I thought speaker wire "burn in" was a B.S. audiphile thing but our lad
just got his hands on some super cheap Kef Q100 speakers which sounded
absolutely gorgeous. I'd be inclined to say quite possibly the best
sounding speakers I've ever heard (apart from the kef LS50's)

Anyway... today we changed his no-brand "richer sounds" 2.5mm sq
(guesstimate) speaker cable that is about 3 years old, for some new 4mm
sq. van damme OFC stuff. Bloody Hell the difference was beyond belief.
Until today I thought Speaker wire "burn in" was complete B.S, but every
single track we played sounded "tight" and strangulated.
It made the speakers sound sharp and overly tight with a significant
separation between frequencies. In other words, just horrible compared
to his original, well etched cables.

Digging around t'internet, speaker wire "burn-in" seems to be as much
contested as computer O.S. ;¬)
There seems to be a certain market for "burner inner" boxes that
eliminate the requirement for 50+ hours of use to condition speaker wire
and given that with the new "home cinema" room we're looking at quite a
number of speaker wires, 50 to 100 hours of use to realize the full
potential of the surround sound system makes a full audio spectrum
burn-in box a worthwhile investment for speaker leads (Atmos 7.1.4) and
interconnects.
Just throwing it out there for any other thoughts about speaker wire
burning in. Definitely noticed a significant "strangulation" of sound
and gappy crossover between tweeter and base driver compared to the
well-used existing speaker wire.

Any thoughts from the experienced audiophiles?

Cheers
Pete

On Sat, 9 Apr 2016 01:45:36 +0100, Pet @ www.gymratz.co.uk ;¬)
wrote:

Anyway... today we changed his no-brand "richer sounds" 2.5mm sq
(guesstimate) speaker cable that is about 3 years old, for some new 4mm
sq. van damme OFC stuff. Bloody Hell the difference was beyond belief.
Until today I thought Speaker wire "burn in" was complete B.S, but every
single track we played sounded "tight" and strangulated.
It made the speakers sound sharp and overly tight with a significant
separation between frequencies. In other words, just horrible compared
to his original, well etched cables.

You mean it sounds how it should, ie a snare drum hurts and you can
hear individual bass guitar notes not some resonant, woolly, mush.

More copper between amp and speakers means the cones are better
damped and thus don't waggle about uncontrolled.

--
Cheers
Dave.

I'm sceptical. I'd be nore suspicious of the issue being poor connection
within the wires. I had some flexible wires once that did sound decidedly
odd, when taken apart, otherwise known as stripped for about a foot or so,
it became clear that the whole cable though twisted was made from fairly
short pieces of much thinner wire, and it relied on the so internal
connections to keep continuity so after some time corrosion occurs and the
conductivity of the wire changes with current drawn.
I'd imagine there could also be issues with some kind of rectification as
well.
So, no matter how much you pay for wire, it might not be all that it seems.
The problem is that this sort of dynamic issue is very hard to measure.

The best sound I ever had was when I wired speakers up using thick solid
core mains wire.
Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!
"Pet @ www.gymratz.co.uk ;¬)" wrote
in message ...
I thought speaker wire "burn in" was a B.S. audiphile thing but our lad
just got his hands on some super cheap Kef Q100 speakers which sounded
absolutely gorgeous. I'd be inclined to say quite possibly the best
sounding speakers I've ever heard (apart from the kef LS50's)

Anyway... today we changed his no-brand "richer sounds" 2.5mm sq
(guesstimate) speaker cable that is about 3 years old, for some new 4mm
sq. van damme OFC stuff. Bloody Hell the difference was beyond belief.
Until today I thought Speaker wire "burn in" was complete B.S, but every
single track we played sounded "tight" and strangulated.
It made the speakers sound sharp and overly tight with a significant
separation between frequencies. In other words, just horrible compared
to his original, well etched cables.

Digging around t'internet, speaker wire "burn-in" seems to be as much
contested as computer O.S. ;¬)
There seems to be a certain market for "burner inner" boxes that
eliminate the requirement for 50+ hours of use to condition speaker wire
and given that with the new "home cinema" room we're looking at quite a
number of speaker wires, 50 to 100 hours of use to realize the full
potential of the surround sound system makes a full audio spectrum
burn-in box a worthwhile investment for speaker leads (Atmos 7.1.4) and
interconnects.
Just throwing it out there for any other thoughts about speaker wire
burning in. Definitely noticed a significant "strangulation" of sound
and gappy crossover between tweeter and base driver compared to the
well-used existing speaker wire.

Any thoughts from the experienced audiophiles?

Cheers
Pete

On Saturday, 9 April 2016 01:45:44 UTC+1, Pet @ www.gymratz.co.uk ;¬) wrote:
I thought speaker wire "burn in" was a B.S. audiphile thing but our lad
just got his hands on some super cheap Kef Q100 speakers which sounded
absolutely gorgeous. I'd be inclined to say quite possibly the best
sounding speakers I've ever heard (apart from the kef LS50's)

Anyway... today we changed his no-brand "richer sounds" 2.5mm sq
(guesstimate) speaker cable that is about 3 years old, for some new 4mm
sq. van damme OFC stuff. Bloody Hell the difference was beyond belief.
Until today I thought Speaker wire "burn in" was complete B.S, but every
single track we played sounded "tight" and strangulated.
It made the speakers sound sharp and overly tight with a significant
separation between frequencies. In other words, just horrible compared
to his original, well etched cables.

