Do you want to buy all the materials and supplies and other things that may be needed for me to write my thesis for you and wait about a month for all the results I’d be more and happy to do that for you
Or you can try and read up about this instead of belittling me and the other people about our knowledge and personal experience with this
Or you can try and read up about this instead of belittling me and the other people about our knowledge and personal experience with this
Very little has yet been offered in response to the original question, which refers to the efficacy of 'burning in' silver interconnect cables.
Personally, I am not a subscriber to the notion that 'burn in' is a legitimate phenomenon. Does anyone know of any scientific evidence to the contrary?
White noise is the best. It completely changes how two identical cables sound, if one is exposed to this white noise for at least a 24 hour period.
Is it belittling to be asked for reasonable evidence in support of a claim about science? If so, you may be 'belittled' a lot on this forum. "Scientific facts" are not something you hope to find and write up next month; they are something already found and agreed, so all you need to do is point me to where they are confirmed. Please note that 'white papers' from cable vendors are not acceptable evidence, neither are threads on other less sensible audio sites.carlthess40 said:
As I said, this audio frequency behaviour of metals was somehow omitted from my education. I have given you an opportunity to help me, yet you seem to decline. Others may wish to draw conclusions from this.
By integrating white noise we can produce 'Brown noise', which is named after the Scottish botanist Robert Brown, and sounds like the low roar of a waterfall.
Brown was the discoverer of Brownian motion, which is the random motion of particles within a medium.
Interestingly, the 'random walk' of silver atoms on a silver surface contributes, in itself, to the signal noise known as Brown noise.
The application of white noise and its influence on the behaviour of silver cable at the atomic level - could there be a scientific link?
Attachments
Twaddle. You said, and I quote verbatim
'Either way I hear and can Measure quality or lack of quality with either copper CCA. Tin plat copper and solid silver or copper coated with silver. For audio sound cables like speaker cables the best I've heard as been using solid silver braided with a pure copper cable with the silver and that would get me the lows back into the sound. It's not black vodo, it's just plan Scientific facts or how metals work with frequencies'
You are the one claiming you can and have measured differences (other than resistance) in the electrical performance of different metals in the audio bandwidth, with cables that are otherwise identical in all respects. I am infering the latter, since a person who invokes science obviously would not dream of changing more than one variable at any given time, and will of course further account for various factors such as differing triboelectric behaviour in their measurements and analysis. Now, since such a claim is contrary to known engineering reality, the onus is upon the one making the claims to prove it, not the other way around. Since you state you have already done so, presumably on multiple occasions, it is not unreasonable for us to expect you to post these revolutionary results, along with a detailed commentary on your test setup, notes on how your equipment was calibrated &c.
You believe you can hear a difference between different conductor materials in otherwise identical wires? Fair enough. Your system, your ears, your opinion. Just leave out the pseudoscientific drivel.
Last edited:
Silver is often preferred over Gold, but...
I am up to my eyeballs in this study right now, so it's interesting that this is an active thread.
It's been my experience that, even if someone prefers the sound of silver interconnect, it always comes down to cost and maintanence. The issue is that silver corrodes, and though there are various treatment options to prevent corrosion, many of these methods have negative side effects that might reduce the audible differences that were the reason for moving from gold to silver in the first place. For those ok with maintanence of equipment (dissasembly of connectors, cleaning, reassembly), the results of my listening tests and interactions with others in industry is that the majority of discerning listeners prefer "the sound" of silver, but are inhibited by cost and maintanence.
On economy, usually mass produced audio products use gold-plating, so with silver we lose the economy of scale and the selection afforded by the ubiquity of gold. You do have a few companies who manufacturer and supply Pure(ish) silver connectors, but they are usually exorbintantly expensive (recently priced some binding posts for a project and price was something like $50-$60 each... and I needed 16 of them!)
On maintanence, if you used untreated silver you must clean and maintain non-soldered interconnects. If you want to treat, the question is immediately what does the treatment do to the conductivity/sound of the interconnect. Some organic compounds are only good for a few months, some last several years- either way, it's maintanence. Some that last very, very long (electroplating with alloys containing Rhodium, Tin, Nickel, and even Ceramics and enamel, etc) significantly impact the characteristics of the silver.
