If so, to steal from Roger Ebert - thumb up or down and why. Of course, if you are using Heimdall with a different speaker - interested in your opinion too.

Heimdall is the gatekeeper of the Rainbow Bridge to Asgard in the Marvel Thor Comics.

Are you saying Roger Ebert uses Heimdall to in his home theater system for movie reviews?
What speakers does he use?

Gary,

the Heimdall is a very good cable. Neutral, transparent, well defined and accurate. It does not change anything in the sound. In general I found the Heimdall to be very good value. The Frey, Tyr and Valhalla are better cables in my opinion (even more defined soundstage), especially with older recordings which will then have a better and more real soundstage.

In my opinion, the Heimdall is the sweetspot if you don't want to spent too much on a cable, because it is IMO a much better cable than the cheaper Baldur.

I have not tried the cable with a Revel speaker on the other hand. I've heard the Heimdall with several speakers, including Eben speakers (which have internal Valhalla wiring) and my own Isophon speakers. In my opinion you can't go wrong with the cable.

But I'm sure alot of people will jump in, telling you there is no difference between the Valhalla, Heimdall and a $1 lamp cord. So I suggest you do the same as with your Thor, buy the cables with the option to return them if you don't like them.

Steve......anyone who know who Heidmall is is OKAY in my book...LOL.....that is exactly what I thought when I saw the title of this thread. I literally grew up on all the Marvel characters....that is the Golden Age for me.... and Thor was one of my favs

When i die, i want a Viking Funeral but being that i'm still alive i'm looking for comments on Heimdall, the Nordost speaker cable and not Heimdall from Marvel comics.

Still waiting for delivery on the Heimdall, will post results. Is it because Heimdall users do not participate in AVS that there are so few posts or are there so few Heimdall users to begin with??

Getting closer - merchant did the burn-in and they're on a UPS truck. Due to some Turkey holiday, delivery is pushed back to 11-27

Hooked up the Heimdall to Performa M20's and C30, didn't hear any improvement over Home Depot 14 guage off spool. Only difference is the volume is louder with the Heimdall so i'm going to recalibrate with the MC12 mic kit to get proper levels.

Gary,

the Heimdall is a very good cable. Neutral, transparent, well defined and accurate. It does not change anything in the sound. In general I found the Heimdall to be very good value. The Frey, Tyr and Valhalla are better cables in my opinion (even more defined soundstage), especially with older recordings which will then have a better and more real soundstage.

In my opinion, the Heimdall is the sweetspot if you don't want to spent too much on a cable, because it is IMO a much better cable than the cheaper Baldur.

I have not tried the cable with a Revel speaker on the other hand. I've heard the Heimdall with several speakers, including Eben speakers (which have internal Valhalla wiring) and my own Isophon speakers. In my opinion you can't go wrong with the cable.

But I'm sure alot of people will jump in, telling you there is no difference between the Valhalla, Heimdall and a $1 lamp cord. So I suggest you do the same as with your Thor, buy the cables with the option to return them if you don't like them.


And so what is the science behind all the things these cables do?

Getting closer - merchant did the burn-in and they're on a UPS truck. Due to some Turkey holiday, delivery is pushed back to 11-27

And what exactly is the science behind this burn in?

after all this time being a part of the forum, it still boggles my mind that "non-cable believers" make it their mission in life to be either sarcastic or ask "proof' everytime a cable thread is started. is it that difficult to stay out of a thread if someone has nothing better to say. talk about being a broken record already. please for the love of ***, if you don't have anything worthwhile to contribute, stop being extremely annoying and just read the thread and laugh by yourself. the OP wants comments on a specific cable brand, if you've never used it or don't believe in it, then stop wasting valuable HD space. you don't have to post on every thread to make your voice known that you're a non believer. this applies to all.... for further proof of this "phenomenon" just check out the thread i started a week ago called "jena labs" and see how many "worthwhile" posts their are and how many i, the OP can actually find helpful and USE!!!!