Digging around t'internet, speaker wire "burn-in" seems to be as much
contested as computer O.S. ;¬)
There seems to be a certain market for "burner inner" boxes that
eliminate the requirement for 50+ hours of use to condition speaker wire
and given that with the new "home cinema" room we're looking at quite a
number of speaker wires, 50 to 100 hours of use to realize the full
potential of the surround sound system makes a full audio spectrum
burn-in box a worthwhile investment for speaker leads (Atmos 7.1.4) and
interconnects.
Just throwing it out there for any other thoughts about speaker wire
burning in. Definitely noticed a significant "strangulation" of sound
and gappy crossover between tweeter and base driver compared to the
well-used existing speaker wire.

Any thoughts from the experienced audiophiles?

Cheers
Pete

The phenomenon of making changes that make no difference then being convinced the sound is different is a well worn phenomenon. BTDT.

The resistance, capacitance & inductance of speaker cable is so trivial compared to the resistance already present in the voice coil that it makes no detectable difference.


NT

On 09/04/2016 01:45, Pet @ www.gymratz.co.uk ;¬) wrote:


Any thoughts from the experienced audiophiles?

Now do a blind test with the old and new wire. Get someone else to
change over the wires and then individually check the audio quality.







--
mailto: news {at} admac {dot] myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

On 09/04/16 01:45, Pet @ www.gymratz.co.uk ;¬) wrote:
I thought speaker wire "burn in" was a B.S. audiphile thing but our lad
just got his hands on some super cheap Kef Q100 speakers which sounded
absolutely gorgeous. I'd be inclined to say quite possibly the best
sounding speakers I've ever heard (apart from the kef LS50's)

Anyway... today we changed his no-brand "richer sounds" 2.5mm sq
(guesstimate) speaker cable that is about 3 years old, for some new 4mm
sq. van damme OFC stuff. Bloody Hell the difference was beyond belief.
Until today I thought Speaker wire "burn in" was complete B.S, but every
single track we played sounded "tight" and strangulated.
It made the speakers sound sharp and overly tight with a significant
separation between frequencies. In other words, just horrible compared
to his original, well etched cables.

Digging around t'internet, speaker wire "burn-in" seems to be as much
contested as computer O.S. ;¬)
There seems to be a certain market for "burner inner" boxes that
eliminate the requirement for 50+ hours of use to condition speaker wire
and given that with the new "home cinema" room we're looking at quite a
number of speaker wires, 50 to 100 hours of use to realize the full
potential of the surround sound system makes a full audio spectrum
burn-in box a worthwhile investment for speaker leads (Atmos 7.1.4) and
interconnects.
Just throwing it out there for any other thoughts about speaker wire
burning in. Definitely noticed a significant "strangulation" of sound
and gappy crossover between tweeter and base driver compared to the
well-used existing speaker wire.

Any thoughts from the experienced audiophiles?

Cheers
Pete


Speaker burn in makes sense - speaker wire (what's that anyway - the
coil or the connecting cables???) is ********.

The cone speaker as a whole is a flexible machine and it makes perfectly
good sense that they would be manufactured so as to sound their best ove
rmost of their life, which means that straight out of the factory, they
are going to be stiff and less responsive.

In article ,
Pet @ www.gymratz.co.uk ;¬)
wrote:
Any thoughts from the experienced audiophiles?

You've bought an expensive product believing it would make a big
difference and have made sure you've not been disappointed.

2.5mm cable of good quality - ie pretty well any - is more than adequate
for domestic speaker in the average room.

If you really are so sure, get someone to swap back to the old cables (if
you can't see them) or not without telling you. And see just how well you
can tell them apart.

--
*Rehab is for quitters.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Tim Watts wrote:
The cone speaker as a whole is a flexible machine and it makes perfectly
good sense that they would be manufactured so as to sound their best ove
rmost of their life, which means that straight out of the factory, they
are going to be stiff and less responsive.

In which case that would show up on a frequency response test.

The 'ear' actually has a very poor memory - influenced by all sorts of
things. Hence the only real way to be certain of any improvment is by
properly conducted double blind tests.

Some time ago, a large cash price was offered to anyone who could reliably
tell the difference between cables of adequate spec. Lets say the basic
phono leads that come in the box with a cheap amp etc, and expensive
'designer' ones. And it's still unclaimed.

--
*Seen it all, done it all, can't remember most of it*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Sat, 9 Apr 2016 01:45:36 +0100, Pet @ www.gymratz.co.uk ;¬)
wrote:

Anyway... today we changed his no-brand "richer sounds" 2.5mm sq
(guesstimate) speaker cable that is about 3 years old, for some new 4mm
sq. van damme OFC stuff. Bloody Hell the difference was beyond belief.
Until today I thought Speaker wire "burn in" was complete B.S, but every
single track we played sounded "tight" and strangulated.
It made the speakers sound sharp and overly tight with a significant
separation between frequencies. In other words, just horrible compared
to his original, well etched cables.

You mean it sounds how it should, ie a snare drum hurts and you can
hear individual bass guitar notes not some resonant, woolly, mush.

More copper between amp and speakers means the cones are better
damped and thus don't waggle about uncontrolled.

Not necessarily surely. If the *amplifier* is well damped then extra
resistance in the wires will make the damping worse.

--
Chris Green
·

On 09/04/16 01:45, Pet @ www.gymratz.co.uk ;¬) wrote:
I thought speaker wire "burn in" was a B.S. audiphile thing

Warning. Troll alert

*plonk*

--
If I had all the money I've spent on drink...
...I'd spend it on drink.

