Same here. Switched from PS Audio AC-12 (I still have three in my MCH system) to Shunyata. Night and day difference. Bigger change than ICs and SCs. Completely befuddles me as to why. I was a powercable skeptic and holdout for years. No more.
AC Power cable "break-in"
- Thread starter marty
- Start date
Same here. Switched from PS Audio AC-12 (I still have three in my MCH system) to Shunyata. Night and day difference. Bigger change than ICs and SCs. Completely befuddles me as to why. I was a powercable skeptic and holdout for years. No more.
Allow me to re-state. I don't expect anyone to publish copyrighted material on the net. I've never seen anyone even reference any published scientific data supporting the audible effects of unbroken power cables. And with that said, I'll go back to ignoring cable threads.
Tim
But that also applies to almost any audio equipment? If you decide your equipment/media preferences based on peer-reviewed scientific data you will be listening to 320k MP3's on a Bose WaveRadio. I'm not saying I agree with all this stuff about power cords needing 200 hrs of break-in, but i really don't know one way or the other.
I wrote:
Originally Posted by Speedskater
"ack" that dielectric memory only applies to some types of capacitors in DC circuits. In an AC circuit that memory gets erased every one half cycle.
Your response has little to do with my post or the subject of this thread which is 'AC Power Cables".
If cables can operate at Cat5 frequencies without addressing this problem, then to suggest that it has any affect on powers lines is unsupportable.
Burn-in is an annoyance in many ways. It is frustrating as a manufacturer to make a fine product and then when it arrives at the customer, it doesn't sound just right. It is frustrating to the customer because they have to wait several days to weeks for their system to stabilize. And it is frustrating from a designer and scientist's point of view because it is so difficult to explain why you need to go through this.
Burn-in is not a perception, it is not an illusion and it is not a product of suggestion. It is a fact. Too many people, world-wide with vast variety of different types of cables, from every single manufacturer have noticed the effect. For the people that insist on having their intellectual curiosity satisfied with proof or peer reviewed scientific papers on burn-in are going to be sadly disappointed. There is no proof that we are currently aware of.
Are there any theories for the burn-in effect? Some people believe that it is related to the dielectric (insulation) that surrounds the conductor. They believe that dielectric changes over time when exposed to an alternating field. I personally do not believe that this is the primary cause of the effect. Copper and silver metals at the atomic level are loosely associated in a roughly crystalline arrangement. This is very dependent upon the manner in which the wire was extruded or cast and dependent upon how it is stressed (bent). What many people don't realize is that the molecules in metals can and do migrate (move) in relationship to one another over time. This migration can be caused by the release of inter-atomic field stress, accelerated by the movement of electrons and associated heat. Also, if a metal is plated or is in contact with a different type of metal, the inter electro-voltaic potential can cause molecular migration. In my opinion, and it is just that - not a proof, is that the movement of the electrons through the metal, over time, causes minute adjustments to the the inter-molecular positions of the atoms relieving stress within the metallic structures. As the current flows micro current pathways are established within the cable. It's just a theory. This is also why cryogenic treatment is helpful in that it accelerates the release of this stress.
Let's look at the probability that a proof or even hard scientific evidence that corroborates the burn-in effect could be acquired. Let's assume that the effect of burn-in is function of a change in the molecular structure within the conductor itself. To find evidence of this we would need to use an electron microscope and examine the structure of the metal before and after burn-in. Even then, it is highly doubtful that we would find a visible difference.
So, why doesn't someone just do some research and publish a paper on it?
Follow the money my friend. To do this kind of research takes time and money. Any institution that would even consider it would want to know what the return on investment would be for such a study. It would be hard to justify just to satisfy intellectual curiosity without some overriding product development potential or financial incentive or advancement to scientific knowledge.
Now what really fries the brain is not what causes the burn-in effect. To me, it is why we can hear it in a high-end audio system. Think about it. You won't find any proof there either. Just a lot of arguments back and forth.
Burn-in is not a perception, it is not an illusion and it is not a product of suggestion. It is a fact. Too many people, world-wide with vast variety of different types of cables, from every single manufacturer have noticed the effect. For the people that insist on having their intellectual curiosity satisfied with proof or peer reviewed scientific papers on burn-in are going to be sadly disappointed. There is no proof that we are currently aware of.
Are there any theories for the burn-in effect? Some people believe that it is related to the dielectric (insulation) that surrounds the conductor. They believe that dielectric changes over time when exposed to an alternating field. I personally do not believe that this is the primary cause of the effect. Copper and silver metals at the atomic level are loosely associated in a roughly crystalline arrangement. This is very dependent upon the manner in which the wire was extruded or cast and dependent upon how it is stressed (bent). What many people don't realize is that the molecules in metals can and do migrate (move) in relationship to one another over time. This migration can be caused by the release of inter-atomic field stress, accelerated by the movement of electrons and associated heat. Also, if a metal is plated or is in contact with a different type of metal, the inter electro-voltaic potential can cause molecular migration. In my opinion, and it is just that - not a proof, is that the movement of the electrons through the metal, over time, causes minute adjustments to the the inter-molecular positions of the atoms relieving stress within the metallic structures. As the current flows micro current pathways are established within the cable. It's just a theory. This is also why cryogenic treatment is helpful in that it accelerates the release of this stress.
