IE8 burn-in: Mass Hysteria? - Page 3

What you got from Headroom wasn't evidence that "burn in" doesn'r occur. It was merely evidence that doesn't show burn in to occur. This is important - a negative observation cannot prove or disprove a negative, it can only fail to support the positive.

The "evidence" that "burn in" doesn't occur is that, given the laws of physics and acoustics as we understand them today, there is no reason to expect it to occur. Those who believe in it are, therefore, the ones who must assume the burden of providing some evidence in it's favour. Those who disbelieve are taking the orthodox position and have no need to prove ie8 burn in doesn't occur, because that is what the state of the art suggests.

If I tell you that there exists a peacock that is invisible, then it is up to me to provide the invisible peacock for study. Observing a million, or a billion, or however many visible peacocks one likes does not disprove in any way that there are no invisible peacocks.

If I do not believe in invisible peacocks it is not up to me to prove that there are no invisible peacocks because I am taking the orthodox position. I cannot prove there are no invisible peacocks no matter what I do, but you can prove that there are by simply providing one for examination. Therefore the burden of proof justly lies with you, not me.

Similarly it is not, I think, up to me to prove that there is no IE8 burn in since there is currently no scientifically pursuasive evidence that there is. It is up to those who claim it exists to provide that evidence, and anecdotes are not evidence.

No one can ever prove that something does not exist and so no one can ever prove that burn-in does not exist. Once can merely ask for credible evidence that it does exist, and be willing to change one's mind if such evidence is produced. Which evidence, history suggests, is highly unlikely to be produced.

I am one of those who wants to really believe the theory of burn-in to make my phones sound better but I have not seen the evidence as of yet. I feel envious of those say my phone finally opened up after x hours of burn in, & etc. You are the lucky one.

Surprissing that so many of you dont believe in burn in. I know for a fact that my ears are not playing tricks on me since I know for a fact that a earphone that has sibilance cant have it disappear after a night of playing pink noise.

I have personally found the sound changing after burn-in in 5 out of my 6 headphones. (PL-30, PL-12, RE1, Sennheiser HD650 and Sennheiser HD201).
Only the Pro 2 PH-1000 headphones have had the same sound even after 2 years.

You are welcom. Thank you for bring the treath out.

I have read thround the whole posts. Some comments like " blindman and elephant story". Who have never seen the elephant to describe what the elephone like by touching.

why there are have no meetin of mind? Because most of us have no enough sharp ear to detect the difference of pre and after burn in of the phones or audio device.

One of my friend who is core audiophile who just let his home audo rigs run all year round for burn in!! He he tell me he can feel the difference of "warm up" sound to the just start up sound.

There is another saying, Machine is a machine which don'd listen too much music as human, Why we must refer to the machine's testing parameter?

Burn in = 10% physical + 90% mental . IMHO. BTW, I just made up the precentage.


Try this. put away your earphones for 'several months' and try to 'erase' any knowledge of it's sound signature. Then listened to it again. Describe how it sound like, the moment the music is playing.

I might be wrong.
TQ.

i have already compared a burned in IE8 and an out of the box IE8 side by side and i can clearly tell that there is a huge difference between the two. the out of the box IE8 has muddy, flabby bass, and the highs were very recessed and also lacks the sparkle. switching between the two is like night and day.

scrane - this was not directed at you, sorry about that. I do believe in IE8 burn-in. I just meant this thread will now become what the other one did with a few posters who absolutely will not believe in burn-in and make it their mission to turn us ALL into non-believers.

No you don't know that for a fact. You may sincerely believe it but you don't know it for a fact. Actually we know for a fact that what you deny can be so happens all the time and has been reliably observed to happen.

There is nothing special about you in that regard. Science has shown that we are all quite easily foolable, including me.

Morever we know for a fact that every time you listen to a decent stereo system and hear a stereo image your ears and brain do in fact fool you into hearing something that just isn't there. In the real external world there is no stereo image at all. There are only two or more speakers playing independantly.

It is purely a product of our ears and brain. Without the fact that you can be so fooled stereo would not be possible.

I have no mission whatsoever to turn you or anybody else into a believer of any kind. Your suggestiong that I or anyone else does in just an invalid attack upon the person.

I do not believe in burn-in because, simply and straightforwardly, there is no evidence that it exists, nor any good reason to believe that it does. I will change my mind a soon as someone provides convincing evidence that I am wrong. Personal anecdotes, however, are not evidence.

But in the case you cited, the evidence is not evidence that there is no burn in. No evidence that burn in does not exist was provided by that example, merely a lack of evidence that it does exist.

I certianly hope for my own sake that there is actual improvement after burn-in of these IEM's.

The reason: When brand new, my IEMs sounded really muddy (and I actually compared them to the Bose IE) but after some period of time, the sound improved dramatically. And, if that improvement was actually my "hearing" burning in, and not the IEM's, well, then, I cannot really trust my hearing anymore.

It'd be like a food critic who realized that they really have no tastebuds, but that everything was in their mind.

If we assume that sound changes due to IE8 burn in effects are not measurable then there is no chance to ever prove an IE8 burn in effect. In this case the claim to provide evidence for IE8 burn in would not accomplishable. In this case the claim to prove existence would be as meaningless as the claim to prove non-existence of burn in.

If we assume IE8 burn in effects should be measurable for every IE8 then this measurement (possibly) provides evidence that IE8 burn in does not exist.