Sir Henry (at Rawlinson's End)

On 09/04/16 09:50, wrote:
On Saturday, 9 April 2016 01:45:44 UTC+1, Pet @ www.gymratz.co.uk ;¬) wrote:
I thought speaker wire "burn in" was a B.S. audiphile thing but our lad
just got his hands on some super cheap Kef Q100 speakers which sounded
absolutely gorgeous. I'd be inclined to say quite possibly the best
sounding speakers I've ever heard (apart from the kef LS50's)

Anyway... today we changed his no-brand "richer sounds" 2.5mm sq
(guesstimate) speaker cable that is about 3 years old, for some new 4mm
sq. van damme OFC stuff. Bloody Hell the difference was beyond belief.
Until today I thought Speaker wire "burn in" was complete B.S, but every
single track we played sounded "tight" and strangulated.
It made the speakers sound sharp and overly tight with a significant
separation between frequencies. In other words, just horrible compared
to his original, well etched cables.

Digging around t'internet, speaker wire "burn-in" seems to be as much
contested as computer O.S. ;¬)
There seems to be a certain market for "burner inner" boxes that
eliminate the requirement for 50+ hours of use to condition speaker wire
and given that with the new "home cinema" room we're looking at quite a
number of speaker wires, 50 to 100 hours of use to realize the full
potential of the surround sound system makes a full audio spectrum
burn-in box a worthwhile investment for speaker leads (Atmos 7.1.4) and
interconnects.
Just throwing it out there for any other thoughts about speaker wire
burning in. Definitely noticed a significant "strangulation" of sound
and gappy crossover between tweeter and base driver compared to the
well-used existing speaker wire.

Any thoughts from the experienced audiophiles?

Cheers
Pete

The phenomenon of making changes that make no difference then being convinced the sound is different is a well worn phenomenon. BTDT.

The resistance, capacitance & inductance of speaker cable is so trivial compared to the resistance already present in the voice coil that it makes no detectable difference.


resistance can make a slight difference to the bass.

That's all I ever detected in nearly a decade of designing and testing
hifi and high power audio kit.


NT



--
If I had all the money I've spent on drink...
...I'd spend it on drink.

Sir Henry (at Rawlinson's End)

On Sat, 9 Apr 2016 11:39:40 +0100, wrote:

More copper between amp and speakers means the cones are better
damped and thus don't waggle about uncontrolled.

Not necessarily surely. If the *amplifier* is well damped then extra
resistance in the wires will make the damping worse.

Exactly. OP has gone from 2.5 (ish) to 4 mm^2 wires so contribution
of the wires resistance to the whole system is reduced.

Try tapping a big loudspeaker cone with the actual speakers terminals
open circuit and short circuit. The speaker has mass and when set
moving momentum. Remove the drive and the momentum will make it act
like a motor. Open circuit no current can flow and the cone will do
what it wants, short circuit a current can flow which generates a
force opposite to that of the momentum thus tending to stop (aka
damp) the movement.

The *only* time that I have ever heard a definate difference in
reproduction was when I changed the 10' or so speaker cables from
"heavy bell" wire to 2.5 mm^2 1024 strand "speaker cable". So marked
and obvious was the difference I got the meter out. Running at a
reasonable level(*) the bell wire dropped somthing over 5 V for each
leg, the speaker cable just a volt or two.

(*) Quad 405, 100W RMS per channel, speakers 150 W RMS, the amp would
give up first... For these tests I probably used "maximum", which
would be *LOUD* but not *F---ING LOUD* at least to me. B-)

--
Cheers
Dave.

On 09/04/16 10:47, Tim Watts wrote:
On 09/04/16 01:45, Pet @ www.gymratz.co.uk ;¬) wrote:
I thought speaker wire "burn in" was a B.S. audiphile thing but our lad
just got his hands on some super cheap Kef Q100 speakers which sounded
absolutely gorgeous. I'd be inclined to say quite possibly the best
sounding speakers I've ever heard (apart from the kef LS50's)

Anyway... today we changed his no-brand "richer sounds" 2.5mm sq
(guesstimate) speaker cable that is about 3 years old, for some new 4mm
sq. van damme OFC stuff. Bloody Hell the difference was beyond belief.
Until today I thought Speaker wire "burn in" was complete B.S, but every
single track we played sounded "tight" and strangulated.
It made the speakers sound sharp and overly tight with a significant
separation between frequencies. In other words, just horrible compared
to his original, well etched cables.

Digging around t'internet, speaker wire "burn-in" seems to be as much
contested as computer O.S. ;¬)
There seems to be a certain market for "burner inner" boxes that
eliminate the requirement for 50+ hours of use to condition speaker wire
and given that with the new "home cinema" room we're looking at quite a
number of speaker wires, 50 to 100 hours of use to realize the full
potential of the surround sound system makes a full audio spectrum
burn-in box a worthwhile investment for speaker leads (Atmos 7.1.4) and
interconnects.
Just throwing it out there for any other thoughts about speaker wire
burning in. Definitely noticed a significant "strangulation" of sound
and gappy crossover between tweeter and base driver compared to the
well-used existing speaker wire.

Any thoughts from the experienced audiophiles?

Cheers
Pete


Speaker burn in makes sense - speaker wire (what's that anyway - the
coil or the connecting cables???) is ********.

The cone speaker as a whole is a flexible machine and it makes perfectly
good sense that they would be manufactured so as to sound their best ove
rmost of their life, which means that straight out of the factory, they
are going to be stiff and less responsive.