Well yeah, but Anthony, that whole Jenna Jameson schtick was too fun to pass up.

after all this time being a part of the forum, it still boggles my mind that "non-cable believers" make it their mission in life to be either sarcastic or ask "proof' everytime a cable thread is started. is it that difficult to stay out of a thread if someone has nothing better to say. talk about being a broken record already. please for the love of ***, if you don't have anything worthwhile to contribute, stop being extremely annoying and just read the thread and laugh by yourself. the OP wants comments on a specific cable brand, if you've never used it or don't believe in it, then stop wasting valuable HD space. you don't have to post on every thread to make your voice known that you're a non believer. this applies to all.... for further proof of this "phenomenon" just check out the thread i started a week ago called "jena labs" and see how many "worthwhile" posts their are and how many i, the OP can actually find helpful and USE!!!!

Well Put....

The problem for us non-believers is it's just too tempting. It's like listening to a couple of people talk about being abducted by aliens. You've just got to offer a remark.

after all this time being a part of the forum, it still boggles my mind that "non-cable believers" make it their mission in life to be either sarcastic or ask "proof' everytime a cable thread is started. is it that difficult to stay out of a thread if someone has nothing better to say. talk about being a broken record already. please for the love of ***, if you don't have anything worthwhile to contribute, stop being extremely annoying and just read the thread and laugh by yourself. the OP wants comments on a specific cable brand, if you've never used it or don't believe in it, then stop wasting valuable HD space. you don't have to post on every thread to make your voice known that you're a non believer. this applies to all.... for further proof of this "phenomenon" just check out the thread i started a week ago called "jena labs" and see how many "worthwhile" posts their are and how many i, the OP can actually find helpful and USE!!!!

If you think this is bad have a look here:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=757571

At least it stays civil (mostly) on the 20K forum. BTW in terms of "popularity" I think number 1 goes to cable/inter connect threads followed closely by Bose and B&W ones.

Well yeah, but Anthony, that whole Jenna Jameson schtick was too fun to pass up.


you are absolutely right, thats why i didn't chew anyone's head off.

I hate to say this but AVSforum has an amazing amount of cheap people on here. I don't know if their wives won't let them spend money on some legit cables or components or maybe it's just jealousy but there is a difference in quality. Now I will say this before all of those cheap people get all riled up. I'm cheap too, just not with my hobbies such as audio. Now everybody, though they might not admit it on this forum, does not have the same "golden-ears." So what it comes down to is this, to each his own. If you want to spend $1.00 a ft on lamp cord have at it. If someone wants to spend $14,000 AQ Everest cable, have at it. The important thing is that you are happy with what you have.

For the record, I have a middle-range system constisting of:

2x Mirage m3-si Loudspeakers (F***ing fantastic loudspeakers)
Outlaw Audio RR2150 Stereo Receiver (legendary performance for the price)
Monster HTS5100mkII Line Conditioner
Primare CD21 Compact Disc Player (Talk about an amazing cd player)
Audioquest 32v dbs Gibraltar single-biwire Speaker Cable
Audioquest King Cobra Audio Interconnects

All in all MSRP for this system would be around 7500 dollars. However, because I sell audio equipment I have a few connections that were able to drop the price down to around a third of that. So in a way I'm cheap too, but I don't have a weak link in my system. Everything is a solid performer and that is what makes me happy. So let us enjoy what we have and stop the bickering. We all love audio and that connects us from there. If T. Preston has a few million in the bank, let him spend it on whatever he wants.

