[Scott F.]

Danny,

Required break in time for the common spider-diaphragm-surround is typically on the order of 10's of seconds and is a one-off proposition, not requiring repetition.

OMG, you have got to be kidding   10's of seconds to break in a driver? Thats like saying a new pair of fine leather shoes will break in within 30 steps. Heck, I think Dickason even showed a measurable change in Q after 30 minutes with a 20Hz sine wave on new drivers.

I've had super stiff drivers (my Lowther PM2As) take well over 500 to 600 hours before they finally became compliant and smoothed out in the highs. Mike D (one of the local guys) thinks my 2A's are still getting smoother in the highs after 3 or 4k hours.


Oh, thats a kick a** switcher you had built BTW

[bgewaudio]

Hi,guys

This is a question regarding the "Quantum Tunneling" theory if anyone cares to answer.

If I've got this right, quantum tunneling is basically electrically charged atoms breaking down the physical impurities in the metals over time, if this is so, could this have an effect on the dielectric materials as well? If so, wouldn't this increase inductance?

[JohninCR]

Oh, thats a kick a** switcher you had built BTW

I'd trust the cheap passive short path switch through which I couldn't measure any resistance long before I'd trust anything that had to be plugged in.

[gitarretyp]

Hi,guys

This is a question regarding the "Quantum Tunneling" theory if anyone cares to answer.

If I've got this right, quantum tunneling is basically electrically charged atoms breaking down the physical impurities in the metals over time, if this is so, could this have an effect on the dielectric materials as well? If so, wouldn't this increase inductance?

That does seem to be what the BFS article is implying, regarding the impurity break down. That sounds a little stange to me, so (provided i have time and sufficient motivation) i'm going to pick-up the refenced book from the library and have a look at the article.

[Danny Richie]

I'd trust the cheap passive short path switch through which I couldn't measure any resistance long before I'd trust anything that had to be plugged in.

And they were connected to your switch how?

The reason it is powered is that there are a bunch of high quality relays that are powered on or off when switching. The hand held switch is remotely located as well. Power was needed for that too. Plus, there is a steeped attenuator that can be added to the signal path between the pre-amp and amp that is active in one of the outputs only. It will allow me to balance the output of a pair of speakers when doing A/B comparisons of different types of speakers.

The cable comparison between burned in and non burned in cables was obvious enough not to need a switch.

When I compared some of these inexpensive speaker cables ( http://www.gr-research.com/components/wire.htm ) the difference is great enough that if you listen to each of them long enough (several minutes) and learn the differences then someone could insert one or the other and not knowing which was which (blind), be able to tell which cable was connected.

[Dan Banquer]

Hi,guys

This is a question regarding the "Quantum Tunneling" theory if anyone cares to answer.

If I've got this right, quantum tunneling is basically electrically charged atoms breaking down the physical impurities in the metals over time, if this is so, could this have an effect on the dielectric materials as well? If so, wouldn't this increase inductance?

I hope someone gives you an answer. Especially the person who brought this to our attention.
                d.b.

[Dan Banquer]

Danny,

Required break in time for the common spider-diaphragm-surround is typically on the order of 10's of seconds and is a one-off proposition, not requiring repetition.

Actually the late Bud Fried said about the same thing. So I guess someone with close to 40 years in loudspeakers just doesn't have a clue?

              d.b.

[HumanMedia]

As I upgraded my system over the last couple of years, I went from not noticing changes over burn-in time to noticing them on almost everything as my system became more resolving.  There is some degree of ears/brain getting used to the new sound, but this only accounts for a small part of the burn-in change.  I know this as I burn in stuff on a separate system and check in on it occasionally, so differences are more obvious.

I have found a pattern repeating itself from hookup wire and opamps through to speaker cable.  Sometimes there is a change in 24 hours, but more often than not there is little change for 100 hours.  Then between 100 hours and 150 hours quite dramatic changes take place and the sound settles into a burned-in state.  Capacitors take up to 400 hours as the changes there are more chemical than what is happening in solid state and conductors.

My own, perhaps fanciful, hypothesis of what happens to solid state and conductors is that a structural change takes place.  Yes I think there is a component of the dialectrics/ceramics curing and changing chemically but I believe that a larger component is structural caused by settling of the conductor and the current running through it.  The Quantum Tunneling concept is interesting and I havent read the article, but I dont think there is a chemical change caused by the current flow but it is a structural one.

We all know the 5 states of matter right?  Plasma, Gas, Liquid, Solid and Bose-Einstein Condensate.
Bose-Einstein Condensate is when matter is supercooled and all of the molecules are brought close together into a steplock grid. When this state is reached internal tensions are relaxed and the matter becomes superconducting.  When the material is left to warm without being restressed it has a more stable and less noisy electrical characteristics.  Sound like the basis for all this cryo-treatment eh?

