Cable burn in

Well, I repeat again, EVERY electron I ever interviewed had very specific attitudes about how they chose to travel on top of wires that WENT THE WRONG WAY, or were NEW, or were made of out materials mined in Communist countries.

You should not take my word for it.  Interview the electrons traveling on top of the metal in YOUR cables and see what THEY say.

Cheers!

I think step 1 is to understand that recordings and the delivery systems are like fingerprints, no 2 alike. They are all different. I think with streaming the problem is there is no way to know where the source implemented is coming from or who was responsible for the mastering. At least with cd's and vinyl, there is path to find out: Usually if a name like, Doug Sax, Steve Hoffmann, Bob Ludwig, Professor Johnson Shawn Briiton, or Bernie Grundman are attached and the source is guaranteed to be from an original master tape, the results, from my experience should be uniformly excellent. My advice would to seek out music from these masters of audio & use these recordings in your evaluations: Anything else, you are wasting your time and worrying about nothing. Good luck & try to enjoy the music without getting to obsessed with cables. I cannot give a definitive answer about cable burn but I do think the brain needs burn when a change is inserted in middle of your system. 

+1 to @richopp , as I have a personal autograph from Eddy Electron. Rich my tag to you is only in regards to Eddy as I appreciated your share. Eddys the man ! To the rest , We’ve all voiced our opinions and I respect everyone here. My personal experience is I’ve heard SQ differences more times than not with wire. I’ve experienced SQ changes related to “ break in “ most of the time. For example my Morrow cables took significantly longer to settle in Vs my Anti Cables. Back when I was hanging out with Eddy Electron in the early 70’s I had the cheap plastic red, white, yellow IC’s and bought bulk 120v lamp cord for speaker wire. Then I built some insulated IC’s with shielded coax. There was a noise rejection improvement, especially with my TT. Now today I believe in cables, but I’m cautious of marketing BS and diminishing returns on mega expensive gear. I just don’t have the income to support the exotic aspect of this hobby. So I run mid level Morrow and mid Level Audioquest, because that’s all I can afford. But my ears don’t lie, and I don’t project my OPINION, only my experience. I’m not an electrical engineer, but I had 4 years of electronics In JR/ High school. I’ve built numerous stereo kits, tube and SS, as well as speaker enclosures. I’m not as smart as most of you, but I’m willing to experiment and trust my ears. Happy Listening my brothers and thanks for sharing. 

 

     Many new electrical facts have been established in the past 100 years, that support audible differences, between various cables, etc.

I agree. Even though, the facts may be not at all what the proponents of hyper-expensive cable offer as explanations for the alleged superior performance of their products.

     It does, however, emphasize/demonstrate how Electrical Theory has progressed, since the 1800s:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGJqykotjog

Yes, a university 101 Quantum Mechanics course usually includes exactly such a discussion. The corresponding theory was mostly built by 1930.

 https://www.quora.com/Are-photons-involved-in-all-forms-of-electricity-for-example-when-it-flows-through-wires?utm_medium=organic&utm_source=google_rich_qa&utm_campaign=google_rich_qa

https://van.physics.illinois.edu/ask/listing/2348

Here we advance to a university Quantum Electrodynamics course level. Yes, photons are considered field carriers of electromagnetic force. The contemporary theory was formulated by early 1960s.

     It's an established (measured) fact that an electromagnetic wave's propagation and speed, are dependent on the materials of which the transmission line (cable) are made (ie: Dielectric Constant/permittivity).     The better (lower) the Dielectric Constant the better the flow and the longer it takes for that material, to become polarized.

   There are no traveling waves in the case of an audio-frequency signal encoded as electric potential applied to a cable.  

A crude analogy: take a piece of rope suspended at one end, and start slowly moving its free end. You will observe no traveling waves. Only a gradual movement of the rope as a whole. 

Now keep increasing the frequency of periodic movements of the free end. At some point you may reach a characteristic frequency, and observe a wave that appears to be traveling.

