Skeptic or just plain hard headed


So I purchased a pair of Morrow Audio phono cables. These are the PH3 with the Eichmann connectors. Wanted to start there to see if MA cables will be a viable option for my system.I think my story is not so unique to others who have purchased MA cables. So no need to go into the hu hum of burn-in in regards to MA cables, and how things sound bad at first, then gets better,  then excellent...yada yada yada. I know the story about this product.  I simply am one who is not a believer in electronics break in periods, or battery packs on cables, etc... Regardless of what side of the fence you are on in regards to that Im NOT trying to start that debate again please.. Anyway. After reading several reviews of the MA cables and understanding that most agreed that the cables needed a substantial burn-in time, and that the cables would not sound its best until this happens I decided to give them a try. Thinking ok lets get a jump on the burn-in period (if the concept is true). I paid for the 2 day burn-in service from MA. What I didn't expect is that when I got the cable it would sound as bad as it did in comparison to my existing name brand cable (not getting into that either, not relevant). I thought well the cable might not quite be up to snuff with all this talk about burn-in (if its true) but not that much of a difference.  I mean as soon as I dropped the needle on the record I immediately heard a profound difference in sound stage and clarity degridation. Needless to say this cable was destined to be returned to MA for a full refund and my thinking was "they are crazy if I am going to trade my cable for this cable" So I decided to give MA a call to setup the return. Talked with Mike Morrow (very nice guy by the way) and we had our differences in what I should expect out of his product. Now my Mother always told me that I have a hard head.. I heard that growing up all my life, and when you couple that with skepticism it makes a pretty, well lets just say not a very fun person to have a debate with lol. However Mike insisted that if I return the cable that I would be missing out on the fruit they would bare after 400 hours of break in. 400 hours??? really!. Oh at that point I was really ready to return them. I told all my friends "Mike must be nuts" (no offense Mike) no way am I going to wait a year to hear what this cable is capable of, AND I do not have any way to expedite the process...at least I thought I didn't until I found an old sound bar I don't use anymore with analog inputs. Ok I know you pro MA and  pro cable burn-in folks are chomping at the bit. Im almost done. Take your hands off the keyboard for just a few more lines. 

So here is the deal to be fair I am going to be open minded about this because Mike really made me feel like I would be missing out if I return the cable without a proper burn-in (great salesman), and since he had such conviction I now think I have to test this thing out right??. Now I know that there are testimonials out there about how the MA cable improved over 100s of hours in their system, and that they are now "blown away". However can you really hear a profound difference in a cable you play in your system over 170 hours or so?  I would think a gradual difference would be harder to detect. I mean my system seems to sound better to me everyday without making any changes. Is it because of  continued cable and electronics burn in?? maybe. Or maybe its just my brain becoming more intimate with the sound of my system. Well this test I'm doing should reveal a night and day difference from what the system sounds like today with the cable pre burn-in if there is any merit to the notion. In regards to does it sound better than my existing cable that is yet to be determined. I think my goal now is to prove or dis-prove if cable burn-in is a real thing. This whole idea has evolved from if it's an improvement or not over what I use today. We can discuss that later.

I now have the cable connected between a cd player , and a sound bar with a CD playing on repeat. The disc of choice for this burn-in is rather dynamic so it should be a good test. At the end of 16 days (384 hours) I will move the cables to my reference system and do about another 20 hours of additional burn-in to compensate for moving the cable. This will put a total of 452 hours of burn-in on the PH3. When I put this cable back in my system I sure hope it sings because this is a lot to go through to add a cable to your system. Mike if you are right I will eat crow and will preach from the highest mountain top that you are right, and that cable burn-in is REAL.  For me anyway the myth will be considered busted or reinforce my belief that cable burn-in is a bunch of BS. 

For those who will argue the point of cable burn-in I fully understand the concept, and I don't plan to get sucked down that rat hole and I won't argue that....yet because at the end of this test I may be in your camp and I don't want to have a steady diet of crow so for now I will remain neutral on the subject until the test is complete.  However I will be totally transparent and honest about the results. So not trying to make anyone angry as I know beliefs about audio are sensitive subjects, and rightfully so this hobby is expensive and I like you have a substancial investment in this. Just trying to get to the truth. I also understand that cable burn-in may actually happen when you consider it from a scientific perspective, but the real question is can you actually hear the difference.  

I will report back to this thread in 17 days from today (need at least one day to evaluate) with the results. 

happy listening!!

-Keith
barnettk

Showing 4 responses by douglas_schroeder

barnettk, I predict you will hear no difference in the recordings. Why would I say that? Because I did my own set of comparisons between "burned in" gear and new gear. While you wait your additional 400 hours you can read my article at Dagogo.com entitled, "Audiophile Law: Thou Shalt Not Overemphasize Burn In". I believe you will find much to consider there.  :) 


barnettk, thank you for the complement. I used to be "hard headed" many years ago, then decided to try things rather than give an opinion. There have been many surprises, and what I learned about burn in was among them.

Currently I am engaged in an ongoing experiment, if you will, about a method I named the Schroeder Method of Interconnect Placement in which I use splitters to literally double the interconnect cables. See discussion of it at my article, Audio Blast: The Schroeder Method of Interconnect Placement, and also in the thread here in the cable forum with my name attached to it. You will likely find that to be challenging to logic, but simple comparison would yield quite a different result than what I expect the burn in test to yield.  (Not trying to sidetrack the entire discussion, just adding for your benefit, as you are now interested in my thoughts. But please see the warnings, caveats, etc. associated, i.e. with class D amps.)

There are some things in audio that result in different outcomes than one expects. Opinions abound, but fewer are those who actually try. It is the trying that has made the journey so amazing to me. :)

Elizabeth, I'm not sure what you are referring to when you stated, "After reading the article. my main criticism is they did this with just one component, a relatively low priced device. And that they assumed the not broken in device was not broken in. they admit it had some time already on it) So any extrapolation to the world of all devices is a stretch. But a nice attempt.      
ANd to say thee re variations in components. Some change a lot some not at all. So again one test does not offer enough to draw conclusions about all components."


To clarify; I worked clearly with three items; a set of cables, a CD player and an integrated amp. I had duplicates of all three, one set used and given additional burn in, and the others like new. There may have been up to 10 hours of use of the new components. It hardly matters, as whether new or 10 hours, versus the hundreds of hours that supposedly burn in is to change a component or cable, the comparison showed no difference, even when three items were used together. One set was as new, while the other had been used for hundreds of hours and given additional burn in, and used warmed up versus cold start for the new ones. 

My conclusion is that was a massive fail for the concept of burn in, and due to the multiplicity of items being compared together more strongly supports a tentative conclusion that no components actually change audibly (excepting the conditions mentioned in the article) over time with use.  

Additionally, if you were referencing my article in the second paragraph of your post, in response I clarify that there was not three levels of change; there was no change at all among three pieces being tested together simultaneously.  :)                     

To clarify for bob, barnettk, and other interested parties, initially I was warning against use with amplifiers as it was a complete unknown in the field. Now, I have built several systems from integrated DAC to amp, or preamp to amp using the Schroeder Method. Similar superb results as when going from source to preamp.

The caveats and warnings still apply; I suggest conversation with equipment manufacturers to check for compatibility.