I believe leaving something to burn-in lets the structure settle physically (cables conform to their new physical arrangment) and that electricity running through it also stabilises the conductors surface on a micro scale (similar to cryo-ing it).  Perhaps after doing this for some time the surface atoms (where current 'flows') are reoriented to more stable positions.  (I dont believe electrons actually move through anything, but transfer from shell to shell of the conducting atoms like a wave along the surface of the conductor.).

I also believe that different materials are more prone to this physical phenomena - silver is less elastic than copper so is more prone to needing burn-in after being moved, bent etc.  Also interesting is that Cardas recommend re-burning in their cables after being deformed or bent.

[Danny Richie]

Actually the late Bud Fried said about the same thing. So I guess someone with close to 40 years in loudspeakers just doesn't have a clue?

Dan, anybody can SAY anything. Anybody and everybody that I know of that has measured T/S parameters on a fresh woofer and at different time intervals up to the 40 or 50 hour point all looks the same and looks just like my measured data.

[warnerwh]

The part that amazes me is that so much time to wire design and sound continues to gain so much attention and discussion. Now wire burn in can only change the original sound so much.When you start with a very subtle change at best in the first place then how much change can there be when wire burns in. Then room acoustics are rarely discussed in comparison yet have a much more important role in sound reproduction.

The fact that wire's effect on the sound is typically on the order of miniscule to undetectable makes me think it's close to a non issue. I'm all for quality connections and cables. I'm against very high prices for wire as I think it's unnecessary compared to changing speakers or dacs. Once you spend several hundred per pair for IC's you could have probably upgraded somewhere else.

I realize it costs money to make a decent cable. Even my 60 cent a foot mic cable to make my own ic's cost me about 11-12 bucks a pair to make. Making my speaker cables costs about 50-60 dollars for an 8' pair. Dealers and Manufacturers have to pay for labor and overhead so I can understand IC's costing a 100 a pair or speaker cables costing a couple of hundred for an 8' pair. Several hundred or thousand for either of these has no doubt sent alot of prospective high end buyers from entering our market.

I do however believe that speaker driver burn in is significant and quite audible. New speakers I've owned changed too much in ways that I can't explain any other way. Then again maybe I moved the speaker wires during that period

[Hegemony]

Hi,

There is an article in Hi-Fi News July '06 regarding this issue.  In what seems to me to be an experiment with reasonable scientific rigor they concluded that there may have been a slight change due to "burn in" as the numbers did suggest this.  However it was nowhere near proof and more research may lead to more positive conclusions...I myself have always noticed burn in on new componentry in my amplifiers...caps etc...and would definitely agree that different cables make a difference throughout my system but have never noticed any burn in of cables. 

Cheers,
Russ

[Steve]

I agree with Dan, and note that anyone with even a basic mechanical engineering education and/or experience will understand it takes time to relieve the stresses in different types of materials used in cones, spiders, and surround, and to become stable in terms of compliance (flexibility).

Hearing differences in wire will depend on factors as room interaction and quality of equipment. I would treat rooms first, then on to ICs, cable etc.

[nathanm]

It's makes more sense to accept that EVERYTHING around you is changing in one way or another, detectable or not.  Your brain is adjusting and compensating for things you hear all the time.  Think about all the different ways you can analyze a song.  You can choose to focus on any one of numerous factors; the notes played, the tone of the instruments, the type of instruments used, the skill of the players, the tempo of the song, the lyrics, the meanings behind the lyrics, other songs which sound similar to this one, you the tone of microphones, the sound of the vocal, the frequency balance of the overall sound, the dynamics (or lack of),  the sound of electronic compression, the ambient sound reverberation, where you were and what you were doing when you first heard this song, the album cover art, the people who recorded the album, how this song differs from others from the same band, how this song sounded different on another system you've heard it on...the list goes on.  If you can push all that aside and choose to focus on such a debateable, questionably extant thing as burn-in of cables...I dunno to me that seems a waste.  In my opinion occupying your mind with such minutia means you are missing out on the whole point of owning exceptionally performing equipment.  Good equipment should make it easier to stop thinking about the mechanics of reproduction and connect you with the emotional factor of music all the more.  But ultimately that choice lies in your own mind.

And IF burn-in of cable is an absolute scientific fact then why doesn't the market value of cable appreciate rather than depreciate?  If a cable sounds better after break-in then people selling used cables should be able to sell them at a higher price, right?  The best cable would possibly the one stowed away in a box in your attic that was plugged in for 10 years.  Maybe if you got a hold of one of those crumbling, cloth-covered relics from a 1930s telephone switchboard you would own an awesome cable aged and distilled to perfection like a fine wine!  Sure, that makes sense...