I ran across a great article in my research (which I've attached here), but it is a bit dated (2004). It would be great to have another, more detailed article that is up-to-date with available options today. If anyone has one, it'd be great to see it.
I am up to my eyeballs in this study right now, so it's interesting that this is an active thread.
It's been my experience that, even if someone prefers the sound of silver interconnect, it always comes down to cost and maintanence. The issue is that silver corrodes, and though there are various treatment options to prevent corrosion, many of these methods have negative side effects that might reduce the audible differences that were the reason for moving from gold to silver in the first place. For those ok with maintanence of equipment (dissasembly of connectors, cleaning, reassembly), the results of my listening tests and interactions with others in industry is that the majority of discerning listeners prefer "the sound" of silver, but are inhibited by cost and maintanence.
On economy, usually mass produced audio products use gold-plating, so with silver we lose the economy of scale and the selection afforded by the ubiquity of gold. You do have a few companies who manufacturer and supply Pure(ish) silver connectors, but they are usually exorbintantly expensive (recently priced some binding posts for a project and price was something like $50-$60 each... and I needed 16 of them!)
On maintanence, if you used untreated silver you must clean and maintain non-soldered interconnects. If you want to treat, the question is immediately what does the treatment do to the conductivity/sound of the interconnect. Some organic compounds are only good for a few months, some last several years- either way, it's maintanence. Some that last very, very long (electroplating with alloys containing Rhodium, Tin, Nickel, and even Ceramics and enamel, etc) significantly impact the characteristics of the silver.
I ran across a great article in my research (which I've attached here), but it is a bit dated (2004). It would be great to have another, more detailed article that is up-to-date with available options today. If anyone has one, it'd be great to see it.
I am not moderator, but this is a DIY forum, not a buyer's opinion forum
@Audio Adrenaline: If you have a cable constructed by using real silver (eventually solid silver wire, not multi-stranded type) with certified purity and properly terminated with decent plugs, it should not sound like you stated your cable sounds!
Only multi-stranded copper cable covered with silver sounds like you state! True solid core silver cable emphasize somehow the medium frequencies, that gives you the impression of highs attenuation, so to speak. I do not believe in cables, but cables have a slight sonic signature of their own. Solid silver gives a sonic signature (in my opinion) with very detailed mids and mid-highs, rounded top higs, and textured accentuated midbass in a decent system. As better a system is (with well engineered electronics/loudspeakers), as less the cables matters!
I have build, in a small experiment, two DIY cables, 30 cm long:
- one of solid silver (4N, taiwan made), two wires for signal plus screen, RCA soldered
- one of solid silver (hot wire 4N + copper cold wire 5N) plus screen, RCA soldered
Both cables has same sound signature, the composite cable (Silver +Copper) having this 'quality' a bit attenuated, but was still there. The cable diameter for silver/copper was 0,65mm, insulation was teflon and the screen was braided type, tinned copper mesh.
I donated the cables to two of my friends, as a gift, as I did not liked the 'silver' sound signature. Also, I have listen pure solid silver cables (DIY from good ingredients, or of known origin if ready made) in multi K audiophile systems, and I did not like them in comparison with copper cable, in most of the cases.
I am using home-made solid (and sometimes stranded) copper cables for my system at home. For interconnect I am using bulk cable made for recording industry, like Hosa, Canare, or Cordial, making my selection on wire section, quality and number of shields, insulation material, depending on the cable task. Also, I am using NEUTRIK connectors for balanced and un-balanced cable plugs, and non-ROHS solder (I love Pb
One better use the money to build/buy better electronics or loudspeakers (or even acoustic treatment of his listening room), than to throw money on fancy (silver or not) cables!!!
Example: for my Technics Sl1700 Mk II turntable I am using CORDIAL CVM 08-32 HD FLEX.
This cable (1.25 meters long, RCA terminated) works like a charm on a Technics SL 1200G, equipped with Ortofon Quintet Black S (MC cartridge) on a client system.
Do you get the idea, or you still believe in The Church of Cables?!
Cables are suppose to carry the signal in a passive way, without alter it, they are not Baxandall correctors, nor 'sound equalizers'
@Audio Adrenaline: If you have a cable constructed by using real silver (eventually solid silver wire, not multi-stranded type) with certified purity and properly terminated with decent plugs, it should not sound like you stated your cable sounds!