Actually the idea is to use materials that don't change with time Tim,
or at least sound best in the showroom



--
To ban Christmas, simply give turkeys the vote.

On 09/04/16 11:39, wrote:
If the*amplifier* is well damped then extra
resistance in the wires will make the damping worse.

WTF are you talking about?

You don't 'damp' amplifiers externally. That's what internal feedback is for

--
"What do you think about Gay Marriage?"
"I don't."
"Don't what?"
"Think about Gay Marriage."

On 09/04/2016 01:45, wrote:

I thought speaker wire "burn in" was a B.S. audiphile thing but our lad
just got his hands on some super cheap Kef Q100 speakers which sounded
absolutely gorgeous. I'd be inclined to say quite possibly the best
sounding speakers I've ever heard (apart from the kef LS50's)

Anyway... today we changed his no-brand "richer sounds" 2.5mm sq
(guesstimate) speaker cable that is about 3 years old, for some new 4mm
sq. van damme OFC stuff. Bloody Hell the difference was beyond belief.
Until today I thought Speaker wire "burn in" was complete B.S, but every
single track we played sounded "tight" and strangulated.
It made the speakers sound sharp and overly tight with a significant
separation between frequencies. In other words, just horrible compared
to his original, well etched cables.

Perhaps I am misunderstanding the whole burn in concept - but I thought
it was the suggestion that the sound quality will improve with use?

All you seem to have demonstrated is that changing cables can affect the
overall sound quality, which while not unexpected in itself, can often
yield unexpected results in that supposedly "better" cables do not
always give you a sound which you prefer.

Digging around t'internet, speaker wire "burn-in" seems to be as much
contested as computer O.S. ;¬)
There seems to be a certain market for "burner inner" boxes that
eliminate the requirement for 50+ hours of use to condition speaker wire
and given that with the new "home cinema" room we're looking at quite a
number of speaker wires, 50 to 100 hours of use to realize the full
potential of the surround sound system makes a full audio spectrum
burn-in box a worthwhile investment for speaker leads (Atmos 7.1.4) and
interconnects.

Unless you establish that the sounds actually does improve after 50
hours (or more likely, you just get used to it by then!), its not
"burning in".

Just throwing it out there for any other thoughts about speaker wire
burning in. Definitely noticed a significant "strangulation" of sound
and gappy crossover between tweeter and base driver compared to the
well-used existing speaker wire.

Any thoughts from the experienced audiophiles?

IME, speakers themselves will change character of sound with use -
bother temporarily - they usually improve as they warm up, and also
permanently as the suspension frees up with use (or stiffens with age).

I have a pair of old Haybrook HB100, that still sound very good - but
they need a good 20 mins of playing before they sound right these days.


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On 09/04/2016 09:04, Brian Gaff wrote:


The best sound I ever had was when I wired speakers up using thick solid
core mains wire.
Brian


A company I worked for (mumble) years ago used to wire entire nightclub
speaker installations using mains cable. Seemed to work well enough.

On Saturday, 9 April 2016 12:28:39 UTC+1, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 09/04/16 09:50, tabbypurr wrote:
On Saturday, 9 April 2016 01:45:44 UTC+1, Pet @ www.gymratz.co.uk ;¬) wrote:
I thought speaker wire "burn in" was a B.S. audiphile thing but our lad
just got his hands on some super cheap Kef Q100 speakers which sounded
absolutely gorgeous. I'd be inclined to say quite possibly the best
sounding speakers I've ever heard (apart from the kef LS50's)

Anyway... today we changed his no-brand "richer sounds" 2.5mm sq
(guesstimate) speaker cable that is about 3 years old, for some new 4mm
sq. van damme OFC stuff. Bloody Hell the difference was beyond belief.
Until today I thought Speaker wire "burn in" was complete B.S, but every
single track we played sounded "tight" and strangulated.
It made the speakers sound sharp and overly tight with a significant
separation between frequencies. In other words, just horrible compared
to his original, well etched cables.

Digging around t'internet, speaker wire "burn-in" seems to be as much
contested as computer O.S. ;¬)
There seems to be a certain market for "burner inner" boxes that
eliminate the requirement for 50+ hours of use to condition speaker wire
and given that with the new "home cinema" room we're looking at quite a
number of speaker wires, 50 to 100 hours of use to realize the full
potential of the surround sound system makes a full audio spectrum
burn-in box a worthwhile investment for speaker leads (Atmos 7.1.4) and
interconnects.
Just throwing it out there for any other thoughts about speaker wire
burning in. Definitely noticed a significant "strangulation" of sound
and gappy crossover between tweeter and base driver compared to the
well-used existing speaker wire.

Any thoughts from the experienced audiophiles?

Cheers
Pete

The phenomenon of making changes that make no difference then being convinced the sound is different is a well worn phenomenon. BTDT.

The resistance, capacitance & inductance of speaker cable is so trivial compared to the resistance already present in the voice coil that it makes no detectable difference.


resistance can make a slight difference to the bass.

That's all I ever detected in nearly a decade of designing and testing
hifi and high power audio kit.

large amounts may. Not milliohms.

8ohm speaker maybe 7 ohms of resistance
3m of 2.5 sqmm cable 53milliohms resistance
Now if you go upto 4mm2, 3m is 33 milliohms
so the upgrade has reduced R by 20 milliohms, a change of just 0.29%. No ears are going to detect that.


