Hmmm...Burn in test?

Go for it. I'd love to see the results!

You mean hear the results

Remember, if you guess it right 50% of the time it means you can't tell a difference. By the way you mentioned only one of the drivers are dead, are you doing this test with only one ear then?

Wouldn't you be able to infer which was which by just being able to tell if the headphones were on your head forwards or backwards? What about being able to tell L & R channels in whatever material you are listening to?

It would be inconclusive.

Not all drivers are exactly the same. There are manufacturing variances in every one. Manufacturers typically test drivers and then match pairs that sound alike.

There is every chance that your new driver won't sound like your old driver due to variance. Not the length of time it had been played. In other words, the new driver an old driver would have sounded different even at zero hours.

A better way to test "burn in" would be to give several pairs to someone. Some pairs would have several hundred or more hours on them and others would be unused. Then ask the person to "burn in" each pair and record notes of sound changes along the way.

The "burned in" pairs ought to show no change in the subjective listening while the new pairs won't. Assuming "burn in" is real, of course. My guess is that the participant would hear "burn in" in every pair and that proponents would interpret this as a sign that headphones continually age to perfection, like wine.

And if anyone believes that, I have some capacitors and resistors to sell you. I've removed them from old radio sets where they've been burned in for a good 50, 60 or 70 years. What could be better? Granted, they don't measure very well. The good news is that measurements are meaningless and test gear is not good enough to measure burn-in or the effects of cables. I'll be happy to apply ProGold to these compoments and I'll also drop them off at the local cryo facility for a $10 freeze. Of course, my time and labor mans that the cryo will cost you $200, but it's totally worth it.

Is it me or is there a recurring theme. When one is willing to do some form of blindtesting, a sceptic will intervene and propose a more '"accurate" methodology which involves ridiculous time and resource expenditure that is commonly not feasible to someone who merely wants to listen to headphones without compromise.

These same rational sceptics believe that their dismal attempts at humour will actually amuse anyone bar their fellow rational sympathisers.

If anyone feels the same as you I think they've all been chased off the sound science forum. I don't even bother reading what anti-burn-in skeptics say now because it's all the same reworded again and again, but after reading what the topic creator has suggested, his test could certainly use some... improvements . The main issue is that flipping the headphones backwards will automatically be audible or felt as different on the head, if you can somehow bypass this, the next issue would be differences in drivers from manufacturing which ought to be tested with objective measuring tools first to see how much of a difference there is.

After that my only suggestion is to videotape it with a well-positioned camera so your siblings or friends don't lie about the results, and use a coin in a container to dictate which way the headphones are to be put on your head. This isn't cheat-proof, but if you want to be an underfunded bold pioneer in sound science you have to at least appear not to be cheating.