Do speaker cables need a burn in period?

Factor in favorite music selections that you know very well and it's incredibly easy to discern break in, even with cables. When your equipment is already broken in, trying new cables with music that you're intimately familiar with is actually quite an easy thing to do. 

Don't we always cite our favorite go to CDs and records when evaluating gear? Why would it be any different with cables?

All the best,
Nonoise

Why are we back to auditory memory stuffs here.  I feel like we are going back to the stone age.  Something we already talked about.
Like I said, manufacturers have a lot of cables lying around so they can do A - B between new and old cables so there is no need to recall something many days ago.

@andy2

Like I said, manufacturers have a lot of cables lying around so they can do A - B between new and old cables so there is no need to recall something many days ago.

And that is exactly why it is suspicious that they do not (that I'm aware of) produce any objective measurements showing the physical changes between a burned in and new cable.   Let alone tests correlating such changes to their audibility. (The only, rare,  attempts I'm aware of to measure for burn-in in finished audio products, either cables or other devices e.g. CD players, were negative for burn in effects).

Even in this thread people have appealed to the idea "high end cable manufacturers recommend burn in, so it must be a real thing!"

Yet when you check out the claims, e.g. on the Nordost page (one of THE most well-regarded cable companies in high-end), anyone with a critical-thinking neuron in their head can see how dicey and unsupported the claims are. 

Look how many cable companies there are.  None (that I know) provide objective,  repeatable data demonstrating their claims and you'd think they have the equipment!  Lots of them just tell you it happens, which entails that it is "only fair" that you keep the cable for the allotted "burn in" time.    And that is a good marketing move - salesmen know about the "get the foot in the door" approach, where once you can say "look, just take it and try it out" the sale is more likely than if the customer doesn't even take the product.


Why do things like "cable burn-in" operate like pseudoscience, where the companies (or audiophiles or hi-fi salesmen) make some technical-sounding claim that is never actually supported by measured data, but only by anecdote? 

Andy, could you answer the question I posed before, because I'm sure it has consequences for the assumptions you've made about cables, that perhaps you have not thought through:

Do you think the "higher end" cables, such as your QED, transmit sonic information that the Belden cable is incapable of transmitting?

cleeds,

This isn’t a scientific group.

I understand, but please make sure are not closing ranks too tightly; I and others who share my skepticism about some areas of high end audio are part of this group (insofar as you mean members of the audiogon forum).

But the seemingly endless demands that posters provide upon request some set of scientific data to accompany their listening observations isn’t going to get anyone anywhere.

I’m not asking anyone here to become a scientist and do all the testing themselves. I only ask sometimes in the more controversial areas of high end gear: "is there any data from anyone ELSE you can point to, to support what you are claiming?"

I’m not a scientist who has worked in the field of evolution, but if I say evolution happened I can certainly point you to all sorts of data supplied by those experts who HAVE done the work.

Nor am I chasing down everyone in every thread on the forum, cable forum included, demanding they justify their subjective claims. If I debate this at all, it’s almost entirely in threads that people create, like this FOR THE DEBATE on the subject.

As I’ve said before in other such threads, my system uses a mish-mash of cables; ones I bought long ago, loaners from friends who have gone through the high-end cable thing. So for instance, I recently needed another pair of interconnects and a pal has loaned me some Nordost interconnects. Will I blind test them in my system? Very unlikely - it’s a hassle, I’m busy, my pal is busy, I just need some interconnects. I might do a brief sighted shoot out to see if I perceive a difference from my other interconnects. And who knows, it’s possible I’ll hear something that sounds distinct, and I’d be happy to say "When I switched out my old cables for the Nordost, I perceived X, Y and Z change in the sound."

But, personally, I will not promote that beyond the level of "evidence" it really is. I’ll say it seemed to me to make a difference, but not that my anecdotal evidence gives me utter confidence. I’m just too aware of the facts about human bias and perception to warrant such a claim.

But here, you often get subjective impressions as some inviolable measurement. If someone hears cable differences and you say you don’t, well because their experience PROVES cables obviously make a difference (or burn in) then YOU must have bad hearing, bad gear etc.
The person maintaining skepticism is cast as a fool or a dogmatist.

That’s an attitude that I think really doesn’t help any forum, this one included.

Why are we back to auditory memory stuffs here. I feel like we are going back to the stone age. Something we already talked about.

When you take that trip back to the stone age, don't forget to pack your beliefs in mass hypnosis, mesmerism, mass delusion, being unable to trust your senses, high enough levels of naturally occurring drug like substances in one's system to promote hallucinations, and other voodoo and superstition. 

Oh, and stop repeating it as well.

All the best,
Nonoise