Lasers in your face,
Pete

after all this time being a part of the forum, it still boggles my mind that "non-cable believers" make it their mission in life to be either sarcastic or ask "proof' everytime a cable thread is started. is it that difficult to stay out of a thread if someone has nothing better to say. talk about being a broken record already. please for the love of ***, if you don't have anything worthwhile to contribute, stop being extremely annoying and just read the thread and laugh by yourself. the OP wants comments on a specific cable brand, if you've never used it or don't believe in it, then stop wasting valuable HD space. you don't have to post on every thread to make your voice known that you're a non believer. this applies to all.... for further proof of this "phenomenon" just check out the thread i started a week ago called "jena labs" and see how many "worthwhile" posts their are and how many i, the OP can actually find helpful and USE!!!!

Thats all good and well and you snake oil folks are a broken record as also. When we ask for proof you come up with this lame response. It just shows there is ZERO science behind the snake oil. It has nothing to do with if I or anyone else uses the cable the slaesmen are the ones making the pie in the sky claims not us who know the truth of the real science.

Funny thing today, i spoke to Mel Schilling at Camelot Technology with regard to using the analog outputs on the Rountable which provide up sampling to 96kHz. This was after coming across "The Surf City AllStar Band I Get Surround", which has a 96 kHz/24 bit stereo mix. The genisis of using the analog outputs was based upon a conversation last week with Barry Ober at M&K who advised using the analog outputs and not the coaxial digital output for better sound. After connecting the analog outputs to the MC12, i tryed a few titles from my collection. What i noticed was greater resolution, the kind of sound that i heard only once before with the Performas when i demoed them at American Audiophile. The weird part is i hooked up the Heimdall a few days ago and today was the first time i played some cds using the analog outputs as well as the Heimdall- the outputs, the Heimdall or maybe a combination of both- i don't know the exact reason for the improved sound. What sold me was listening to "The Best of the Fireballs The Original Norman Petty Masters" and hearing cleaner and more detailed instrumentation. Also, recently adding the Thor has contributed to increased resolution overall. My ears, my observation and valid to me, not trying to push this thinking on anyone.

Pete,
Love the passion. Personally, I can't stand reading the posts about the "snake oil," nor the "science" behind the reasons that people use to try and make others feel stupid about paying significant dollars for interconnects or speaker cables. The fact is that I enjoy my Home Theater setup; It's a passion of mine. If I personally feel that I get better performance out of my equipment using more expensive cables, please, let me feel that way. I'm not asking you to agree or not. This is what I think, and I'll be sure to give my opinion without getting riled up about it. I'm not going to use sarcasm and put-downs to trash people who don't agree with me. I absolutely enjoy researching cables and connections and trying to tweak my system so that it sounds it best, and I'm sure others do too. All I ask is for you guys to accept that without called us "cable believers" a group of idiots.

Take care,
-Lloyd

I hate to say this but AVSforum has an amazing amount of cheap people on here. I don't know if their wives won't let them spend money on some legit cables or components or maybe it's just jealousy but there is a difference in quality. Now I will say this before all of those cheap people get all riled up. I'm cheap too, just not with my hobbies such as audio. Now everybody, though they might not admit it on this forum, does not have the same "golden-ears." So what it comes down to is this, to each his own. If you want to spend $1.00 a ft on lamp cord have at it. If someone wants to spend $14,000 AQ Everest cable, have at it. The important thing is that you are happy with what you have.

For the record, I have a middle-range system constisting of:

2x Mirage m3-si Loudspeakers (F***ing fantastic loudspeakers)
Outlaw Audio RR2150 Stereo Receiver (legendary performance for the price)
Monster HTS5100mkII Line Conditioner
Primare CD21 Compact Disc Player (Talk about an amazing cd player)
Audioquest 32v dbs Gibraltar single-biwire Speaker Cable
Audioquest King Cobra Audio Interconnects

All in all MSRP for this system would be around 7500 dollars. However, because I sell audio equipment I have a few connections that were able to drop the price down to around a third of that. So in a way I'm cheap too, but I don't have a weak link in my system. Everything is a solid performer and that is what makes me happy. So let us enjoy what we have and stop the bickering. We all love audio and that connects us from there. If T. Preston has a few million in the bank, let him spend it on whatever he wants.

