New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

IEM break-in not necessary? - Page 2

post #16 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott549 View Post
Why doesn't anyone ever think the sound gets worse when they burn in? Shouldn't they get better 50% of the time and worse 50% of the time?

I just wish people would think scientifically about this.
There are scientific explanations out there. Just search the forums, and you should find some explanations that'll satsify your curiosity.

But regardless, unless you've burned in headphones or IEMs before (like serious burning-in, and listening at various intervals) or have done A/Bing with a new pair and a burned in pair, you won't really appreciate, much less understand the burn-in concept.
post #17 of 22
As far as I have been able to tell, burn-in has never been established in any valid scientific study to be caused by physical changes to the earphone, headphone or speaker.

It's funny that people are so reluctant to want to think the changes are in their brain rather than in the headphone itself. Why should it matter? The facts are the facts.
post #18 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott549 View Post
As far as I have been able to tell, burn-in has never been established in any valid scientific study to be caused by physical changes to the earphone, headphone or speaker.

It's funny that people are so reluctant to want to think the changes are in their brain rather than in the headphone itself. Why should it matter? The facts are the facts.
Ah, don't go there...you'll completely derail another thread with the Great Debate.
post #19 of 22
Let me add one thing. If the physical burn-in were real, the manufacturers would surely know about it. And if they knew about it, they would put notes about "burn in" in their instruction manuals, because they would not want people giving up on their products before they burned in.

I suspect many of the people who believe the physical burn-in concept also think $1,000 cables make their speakers sound better.
post #20 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott549 View Post
Let me add one thing. If the physical burn-in were real, the manufacturers would surely know about it. And if they knew about it, they would put notes about "burn in" in their instruction manuals, because they would not want people giving up on their products before they burned in.

I suspect many of the people who believe the physical burn-in concept also think $1,000 cables make their speakers sound better.
Many manufacturers do acknowledge that their phones need some burn-in. So what if they don't put it in the manuals?
post #21 of 22
Thread Starter 
At the risk of over-generalizing, perhaps its safe to say that armature-powered earphones do not benefit significantly from burn-in, while dynamic driver versions see a bit more. Of course, at the size we are talking about and the excursion of the dynamic driver's surround being incredibly small, I don't think there is a huge "burn-in." It's really going to take a larger, full-size headphone driver for maximum effect. The debate rages...
post #22 of 22
Burn-in also applies to balanced armature based earphones. The extent of the changes varies a lot depending on the armature in question. Some IEM manufacturers burn-in the earphones before shipping, which actually serves two purposes. One of course to make them sound their best and it also works as a stress test to hopefully prevent faulty earphone drivers from entering the market.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav: