Power Cable Break In - Such a Change!

I installed a new AudioQuest Dragon Source power cord from my Lumin X1 to my Niagara 7000. The power cord from the wall to the Niagara 7000 is also a Dragon but the High Current version. I bought that cord used.

So, when I first started using the new power cord everything sounded great. However, after a couple of days I started hearing a strident sound. Especially in the upper mid/ treble region. The bass was also constricted. I started blaming the sound change on another piece of equipment that was installed concurrently.

Now, I was under the impression that the Dragon power cord with its DBS system required no break in. But I did inquire about it to AudioQuest who responded that it would still need about 150 hours to break in. It's been close to that now and sure enough yesterday I started hearing the glorious sound that I heard from day one with the power cord only perhaps better.

I must say the difference during break in and now is quite remarkable, I don't remember any other power cord going through this amount of dramatic change.



@rodman99999 Nice list !!

I think Hamlet shares our view ... "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, / Than are dreamt of in our/your philosophy"


Thanks for all the posts thus far. Just a little of history. I have owned several iterations of PS Audio power plants. I also have owned Acoustic Revive, Shunyata, Purist, Synergistic etc. The AudioQuest Niagara 7000 has been the most impressive of all of them.

Ahh...Forgive me Ozzy for asking a question you had answered already earlier. For some reason I missed it? Due to old(er) age I suspect?!



I didn't ask for anyone to measure the cable inductance, impedance, or resistance, I asked for a mic to be setup in the listening position, record cable 1, vs. cable 2 with all other things being equal. Maybe those who believe cables are awesome are right and the way cables have been measured are indeed all wrong. But for the differences described by using high end/ costly cables, by users who say you have to hear to believe, they claim there is a clear, audible difference in sound, which, should be easy to measure with this test. Null the recorded similarities, and present the differences between the cables from the same listening position, music, etc. 

And with all due respect, when you suggest science can't do something, after being trained in the filed, WTF do you believe in when science doesn't have an answer,  witchcraft? 

This is a SUPER simple test. Null the same things, present what is different. Don't measure the cable per se, but rather, the FR at a listening postion, all things being equal. Yet, not a single cable manufacture does it. Scientifically speaking, should I just believe the guy who claims a 4k cable sounds so much better, and it can't be measured, or, believe in other scientific, peer reviewed studies, about confirmation bias and why the person who spent 4k on a cable may believe it's better than just a $10 one? 



Several years ago I talked with an actual metallurgist and specifically asked him about cryogenic treatment of wires changing the crystal structure and when he stopped laughing, he said *if* that happens, the crystals will go back to their normal structure when they return to room temperature.

Am I missing something here? I thought and was taught not only at Atlanta Area Technical but at The Delta Airlines Technology Operations Facility in Atlanta, GA to treat metal parts cryogenically is changing the crystal structure and exactly what happens in cryogenic treatments of metals. I have seen first hand cryogenic treating of metals in a facility that is almost 10 times the size of a football field and is more akin to an Aeronautics plant than anything I’ve ever seen.

Thermal processing for metals is nothing new. Heat treating has been used for centuries to alter metals’ characteristics. Although the simplest heat treatment comprises just three steps—bringing the metal to a specified temperature, holding the temperature for a set length of time, and bringing it back to room temperature, in a precise manner under controlled conditions—these steps can be applied in literally countless combinations. The quenching step alone has innumerable variables, including the quenchant, such as oil, water, brine, aqueous polymers, air, nitrogen, or helium; the type of agitation—none, mechanically agitated, or ultrasonically agitated; and quenchant temperature. Circa 2013 Cryogenic processing—dispelling the myths, mysteries

Here are just some of the uses of cryogenic treatments in manufacturing:

  • Aerospace & Defense: communication, optical housings, weapons platforms, guidance systems, landing systems, aircraft parts.
  • Automotive: brake rotors, transmissions, clutches, brake parts, rods, crank shafts, camshafts axles, bearings, ring and pinion, heads, valve trains, differentials, springs, nuts, bolts, washers.
  • Cutting tools: cutters, knives, blades, drill bits, end mills, turning or milling[3] inserts. Cryogenic treatments of cutting tools can be classified as Deep Cryogenic Treatments (around -196 °C) or Shallow Cryogenic Treatments (around -80 °C).
  • Forming tools: roll form dies, progressive dies, stamping dies.
  • Mechanical industry: pumps, motors, nuts, bolts, washers.
  • Medical: tooling, scalpels.
  • Motorsports and Fleet Vehicles: See Automotive for brake rotors and other automotive components.
  • Musical: Vacuum tubes, Audio cables, brass instruments, guitar strings[4] and fret wire, piano wire, amplifiers, magnetic pickups,[5] cables, connectors.

I don’t know where your metallurgist got his education but he is/was dead wrong? In fact metallurgy is one of the oldest sciences known to man. Understand cryogenic processing or treatment is a vast scientific improvement/study far and above over simple metallurgy techniques that were used in the past. Metallurgy is the precursor of cryogenic treatments/processing.


Also, in more than 40 years of reading about stereo stuff, I’ve never heard of something sounding worse after the supposed break-in. Why is that?

Although I do agree with this above statement.

And I also agree with our own beloved @geoffkait who stated:

’Let me explain. Electronic (Electrical) engineers don’t get any courses in Materials Science, Engineering Science and Strength of Materials as do Aerospace Engineers and he obviously has zero experience in cryogenics whereas I have 20 years of experience.’

Love the guy.