Lasers in your face,
Pete

After all these yrs. of reading this and other forums, MY FIRST POST!
I'm gettin old so it's likely to be a longer story then it need be. But somewhere in here there is relavance to the thread

I'm not rich in any real sense of the word, I'm not poor either for that matter. So expenditures on my little hobby, I feel have to be well worth it (sonically and/or visually) and has to last far longer then things people purchess of lesser quality to be used for what will most likely be a much shorter period of time.
It took me a very long time, (since the advent of the phrase "high end") to put together a "high end" system. And as you should all know, it's an ongoing process that will never end but it did get to slow down after awhile. Untill they started with a dozen new audio and video formats, new tech. altogether and all at the same point in history.
Anyway,
When I first got into all this, the first thing I bought was the G.A.S. Ampzilla. Which, by the way, is still active in my system as sub-woofer power for a REVEL SUB-15, which originally came with an expensive peice of junk for power. So the Zilla gets more of a workout since I'm using this Sub then it did all those yrs. it drove nothing but a pair of high efficiency Altec Stonhedge 111's. Which I also still have active but in a lesser system in another room.
In Ampzilla's manual, if it could be called that, they told you how to set the thing up and they specified the use of ZIP-CORD to be used as speaker wire, they also used a peice of RG-6 (I think it was, or rg-56, it really doesn't matter) sheilded coax to connect the input jacks to the circuit boads. I mean hell, it was shielded wire, what could be better? Who the heck did any real research on a lousy peice of wire back then past shield or no shield. WIRE was WIRE, period!

Through the yrs. studies were done, I guess depending on who the poster is these studies were scientific or not. In any case, no manufacturer these days really believes any wire will do for any particular thing, be it internal to the equipt. or external to equipt. such as interconnects and speaker wire. If they did, the guy who designed my Ampzilla to begin with, would not have taken it back yrs. later and change out all the internal wiring for stuff that even at the time of that rebuild was fairly "exotic" at the time and today, still better then some of these posters would use for their interconnects!
He always was a frugal guy, he thought everybody should be able to afford a good amplifier. So he built them with the best possible parts, including what he though was "good enough" wiring and didn't waste money on things that would just make the Amp. more expensive but not make it sound any better. With his yrs. of experiance, he learned that the simple peice of wire made his Amps sound better. And it does sound better then when it was new. Of course, more recently alot of 30yr old parts were changed to make it sound even that much better then simply swapping some wires. WIRE IS VERY IMPORTANT in making and connecting anything you might want to call high end. though I have seen and heard major differances in real cheap systems by simply changing a stupid wire.
How these guys can laugh at people who have expensive cables is beyond me.

In older, cheaper systems, like alot of my neighbors have, as well as in other rooms in my own house, even those I have sound better then the same one across the street, strictly because of that peice of wire.
It doesn't have to be a $14,000 cable to be a better wire and I've heard cheaper cables I've liked better but you gotta spend what you gotta spend (but only as much as you can afford) to make hums, hisses and buzzes disappear or at least fade them into the background so far as to not be a bother. Even a really good peice of equipt. that in itself is free of any noise, can wind up noisy and colored so badly by a poor peice of wire in the chain between source and Speaker.
Moreover, if you've already spent your $20,000 plus on your system, why would anyone even consider zip-cord or it's ilk in their system. If you've spent that much and you can't hear a differance between zip-cord and a $14,000 cable, you didn't need a $20,000 plus system to begin with!

Personally, I've been using Transparent cables, which seem to make my particular set-up sound the way I like it. You need to use whatever cable makes your Revels sound best. Everything from the wire in the wall you run your cable past to get to your speaker changes the tone in one way or another.

Take it easy on the Absinthe while rewiring anything :cool:

bigbro

After all these yrs. of reading this and other forums, MY FIRST POST!



