Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › My theory as to why headphones appear to 'burn in'.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

My theory as to why headphones appear to 'burn in'. - Page 10

post #136 of 261

Prog rock man, merely speculations. You use the word "conclude" and "conclusion" incorrectly. There is very little conclusions you can draw from those tests, but if you look at the second Nousaine one, the author does believe in permanent break-in.

 

I'm unsubscribing this thread btw.

post #137 of 261

Many of these anti-cable people seems to be fanatic on the level of fundamentalistic religious beliefs..

It's the "if you don't see it our way, you're wrong" attitude.

post #138 of 261
Thread Starter 

Again , this article finds measurements were the same before and after the manufacturers recommended break in period. It also has a claim an engineer stated there is a break in period, of a few seconds only as the speaker is checked during quality control.

 

http://bruce.coppola.name/audio/BurnInLegend.pdf

post #139 of 261
Thread Starter 

This is a brilliant article where Hif Matrix wrote to numerous speaker makers and asked them about burn in. The variation in responses is fascinating...

 

http://www.matrixhifi.com/ENG_contenedor_rodajealtavoces.htm

post #140 of 261
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrProggie View Post

Many of these anti-cable people seems to be fanatic on the level of fundamentalistic religious beliefs..

It's the "if you don't see it our way, you're wrong" attitude.


Nope just following the evidence. It just so happens that the evidence leads to the conclusion that burn in does not exist as audiophiles claim it does. Haloxt asked for evidence, so I have found some and he withdraws from the thread. If it was me and Haloxt countered my theory with evidence, I would have happily announced my theory to be proven wrong.

 

MrProggie, your comments just make me all the more determined to find evidence, whether or not that evidence backs me up or not.

post #141 of 261

Nice, I'll read that pdf tomorrow. And hopefully I can find some time to dig up headphone burn-in measurements - I should have bookmarked every single one I stumbled upon..

post #142 of 261
Thread Starter 

EDITED -  on a second reading there were no actual measurements to back up what was being said.

 


Edited by Prog Rock Man - 8/22/10 at 1:46pm
post #143 of 261
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prog Rock Man View Post

Again , this article finds measurements were the same before and after the manufacturers recommended break in period. It also has a claim an engineer stated there is a break in period, of a few seconds only as the speaker is checked during quality control.

 

http://bruce.coppola.name/audio/BurnInLegend.pdf

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prog Rock Man View Post

This is a brilliant article where Hif Matrix wrote to numerous speaker makers and asked them about burn in. The variation in responses is fascinating...

 

http://www.matrixhifi.com/ENG_contenedor_rodajealtavoces.htm


I think its hilarious you cite these links as some sort of gospel proving speakers don't burn-in.  The fact that you see no problems w/ the test(s) that Mr. Coppola did and that somehow both articles lead to your espoused conclusion is laughable.  If you really are a lawyer I hope it's in Real Estate.  Heaven help anyone on Death Row who might be depending on your analysis. 

 

And comparing subwoofers in enclosures and extrapolating conclusions to open full range headphones?!  Really?  There is not enough adequate methodology, analysis or sampling in the least bit to support your claim...'headphone burn-in is nonsense'.

 

I like how you claim Haloxt withdrew because of your evidence.  Post hoc ergo propter hoc counselor, tsk, tsk....

post #144 of 261
Thread Starter 


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anaxilus View Post

I think its hilarious you cite these links as some sort of gospel proving speakers don't burn-in.  The fact that you see no problems w/ the test(s) that Mr. Coppola did and that somehow both articles lead to your espoused conclusion is laughable.  If you really are a lawyer I hope it's in Real Estate.  Heaven help anyone on Death Row who might be depending on your analysis.

 

And comparing subwoofers in enclosures and extrapolating conclusions to open full range headphones?!  Really?  There is not enough adequate methodology, analysis or sampling in the least bit to support your claim...'headphone burn-in is nonsense'.

 

I like how you claim Haloxt withdrew because of your evidence.  Post hoc ergo propter hoc counselor, tsk, tsk....


It is not gospel, no matter what you think, it is just evidence. I would hope that someone with more science than me would come and give a proper critique as I have just gone by the conclusions which appear consistent with the measurements.

 

I acknowledge the articles are about subwoofers and speakers other than headphones. It seams reasonable to me that the speakers in headphones will behave in the same way.

 

I have re read what I said about Haloxt and sorry, it was not worded well, I was meaning that it is a shame he has gone just as I get some evidence together.

post #145 of 261
Thread Starter 

A post from this forum where JaZZ measured various speakers and the differences he found

 

http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/51840/burn-in-techniques/30#post_593776

post #146 of 261
Thread Starter 

Some measurements of a woofer during burn in which contradict the first evidence that I linked to. Here it is shown (confirmation anyone?) that the woofer did not return to its original settings on cooling down. Mention is also made of the 'spider' which is also mentioned in the original links. It is a stretched cloth dipped in epoxy which cracks during use and so gets more pliable. Is that present in all speakers, including headphones?

 

http://www.gr-research.com/burnin.htm

 

Here is another test which goes in favour of burn in does exist. Again it is with woofers.

 

http://www.gr-research.com/myths.htm

 

So have I been barking up the wrong tree with woofers? Why is that all the test are with woofers?

 


Edited by Prog Rock Man - 8/23/10 at 5:49am
post #147 of 261
Thread Starter 

Copied from a previous thread here on burn in (now locked) It is the view of Harbeth's owner on burn in....

 

"The other thing that is common throughout your experiences is you and your ears. It your ears that are being 'broken-in' (burned-in), or to say that in a more friendly way, your ears are acclimatising to the new sound.