NT

On 09/04/2016 11:00, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Pet @ www.gymratz.co.uk ;¬)
wrote:
Any thoughts from the experienced audiophiles?

You've bought an expensive product believing it would make a big
difference and have made sure you've not been disappointed.

In which case, one of us has misread what the OP was trying to say... I
took it as the "better" cable gave noticeably *less* likeable sound.



--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

In article l.net,
Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Sat, 9 Apr 2016 01:45:36 +0100, Pet @ www.gymratz.co.uk ;¬)
wrote:

Anyway... today we changed his no-brand "richer sounds" 2.5mm sq
(guesstimate) speaker cable that is about 3 years old, for some new
4mm sq. van damme OFC stuff. Bloody Hell the difference was beyond
belief. Until today I thought Speaker wire "burn in" was complete B.S,
but every single track we played sounded "tight" and strangulated. It
made the speakers sound sharp and overly tight with a significant
separation between frequencies. In other words, just horrible compared
to his original, well etched cables.

You mean it sounds how it should, ie a snare drum hurts and you can
hear individual bass guitar notes not some resonant, woolly, mush.

More copper between amp and speakers means the cones are better
damped and thus don't waggle about uncontrolled.

That's only really true if you start off with cable of an appreciable
resistance. Which 2.5mm in the average domestic run simply won't have.

--
*Men are from Earth, women are from Earth. Deal with it.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

The Natural Philosopher Wrote in message:
On 09/04/16 01:45, Pet @ www.gymratz.co.uk ;¬) wrote:
I thought speaker wire "burn in" was a B.S. audiphile thing

Warning. Troll alert

*plonk*

Pete's been posting here for years, trolling seems unlikely.


--
--
Chris French

In article ,
Lee wrote:
A company I worked for (mumble) years ago used to wire entire nightclub
speaker installations using mains cable. Seemed to work well enough.

It's cheaper than similar spec flex.

--
*Too many clicks spoil the browse *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 09/04/2016 14:05, John Rumm wrote:

In which case, one of us has misread what the OP was trying to say... I
took it as the "better" cable gave noticeably *less* likeable sound.

Indeed John.
It's only a 2m run between amp and each speaker too.
I wasn't expecting to notice any difference in sound.

On 09/04/2016 14:20, wrote:
On 09/04/2016 14:05, John Rumm wrote:

In which case, one of us has misread what the OP was trying to say... I
took it as the "better" cable gave noticeably *less* likeable sound.

Indeed John.
It's only a 2m run between amp and each speaker too.
I wasn't expecting to notice any difference in sound.

I did an experiment once with one of my sets of speakers - I tried
bi-wiring them as it seemed that everywhere you looked people were
claiming it would improve the focus and stereo imaging etc. The result
was actually very disappointing. I was expecting to either hear no
difference, or some level of improvement. All it achieved was to create
a sounds that (subjectively) just no longer worked as a whole. The
imaging was actually less convincing, and the whole result less musical
and enjoyable. Went back to single cables!


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On 09/04/2016 13:55, John Rumm wrote:

Perhaps I am misunderstanding the whole burn in concept - but I thought
it was the suggestion that the sound quality will improve with use?

That's what I'm wondering.
From a logical/electronic point of view something passive like speaker
wires shouldn't change characteristics so significantly but the sound
difference appears to be regularly commented on.

He's going to give the cables time to do whatever they may or may not do
and see if things change.

Always got the original cable to put back on if required.


All you seem to have demonstrated is that changing cables can affect the
overall sound quality, which while not unexpected in itself, can often
yield unexpected results in that supposedly "better" cables do not
always give you a sound which you prefer.

It seems to be so. I always thought things like cables and
interconnects weren't very significant compared to speakers, amps etc.
looks like I've been missing a trick..

Unless you establish that the sounds actually does improve after 50
hours (or more likely, you just get used to it by then!), its not
"burning in".

Time will tell.
Another thought... if the cables are "upgraded" then perhaps the
speakers could take on a whole new "bedding in"

IME, speakers themselves will change character of sound with use -
bother temporarily - they usually improve as they warm up, and also
permanently as the suspension frees up with use (or stiffens with age).

I have a pair of old Haybrook HB100, that still sound very good - but
they need a good 20 mins of playing before they sound right these days.

I also have a pair Heybrooks the HB1. And I also have a set of
replacement rubbers for the speakers as the original ones fell to bits.
Another DIY job that's been sat on my desk since 2013 waiting for the
right time to be done.

On 09/04/2016 14:19, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Lee wrote:
A company I worked for (mumble) years ago used to wire entire nightclub
speaker installations using mains cable. Seemed to work well enough.

It's cheaper than similar spec flex.

My first house had the speakers connected up by 2.5mm T&E
Don't know how it compared to "proper" speaker cable as I didn't ever
swap it out.

On 09/04/16 14:20, Pet @ www.gymratz.co.uk ;¬) wrote:
On 09/04/2016 14:05, John Rumm wrote:

In which case, one of us has misread what the OP was trying to say... I
took it as the "better" cable gave noticeably *less* likeable sound.

Indeed John.
It's only a 2m run between amp and each speaker too.
I wasn't expecting to notice any difference in sound.


Once upon a time all my amplifiers were coming off the production line
testing for .015% distortion. Normally around 0.03%

Cleaning the plug on the test rig connector to remove the silver oxide,
restored sanity.

