Hi
I chop and change my system around a lot whilst tweaking, and am positive most of the IC's I use have never reached a state of reasonable burned-in-ness.
I've been thinking for a good while that there must be a cheap and easy way to make a burn in device using an AC to AC low voltage adaptor and a suitable resistor.
I think for these purposes something like a 6v AC adaptor would do the trick for interconnects (probably a fair bit more for speaker wires!)... connecting the positive and negative on the pin and screen of, say, a phono plug at one end, but I'm not sure about what resistor to employ for attaching across the "far end".
Does anyone have any thoughts on this as an idea? Has this already been discussed elsewhere on the internet that anyone knows about?
Cheers in advance!
I chop and change my system around a lot whilst tweaking, and am positive most of the IC's I use have never reached a state of reasonable burned-in-ness.
I've been thinking for a good while that there must be a cheap and easy way to make a burn in device using an AC to AC low voltage adaptor and a suitable resistor.
I think for these purposes something like a 6v AC adaptor would do the trick for interconnects (probably a fair bit more for speaker wires!)... connecting the positive and negative on the pin and screen of, say, a phono plug at one end, but I'm not sure about what resistor to employ for attaching across the "far end".
Does anyone have any thoughts on this as an idea? Has this already been discussed elsewhere on the internet that anyone knows about?
Cheers in advance!
Hi.
Have your tried the Cable forum at www.audioasylum.com ?
I'm sure those guys will help you in getting your cables to a complete burned-in-ness state.
J.Guilherme
Have your tried the Cable forum at www.audioasylum.com ?
I'm sure those guys will help you in getting your cables to a complete burned-in-ness state.
J.Guilherme
Hi RBBB
Sometime ago i wrote a simple prog for an AVR which generates square waves within the audio band. At that time i was also in need of a good break-in device but strangely never had a reason to use it once completed
It seems like 1kHz square wave, 10v p-p at some reasonable current (10-20mA) may be sufficient for ICs and connectors. It is very easy to make a square wave generator for a fixed frequency and boost its power with a small chip amp.
Sometime ago i wrote a simple prog for an AVR which generates square waves within the audio band. At that time i was also in need of a good break-in device but strangely never had a reason to use it once completed
It seems like 1kHz square wave, 10v p-p at some reasonable current (10-20mA) may be sufficient for ICs and connectors. It is very easy to make a square wave generator for a fixed frequency and boost its power with a small chip amp.
analog_sa said:
Great info thanks, and your talk of square waves got me thinking about the studio full of synths I've got... I've currently just wired a set from a synth output to a power amp input, left the power amp switched off, and "latched" an arpeggiator of the worlds most horrid square and sawtooth wave sound, at maximum volume and all osciallators to full.
Although it's nowhere near 10v, I expect it's still far higher than normal hifi volumes - and most of all, I can just leave it running over a weekend on its own... so perhaps that could prove faster than the usual hifi method?
Still interested in any DIY plans for cable cookers though.
Ridiculous ideas all.
The proper break in signal is music.
Simply get a pair of 50 watt, 8 ohm resistors. Disconnect the speakers and put the resistors in their place. Then, play a CD on continuous repeat at high level for 24+ hours.
Everything is broken in at the same time, resistors, wire, transistors, ICs, connectors, etc.
The proper break in signal is music.
Simply get a pair of 50 watt, 8 ohm resistors. Disconnect the speakers and put the resistors in their place. Then, play a CD on continuous repeat at high level for 24+ hours.
Everything is broken in at the same time, resistors, wire, transistors, ICs, connectors, etc.
Yes, the point was to construct a device which allows burn in without hifi, but I guess there's always someone has to tell you white is black.
My synth-loop burn in (this is a music signal, incidentally) seems to have worked well, left it on for 12 hours straight and its definately started to open up the silver ic's I'd left on there, and the frykleaner kit looks ideal, and I'm seriously considering ordering the kit for the smaller version (I don't really care about burning in speaker cables as they typically don't take the same amount of time as interconnects to to really settle down).
This could be the answer!
My synth-loop burn in (this is a music signal, incidentally) seems to have worked well, left it on for 12 hours straight and its definately started to open up the silver ic's I'd left on there, and the frykleaner kit looks ideal, and I'm seriously considering ordering the kit for the smaller version (I don't really care about burning in speaker cables as they typically don't take the same amount of time as interconnects to to really settle down).
This could be the answer!
Thanks for everyone's interest. I've bought the frykleaner half-kit as on a cost-to-convenience basis it's got to be the way forward!
My response to the dickwad who ruled that we should all use music only - my turntable has phono connections, and I've got a set of pure silvers on there, now, exactly HOW MANY years do you think it would take to burn them in at the puny phono level voltages involved?
Will we even still be using hifi by then? I don't think so.
My response to the dickwad who ruled that we should all use music only - my turntable has phono connections, and I've got a set of pure silvers on there, now, exactly HOW MANY years do you think it would take to burn them in at the puny phono level voltages involved?
Will we even still be using hifi by then? I don't think so.
