Though they are supposed to be used, they look new and I believe need some break in time. Perhaps 100 hours.
ozzy
Cable Break In for the Naysayers
I still cannot believe that in this stage of Audio history there are still many who claim cable break in is imagined. They even go so far as claim it is our ears that break in to the new sound. Providing many studies in the way of scientific testing. Sigh...
I noticed such a recent discussion on the What’s Best Forum. So here is my response.
______________________________________________________________________________________________ I just experienced cable break in again firsthand. 10 Days ago, I bought a new set of the AudioQuest Thunderbird XLR 2M interconnects.
First impression, they sounded good, but then after about 30 hours of usage the music started sounding very closed in and with limited high frequencies. This continued until about 130 hours of music play time.
Then at this time, the cables started to open up and began to sound better and better each passing hour. I knew at the beginning they would come around because they sounded ok at first until the break in process started. But now they have way surpassed that original sound.
Now the soundstage has become huge with fantastic frequency extensions. Very pleased with the results. Scientifically I guess we can’t prove cable break in is real, but with good equipment, good ears, it is clearly a real event.
ozzy
- ...
- 296 posts total
@ozzy There would appear to be a very simple way to put an end to this whole break-in question. Simply run your cables for any time you choose, 100, 300 or 500 hours. Then invite a group of qualified listeners over and do a blind test. Listen with the broken in loom, and again with a brand new loom. The difference will either be undeniable to everyone, your point is proven, or it won't. Yes you would need a second loom, but you should think AudioQuest would be happy to provide the cables for this event. What surprises me is the complete lack of verified blind testing of audio equipment, with results that are without question. Forget about science and math. If the results are there, it should be easy to prove? |
So once again cable breakin has proven to me to be real. The recent purchase of the AQ Dragon interconnect, was for a used cable. I am not sure when the last time it was used or really how many hours are on it. It looks to be new, When I first received it, I honestly, was a little disappointed. The sound was a little too sterile and lacking in body. Today about 50 hours of usage, once again the cable is exhibiting that wide open full body AQ Dragon sound that I was expecting. Words and theories do not replace the human hearing and the breakin for a cable is real. IMHO. ozzy |
@ozzy I'm not saying cable break-in is not real. I'm an agnostic on this issue. I haven't experienced it myself, but would be pleased to have some verified, industry accepted blind testing that can be replicated. Why we let this industry continue to produce expensive products, with claims that are rarely, if ever substantiated is baffling. We wouldn't accept this behavior from suppliers of other products, but gleefully lay down our money on spurious claims on the latest audio product. I look at my own experience with my system. Some days I question the quality of sound. Other times it blows me away. Different room temperature or humidity, time of day, source material, or maybe the 5gm of THC? So many factors that I have never been able to attribute to replacement of cables. But hey, that's just me. Cheers. |
- 296 posts total