Cable Burn In


I'm new here and new to the audiophile world. I recently acquired what seems to be a really high end system that is about 15 years old. Love it. Starting to head down the audiophile rabbit hole I'm afraid.

But, I have to laugh (quietly) at some of what I'm learning and hearing about high fidelity.

The system has really nice cables throughout but I needed another set of RCA cables. I bit the bullet and bought what seems to be a good pair from World's Best Cables. I'm sure they're not the best you can get and don't look as beefy as the Transparent RCA cables that were also with this system. But, no sense bringing a nice system down to save $10 on a set of RCA cables, I guess.

Anyway, in a big white card on the front of the package there was this note: In big red letters "Attention!". Below that "Please Allow 175 hours of Burn-in Time for optimal performance."

I know I'm showing my ignorance but this struck me as funny. I could just see one audiophile showing off his new $15k system to another audiophile and saying "Well, I know it sounds like crap now but its just that my RCA cables aren't burned-in yet. Just come back in 7.29 days and it will sound awesome."
n80
fleschler,

Right, so you listen to cables. Ok.

I don’t care that a machine will tell me that they all test the same other than for capacitance, inductance or resistance. The manufacturer tests for the basics. What we do is determine if sonically, we prefer the current version or the new version, usually its the current version.



So what puzzle me here is:

If the cables need burn in, how are the manufacturers determining what is causing this phenomenon? As we aren’t talking about magic, presumably manufacturers identify some "pre-burned in" state they can measure, vs post burn in, where the measurements change. Otherwise...how do they know what’s going on at all?

That’s what I’m not seeing yet in this thread, including in your post.

What exactly do you think is technically happening to cables when you "cook" them, and have you, or the manufacturers you work with, any actual data showing these differences?


I don't care why it works technically.  Just like I don't care why SR duplexes, fuses and HFTs work, or Stillpoints or Omega E-Mats.  They work for my system and my friends systems.  My cable manufacturing friend doesn't use SR tweaks or stillpoints or E-Mats.  However, he heard the difference between SR blue fuses and his stock fuses and decided to eliminate the fuse with a breaker instead which resulted in a sound similar to the effect of an SR blue fuse.  His system and room are diametrically different acoustically (mine-live, high vaulted ceilings, windows and large room with flat walls with 4.5 way large high sensitivity speakers/his-damped room, low flat acoustic tile ceilings, small room with two way high resolution, low sensitivity speakers).  Two different rooms and systems to address the cabling effects for different systems.

I don't know what cooking cables does.  Same with components in equipment (like capacitors) and speaker cones and panels.  The latter two I've heard change over time, breaking in so to speak without regard to their technical changes.   

What I think is happening is an electrical circuit or field is changed while the cable or capacitor is charged.  Speaker cones and panels vibrate and become less stiff.  One's electrical and the other is mechanical.  It's just the way it is.  I buy into the burning in concept because I can hear it.  
I’m not quite sure I see why the military would have any use for cables that outperform. Unless maybe the General was an audiophile. Obviously there are technical standards for BER, voice recognition, signal to noise ratio, that sort of thing.
Post removed 
Post removed