Dickwad here.
If you burn in any wire or cable with a signal other than the type for which it will be used, it will become biased toward that type of signal. Burning in with noise or random stuff will actually make the wire a worse performer for music. Try it and you'll see. When the truth of the matter then becomes clear, you will want to reverse the direction of the wires/cables and un-burn them before burning them in properly.
As my long lost step-mother used to say, "Do it once, do it right, move on."
If you burn in any wire or cable with a signal other than the type for which it will be used, it will become biased toward that type of signal. Burning in with noise or random stuff will actually make the wire a worse performer for music. Try it and you'll see. When the truth of the matter then becomes clear, you will want to reverse the direction of the wires/cables and un-burn them before burning them in properly.
As my long lost step-mother used to say, "Do it once, do it right, move on."
If you wish to burn in signal level interconnects without damage Bill F is right, you have to use the kind of signal that the cables will be used for in their intended service application. It is possible however to shorten the burn-in time, not by using potentially damaging increased levels, but by playing faster music through the IC's. Playing 33 RPM albums at 78 RPM through your cables will halve the necessary burn-in time. Better yet, if you get a copy of one of the Chipmunk's albums and play it at 78 RPM you will cut your burn in time by 75%. This is not rocket science.
rcavictim said:
I can't agree with that. The Munks played at 78rpm will be severely bass shy unless it is warped. The burn in signal needs to be full range. I think an organ symphony would be a better choice if you're going the speed up route.
Come to think of it, if you arrange the wiring so the signal is always going downhill it will speed things up without bass loss.
Hmmm; organ symphony. I wonder if my wife is still awake.
I am pretty much new at the forum thing but personally I did not know about the burn in thing for cables. Although I have noticed differences in my cables after use (did not know why). I am interested in this post and I started thinking about the link in post 10
Lynn stated that the dielectrics of the cable being the cause and not the cable conductor?
If this is the case wouldn't the higher voltage greatly speed up the break in process and if the load was kept extremely low their would be very little possibility of damage to the cable. Even interconnect cables should safely handle significant voltage if they are not loaded. I mean not enough voltage or frequency to damage the insulation say 15 or so volts with like a 3 meg or so load at a fairly high frequency like Lynn stated.
I am not trying to say that any proven methods are wrong, but it can be hard to find out why the method works and to discredit other methods unless their are tests to prove them wrong. I would be interested if possibly someone with a great ear could tell the difference between a synthetically (speed up with voltage and freq) broke in cable and a natural one (normal music play). Kinda a blind sound test "the pepsi challange"
Lynn stated that the dielectrics of the cable being the cause and not the cable conductor?
If this is the case wouldn't the higher voltage greatly speed up the break in process and if the load was kept extremely low their would be very little possibility of damage to the cable. Even interconnect cables should safely handle significant voltage if they are not loaded. I mean not enough voltage or frequency to damage the insulation say 15 or so volts with like a 3 meg or so load at a fairly high frequency like Lynn stated.
I am not trying to say that any proven methods are wrong, but it can be hard to find out why the method works and to discredit other methods unless their are tests to prove them wrong. I would be interested if possibly someone with a great ear could tell the difference between a synthetically (speed up with voltage and freq) broke in cable and a natural one (normal music play). Kinda a blind sound test "the pepsi challange"
What Else Is New?
Hi,
Thanks for the link but this "discovery" is really nothing new; it seems closely related to what Dr. Pierre Johannet showed: static discharges from plastic materials used as insulators.
The proposed solution was to polarize the dielectric and this idea has been discussed on the forum. Whether it does away with the need for a burn-in period, uphill or down, I very much doubt.
It should however prevent the build-up of new static to a great extent due to manipulation by "users".
Here's what the local search engine dug up on the topic...not sure if that particular thread is part of the results but it should get you started anyway and....there's always the mighty google to find you more.
MDI
Cheers,
Hi,
Thanks for the link but this "discovery" is really nothing new; it seems closely related to what Dr. Pierre Johannet showed: static discharges from plastic materials used as insulators.
The proposed solution was to polarize the dielectric and this idea has been discussed on the forum. Whether it does away with the need for a burn-in period, uphill or down, I very much doubt.
It should however prevent the build-up of new static to a great extent due to manipulation by "users".
Here's what the local search engine dug up on the topic...not sure if that particular thread is part of the results but it should get you started anyway and....there's always the mighty google to find you more.
MDI
Cheers,
A Wheel's a Wheel Dammit
You perhaps misunderstand that that of which we in North America speak as a "discovery" refers to something discovered within the narrow range of inquiry afforded those who speak and read only English. When we say we discovered the wheel, we really think we discovered the wheel, as a wheel is evidently not a roue, a Rad, a rotella, a .....
fdegrove said:
You perhaps misunderstand that that of which we in North America speak as a "discovery" refers to something discovered within the narrow range of inquiry afforded those who speak and read only English. When we say we discovered the wheel, we really think we discovered the wheel, as a wheel is evidently not a roue, a Rad, a rotella, a .....
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.