And thanks for adding ZERO Science to the debate.

where is the "science" on your end of the "debate" showing wire makes no differance? All I see is conjecture and opinion, nothing more.

On the other hand, I worked for a quarter of a century for a couple of power companies and they seem to believe that some cable material for insulation is better then others and some core materials are better then others.

Take copper for instance, which everybody did :) now they know it conducts elec. better then aluminum (or do you dispute that FACT as well, if so, I know where you can get some cable mighty cheap), and when nobody was stealing big bars of pure copper, that's right, pure copper in bulk form but not quite as refined as 99.9999% like they would use even in monster cable at 1buck/ft, The copper cable and grounds and bus runs and everything else, they started to turn to alum. as a replacement. All about the same time wire became an issue in ahhhmmm, hi-fi. But for the power company, the losses involved with transmitting over alum. became just to cost effective to stay with good copper, that keeps getting stolen. For them what they loose in saleable power is more then made up with the cost diff. of alum vs. copper. So they use a "PROVEN" worse conductor. Still, in something sensative, such as a relay and I'm talking big guys here for the most part, no 1" thing, more like a shoebox, the material of choice is still pure copper. If it's real sofisticated, then they might use silver or gold, depending if it's indoors or out.

So why don't you guys use alum. cables, there cheap and they work, I tried runs of it for speaker cable myself at one point in time. Get em, use em, no diff. to you I see.
Same thing goes for insulation qualities, where a stray rf signal might be more problematic, they use a good sheilded wire, they don't wanna pick up a signal nor send one out, why should you? All this comes down to, wire makes no diff. unless it's important! And of course there are many more reasons they have to use better cable and connectors in some places rather then others. But what do they know about it, they just started to write specs for what they need for only a little more the 100yrs.

So where might any of this be wrong thinking? It sounds like you might have the answer to this age old question, GIVE!

Bigbro

where is the "science" on your end of the "debate" showing wire makes no differance? All I see is conjecture and opinion, nothing more.

OK, someone's got to temper this discussion with some reason.

On the other hand, I worked for a quarter of a century for a couple of power companies and they seem to believe that some cable material for insulation is better then others and some core materials are better then others.

Certainly, based on dielectric constand and inherent resistance. This is basic, and it makes a BIG difference in losses when you're talking about MV (1200VAC+) and high currents (>1200A).

Take copper for instance, which everybody did :) now they know it conducts elec. better then aluminum [...] But for the power company, the losses involved with transmitting over alum. became just to cost effective to stay with good copper, that keeps getting stolen. For them what they loose in saleable power is more then made up with the cost diff. of alum vs. copper. So they use a "PROVEN" worse conductor.

There's more to it than just the raw cost of the wire. For suspended lines, the weight difference is also a cost-savings. At the end of the day, electric utilities are about making money, so all their decisions are financially-based - they have to be. This has little or nothing to do with the decisions we make for our audio systems.

So why don't you guys use alum. cables, there cheap and they work,

No, there are BIG differences here. Galvanic issues are the first, resistance is second, availability is third. Aluminum is a non-starter.

Same thing goes for insulation qualities, where a stray rf signal might be more problematic, they use a good sheilded wire, they don't wanna pick up a signal nor send one out, why should you?

I don't think anyone has ever suggested that differences between shielded signal cables are 'snake oil'. Given that these cables are used for carrying low-voltage, low-current signals into very high-impedance inputs, having a good cable here is tremendously important. Shielded cables have VERY significant capacitive and inductive effects to go along with the purely resistive impact of the conductor choice. Also, the quality of the shield and resiliency of the dielectric (bend radius) can definitely impact the performance of the final system. That said, I would counter that I've seen some relatively inexpensive cables outperform some very expensive 'boutique' cables in the pro audio field. Now understand when I say 'relatively inexpensive' I am NOT talking about Radio Shack cords or the stuff that comes in the box with a $69 DVD player. I am talking about real name-brand cables that make the effort to build a quality product.