[Dan Banquer]

It's makes more sense to accept that EVERYTHING around you is changing in one way or another, detectable or not.  Your brain is adjusting and compensating for things you hear all the time.  Think about all the different ways you can analyze a song.  You can choose to focus on any one of numerous factors; the notes played, the tone of the instruments, the type of instruments used, the skill of the players, the tempo of the song, the lyrics, the meanings behind the lyrics, other songs which sound similar to this one, you the tone of microphones, the sound of the vocal, the frequency balance of the overall sound, the dynamics (or lack of),  the sound of electronic compression, the ambient sound reverberation, where you were and what you were doing when you first heard this song, the album cover art, the people who recorded the album, how this song differs from others from the same band, how this song sounded different on another system you've heard it on...the list goes on.  If you can push all that aside and choose to focus on such a debateable, questionably extant thing as burn-in of cables...I dunno to me that seems a waste.  In my opinion occupying your mind with such minutia means you are missing out on the whole point of owning exceptionally performing equipment.  Good equipment should make it easier to stop thinking about the mechanics of reproduction and connect you with the emotional factor of music all the more.  But ultimately that choice lies in your own mind.

And IF burn-in of cable is an absolute scientific fact then why doesn't the market value of cable appreciate rather than depreciate?  If a cable sounds better after break-in then people selling used cables should be able to sell them at a higher price, right?  The best cable would possibly the one stowed away in a box in your attic that was plugged in for 10 years.  Maybe if you got a hold of one of those crumbling, cloth-covered relics from a 1930s telephone switchboard you would own an awesome cable aged and distilled to perfection like a fine wine!  Sure, that makes sense...

Excellent! I hope everyone on audiocircle reads this.
             d.b.

[Scotty]

The fact that the subject of cable burn-in or speaker break-in still comes up and is debated
just goes to show that the flat earth concept of audio is alive and well.
Scotty

[Russell Dawkins]

I think it's excellent that we managed to get through 6 pages of this and remain civilized!

[Steve]

"If you can push all that aside and choose to focus on such a debateable, questionably extant thing as burn-in of cables...I dunno to me that seems a waste.  In my opinion occupying your mind with such minutia means you are missing out on the whole point of owning exceptionally performing equipment.  Good equipment should make it easier to stop thinking about the mechanics of reproduction and connect you with the emotional factor of music all the more.  But ultimately that choice lies in your own mind."

I appreciate your point of view Nathanm. I think we agree. If the music sounds better using exceptional performing equipment, in the best room possible, and with the best cables, that is what I want. I want to enjoy the musical experience as much as possible and better  cables help me to do just that.
 
Depending on the resolution of the system, the improvement can be minor to moderate, maybe even major. 

[nathanm]

Nothing wrong with that at all.  I just feel that if one is going to make extraordinary claims of their hearing acuity they should be more than happy to 'throw down' on a diligent, scientific test.  By extraordinary claims I mean the claim that two of the same make cables, one new and the other which has passed signal for 100 hours are going to sound noticeably different.  That to me is a claim of extreme hearing ability.  Even more extreme than the claim that two different brands\configurations of cables will sound different.  This claim tells me that the listener is able to filter out all the myriad other factors I described earlier and somehow tune themselves into the the cable itself.  That's pretty impressive stuff and if the difference is so easily noticeable then it should be quite easy for such a listener to spot the burnt cable from the new one, right?

A guitarist may be able to pick out technical details about the guitar played on a certain recording, a recording engineer may be able to pick out technical details of the microphones and placement used on a certain recording; so I simply assert that an audiophile, as someone who listens to a variety of cables as part of his hobby, should be able to correctly guess technical details about things like cable or cable age with a similar degree of accuracy as the guitarist or recording engineer.  I have my doubts about that though, that's all.  But it's no tragedy because as I said earlier, there are tons of details to analyze when listening to music which are of a far coarser, more recognizable nature.  I don't understand why some people focus on the most vanishingly small and difficult to measure sonic parameters as being critically important while much broader issues are marginalized. 

I'm not pointing fingers at anyone here, but look at what happens - newbies come into the Hi-Fi scene and inevitably start asking questions about what kind of cable they should buy when they really could start off with something that costs nothing: proper speaker and listener placement within a given space.  I just think getting people weirded up about such ridiculous topics as cable burn-in (as opposed to denim jeans or leather shoes burn-in, which can be much more easily observed and tested) is a speed bump on an otherwise fun hobby where there's plenty of more obvious sonic virtues to mull over.

[Steve]

I agree that room/system interactions are a very high priority and should be treated as such.

I think what may help is to convey that after the room is properly treated, then upgrading  to better equipment and better peripherals will produce greater satisfaction.

As long as one generally moves forward (it is possible to make a bad purchase, we all make mistakes) toward their musical satisfaction, I think one is in pretty good shape.

[Scotty]

It has been my experience that extreme hearing acuity is of far less importance to hearing a difference between cables than possessing
a system in which such differences can be heard in the first place.
  The phenomena of speaker break-in is of greater interest to me than cables.
I would like to see distortion measurements done on a driver cold out of the box
and after 300 hrs. of break-in. It would be nice to see if there is a lowering of distortion products after break-in. If there was a lowering of distortion it would go a long way towards explaining the change in sound that I have heard take place
in a speaker system that has a fair amount of time on it.
Scotty