Best interconnect burn-in method

I think I know the answer to this, but I just wanted to double check with everyone.  I am in the process of burning in an XLR interconnect.  The interconnect is between the DAC and the integrated amp.  I am using a laptop as the source, and it is connecting via USB cable to the DAC.  Is it true that I am still burning in the XLR IC if I leave the integrated amp turned off while playing music continuously on my laptop with the DAC turned on?  Thank you for your input.

Fortunately, there is no logical reason for burn-in with cables. So your approach will be equally effective as any other. If you experience audible differences over time (drift in performance) then it would be best to have your active gear (amp, preamp, power source, grounding etc.) checked and repaired/replaced. Generally a change over time means something is wrong (temperature issues, incompatibility between components, leaks to ground, capacitors beginning to fail etc)
@shadorne ,
I’m not here to debate the concept of cable burn-in, god knows it’s been done before. But what the manufacturers do state is that newly installed cables need a settling in period. For example, cables that have been coiled and packed in a box for some time, need to be installed, let the dielectric reach room temp, and run a signal through them.

@shadorne Your statement flies in the face of Audioquest's Dielectric Bias System and an understanding that once installed in a system, cable dielectrics "form" after a period of time with signal flowing through them.  AQ's DBS system sends 72 volts through the cable to keep the dielectric formed at all times after initial break-in.  As the dielectric forms the cables tend to "open up" in terms of sound quality.  It is actually a cool thing to experience if you have never had the occasion to do so.  Lots of unexpected pleasures in this hobby.  That's one of them.

Couldn't help myself. My brain is just reeling from the vast wealth of information and disillusion from the black fuse thread😳
Post removed 
Don't go out there Christopher, the world, she's-a-flat, and you'll sail off the edge of the world.
@randy-11  Gee Randy, what is a dielectric?  I'm new to audiophilia.  Thanks for helping me out!

Unless a person has done testing they have only opinions.

You can read about my experience at in the article entitled "Audiophile Law: Thou Shalt Not Overemphasize Burn In"

Unless a person understands science they have only un-informed opinions.
Why does a question have to turn into a cable debate?

Nordost Vidar.

The OP should post this question in the Cable section at audio asylum where he won't be pestered
Two conditions are required for a cable to be able to break-in:1) signal, 2) some current flow.
The signal (volts following the music) are coming from the DAC, the tiny current also follows the signal and is caused by the input impedance of your amp. That impedance is there no matter if the amp is switched on. Just make sure that the input selector matches the XLR input you connect the cables to. Sometimes the input selectors disconnect the "other" inputs and the input impedance goes to "open circuit" and no current will flow. Give the break-in enough hours.
Good luck and happy listening!


Just...use your cables.  If they aren't faulty, they will work fine out of the box. 

The fewer audiophile myths you fall for, the less money you will waste and the less paranoid you will be. 

Must become a debate or else these scrounges can't make the nickel they desperately need.  

Get a cable cooker. They work for burn-in and a recharge of cables when used once a year. I consider them a necessity and not a luxury for top heap audio. Mine recommends 1.5 days to burn in an interconnect using it.

Playtime 24 hours after that plus settling depending on your conductor structure.

I’ve tried using an arc welder to burn in a set of binding posts, just prior to a show. To try and eliminate that part of the burn in process. the answer is, don’t do it. Far too dark, is the result.

Thankfully, it bounces back to a norm of sorts, but it does take a few days. Just like normal burn in.


90% of what we mean in a face to face conversation, is lost in internet conversations. The reflection of their ego fills in what they desire, into what you have said/written. The attacks are coming out of them, based on their minds, not yours or your intent, meaning, etc. This is the fundamentals of psychology in the internet written world.

They really are, most seriously, stroking themselves heavily. Ergo...There is no chance of a meeting of the minds or a middle ground.

When we add in the forceful ego projections of some folks, there is even less chance they’ll learn anything --- and that they are trolling to get their jollies. Not much more can be said.

Ignore them. 100 percent ignore them. The thing their projecting egos can’t deal with, is being ignored ~entirely~.

Have your conversation as if they aren’t even there.

Zero response: It’s the only thing that drives them away.

