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 14

post #196 of 261
Thread Starter 

Sorry, can't figure that one out, but if you google

 

ninja mania sony MDR CD900ST

 

and ninja mania akg k324p

 

they are the first results.

post #197 of 261

The "forum"s editor is crap, that's what happened. It tampers with everything you enter, including hyperlinks it seems.

post #198 of 261

I have only owned one pair of decent phones, unless you count some 30 dollar Koss's before these MDR-XD400.

 

During certain albums, which contain sustained bass tones throughout, at certain listening levels I will realize after a while the music is LOUD, especially the bass. I felt the cups and they were warm. It seems as if the drivers heat up a little, softening the surround and cone, or maybe changing the electrical properties of the system, but it leads to freer movement of the drivers. This in turn, I guess leads to faster heating due to more flexing/friction of the surround.

 

My question is whether different levels or content, played during the burn in period, would affect the specific way the drivers burn in? Near the beginning of the thread, a physicist mentioned epoxy curing continuously or past the date of first use, stiffening the connection between the coil and cone. If the material is allowed to heat, it surely would permanently affect the final product, shaped differently as more solvent or whatever changes during the curing process evaporates or reacts at different rates closer to the surface of the air/material interface than inside of it. It probably all ends up evening out, but in the realm where $1k analog cables make a difference to some ears, a way bigger one would be introduced within the mechanical properties of the transducer itself.


Edited by k00zk0 - 9/16/10 at 5:12am
post #199 of 261

Bump for new article relevant to the topic.

 

http://www.headfonia.com/test-burn-in-and-production-variations/

post #200 of 261
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anaxilus View Post

Bump for new article relevant to the topic.

 

http://www.headfonia.com/test-burn-in-and-production-variations/


It would have been more interesting with a blinded component to the test.  Why?  Some didn't notice a difference between the two burnt in versions.  The same question applies for the two before the new version was burnt in.

 

 

I don't think this can truly be proven either way.  If you believe in burn-in, burn away.  If you don't, then enjoy your cans straight from the box.  I sit in wonder at the fuss over this.  Must be just the fun of discussing it?


Edited by aimlink - 10/17/10 at 1:32pm
post #201 of 261

Fun Facts about Absolute Pitch:

 

An absolute listener's sense of hearing is typically no keener than that of a non-absolute ("normal") listener. Absolute pitch does not depend upon a refined ability to perceive and discriminate gradations of sound frequencies, but upon detecting and categorizing a subjective perceptual quality typically referred to as "chroma".

 

Speakers of European languages have been found to make use of an absolute, though subconscious, pitch memory when speaking.

 

Researchers have been trying to teach absolute pitch ability in laboratory settings for more than a century, and various commercial absolute-pitch training courses have been offered to the public since the early 1900s. However, no adult has ever been documented to have acquired absolute listening ability, as all adults who have undergone AP training have failed, when formally tested, to show "an unqualified level of accuracy... comparable to that of AP possessors".

 

Many musicians have quite good relative pitch, a skill which can be learned. With practice, it is possible to listen to a single known pitch once (from a pitch pipe or a tuning fork) and then have stable, reliable pitch identification by comparing the notes heard to the stored memory of the tonic pitch. Unlike absolute pitch, this skill is dependent on a recently perceived tonal center.

 

One out of every ten thousand have an Absolute Pitch, not counting East Asians, autistic individuals and people born with optic nerve hypoplasia.

post #202 of 261
Quote:
Originally Posted by Albedo View Post

Fun Facts about Absolute Pitch:

 

An absolute listener's sense of hearing is typically no keener than that of a non-absolute ("normal") listener. Absolute pitch does not depend upon a refined ability to perceive and discriminate gradations of sound frequencies, but upon detecting and categorizing a subjective perceptual quality typically referred to as "chroma".

 

Speakers of European languages have been found to make use of an absolute, though subconscious, pitch memory when speaking.

 

Researchers have been trying to teach absolute pitch ability in laboratory settings for more than a century, and various commercial absolute-pitch training courses have been offered to the public since the early 1900s. However, no adult has ever been documented to have acquired absolute listening ability, as all adults who have undergone AP training have failed, when formally tested, to show "an unqualified level of accuracy... comparable to that of AP possessors".

