Do speaker cables need a burn in period?


I have heard some say that speaker cables do need a 'burn in', and some say that its totally BS.
What say you?


128x128gawdbless
"I would think people buy cables for the sound quality. I don’t think they care about burn in."


Just this thread has 17 pages. At least half is our non-sense arguing about something else but actual question, but still. Eight pages, 400 posts or so, are arguing about existence of burn-in.

 Someone cares. I am not sure why, though, but someone cares.
no2headphones:
Challenging  issues you raise. Not everyone here is an industry shill, some are just true believers without much respect for concepts like double blind, established physics, expectation bias etc. They are fine people but no point in arguing religion.
To have real discussions with science/engineering oriented music lovers who want to discuss audio, including the possibilities of edgy stuff/ limits of audibility, tinkering etc etc would likely need to be established on another forum since Audiogon is about selling stuff. And the "magic"  cable properties are a big part of the "stuff" that is sold in the whole market.

I have a feeling that almost nobody here is related to any manufacturer. Save for one or two who actually do not try to hide that fact. They do not flaunt it, but they do not pretend they have no connection to the manufacturing side.

Hi glupson. You're certainly right to be confused about burn in if you're following this thread. BTW, love your suggestion about DACs. I did a quick check and found over 75,000 references to DACs on AG. DAC chips have already evolved well beyond on our ability to resolve all that they can do. My problem has to do with the pricing on stand-alone DACs which is far beyond what it needs to be. There are really only a few manufacturers of the chips and different companies either specify the parameters they want for their own or usually just buy from a selection of available chips. I still find it mind boggling, the processing power that's available in these chips that fit on the tip of your finger. When you consider the processing power and speed that's required for the new 8k displays, even 20 years ago, it was hard to fathom the capabilities of these little wonders today - and it continues to increase so rapidly.

As to the latest article from Audioquest, see below from engineer Gene DellaSala, owner of Audioholics, written back in 2004 when Audioquest made the same claims.


"Cable Vendor Claim
"'Breaking in' a cable has everything to do with the insulation - not the wire itself. 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." - Audioquest

Audioholics Response

Thus their conclusion is the dielectric , not the wire causes distortion! Claims regarding insulation molecules "aligning" with a signal, skin effect, strand jumping, etc, are anecdotal at best. Let's not forget that an audio signal is AC, and effectively random from a physical perspective. Nothing can align to a random signal by being anything other than random - exactly the state they claim is "cured" by injecting a signal.

"Break In" is not a proven audible or measurable phenomenon. The perception of changes in sound quality with time is likely attributable to the classical placebo effect, i.e., a listener anticipating a possible audible difference is predisposed to hear one whether or not it exists. Note that Audioquest isn't the only exotic cable vendor that claims cables "Break In". This is actually quite a popular myth touted by many other exotic cable vendors and cable forum cult hobbyists alike."

So, glupson, don't give in to the dark side. Far and away, the part of your system that most requires break in are your speakers and there's plenty of legitimate information easily available to you on that subject.

Happy listening!

I for one am not calling anyone a moron, just suggesting we inhabit completely different paradigms concerning what science is or isn't.

" You may want to wait for a 6'5" black belt, amateur boxer to finish his sentence before telling him he is a moron. :

That wasn't a veiled threat was it?