Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Tyll testing confirms: Burn-in is clearly audible
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Tyll testing confirms: Burn-in is clearly audible - Page 6  

post #76 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by koolkat View Post

Optical illusions.

 



 


No.

 


 

 

post #77 of 86

An optical illusion proves that your brain can be easily tricked into imagining things.

 

 

post #78 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by koolkat View Post

An optical illusion proves that your brain can be easily tricked into imagining things.

 

 

 

backhand.gif

 

That's so vague I'm surprised I even responded the first time.

 

-Daniel

 

 

post #79 of 86

IMO, burn in definietly happens, whether for good or bad, depends on personal tastes and different headphone models

 

post #80 of 86

Could you get any denser? ಠ_ಠ

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by BournePerfect View Post

-Daniel

 

I'm going to say this once more.

Your brain, can be easily tricked into imagining things.

 

Evidence: Optical Illusions. A million and one examples. Google it.

Evidence: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYTlN6wjcvQ Skip to 08:00 

 

Surely someone who "can get out out of bed and dress themselves in the morning without convincing themselves that maybe they're still dreaming"

is immune to optical and aural illusions. Also, because they've relied on their hearing to provide for their families for over 20 years surely their hearing

is perfect and immune to aural illusions. 

 

HA!

 

http://www.head-fi.org/t/570794/tyll-testing-confirms-burn-in-is-clearly-audible/30

 

Read Gregorio's comment. 

 

 

 

 

post #81 of 86

Show me where an optical illusion (brain trick) equates to this supposed brain burn in people refer to?? Maybe you're brain was tricked into thinking they are the same thing-especially when one is in the audio realm, and the other optical? I'm well aware of what an optical illusion is-same as anyone else who has passed 3rd grade. Unfortunately that isn't part of this discussion, so I'm not gonna bother trying to refute optical illusions-it's simply not the topic at hand. Are you dense?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

lemme be, woman!.gif

 

-Daniel


Edited by BournePerfect - 9/10/11 at 1:54pm
post #82 of 86
An optical illusion isn't seeing what's not there, it's misinterpreting what's seen. Tyll's measurements showed small but consistent changes in response with one and only one model, which still may have been pre-burnt by the mfr, despite his assurances that "It's not likely." This jury is waiting for tests on other medium-priced headphones that are definitely not pre-played by the mfr on an automatic test bench.
post #83 of 86

Koolkat I think a good example of brain burn-in terms of visual sensation would be the "upsidedown" glasses experiment in which someone wears a pair of glasses that mirror image one's vision vertically. After so many days the brain deconditions its natural tendency to invert the image and the viewer sees the world as right side up while wearing the glasses, but upside down when removed. You could also consider the example of acquired tastes in music and food as "brain burn in". An optical illusion would suggest a more immediate misinterpretation of a correct stimulus.

post #84 of 86

Well my point is your brain's not immune to bias.

Optical illusions show that. Aural illusions show that.

 

There's a lot of comments like these : "I know my ears aren't lying because I'm hearing this and all you nut-jobs are too dependent on numbers and technology".

Which is pure nonsense. Brain burn-in could just as easily be yourself adjusting to the headphone's sound signature, wear and tear, or a combination of both.

 

You might think that your hearing is perfect and that there was no way burn-in could've been inyohead, but subconsciously, who knows? You could've adjusted

to the harsh highs on a pair of Grados or AKGs. You get conditioned to hearing the harshness, it seems to smooth itself out after a few months. Could've also

been some changes on a really tiny scale which in turn resulted in sonic differences.

 

If anything, and this has been said before, the experiment Tyll conducted shows that he could tell 2 headphones apart. In an ideal world, all AKG K701s would

be identical to each other, so conducting a burn-in experiment would be much easier. 

 

Personally, I think burn-in is overrated, over-exaggerated and over-emphasized.

 

 

Note* I would engage in a childish online meme posting competition, but I've been cautioned a couple of times here. One more and I'm sent off, lol.  

 

 

 

 


Edited by koolkat - 9/10/11 at 2:35pm
post #85 of 86

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by koolkat View Post

 

 

Personally, I think burn-in is overrated, over-exaggerated and over-emphasized.

 


 

It's important to note that Tyll has basically said the same thing as well. Also, it's not necessarily an apt comparison, but the brain does adjust our hearing very quickly. We tune out background noise  like our lives depend on it.

post #86 of 86

Replace optical illusion with cognitive illusion and you have a valid argument, however an argument from ignorance only highlights your incoherent attitude.

 

Those that have successfully blind tested between two phones are ignored on an incorrect scientific basis, or told all phones are not created equal. It's trivial babble to dig themselves out of the corner they find themselves in, this trivial babble is self-evident.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
This thread is locked  
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Tyll testing confirms: Burn-in is clearly audible