Let's look at the probability that a proof or even hard scientific evidence that corroborates the burn-in effect could be acquired. Let's assume that the effect of burn-in is function of a change in the molecular structure within the conductor itself. To find evidence of this we would need to use an electron microscope and examine the structure of the metal before and after burn-in. Even then, it is highly doubtful that we would find a visible difference.
So, why doesn't someone just do some research and publish a paper on it?
Follow the money my friend. To do this kind of research takes time and money. Any institution that would even consider it would want to know what the return on investment would be for such a study. It would be hard to justify just to satisfy intellectual curiosity without some overriding product development potential or financial incentive or advancement to scientific knowledge.
Now what really fries the brain is not what causes the burn-in effect. To me, it is why we can hear it in a high-end audio system. Think about it. You won't find any proof there either. Just a lot of arguments back and forth.
First of all, it's not true of almost any audio equipment. Lots of audio equipment has been tested, their effects have been measured, and those effects have been reported. We know very well that the signal, on the other side of a functional amplifier, is louder. Do we have any objective knowledge of the effects of high-end power cables? If we do, I've never seen anyone refer to it in one of these discussions on the internet. Not once, in hundreds of posts. Everything has been subjective and anecdotal. That, and the obvious "first things first," as my initial post was a response to this statement from Marty:
Tim
The problem I have with the burn-in debate (I think it's a real issue) is the inconsistency. I've had cables that seemingly took months (cardas arm wires) and some that required little, if any time. When I upgraded my dedicated AC units, they felt like they needed 6 months to settle before the sound "returned", but they include dedicated circuits & capacitors. Other examples, P&S better wall outlets sound kinda hard & brittle for about a month before they settle, yet Eagle outlets don't require nearly that much time.
From strictly a consumer perspective, I for one would appreciate a definitive answer. It certainly would help separate fallacies, and accompanying snake-oil issues ... from reality. I mean, stuff like re-cable-burns every 6 months, is that really necessary? Perhaps it's cable specific? Certainly, I've never felt the need for that kind of effort within my system. I could be wrong, but judging by this; recently I put my entire system into storage for 3 months during a move, therefore I figured with that length of in-activity, re-burn-in was definitely required. Yet, it really wasn't.
tb1
What is it with these audiophiles? If an online community of wine lovers would dedicate as much time debating the chemistry of winemaking and the chemical composition of good and bad wines people would be rolling on the floor laughing. Why does this pinot take 7 years to reach its peak, but this Bordeaux gets better for 15 years? Send these bottles to the lab?
Yet here we are......
We have found that burn-in is very consistent and predictable with our products. We know what the cables will sound like from day to day which we have described in many forums. There is nothing (materially) that would make one cable from one manufacturer to another differ as far burn-in is concerned.
In my experience, and we have done the tests repeatedly, the majority of cable burn-in occurs within the first 5 days of burn-in. This assumes that the cable is pulling current 24/7. The only variables have to do with the quantity of current and to a greater extent the mass of the metal. Cables with a larger cross-sectional area take longer to burn-in. BTW, this does not just apply to cables - it applies to any and all devices that have metal conductors including: PCB traces, coils, capacitors, tubes, transformers, contacts, etc.
Regarding our power conditioners that use the NICs: They do take longer to fully stabilize because the NICs contain massive copper tubes.
I confess to similar behavioral inconsistencies with regard to different hobbies. Its weird.
At the risk of ridicule,yes. One, cables don't like being disturbed and require on the order of 24 hrs of being left in place before sounding their best. Symptoms include a loss of transparency and instrumental focus. Two, depends upon whether or not the cables were sitting around unused and for how long.
Hello, rrbert. Also at the risk of ridicule, I will echo MylesBAstor's observations. It has been my experience/observations that even used cables or cables that haven't been used for some time have some sort of break in period associated with them. Not as much as a new set of cables but a break in nonetheless. This may also have something to do with the gear associated with said cables as well.
Tom
Beware the used electricity... http://www.gocomics.com/peanuts/2013/11/10
Wine aging and cable aging have little in common.
Noise traps and the like can occur in cables, but I have not the ears nor the system to hear audible effects from them.
Wine aging and cable aging have little in common.
Noise traps and the like can occur in cables, but I have not the ears nor the system to hear audible effects from them.
We don't call that burn-in preferring to call it "settling time".
If you remove the cable carefully and don't bend it too much the settling period will be very short. A few minutes to a couple of hours.
If you want to experiment, take a cable out of the system and bend it in several places along the cable. Then, if your floor is carpeted, throw the cable to the floor with some force. Then put it back in and listen to it.
Unfortunately, shipping a cable virtually erases burn-in. The settling time for a burned-in cable after shipment is about 5 days - the same as a new cable. Probably because of the extreme coiling of the cable for packing and the vibration of the trucks that transport it. This is one of the reasons we don't pre burn-in cables at the factory.
Similar threads