 

Many musicians have quite good relative pitch, a skill which can be learned. With practice, it is possible to listen to a single known pitch once (from a pitch pipe or a tuning fork) and then have stable, reliable pitch identification by comparing the notes heard to the stored memory of the tonic pitch. Unlike absolute pitch, this skill is dependent on a recently perceived tonal center.

 

One out of every ten thousand have an Absolute Pitch, not counting East Asians, autistic individuals and people born with optic nerve hypoplasia.

 

Good stuff right there.  Post more Albedo!
 

post #203 of 261
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anaxilus View Post

Bump for new article relevant to the topic.

 

http://www.headfonia.com/test-burn-in-and-production-variations/


A flawed article. It continually refers to the new headphone as if it means the old (burned in one). There is clearly a mix up here "If the new unit was inferior in instrument separation, now it pretty much equals the new one."

 

For me the really interesting part is when, crucially it states "the difference due to the burn-in is even more marginal than the production batch difference." So why do we even bother with discussions on burn in when there is apparently a greater difference between two new headphones? If that was the case why are there not huge threads on quality control with manufacturing headphones?

post #204 of 261
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prog Rock Man View Post

For me the really interesting part is when, crucially it states "the difference due to the burn-in is even more marginal than the production batch difference." So why do we even bother with discussions on burn in when there is apparently a greater difference between two new headphones? If that was the case why are there not huge threads on quality control with manufacturing headphones?

 

When you say 'quality control', are you referring to ensuring that two of the same model headphones should sound the same?  If this is so, within the scope of current manufacturing methodology and the fact that we can't have two identical pieces of the same material, will two headphones that seem identical ever sound the same? 
 

post #205 of 261

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anaxilus View Post

Good stuff right there.  Post more Albedo!


What the point.. scientific bent people only consider blind-ABX as the only reasonable test, but subconsciousness is and always will be flabbergasted by a plethora of blind test that eliminates that aspect of hearing. As noted before with Europeans and their subconscious pitch memory and that none has ever acquired AP with training... what's more to say about that matter?

 

Reason is a lie...

post #206 of 261
Thread Starter 


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Albedo View Post

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anaxilus View Post

Good stuff right there.  Post more Albedo!


What the point.. scientific bent people only consider blind-ABX as the only reasonable test, but subconsciousness is and always will be flabbergasted by a plethora of blind test that eliminates that aspect of hearing. As noted before with Europeans and their subconscious pitch memory and that none has ever acquired AP with training... what's more to say about that matter?

 

Reason is a lie...


Eh? Are there racial reasons why people fail blind tests now!?

post #207 of 261

No, I'm only referring to documented info. nothing racial about it... as one born in Africa scores lower on an IQ-test doesn't make me a KKK-member. It's cultural, not genetics. Do you see the implications of AP and the subconsciousness vs. blind-ABX testing?

 

..what is your somewhat misplaced "provoked" reaction coming from? (not racial sentiments... that's for sure), what's so disturbing and in dire need of instant classification?


Edited by Albedo - 10/18/10 at 12:18pm
post #208 of 261
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prog Rock Man View Post

Eh? Are there racial reasons why people fail blind tests now!?

 

No, I believe he was referring to the development of Western language results in differing listening attributes than in Eastern Asian cultures.  The best example is English which has no accents versus Vietnamese which was converted to use Western phonetics from Asian characters and has a plethora of accents any of which change the meaning of a word drastically.  European isn't a race btw.   
 

post #209 of 261
Thread Starter 

I put my hands up to not really following what you are saying Albedo. How is absolute pitch connected to blind tests?

post #210 of 261

Relative pitch is dependent on a recently perceived tonal center, but pitch memory is subconscious and very much at change depending on the current environment. In alchemy we have sulphur and quicksilver, dissolution and coagulation, not making the slightest sense science wise, but what about our feelings?

 

Saying helló (going up at the end means your glad), hellò (going down, what? not glad to see me, too hurtful -> feeling delegated to the subconsciousness). As for rigourous blind tests, it's what people consciously discerns throughout a greater time span (crystallized, end product, summa summarum)  than just one feeling.. like trying to catch lightning with glue, one gets entangled in a system (dead, slow, stable, center...)

 

Boring and all equipment tends to sound the same... ego-bounded/ narcissistic thoughts dominate, a shift of the current feeling of proving that's a fact within a very limited view of eternity? Sub specie aeternitatis. LOL!

 

In the wind of the mind arises the turbulence
called I.
It breaks; down shower the barren thoughts.
All life is choked.

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'.