So many other reasons for bad sound beyond cable resistance


--
A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on
its shoes.

its only drawback is that it is hardly flexible. I did attend a demo once by
the company who handled Monster cables and yes they didsound different to a
similar length of bell wire, which is not very surprising. I'd have liked to
hear them compared with thickish cable of any type.
The daft thing I found here is that inside my now aging tannoys, thewire is
just ordinary looking flexible pvc covered wires.

Maybe we need Russ Andrews to come up with a difinitive theory on this one.
:-)
Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Lee wrote:
A company I worked for (mumble) years ago used to wire entire nightclub
speaker installations using mains cable. Seemed to work well enough.

It's cheaper than similar spec flex.

--
*Too many clicks spoil the browse *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
John Rumm wrote:
On 09/04/2016 11:00, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Pet @ www.gymratz.co.uk ;¬)
wrote:
Any thoughts from the experienced audiophiles?

You've bought an expensive product believing it would make a big
difference and have made sure you've not been disappointed.

In which case, one of us has misread what the OP was trying to say... I
took it as the "better" cable gave noticeably *less* likeable sound.

2/10 for me. Must read the question first. ;-)

--
*Someday, we'll look back on this, laugh nervously and change the subject

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Actually, not quite true, though you would think so from traditional
knowledge. its short term changes that seem to cause the issue. As I said,
there is a difference, but actually figuring out why its there is not that
easy. I certainly do not subscribe to litz oxygen free etc, claims, they are
just fiddling around in the dark. Its got more to do with the way the cable
is made as I eluded earlier, and there are a lot of ables out there claming
things that are not justified.
Here is an example of what a slightly dodgy connection can do.
I have a Dennon amp with a speaker relay to stop switch on thump. Every few
months one contact will be a bit less than good and although the levels
seems to be the same, the sound gets very rough. Indeed, cleaning the
contacts with a bit of newspaper and holding the relay closed makes the
whole system sound better. I'm surely tempted to see how bad the thump might
be and short it out altogether!

Its the slight rectification or contact resistance changing according to
current that you are hearing I fancy. Whether this is a problem in the amp
being presented with wobbly impedance or just a factor in the speaker, I
have no idea. As for being convinced but it being no different, well, I
don't buy that as blind tests would seem to support a difference is there.
Now where is that contact cleaner.....
Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!
wrote in message
...
On Saturday, 9 April 2016 01:45:44 UTC+1, Pet @ www.gymratz.co.uk ;¬)
wrote:
I thought speaker wire "burn in" was a B.S. audiphile thing but our lad
just got his hands on some super cheap Kef Q100 speakers which sounded
absolutely gorgeous. I'd be inclined to say quite possibly the best
sounding speakers I've ever heard (apart from the kef LS50's)

Anyway... today we changed his no-brand "richer sounds" 2.5mm sq
(guesstimate) speaker cable that is about 3 years old, for some new 4mm
sq. van damme OFC stuff. Bloody Hell the difference was beyond belief.
Until today I thought Speaker wire "burn in" was complete B.S, but every
single track we played sounded "tight" and strangulated.
It made the speakers sound sharp and overly tight with a significant
separation between frequencies. In other words, just horrible compared
to his original, well etched cables.

Digging around t'internet, speaker wire "burn-in" seems to be as much
contested as computer O.S. ;¬)
There seems to be a certain market for "burner inner" boxes that
eliminate the requirement for 50+ hours of use to condition speaker wire
and given that with the new "home cinema" room we're looking at quite a
number of speaker wires, 50 to 100 hours of use to realize the full
potential of the surround sound system makes a full audio spectrum
burn-in box a worthwhile investment for speaker leads (Atmos 7.1.4) and
interconnects.
Just throwing it out there for any other thoughts about speaker wire
burning in. Definitely noticed a significant "strangulation" of sound
and gappy crossover between tweeter and base driver compared to the
well-used existing speaker wire.

Any thoughts from the experienced audiophiles?

Cheers
Pete

The phenomenon of making changes that make no difference then being
convinced the sound is different is a well worn phenomenon. BTDT.

The resistance, capacitance & inductance of speaker cable is so trivial
compared to the resistance already present in the voice coil that it makes
no detectable difference.


NT

On 09/04/2016 01:45, Pet @ www.gymratz.co.uk ;¬) wrote:
I thought speaker wire "burn in" was a B.S. audiphile thing but our lad
just got his hands on some super cheap Kef Q100 speakers which sounded
absolutely gorgeous. I'd be inclined to say quite possibly the best
sounding speakers I've ever heard (apart from the kef LS50's)

Anyway... today we changed his no-brand "richer sounds" 2.5mm sq
(guesstimate) speaker cable that is about 3 years old, for some new 4mm
sq. van damme OFC stuff. Bloody Hell the difference was beyond belief.
Until today I thought Speaker wire "burn in" was complete B.S, but every
single track we played sounded "tight" and strangulated.
It made the speakers sound sharp and overly tight with a significant
separation between frequencies. In other words, just horrible compared
to his original, well etched cables.

Digging around t'internet, speaker wire "burn-in" seems to be as much
contested as computer O.S. ;¬)
There seems to be a certain market for "burner inner" boxes that
eliminate the requirement for 50+ hours of use to condition speaker wire
and given that with the new "home cinema" room we're looking at quite a
number of speaker wires, 50 to 100 hours of use to realize the full
potential of the surround sound system makes a full audio spectrum
burn-in box a worthwhile investment for speaker leads (Atmos 7.1.4) and
interconnects.
Just throwing it out there for any other thoughts about speaker wire
burning in. Definitely noticed a significant "strangulation" of sound
and gappy crossover between tweeter and base driver compared to the
well-used existing speaker wire.