So where might any of this be wrong thinking? It sounds like you might have the answer to this age old question, GIVE!

Well, the issue with speaker cables comes down to this. When you're talking about pure copper wire, the single biggest properties of concern are gauge (cross-section), length, and strand count. Secondary issues would be insulation, inter-conductor spacing, and any twisting of the conductors (not generally present in speaker cables). There can also be some very minor inductance added by the strand configuration - this is REALLY small, unless you're talking about hundreds of feet of wire.

Here's my point: We can all agree that if you change the wire gauge, you will impact the signal - this is basic, and should not be disputed by even the harshest of nay-sayers. Additionally, you have to have good insulation, consistent gauge, good connections, and the shortest runs possible (at equal lengths, where possible). If you can't hear the difference between 50 ft of 18-gauge Radio Shack 'speaker wire' and 8 ft of 12-gauge OFC, then I guess you don't need to spend very much money on ANY of your gear.

Beyond these points is where it gets a bit tougher. When you're talking about a low-voltage (30-50V) 4-8 Ohm system, the classical math indicates that the level of capacitance and inductance added by the speaker cable is so small that it shouldn't have any impact at all in the audible frequency range. Heck, the variance in capacitors in the speakers' internal crossovers or filters will be larger than this (assuming it's not a bi- or tri-amped system, of course).

Am I saying that there's no difference? Not necessarily. I won't argue this - I have seen some really 'stupid' things make an observable difference in other fields, so I am not beyond believing that there are effects we don't know how to describe or model. What I am saying though, is that adequate objective metrics have not been given to show the reasons for any difference in sound due to a change from one high-quality speaker cable to another high-quality speaker cable. So, those who are trained engineers have a tough time accepting how something that cannot be measured and objectively described can make enough difference to be worth even $.01/foot additional cost. When the answer is 'Trust me, I can hear it', with no reproducible measurement to back it up.......you get a flame-fest.

Not sure how to evaluate this- i returned the Heimdall 2.5M center speaker cable to the dealer who then made sure to give it a thorough burn in. Seems it didn't get the burn-in like it was suppossed to previously and i could hear it wasn't right. After getting it back i recalibrated with the MC-12 mic kit and the setting changed from pre burn-in -2db to -9.5db after burn-in. A 7.5db increase in volume due to burn-in seems odd to me; i'll leave it to the audio engineers to expain.

Not sure how to evaluate this- i returned the Heimdall 2.5M center speaker cable to the dealer who then made sure to give it a thorough burn in. Seems it didn't get the burn-in like it was suppossed to previously and i could hear it wasn't right. After getting it back i recalibrated with the MC-12 mic kit and the setting changed from pre burn-in -2db to -9.5db after burn-in. A 7.5db increase in volume due to burn-in seems odd to me; i'll leave it to the audio engineers to expain.


The calibration was off before. thats the only real reason outside of you being fooled into thinking a burn in helped.There now its explained.

Why do people not look to the obvious reasons and assume its the snake oil. Your dealer needs you to keep that cable so of course he is going to feed you a line about burn in.

Please invite him to come here and tell us all about it.

Beg you pardon but i don't miscalibrate. I set up the 4 microphones very carefully at the sweet spot and at where my ears are when i'm sitting. Funny, when i bought the Thor people here said snake oil but it improved resolution and i don't have faulty ears or perceptions. Could have bought a new plasma with the money i spent on the Thor, power cables and the Heimdall but i chose to audio tweak. I never said the Heimdall improved my sound, just the Thor. The few hrs. that i've listened to the center speaker after recalibrating- my sense is it is playing with more power or impact. My ears, my set-up- if you were here you might agree but your not so it's not fair to comment on what you haven't heard.