Only multi-stranded copper cable covered with silver sounds like you state! True solid core silver cable emphasize somehow the medium frequencies, that gives you the impression of highs attenuation, so to speak. I do not believe in cables, but cables have a slight sonic signature of their own. Solid silver gives a sonic signature (in my opinion) with very detailed mids and mid-highs, rounded top higs, and textured accentuated midbass in a decent system. As better a system is (with well engineered electronics/loudspeakers), as less the cables matters!
I have build, in a small experiment, two DIY cables, 30 cm long:
- one of solid silver (4N, taiwan made), two wires for signal plus screen, RCA soldered
- one of solid silver (hot wire 4N + copper cold wire 5N) plus screen, RCA soldered
Both cables has same sound signature, the composite cable (Silver +Copper) having this 'quality' a bit attenuated, but was still there. The cable diameter for silver/copper was 0,65mm, insulation was teflon and the screen was braided type, tinned copper mesh.
I donated the cables to two of my friends, as a gift, as I did not liked the 'silver' sound signature. Also, I have listen pure solid silver cables (DIY from good ingredients, or of known origin if ready made) in multi K audiophile systems, and I did not like them in comparison with copper cable, in most of the cases.
I am using home-made solid (and sometimes stranded) copper cables for my system at home. For interconnect I am using bulk cable made for recording industry, like Hosa, Canare, or Cordial, making my selection on wire section, quality and number of shields, insulation material, depending on the cable task. Also, I am using NEUTRIK connectors for balanced and un-balanced cable plugs, and non-ROHS solder (I love Pb
One better use the money to build/buy better electronics or loudspeakers (or even acoustic treatment of his listening room), than to throw money on fancy (silver or not) cables!!!
Example: for my Technics Sl1700 Mk II turntable I am using CORDIAL CVM 08-32 HD FLEX.
This cable (1.25 meters long, RCA terminated) works like a charm on a Technics SL 1200G, equipped with Ortofon Quintet Black S (MC cartridge) on a client system.
Do you get the idea, or you still believe in The Church of Cables?!
Cables are suppose to carry the signal in a passive way, without alter it, they are not Baxandall correctors, nor 'sound equalizers'
Interestingly, this is the opposite point of view to that which is promulgated by hi-fi magazines.
Their argument is that expensive interconnects and loudspeaker cables bring improvements in sound quality which will be appreciated by those with expensive hi-fi systems.
This is a stark example of hi-fi elitism!
They offer this as a counter argument to those with budget hi-fi systems who argue that expensive cables do not make a difference!
It is also a justification for them filling several pages within a magazine with entirely subjective, and consequently meaningless, reviews of expensive cables!
The efficacy of 'burning in' silver interconnect cables is the same as 'burning in' cables of any other conductor. There is no burn-in effect in any case.
There is no scientific or engineering evidence to support burn-in.
When making unsupported claims, the burden of proof is totally on you.
And just where would we read-up on this?
This is too general to be of much use. What amplitude? What current? Is current even important? Does the amplitude (current) relate to the cross section? Or do you just choose parameters close to the actual intended use?
As i need to break in transformers and chokes more often than wire i tend to use several files with a demag track and several noise tracks. Seems to do the job with interconnects as well.
How about mains cables?
Not 100% convinced silver cables always sound "silvery". One of my tonearms is factory wired with silver and there is no way one can tell this from the sound. Yes, the bulk of silver wire shares a very similar signature, but apparently there are exceptions. I wonder why?
As for maintenance, as a long term Shallco user i tend to chemically clean all my switches about once a year. The first week after the clean up the brightness is intolerable. Soon after it settles down. Perhaps this is the time the oxide layer grows thick enough to be audible.
Dr Malcolm Hawkesford
Does this article by Dr Malcolm Hawkesford shed any light on why cables might sound different?
The Essex Echo 1995: Electrical Signal Propagation & Cable Theory | Stereophile.com
I don't understand most of it but it does appear to be scientific.
t
Does this article by Dr Malcolm Hawkesford shed any light on why cables might sound different?