One reason anything that comprises an RLC circuit (ie: capacitors, cables, PC boards), takes time to, "form" or, "break/burn-in".*  

                        *Something that makes the Denyin'tologists apoplectic.  

https://resources.pcb.cadence.com/blog/2019-dielectric-constant-of-pcb-substrate-

materials-and-signal-integrity

Yes, this is very important, yet once again, for significantly higher frequencies than the ones present in an audio signal.

              and (note: frequency figures in EVERY equation and our typical music signal is comprised of a VERY complex mix of information/frequencies, potentially lending to multiple time smears, if not handled correctly):

       https://unlcms.unl.edu/cas/physics/tsymbal/teaching/EM-914/section5-Guided_Waves.pdf

On page 4 of this paper, you'll find a criterium for a wave propagation. Non-propagating waves are referred to as "cutoff modes or evanescent modes". For more details in a more accessible format, please see: 

 

     Even the most inane (regarding the Sciences) must admit; braiding and twisting wires eliminates/reduces EMI interference.

                  That, of a necessity, lends credence to various cable geometries.

Yes, shielding from electromagnetic interference is crucial. Even when the frequency of such interference is not in the audible range, it can create intermodulation effects in active amplification components.

A competent audio cable designer would follow official guidelines to ensure the cable  rejection of common EMI, to the degree acceptable for a cable class.

Professional-grade cables terminated with XLR connectors would require to pass a higher EMI rejection threshold compared to a home-use audio cable terminated by RCA connectors.

     That better dielectrics enhance the propagation of electromagnetic waves (ie: your music signal), lends the same credence to choosing cables with better materials (ie: Polypropylene, Teflon, air, etc).

Since there are no actually propagating waves at the audio frequencies in a commonly used audio cables, this argument doesn't apply. In fact, perhaps surprisingly, a better "cable" could be made of two non-insulated thick wires not touching each other, provided that no significant EMI sources are present in its vicinity.

     Of course: anything the Church of Denyin'tology's popes can't fathom, they'll summarily dismiss (uneducated twits that they are).

As I already mentioned, this characterization doesn't apply to me. I'm an educated professional in a relevant field.

      I (personally) know of no one that listens to test signals, via their home audio system and (as alluded to above*):

That's a loss for those who don't measure an audio system output on test signals. I lot could be learned from that.

there's MUCH MORE involved when attempting to reproduce the complexity of music in a reverberant environment (ie: various voices instrumental, vocal, their separation/placement and ambient information).

Agreed. But electromagnetic properties of competently designed practical cables have little, if any, influence on that.

      Happy listening and (as Richard Feynman would often encourage): NEVER STOP LEARNING!

What would help here is learning about active amplification elements reaction to changes in their temperature. Bipolar transistors, especially, exhibit strong temperature-dependent effects.

A thick cable made of premium materials may, under certain circumstances, serve as an auxiliary heat sink, shifting down the equilibrium working temperature of transistors and other components in an electronic device.

But then again, a similar, or even stronger, effect may be achieved through proper installation and active ventilation of said electronic devices. Buy a 12"-18" electric regulated fan and operate it on a silent/slow setting.

Observe sound quality changes, if any, over 15-30 minutes since the fan was turned on or off. Be aware that specific temperature-related changes in audio devices performance may or may not be preferred by a particular listener.

@chiadrum leave your BlueJeans cables alone for now and let them settle.

Before you embark on the cable shopping spree, I would recommend addressing the upgrades in the following order:

1. Components and speakers - make sure that is taken care of and you have the best possible components you can afford

2. Room acoustics - at least minimal acoustic treatment (bass traps, first reflection points, area rug, etc)

3. Speaker cables, power cords, interconnects, ethernet cable - after your room acoustics are in order.
Everything matters. Don’t expect sonic miracles from low end cables (you get what you pay for) just like you wouldn’t from low level components

Going crazy with cables not having properly matched components and room acoustics taken care of will put you on a cable and component mary-go-round.