Any thoughts from the experienced audiophiles?

Cheers
Pete


Google placebo.

In article ,
Pet @ www.gymratz.co.uk ;¬)
wrote:
I thought speaker wire "burn in" was a B.S. audiphile thing but our lad
just got his hands on some super cheap Kef Q100 speakers which sounded
absolutely gorgeous. I'd be inclined to say quite possibly the best
sounding speakers I've ever heard (apart from the kef LS50's)

Anyway... today we changed his no-brand "richer sounds" 2.5mm sq
(guesstimate) speaker cable that is about 3 years old, for some new 4mm
sq. van damme OFC stuff. Bloody Hell the difference was beyond belief.
Until today I thought Speaker wire "burn in" was complete B.S, but every
single track we played sounded "tight" and strangulated. It made the
speakers sound sharp and overly tight with a significant separation
between frequencies. In other words, just horrible compared to his
original, well etched cables.

Digging around t'internet, speaker wire "burn-in" seems to be as much
contested as computer O.S. ;¬)
There seems to be a certain market for "burner inner" boxes that
eliminate the requirement for 50+ hours of use to condition speaker wire
and given that with the new "home cinema" room we're looking at quite a
number of speaker wires, 50 to 100 hours of use to realize the full
potential of the surround sound system makes a full audio spectrum
burn-in box a worthwhile investment for speaker leads (Atmos 7.1.4) and
interconnects.
Just throwing it out there for any other thoughts about speaker wire
burning in. Definitely noticed a significant "strangulation" of sound
and gappy crossover between tweeter and base driver compared to the
well-used existing speaker wire.

Any thoughts from the experienced audiophiles?

I'm glad to hear that you now have your new speakers set up to give the
best sound that you will enjoy for a long time to come.

Having over 50 enjoyable years of "hi Fi" experience, I have never come
across the situation where changing one type of speaker cable for another
has improved the sound as much as you say "Bloody Hell the difference was
beyond belief". Provided both cables could cope with the signal then any
percieved difference is subtle and usually due to particular speakers
presenting a difficult load to the amp.

However there is one situation where the changing of a speaker cable can
have a drastic effect on the sound and that is where the original cables
had been incorrectly fitted out of phase. The correctly connected cable
gives a marked tightening of the sound, positioning of instruments in the
sound stage become precise, bass loses its flabiness etc. I can remember
being thrown out of one of the demos at a HiFi show in a London hotel in
the 1970s when I pointed out that this trick was being used by a purveyor
of expensive "snake oil" speaker cables to show how good his product was!

The other problem that I have come across is where the speakers are
bi-wired (ie each speaker has 2 sets of cable from the amp to the
different drivers in the speaker) which I don't think is so in your case.
If one of those cables is connected out of phase with the other then you
get poor results from that speaker.

As Tim has mentioned the "burning in of speakers" by using them to play a
range of source material for a day or 2 normally leads to an improvement
to the sound of new speakers.

Other ways of making differences to the sound is by altering the pseaker
placement in the room.


Anyway now you've got them set up, sit back and enjoy your new speakers.

Happy listening

Alan

--


Using an ARMX6

On 09/04/2016 12:31, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 09/04/16 11:39, wrote:
If the*amplifier* is well damped then extra
resistance in the wires will make the damping worse.

WTF are you talking about?

You don't 'damp' amplifiers externally. That's what internal feedback is
for


The Speaker motion is damping is changed if the cable resistance is altered.

On 09/04/2016 17:00, DavenPort wrote:
On 09/04/2016 12:31, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 09/04/16 11:39, wrote:
If the*amplifier* is well damped then extra
resistance in the wires will make the damping worse.

WTF are you talking about?

You don't 'damp' amplifiers externally. That's what internal feedback is
for


The Speaker motion is damping is changed if the cable resistance is
altered.

Hmm, but by how much?
A shop insisted that I had to have equal length cables to my speakers.
I wanted 2m and 3m and didn't want to pay for an extra 1m.

They tried to convince me that I would get all sorts of phase effects, etc.

I told them I would move the speaker on the 3m cable .003 mm closer to
compensate.

Tim Watts wrote:
On 09/04/16 01:45, Pet @ www.gymratz.co.uk ;¬) wrote:
I thought speaker wire "burn in" was a B.S. audiphile thing but our lad
just got his hands on some super cheap Kef Q100 speakers which sounded
absolutely gorgeous. I'd be inclined to say quite possibly the best
sounding speakers I've ever heard (apart from the kef LS50's)

Anyway... today we changed his no-brand "richer sounds" 2.5mm sq
(guesstimate) speaker cable that is about 3 years old, for some new 4mm
sq. van damme OFC stuff. Bloody Hell the difference was beyond belief.
Until today I thought Speaker wire "burn in" was complete B.S, but every
single track we played sounded "tight" and strangulated.
It made the speakers sound sharp and overly tight with a significant
separation between frequencies. In other words, just horrible compared
to his original, well etched cables.

Digging around t'internet, speaker wire "burn-in" seems to be as much
contested as computer O.S. ;¬)
There seems to be a certain market for "burner inner" boxes that
eliminate the requirement for 50+ hours of use to condition speaker wire
and given that with the new "home cinema" room we're looking at quite a
number of speaker wires, 50 to 100 hours of use to realize the full
potential of the surround sound system makes a full audio spectrum
burn-in box a worthwhile investment for speaker leads (Atmos 7.1.4) and
interconnects.
Just throwing it out there for any other thoughts about speaker wire
burning in. Definitely noticed a significant "strangulation" of sound
and gappy crossover between tweeter and base driver compared to the
well-used existing speaker wire.