Remember, they are most definitely baiting you to respond and they’ll say anything (all emotionally driven and barbed) to get that response from you. The only win available is to never respond. not even once. Think of a screaming child looking for attention and 'what it wants'. If you cave, the cycle never ends.

a better idea would be to educate oneself in the areas of science that affect sound and its reproduction (as well as how to do subjective testing) - I recognize that is difficult but it will pay off 

some things matter a lot, and some not at all
You’re both waaay off. You need to study mind matter interaction and evolution, especially evolution as it pertains to survival skills and sensory perception. Everything else, all the typical things audiophiles take for granted, are not even close. But gee, where does one go to find out how the immediate surroundings affect hearing and about evolution of the senses and survival? The biggest thing in audio and you can’t even find any textbooks about it. 😩

YOU , are dead wrong .
Music is an innate element in humans like sex, found in all cultures and all times , and like sex not subject to evolution .
Things may very but due to culture not evolution .

Hard to write a book on a non-existent topic .

Post removed 
As someone born in 1935 I can assure you what passes for music at present does NOT serve as a guide  and actually makes my point 
on culture .
Take a rock concert for instance, it is impossible that  X-thousand people
could all decide to  raise their arm , same arm, at same time , and wave same in unison because of the music . It is a social event not a musical one
and follows that cultural norm . Reminds me of a Nazi rally(no joke) .
Yes on selection but that is not evolution .
 Yes also on new gear as well .
Things are worse than you think. Much worse. You only think science, acoustics, electronics, neuroscience, whatever, can explain it all and that you can actually control it because you’ve lived with your while life. Besides, it’s subconscious. You can’t do anything about it even if you wanted to. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news.

You can’t control the controllers. - Anonymous

note to self: you know you’re probably in a controversial thread as soon as the word Nazi raises its head.

Actually its good news, if you only put good stuff in your subconscious , and don't do drugs, only good stuff comes out .
Sorry to be the one to tell you but you cannot control what goes into the subconscious. Hence the "sub" in subconscious. Especially when what’s in the subconscious was put there hundreds of thousands of years ago and has remained there through the evolution process. You aren't born with a clean slate. You cannot control the controller.

No wonder I don't let those little voices control me, they don't speak English !
What if God set up the evolutionary process? Since by nature God is metaphysical we have transcended the mere physicality of the evolutionary process.
What if  the creator continues to create and we call the small part we grasp
evolution ?
Sometimes to create you must first destroy.

...but, nowdays, more-likely, every time you want to create something, you must destroy same you're actually 'creating' to 'make room' and than  claim that to your name.

It looks like all Creator does is destroying already created recursively and than creating it again and again. So where can you find yourself?


And you may find yourself
Living in a shotgun shack
And you may find yourself
In another part of the world
And you may find yourself
Behind the wheel of a large automobile
And you may find yourself in a beautiful house
With a beautiful wife
And you may ask yourself, well
How did I get here?


Isn't THAT once in a lifetime or ... ?

Unless a person understands science they have only un-informed opinions.

Science by its nature is poised to create as much as possible those un-informed or diverse opinions called HYPOTHESIS. Only math can straighten out all hypothetical opinions in one unique making HYPOTHESIS a proven scientific FACT.

Unless person starts plugging in numbers into scientific formula(s), the given hypothesis will always be in ’hibernation’ creating points of forum discussions...

So randy-11, please share your wisdom on what it takes to understand science and why do you think that posters here have ’un-informed opinions’?

many posters here are immersed in woo-woo snake oil, and/or mis-apply real effects 

an example of the latter is claiming that skin effect is an issue at audio frequencies (tho it is real for microwaves...)

if you can translate the rest of your post into English I'll try to comment
But no one here has claimed skin effect applies to audio frequencies. So what you said is, you guessed it, a Strawman Argument.

there is someone phoney here, that's for sure - got a mirror??

skin effect is - as I said - an example; there are many more and anyone can see dozens by looking at troll-kait's web store

if you can translate the rest of your post into English I’ll try to comment

you mean from Science to English? What portion of post you need translation mind mentioning? It looks like you’re asking to translate the whole thingie...

It’s hard, because not everyone indeed understands Science as you noted prior, but I can give hint on how to understand and translate:

Once you find CORRECT definition of SCIENCE, you’ll be able to translate my rest of post. You should also find definitions of the following words: HYPOTHESIS, EXPERIMENT, FACT.

In my school days, we simply neglected skin effect on audio circuits and treated them as DC so here's another word you need to find CORRECT scientific definition: ASSUMPTION!

For now, I guess all you need to do is finding a good school and register for classes such as Science101 or somethin’

Shakespeare?! What? Hey! Nothing so high falutin', I'm afraid. That's David. The android from the Sci Fi flic Prometheus.

Why don't you just listen and let it do its thing....  Its interesting how it changes...