The molecular level explanation of "cable burn-in"

According to one cable seller

"The insulation (or dielectric) will absorb energy from the conductor when a current is flowing (i.e. when music is playing). This energy-absorption causes the dielectric's molecules to re-arrange themselves from a random order into a uniform order. When the molecules have been rearranged, the dielectric will absorb less energy & consequently cause less distortion."

So it’s the plastic polymer (as dielectric insulation) to undergo some sort of molecular rearrangements to minimize the distortion. Probably one of the greatest scientific discoveries ever!

“Many premium AC cords constrict or compress the audio transient as their characteristic impedance restricts the transient current.”

We all know impedance restricts current but how possibly “many” premium AC cords constrict/compress the audio transient (when not carrying audio signal)? Then again is it achieved by this molecular rearrangements of the cable insulation?

Unfortunately there are no measurement data or mathematical formulas to be found to back up this amazing scientific discovery. Simply “it happens”. So I came up with a formula for them.

∆E = P - SoT

∆E: energy absorbed by dielectric

P: energy (power) drawn from wall outlet

So : Smake Oile

T: Dielectric Transition Temperature



Interesting topic.

I find that the technical explanation of "observable" phenomena can take the following path(s):

Nothing observable happened. Therefore every explanation to validate it is BS.

Something did happen. The entirety of supportive explanations are valid.

Something did happen. But, our attempts to describe what we observed are invalid.

The case above, it’s an automatic reflex to reject all of the explanations if some of the explanations are invalid -- in OUR view even though there is a (growing) body of evidence to show something is real here. Taking an example of an individual finding a mere 20% of the talking points to be "true", that means that the vast majority of the details are not true (in their opinion). What about the other 20%? Do we reject the premise entirely even though there are proven elements to the premise?

I find it interesting, that groups of people with pedigrees as long as their arms can reach totally opposite conclusions on many subjects; some a matter of life or death. So, it comes down to motivation. What’s in it for them?

Are they trying to save the world from bad sound? Trying into make a buck? Attempting to maintain their SGR (Smartest Guy in the Room) status? Just enjoying lively conversation? Every fiber of their being is wrapped around this, and the penalties for failure are severe? (job, status, potential prison sentence ...). And, yes, there can be multiple motives -- save the world from bad sound AND make a living in the process. These are not always contradictory but can be rather complimentary.

The atomic expansion theory states that all atoms in the universe are expanding at the same rate, so we don’t observe anything changing. Right? Wrong? I don’t know. It’s well above my pay grade. But, it’s fun to watch the really smart guys on both sides of the issue duke it out. With no clear winner.


I’m retired as many on this site, perhaps repetition Is a byproduct of forgetfulness. Over and over with 0 resolve, he said she said I say….who cares ! Enjoy what you have, snake oil or not and let’s move on.


If you look a Belden wire catalog they make all types of wire and fiber optics. They rate the insulator in capacitance per foot and the longer the cable the higher the capacitance becomes. The indicatance is from the wire and is rated in frequency as reactance Xc. You can check Belden silver plated wire and teflon insulator and compare it to a PVC or insulator and find that it's significantly lower.

Facts are out there