For Your Edification and Enjoyment re "Burn In", etc.

Doug,
Just a few things and then I think we have discussed this enough

If you can honestly say you use digital because you think it sounds better this will never been discussed again. But be honest enough to list any reasons other than sonics that you prefer digital to analog. My guess is ease, speed and time have a huge part in this.

You references to Frank V. dont move me. Did you you ever think he added IECs after the realization that this was a good business decision. His incorporation of IECs speaks nothing to his belief in cables and to imply that he incorporated this item after visiting you is a bit much.

Regarding ABX did you ever think he designed this to substantiate his previously held beliefs about cables and perhaps burn in. I dont think your inability or willingness to hear a difference exceeds mine to deny that there is none.

Perhaps the most frustrating thing to me is your ongoing references to your work being gratis as if this adds anything to its legitimacy and more importantly to your objectivity. You probably do what you do for the same reasons I started selling vacuum tubes over 20 years ago. Shows, knowledge, industry accommodations, etc. I dont buy this martyr stuff.

I should not have gone back to your original article. Really a Peachtree component?

Apologies in advance as this all was written and is a first draft with no checking.

Science vs psychoacoustics.
I'll go with science, others can believe whatever they want.
Makes zero difference to me - I've got nothing to sell.

This comment. "I should not have gone back to your original article. Really a Peachtree component," and the repeated appeal to analog, confirms what I suspected initially.

I am finished with this discussion.

Just as I thought. Remember that I am presenting my points as opinions and possibilities not as scientific facts established through some sort of methodology. I never placed myself in a position of authority just as an experienced listener with valid opinions. BTW I have a friend with this Peachtree component as well as the D-5 (I think) speakers, I got them for his college-bound son.

Doug - (or anyone) would you do an experiment?  
Run “burned in” cable to one speaker, and a brand new version of the exact same cable to the other.  Invert the phase of one channel. 
Play a track in mono. In theory, shouldn’t there be silence?

if there isn’t silence, an explanation could be that the sounds from each speaker are different and therefore don’t cancel, therefore the cable differences are real. 
But, there are other explanations to discount. Maybe the reflection in the room are not perfectly symmetrical. So we can discount that by putting new cables to both speakers (or similarly burned in ones). Play mono out of phase again, and do we get silence now?

If we do get silence, then there is evidence that the lack of silence before was due to differences in the cables. 
If we don’t get silence, then we know any differences actually due to cables will need to be unpicked from differences due to the room. 
The noise in the room in the two scenarios can be measured (and listened to) and compared. We will then get an estimate of the relative effect of room reflection asymmetry as compared to cable asymmetry. 
Thoughts?  Mine are that in any home listening environment, the room reflection effect (and tiny variations in speaker build, etc) will completely dwarf any differences arising from cable burn in.   It would be nice to know though. 
First issue - am I right about inverting one channel of a mono sound resulting in noise cancellation?