Another Cable Burn-in Question


I've checked the archives and I'm still not certain about this. I want to burn-in a new ic cable between CD player and preamp. I set the CD player to repeat/play but does the preamp need to be turned on? I'd rather not leave my tubed pre on during burn-in if I don't have to.
jc4659
Mrtennis

given these posts and assumptions why bother to do anything other than connect the cables and allow their differing potentials and impeadances to burn them in.... BTW... Do you have to plug the hagerman thingy into an AC power supply?

Imagine that. I'd think Mr. hagerman would be all over this cable burn in biz, huh? Why do you suppose he uses electricity to generate a signal with sufficient values to run in cables, instead of the static approach previously mentioned?

here's a thought... let's have a race. Two folks buy the same cables. one pair each. one goes the static route by merely leaving them plugged into a nonoperational componenet, and the other goes the archaine path of actually turning the components on and sending a signal thru the cables. At the end of 10 days another third party will listen to each cable pair, static and regular, not knowing which is which and report back. thereafter, each of the ones directly involved can try them... again not knowing which or how they were run in.

I'd bet money, in a honest examination, there will be easily descernable diffs... with the hot pair being the more amenable ones.

Good idea? Bad Idea?
the suggestion to use a break-in device is based upon the idea of not hastening the demise of a laser mechanism.

a tuner or other low current source is suitable as well.

i agree that using a break-in device as compared to say a cd player will initially produce contrasting sonic differences. i suspect, after some duration, one won't be able to distinguish one pair from another. however, i'm not sure of the duration of a signal passed through an interconnect cable, neede to erase initial sonic differences.
MrTennis, et al
My take solely is about the 'static' (uphill or down) non energized method mentioned above for cables run in periods vs. energized 'conducting a strong signal' thru them with componenets at both ends being powered up.

Consequently, due to the mention of the Hagerman device, and the philosphy behind it's construction & operation, why is it powered, or even offered at all? Aside from the obvious application for tube saving uses.... if static or non current sending is as good a thing to do for breaking in cables?

I ask only because with the presence of such a device of and by itself, a statement which seems to me to be quite ludicrous is made towards one camp or the other. At the OR very least one of great irony.
does a cdp require eelectricity ? if so it is hard to say that it will generate more or less kwh than a break-in device. both use elctricity and the break in device does not require an interface with another component.

it is simply a case of the use of a cd player or tuner or a break-in device. both require a source of power.
there are no other issues. case closed.