everything this site fights against.

I'm just trying to pull you forward...

 

[vicenzo_del_paris]

Frankly I don't have the equipment, nor can I afford it. I'm not sure Amir is set up to do this as well.

Hum, you do.
Once again, for such obvious astonishing improvements, a laptop and a mic is enough.

 

[vicenzo_del_paris]

Hum, you do.
Once again, for such obvious astonishing improvements, a laptop and a mic is enough.

If enhancements were more anecdotic, yes you would need a lab with an analyzer to quantity it using methodological procedures.
But night and day sound differences do not requires such equipment.

 

[voodooless]

Frankly I don't have the equipment, nor can I afford it. I'm not sure Amir is set up to do this as well.

What equipment do you think is needed to measure this?