The Essex Echo 1995: Electrical Signal Propagation & Cable Theory | Stereophile.com
I don't understand most of it but it does appear to be scientific.
t
No. Hawksford's article (originally in HiFi News back in '85) is riddled with so many glaring issues it's hard to know where to begin. A handful (and this is far from being comprehensive):
-The test setup was never detailed with sufficient clarity to allow others to repeat his experiments.
-Energy storage was neglected, nor did he test different wire gauges of the same material preventing comparisons in electromagnetic permeability.
-The Poynting vector is perpendicular, not parallel to the direction of travel; since everything that penetrates the conductor is converted to heat, its propogation velocity being slower than in the surrounding EM fields is neither here nor there for the purposes claimed.
-Nobody else has ever obtained the same results in testing.
-If the issues he claimed to have found existed, the modern world (high speed computers, communications &c.) would not, and could not work. Since they do -QED.
Your phrase 'it appears to be scientific' is rather the point. It does appear that way. But it isn't. It's pseudo science. The equations themselves are correct / standard, but the interpretation, with its mixing & matching of select pieces of EM and classical electrical engineering, poor test proceedure & peculiar methodology is outright nonsense. You can't pick & choose; it doesn't work that way. You either use EM or you don't. Hawksford has done a lot of good in other fields but this really wasn't one of them.
-The test setup was never detailed with sufficient clarity to allow others to repeat his experiments.
-Energy storage was neglected, nor did he test different wire gauges of the same material preventing comparisons in electromagnetic permeability.
-The Poynting vector is perpendicular, not parallel to the direction of travel; since everything that penetrates the conductor is converted to heat, its propogation velocity being slower than in the surrounding EM fields is neither here nor there for the purposes claimed.
-Nobody else has ever obtained the same results in testing.
-If the issues he claimed to have found existed, the modern world (high speed computers, communications &c.) would not, and could not work. Since they do -QED.
Your phrase 'it appears to be scientific' is rather the point. It does appear that way. But it isn't. It's pseudo science. The equations themselves are correct / standard, but the interpretation, with its mixing & matching of select pieces of EM and classical electrical engineering, poor test proceedure & peculiar methodology is outright nonsense. You can't pick & choose; it doesn't work that way. You either use EM or you don't. Hawksford has done a lot of good in other fields but this really wasn't one of them.
Last edited:
Maybe it is the chemicals you use. I remember removing one of the wipers in the switch of my TVC (guess which one...) and replaced it with a piece of litz wire. As the switch was already disassembled I also cleaned the contacts with Kontakt 60 cleaner. Back in service the preamp sounded like ****, highs were really getting on my nerves, worse than a 12dB peak at 7kHz. I figured the contact cleaner left a slightly conductive film (measurable...). Once cleaned the issue (both electrical and sound) was gone.
There are many types of silver wire. Your tone-arm may have silver litz wire (multi-strand). This will sound more balanced, compared to a solid core silver, or silver ribbons.
Silver ribbons will sound very good across a full audio spectrum, but this requires parallel runs of at least 2, preferably 3 ribbons for each signal "wire"
Annealing will completely change the sound of silver.
Pure silver - very fast sound, a lot of high-frequency extension and details
Pure copper - great mids
Gold-plated pure copper - great bass frequency extension
So, different combinations + various levels of annealing can tune the sound to suit individual listening preferences and various sound system setups/room acoustics
Silver will oxidize with time... silver oxide will bring the silver ribbon sound in to perfect balance, but this requires time.
... and then, you put all those wires in a shield braiding (but only if you really must, of course)... which now introduces capacitance/inductance into play from shield interactions with signal wires
Last edited:
It would appear that the placebo effect mentioned by mictester has not fully worked for Audio Arenaline!
Is it too silly to suggest obtaining phono splitters in order to experiment with running the old and new interconnects in parallel?
Can't do that. The capacitances of the two cables is now shared by them, and will be seen by both of the devices being fed.
Unfortunately Hawksford has a track record of using scientific words to write things which show errors in basic understanding. Writings in popular magazines which have not had the limited benefit of peer review will be particularly suspect. The fact that he is a staff member of a British university should not be taken as useful evidence of anything.dhsettim said:
The Poynting vector is often misused. All Poynting's theorem says is that if you integrate the normal component over a closed surface then it gives the total energy flow through that surface. It does not necessarily give the energy flow at any point in space, yet many people wrongly believe that it does and so reach false conclusions.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.