What are we listening for during break in?


Is it time for a reality check? A few days ago a post was started which asked a question concerning burn in of interconnect cables. The consensus of answers agreed that this was a necessary function with no opposing view. The recommendation that got me thinking was to install the ICs between cd player and preamp and use a test disc for 250 hours. My immediate reaction to that bit of advice was "give me a break." That is roughly equal to listening to 250 cds. Considering the amount of time I spend listening to music, it would take me six months to break in ICs.
I have experienced a sonic change after new speaker break in period so I'm not argueing break in doesn't occur. Whether a sonic difference occurs after ICs break in is another matter.
My question is, what are we listening for when we run our equipment for 250 hours just to break in an IC or modification? I don't mean why listen to music, I mean what sonic difference are we hearing? Is it better, worse, different, What the?
timrhu
So you have an expensive or "new to you" cable added to your system. You have the option to return it within a given time period. Do you just put it in, give an immediate listen or so and decide? Or, might you defer the listening briefly to follow the recommendation of the manufacturer and/or various critics, "authorities," and geeks, and burn it in to see what you think after break in before deciding?

For me, the issue with my phono cable was to give the cable the best shot by burning it in first. My interest was in the effect in the system after what seemed like a reasonable break in. If there were to be any nuance of change at various points at time, I really didn’t care. What difference would a transient state make to me in the long run?

I also think that it’s a bit unfair to reatilers and others offering auditions not to give a cable a reasonably fair audition hta culd include burnb in before returning it. I have tried various cables in my system and felt a bit bad when returning one because there is a cost to the seller (and to me when mail order) for this service.

If I had my druthers, there would have been auditions of multiple phono cables but there were no dealers nearby that had all four of those I might have wanted to try, so I did my research (flawed as it was) and tried one that seemed like it might fill the bill fianancially and sonically.

Phono cables, particularly those with rca’a on only one end are pretty much a special order item. An rca to rca phono cable setup might have made my situation a bit easier, but many high end dealers don’t have any or many turntables set up anymore, much less a decent selection of phono cables to a-b.

Back to the issue that started this thread, I’m unconvinced that any arguments that are made on one side or the other of the break in issue will do much more than prove that there is no shortage of gas.

And, Gregadd, if you haven’t tried a different cable on your SME IV, you should. It made a substantial difference with mine.
the reason why it is suggested to install the ICs that need break in between cd player and the pre-amp is that you can have your cd player spinning 24/7 and nothing else needs to be on in your system. that's all. you don't have to be listenning for 250 hours. I noticed cables go through various stages during the break in, at times sounding harsh, at times lacking detail and sounding dull. It doesn't always take 250 hours for a cables to start sounding the way they should. different cables, different break in time. I observed it while breaking in ICs and speaker cables in my system. I beleive in both cable and component break in.
I usually play a good recording of Mahler's 5th and Metallica's "black album" to break in cables with pretty good results.
Audphile1, I've noticed all of those charactistics you mentioned in my system at various times. I thought it was just the mood I was in. So maybe it was the mood my cables were in?