Another Cable Burn-in Question

OOOPS:)

I did in fact see the threads writer solved his deal.

I'm simply enthralled with the notion that devices don't need to both be on for cables to be run in.

Seeing the mention of the active cable cooker also makes me think, then, it has to be otherwise.

Then too I thought about power cords. Both cables conduct. Both cables pass signals, one more narrow than the other of course and with far greater amplitude... when active.

Naturally then too, then came thoughts of speaker cables.

Doesn't it seem odd to anyone else that each of these cable types transmit signals yet only interconnects can run in without active components at either end of them being in use?

It just fascinates me. That's all.

how do cable makers feel about the notion of interconnects getting broken in using an active device on only one end of the cabling?

Blindjim,
It takes current through a cable for it to break in. I think all of us could agree to this. First, the cable must be connected to a source that is on and has a signal. For example, this source could be a CD player or tuner. Second, it must be connected to a load which has some input impedance such that it will draw a current. This could be a preamp. Preamps present an input impedance whether they are on or off. If you don't believe this, just measure it with a ohm meter. The lower this impedance, the more current is drawn and the faster the cable will break in. If the preamp is off, it just doesn't amplify the signal that it sees.

Exactly as I stated earlier(voltage actually) Mr. Z, and absolutely correct!

Amazing.