Any thoughts from the experienced audiophiles?

Cheers
Pete


Speaker burn in makes sense - speaker wire (what's that anyway - the
coil or the connecting cables???) is ********.

The cone speaker as a whole is a flexible machine and it makes perfectly
good sense that they would be manufactured so as to sound their best ove
rmost of their life, which means that straight out of the factory, they
are going to be stiff and less responsive.


Surely from a mechanical point of view, a stiff cone is a *more* responsive
cone?

Tim

In article ,
Tim+ wrote:
The cone speaker as a whole is a flexible machine and it makes
perfectly good sense that they would be manufactured so as to sound
their best ove rmost of their life, which means that straight out of
the factory, they are going to be stiff and less responsive.


Surely from a mechanical point of view, a stiff cone is a *more*
responsive cone?

The cone itself should be stiff, but the suspension compliant.

--
*Taxation WITH representation ain't much fun, either.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 09/04/2016 15:49, Alan Dawes wrote:
snip
Anyway now you've got them set up, sit back and enjoy your new speakers.

Happy listening

Alan

Thanks Alan, and everyone that has given input.
We _may_ have discovered a possible reason for the very significant change.

He received the speakers on Thursday morning and had spent all day
playing our old CD's so when I got in some 12 hours later they were well
and truly "warmed up" The sound was phenomenal.

He'd ordered the speaker wire to test as I'd suggested we could use it
for the home-cinema (mentioned in another post)
It's "Van Damme Loudspeaker 2x 4.0mm Hi-fi"
http://www.van-damme.com/25.html

As he only required 4m the Amazon vendor let him have it at no cost in
exchange for a review apparently.

We connected up the new speaker wire yesterday after his system had been
switched off all day and it seems the tightness of 1 day old speakers is
the issue, comparing very well warmed up speakers on old cable on day 1
with cold speakers on new cable on day 2.

He's left a CD running all day on shuffle and we've just gone into his
room to listen. The sound is right back to as it was the first day I
heard it so there we have it.

Nothing to do with the wires, just new speaker syndrome.

On 09/04/2016 01:55, Dave Liquorice wrote:

You mean it sounds how it should, ie a snare drum hurts and you can
hear individual bass guitar notes not some resonant, woolly, mush.

More copper between amp and speakers means the cones are better
damped and thus don't waggle about uncontrolled.

No. The old speaker wire was decent stuff.
The new horrible noise had a distinct hole of missing frequencies.

But we've solved the issue.
Day one the speakers had been running all day when I heard them.
Day 2 they'd been off all day and we fitted the new cables before
listening so didn't realise just how big a difference there was between
being warm and cold.

Having done a listen now after leaving his system on repeat shuffle all
day the glorious sound is back. Speaker wires couldn't be blamed, just
very tight speakers.


Some interesting theoretical electron disruption from the insulation and
other stuff on the following page.
http://greenmountainaudio.com/how-to...peaker-cables/

On 09/04/16 17:00, DavenPort wrote:
On 09/04/2016 12:31, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 09/04/16 11:39, wrote:
If the*amplifier* is well damped then extra
resistance in the wires will make the damping worse.

WTF are you talking about?

You don't 'damp' amplifiers externally. That's what internal feedback is
for


The Speaker motion is damping is changed if the cable resistance is
altered.

Try less beer and more English, Dave


--
All political activity makes complete sense once the proposition that
all government is basically a self-legalising protection racket, is
fully understood.

On 09/04/2016 18:46, wrote:

He's left a CD running all day on shuffle and we've just gone into his
room to listen. The sound is right back to as it was the first day I
heard it so there we have it.

Nothing to do with the wires, just new speaker syndrome.


Sounds like my old Hayebrooks - they do that trick every time you use
them! (in fact the amp also benefits for a little bit of warm up time).


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On Sat, 09 Apr 2016 14:07:30 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article l.net,
Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Sat, 9 Apr 2016 01:45:36 +0100, Pet @ www.gymratz.co.uk ;¬) wrote:

Anyway... today we changed his no-brand "richer sounds" 2.5mm sq
(guesstimate) speaker cable that is about 3 years old, for some new
4mm sq. van damme OFC stuff. Bloody Hell the difference was beyond
belief. Until today I thought Speaker wire "burn in" was complete
B.S,
but every single track we played sounded "tight" and strangulated. It
made the speakers sound sharp and overly tight with a significant
separation between frequencies. In other words, just horrible
compared to his original, well etched cables.

You mean it sounds how it should, ie a snare drum hurts and you can
hear individual bass guitar notes not some resonant, woolly, mush.

More copper between amp and speakers means the cones are better damped
and thus don't waggle about uncontrolled.

That's only really true if you start off with cable of an appreciable
resistance. Which 2.5mm in the average domestic run simply won't have.

That's very true. I wonder how many metres of 2.5mm you would need to
create the extra 8 ohms loop impedance[1] required to make a noticeable
enough difference? :-)

[1] Assuming the use of 8 ohm speakers. It's amazing how often
audiophiles will concern themselves over the 10 or so mili ohms output
impedance of the amp yet blithely ignore the 7.5 ohms coil resistance
effectively in series with this 'damping' circuit impedance.

--
Johnny B Good