So what is actually going-on inside your brain during this acclimatisation process with other speakers? Simple: your subconscious mind is hearing various acoustic problems which your conscious mind is suppressing. To draw a comparison which also illustrates the way we are programed by evolution - you start to date a pretty girl. For several dates everything is great but slowly your subconscious mind starts to identify characteristics of her nature or personality which your conscious mind has been deliberately suppressing. She is so pretty that you are carried along on a little fluffy cloud of admiration. But inevitably, at some stage in the relationship as you say maybe hundreds of hours later, either your conscious mind wins through and you live happily ever after or your subconscious mind finally takes dominance, casts the deciding vote and you split with the girl. The subconscious mind is far stronger than the conscious one, but it moves slowly. The subconscious works on the conscious mind like woodworm in oak; it always wins given enough time.

The "burn-in process" does not exist in any real technical sense as I've said here before. It is a marketing man's way of countering your subconscious mind whispering "there is something wrong with these speakers". Those 'something wrong' signatures may be directly measurable - too bright, too hard, too much bass etc. or they may be more subtle colourations that are invisible in the basic acoustic measurements. In any event, this conscious/subconscious battle has to run its course; it can not be accelerated. The best solution is not to waste time fighting speakers with latent problems.

__________________
Alan A. Shaw
Designer, owner
Harbeth Audio UK

Quote:

I have explained the reality of the so-called burn-in issue. As far as loudspeakers that I know of are concerned, the issue is 100% in the mind. It is entirely about acclimatisation. I am so sure of this that I am willing to eat any Harbeth speaker that you or anyone else can demonstrate changes its character after a so-called burn in.

This is one of those wretched non-issues that has been hijacked by marketeers as a cover for poor speaker design. They've cunningly switched the responsibility from the designer to the consumer saying 'if you, the consumer can't hear how wonderful these speakers are then you, the consumer are in the wrong'. In fact, the design is wrong.

Speaking as a designer, it is 100% my responsibility - my duty, my job to design you a speaker that you will enjoy from the moment you open the carton. It is not your responsibility to have to endure some half-baked, ill-conceived excuse for a quality speaker for hundreds of hours until you are so ground down by the experience that you can't tell right from wrong. Sorry, but that's the reality - poor design covered-up by marketing BS: that's the top and bottom of the 'burn-in' fantasy!

=============================

P.S. I've been thinking through my own listening experiences over many years. It's occurred to me that mine are the completely opposite of the burn-in brigade that you mention. The BIB you say is often seduced over a long period of acclimatisation (or maybe not) - that is, the more they listen the less faults they hear; the less pimples, spots and blemishes they notice on their new speaker girlfriends. However, during either my own product design and development phase (or evaluating other speakers) my personal experience is the exact opposite of the BIB's. Initially I am under my new design's mesmeric spell, because I've created this beautiful baby and it charms me ... but the more I listen the less the spell binds me, the more issues I can hear. Sometimes it takes hours, sometimes days and in the case of a complex speaker months for them to bubble up from my subconscious. Then one has to roll up ones sleeves and resolve those subtle and concealed problems until finally the design is truly ready to go to market. Unresolved issues irritate me. They're unprofessional. But I have the huge luxury of being my own judge, juror and executioner. I never invite anyone to listen at any time during the design phase over perhaps a year or more. How could a brief exposure to a well intentioned visitor contribute meaningfully to the design cycle when it's taken me innumerable hours to identify issues? But that's not the way anyone else I know works - they have pressure form other departments and hence the outcome is a speaker designed by committee with latent technical issues that nobody takes ownership of. And those are the ones that you need to acclimatise to. Not a Harbeth.
__________________
Alan A. Shaw
Designer, owner
Harbeth Audio UK"

post #148 of 261

 

I'm still on your side and I think Alan nailed it.  It's simple marketing playing on audiophile fears.  Burn-in=BS.

 

How is it that none of the "believers" hear the burn-in during a song???  

 

The one point I'd argue with Alan on is the definition of "wrong" when it comes to a loudspeaker.  I've not heard the perfect speaker and all of the ones that I've owned have done certain things differently but I'm not sure I'd call any of them "wrong".

 

Bill

post #149 of 261
Thread Starter 

I agree that there is potentially a factor of speaker companies playing to the market. The Hifi Matrix link where they e-mailed different makers even had Thiel reply that 'audiophiles state it takes 30 hours'.

post #150 of 261
Thread Starter 

So this thread turned out to be a bit of a car crash. I am sorry about calling burn in 'nonsense' in the original post and anything else that made it appear I was laying down the law for others to follow. That was counterproductive and clearly got peoples backs up. It was also unintentional.

 

With my limited knowledge I have read through the various tests and the article I have linked to and would, IMHO conclude

 

- manufacturers themselves do not agree whether burn in exists or not with their own speakers (HifiMatrix article)

 

- there are mechanical changes with speakers (all of the tests linked to)

 

- those mechanical changes do reverse to one degree or another after use.

 

- it is not clear how long the reversal takes. Audioholics and one of Tom Nouaine's tests left the speakers for much longer after use than they were left in other tests. It is clear that the less time between the end of the test and the measurements, the more likely it is to find changes still present in the speaker.

 

 - we need more tests, particularly to confirm whether or not, given sufficient time all speakers will return to their original state after use and with headphone speakers.

 

- if all speakers do return to their original state after use, there is no burn in as commonly described by the audiophile. But, depending on how often you use a speaker, if it takes a day or so to return to its original state, your use of of it may mean that it never has a chance to return to the original state. So, in that case there is burn in.

 

- in any case, to what extent are the changes audible, particularly in terms of improving sound quality?

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › My theory as to why headphones appear to 'burn in'.