Beg you pardon but i don't miscalibrate. I set up the 4 microphones very carefully at the sweet spot and at where my ears are when i'm sitting. Funny, when i bought the Thor people here said snake oil but it improved resolution and i don't have faulty ears or perceptions. Could have bought a new plasma with the money i spent on the Thor, power cables and the Heimdall but i chose to audio tweak. I never said the Heimdall improved my sound, just the Thor. The few hrs. that i've listened to the center speaker after recalibrating- my sense is it is playing with more power or impact. My ears, my set-up- if you were here you might agree but your not so it's not fair to comment on what you haven't heard.

it may be not fair but you should understand the variables involved. And what really changes. please explain exactly how burn effects a passive thing like a cable?

So burn-in period applys to speakers but not speaker cables?

I can't say that I realy believe all of the stuff about burn in, but theoretically speaking it would make sense that any kind of material (rubber, paper, Kevlar, whatever) will change parameters slightly as it's flexed over time.

It therefore stands to reason that a speaker's frequency response or ability to damp might change SLIGHTLY from new out of the box to say 50 hours of being used. I would also say however that in the case of foam surrounds, the slight change will be continuous until the falls apart as foam surrounds will do over time.

It's really no different than the slowly degrading image of a CRT or digital projector. The carefully calibrated 6500 Kelvin point shifts ever so slightly every hour of use as the bulb/phosphor deteriorates, but you're not going to get an ISF calibration every few hours.

I fail to see how burnin will affect an amplfier, signal processor, signal source or speaker cable...

Is it the consensus here that the Nordost CBID-1 burn in machine is a snake oil product too?

Is it the consensus here that the Nordost CBID-1 burn in machine is a snake oil product too?



From Gene Desalla(sp)

“Breaking-in” period — Like a new pair of shoes, some exotic cable manufacturers claim that a new cable must be “broken-in” in order for customers to achieve true sonic enjoyment. The curing process can take days or weeks, usually beyond whatever the return period is allowed for the cable. To “break-in” a cable, one must run a signal (i.e. play music) in order to cure the cable and rearrange all those fancy electrons into a usable pattern. Again, there’s no scientific data to support this claim.

It’s important to note that neither the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) nor the Audio Engineering Society (AES) has published any papers in support of the claims noted above.

From Gene Desalla(sp)

“Breaking-in” period — Like a new pair of shoes, some exotic cable manufacturers claim that a new cable must be “broken-in” in order for customers to achieve true sonic enjoyment. The curing process can take days or weeks, usually beyond whatever the return period is allowed for the cable. To “break-in” a cable, one must run a signal (i.e. play music) in order to cure the cable and rearrange all those fancy electrons into a usable pattern. Again, there’s no scientific data to support this claim.

It’s important to note that neither the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) nor the Audio Engineering Society (AES) has published any papers in support of the claims noted above.

I'll start with an anecdote ... "my experience" with cables, if you will. It was an old trick among audio salesman ... even twenty ot thrity years ago ... to swap out RCA cables, and demonstrate what an incredible difference was heard. Even the most tin-eared idiots could hear a difference! Putting aside, for the moment, the strong power of suggestion, lack of variable control, lack of accounting for presence/absence of human memory effects, and all those things that tend to render isolated, uncontrolled subjective observation meaningless ... could a difference actually be heard? The answer was YES ... but it had nothing to do with the cables, per se. The reason was because simply removing an RCA cable and plugging-in a new one would scrape the oxidation and corrosion from the metal at the surface contact, improving the electrical connection. In fact, unplugging a cable and plugging back in the very same cable could create an audible ... and measurable ... difference

Let's start by stating the obvious : at both the line-level and speaker-level points in the audio reproduction chain, the signal is electrical in nature ... rather than mechanical or acoustical. I suspect most (perhaps not all) would agree with this point. So the question naturally arises ... what electrical properties of the cable matter?

