Jump to content

Interconnect Break In Time and Factors?


zuzu

Recommended Posts

What is it in the construction or materials that add to or reduce the amount of time for an interconnect to break in? Does playing at higher volume break in a interconnect faster? What does the % broken in vs time curve look like in general. Does break in occur faster between some components than others ie CD to Pre amp vs pre amp to power amp?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no break-in time for metal conductors and I expect the same is true for semiconductors except for some temperature related matters.

The wire and plugs work just fine right out of box and continue to do so for decades as long as there is not a corrosion issue.

Like I say, you can't make things better by fixing a problem which doesn't exist in the first place.

Gil

Link to comment
Share on other sites

zuzu

The list of reasons why break-in's are required and what is occuring will be just as long as the list that suggest no break-in's are required and nothing is occuring.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've heard folks talk about "break in" periods for interconnects and speaker cable before. This simply has to be way out there in snake oil territory! What's to break in? Are molecules supposed to re-arrange themselves somehow imparting better sound thereafter? If there is an empirical, verifiable explanation for the claim that cables need to break in I'd sure be interested in knowing about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How dare I read such blasphemy!

So we indeed have folks out here who are not exercising their cables?!?!

I suspect that this is simply the result of too many not exercising their minds either!

And seeing as so many are so lazy and care so little for their interconnects, I have gone to the trouble to source the latest incarnation from the alchemists lab, just for you! For the others, its from AudioAdvisor, the home of snake oil and the same folks who in the 80's brought you the ever so desired "water insulated cables" and the "light insulated cables". (Hey folks, even I couldn't make this stuff up! It's real!..well, meaning that they actually were sold! ...for outrageous prices...But hey, excellence costs!)

The irony is that when I was involved with the development of the RS6000SP internals, by virtue that it is the most powerful supercomputer available and offering a strategically critical position, IBM could have specified molecularly deposited salamander livers upon a platinum substrate if they could justify the reduced bit error rate and enhanced conductivity. And have you priced salamander liver these days!? Instead, plain old copper was employed on the circuit boards. And it wasn't even conditioned! Can you imagine!? Now there's a scandal for you!

post-23237-13819333874776_thumb.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My favorite are the cables with the arrows on them. You best not hook those babies up backward.[;)]

It depends. Often this is done to indicate that the shield is lifted at one end - a legitimate form of directional cable that can be employede to minimize ground loops and to provide additional RF/EMI rejection.

If it is sold as the electrons flowing in one direction better than another, run. As no one is marketing cable featuring strain-improved channel mobility via a strained matrix substrate material in cables where directional conductivity is improved. And even if they were, the cost would not justify the benefit.

I like to think of this distinction as being one between 'directional cable' and 'directional wire'. The former is real, the latter is not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Are molecules supposed to re-arrange themselves somehow "

Actually Mick I think some of these cables manufacturers suggest just that[:|]

Funny Mark, I bought some used cables off A-goN with directional ends so I might just have to turn them around an see what happens[:o] Wonder if it will take the sound longer to get to upstream equipment then? LOL

So it's go direct to jail and you don't collect $200.00[:^)] HeHe

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a hard time imagining break in for interconnects.

Bob Crites has a "widow maker" contraption for conditioning capacitors in some way. Also think I've heard LeoK speaking of conditioning caps, but this is different kind of animal.

But I'm a skeptic. I don't think much of high end power cords either. So take my opinion with a grain of salt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was waxing poetic over this.

1) Humans have been putting signals down wire since the invention of the telegraph in about 1830. Let's say that by the Civil War, telegraph wire was well used. But it is only in the last decade that anyone suggested there was a break in period.

2) The manufacturers of interconnects have never put up any data suggesting there is a break in period. Little wonder.

3) I think it is just a matter that people get used to the concept they have put a lot of money into an expense which has no effect.

4) Doing science by vote of laymen (some people say yes, some people say no) is not science. Before year 1500 the flat earther's had a majority. After that, the round earthers had a majority. Nothing in fact changed except that the data became undeniable. So we have to rely on data not opinion. In electronics, that comes from meters and physics.

Sorry if I'm taking a hard line on this.

Gil

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I must admit I was sad when I first saw the frybaby on the hagtech website as I really like some of his other designs. What happened to his top of the line phono stage? Was it the trumpet? 



I don't have a problem with fancy cables just don't pay fancy prices. If you have nice gear why use the ugliest wire you can find? The most I have paid for speaker cables was about 150 but new they would have been about 600 and they look cool : )
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was waxing poetic over this.

1) Humans have been putting signals down wire since the invention of the telegraph in about 1830. Let's say that by the Civil War, telegraph wire was well used. But it is only in the last decade that anyone suggested there was a break in period.

2) The manufacturers of interconnects have never put up any data suggesting there is a break in period. Little wonder.

3) I think it is just a matter that people get used to the concept they have put a lot of money into an expense which has no effect.

4) Doing science by vote of laymen (some people say yes, some people say no) is not science. Before year 1500 the flat earther's had a majority. After that, the round earthers had a majority. Nothing in fact changed except that the data became undeniable. So we have to rely on data not opinion. In electronics, that comes from meters and physics.

Sorry if I'm taking a hard line on this.

Gil

A hard line is not permitted on this forum. Prepare to defend your opinion, which is likely held only by you and your fellow rationalists.

En garde, mon brave!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I know Islander is joshing me on. A good part of the forum. Smile.

Zuzu's question is actually a matter of "begging the question" in classic logic. Even before electricity, perhaps even apes throwing rocks, people had to deal with such.

The term "begging the question" is often misused. You see discussions where a stream of discussion invites further inquiry. E.g. "If it is proven that there is some resistance in the circuit, this begs the question of how much effect it can have in the overall loop equation as far as loses."

I just made that up. It is a valid question flowing logically from the starting point that there IS resistance.

However, Zuzu's question assumes that there is a break in period and then asks for more data to support the nature and extent of the starting assumption. That is, classically, begging the question. Probably, begging the answer.

- - -

The way these things should go is that someone steps up and says: Here is hard data by an unbiased source, my HP meter, which shows there is a change in electrical characteristics over time.

Grr. I rant.

Gil

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It can be tough being an audio rationalist. There are an amazing number of remarkable concepts floating around, between makers of oddball stuff that may or may not work, people that half-understand established concepts and take off in strange directions and of course people that take the dubious concepts and run away with them.

When I was involved with motorcycle racing, it didn't matter what tweak you tried, it either went fast or it didn't. If it went fast, you were right, end of story, but audio is a whole different game. Everyone is their own referee, which is the way it should be in your own living room. However, the idea that everyone who disagrees with someone's pet concept is six kinds of idiot is something I can't get used to.

As for me, although my ears should be the final arbiter, my meter shows them to have more dips and peaks than my speakers, in the bass region at least. I'm not about to try to micro-EQ the system to suit my ears, so good enough is good enough, and good enough is pretty good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...