Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Do the following links provide empirical evidence of burn in?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Do the following links provide empirical evidence of burn in?

post #1 of 7
Thread Starter 
I saw these linked in a different post claiming they prove burn in. I'm wondering if it is the case, or if there is something inherently flawed in the methodology used.

How the Audax AP100Z0 loudspeaker drivers were broken-in and the T/S parameters measured.
Peerless XLS10 10" Subwoofer (830452) and Passive Radiator (830481)

I look forward to your responses, especially since I'm not actually sure what parameters exactly were being measured.
post #2 of 7
(I did not read the links) Mechanical devices, like loudspeakers, have a burn in process. After manufacturing, the suspension components have a degree of mechanical stiffness that will reduce after they start flexing while being used. I suspect this will hold true for most headphone drivers also. Basically they are measuring the resonance charcteristics of the drivers, which changes as the suspension stiffness changes.

This is very different from the claimed electrical burn in of cables etc.
post #3 of 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by JxK View Post
I saw these linked in a different post claiming they prove burn in. I'm wondering if it is the case,
It is. At least for three days of non-stop playback. Someone once claimed that if the speakers were to rest for some days, they would return to their initial state. I never saw any measurement to back this up.

However, the result of this burn-in on the finished speakers is very small. At the threshold of audibility.
post #4 of 7
I'd like to point out that these are very cheap drivers (5 pounds each they say?) and that it's not at all strange that they would deteriorate quickly from constant, non-standard use. I mean, even fairly well made drivers shouldn't be left on over night

Anyway, I see a lot of numbers, but I don't see any testing to see if the difference is humanly audible. Just signs that the machine has been damaged from constant use.
post #5 of 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chef View Post
Anyway, I see a lot of numbers, but I don't see any testing to see if the difference is humanly audible. Just signs that the machine has been damaged from constant use.
On one hand, the more the burn-in of the speakers goes on, the closer to the specs they are.

On the other hand, JBL agrees with you : speakers don't burn-in, they age.
post #6 of 7
Same with car engines - they won't make maximum power until damaged from constant use.
post #7 of 7
Certain designs can burn-in, but you're usually talking large subwoofers with potentially poor quality damping.

I question that if a headphone is properly designed it would burn in. For example, the K701. The damping on it is solid, and the mass is dismal. How is this to take a toll on the surround that will even begin to measure?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Do the following links provide empirical evidence of burn in?