The answer is remarkably simple. The cable is an electrical network, and it's operating with signals whose electrical wavelength is much, much longer than the cable itself. Therefore, what matters electrically are the parameters in the classic "lumped model" : namely, the cable's Resistance (R), Inductance (L) and Capacitance (C). We can completely discount all transmission line effects ... including standing waves, reflection coefficients, and termination impedance matching (excepting, of course, digital audio transmission ... when the signal is digital, it's bandwidth is orders-of-magnitude higher than analog audio).

How the RLC parameters of the cable effect the signal transmission will depend on the source and load impedance ... in other words, what's driving the cable, and what's on the other end. Knowing these impedances will allow us to measure, or predict, any alteration in the audio band frequency response ... aka magnitude and phase versus frequency ... that a given cable may generate. Linear system theory is a well-established science ... not open to opinion or subjective experience.

Any general conclusions? Sure ... for example, it takes a real effort to significantly impact frequency response at the RCA/line-level, because the load resistance is so high compared to the series elements of R and L. You may, however, want to pay attention to the shunt capcitance in interconnect cables ... it's possible that the capacitance may cause some roll-off in the treble, with a long cable (meaning, high capacitance) and high-ish source impedance. Similarly, you might want to pay attention to the series elements of R and L at speaker-level cables, particulary when driving low impedance loads (like low impedance subs, or highly-capacitive electrostat panels).

Anything else matter about cables? YES ... contact metallurgy, as mentioned. Not only can certain metals oxidize and corrode (impacting that parameter R), but dis-similar metals in a pressure contact can create galvanic effects that demonstrate very measurable ... and potentially audible ... effects. Furthermore, we must include the noise-shielding properties of the cable. How significant? Depends, of course, on how noisy the environment is

What's the bottom line? Let's do some make-pretend Q&A:

Q: Do all cables sound the same?
A: OF COURSE NOT ... but the question is meaningless. A rusty, 30 gauge cable that's 40 feet long will obviously sound different when driving 800 watts to your sub, compared to a short, clean 12 gauge cable.

Q: OK ... so what causes cables to sound different?
A: The only parameters that could matter are RLC, contact metallurgy and noise shielding. The significance of each, depends on the exact environment and application.

Q: What about hyperlitz geometries and specific metal elements?
A: If they don't impact RLC and frequency response over 20kHz, they won't impact the sound ... simply because they can't. If the electrical signal is not altered over a 20kHz bandwidth, the sound coming out of your speakers won't be altered either.

Q: What about the "network boxes" on some super-megabuck cables?
A: Of course they can alter the sound, if they are providing a change to the frequency response (magnitude, phase) of the network operating on 20kHz electrical signals. In other words ... if they are providing some degree of equalization, they can change the "sound". Linear system theory tells us that there is simply no other way to alter the signal, or thereby the "sound" of the cable.

Q. Do all cables ... THAT MEASURE THE SAME ... sound the same?
A. No known reason to believe otherwise If you wish to disprove the hypothesis, though, you must of course establish an experiment where all other possible variables are eliminated.

T3mpest very well written. Too bad the snake oilers dont see the light.

That's because they hear differences, or think they do, whichever the case is. Honestly, I'd believe in some cases their may be a difference. If they unplugged their RCA's, they very well might hear a difference after they plugged it back in, even with no changes made. Some of the oxidation can scrape off, that will alter the electrical signal enough to be audible. If they happened to change wires out, then the difference, for them, would simply be attributed to the wires. Salesman have been using that trick for years, who's to say an audiophile hasn't unwittingly used that on himself!

I guess what it comes down to, at the end of the day, is do what makes you happy. Even if the sound doesnt' change 1 bit from your stereo, but it makes you feel better, it may be worth it. Just a change in wires might be enough to make you appreciate your stereo again, listen for low level details you were "missing" before, even if they were present, you just quit listening. If you budget allow it, do what makes yourself happy. For those like me, who don't have 3k to spend on a few feet of wire, spend the money on things you know WILL make an audible difference, because logic says it must! due to the wire change. Different priorities for different people.