Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Breaking-in headphones, the final verdict!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Breaking-in headphones, the final verdict! - Page 2

post #16 of 59

This has been debated so much I don't see the need of starting another thread.

 

I believe that some aspects of breaking in is psychological, but not all of it for sure.

post #17 of 59
Some drivers definitely break in. Ex. Magnums

Also, all drivers vary.
post #18 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrislangley4253 View Post

Some drivers definitely break in. Ex. Magnums


Do you have anything objective to support that claim?

 

post #19 of 59

Assuming the break-in is real, what evidence is there to support the idea that headphones actually sound better rather than worse after break-in?

post #20 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mauricio View Post

Assuming the break-in is real, what evidence is there to support the idea that headphones actually sound better rather than worse after break-in?


There isn't, but that tends to be the pattern. I've heard of 2 IEMs get worse with burn in, then better. Dunu Hephaes and Aurisonics ASG-1.

I believe in lots of forms of burn in: mechanical, tip/cushion, psychological, etc. the main reason I think headphones tend to sound better with time is that the cushions/tips tend to seal better with your ear or head with time. This better deal can only (normally) lead to a better fit which normally will lead to a better sound.
post #21 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by xnor View Post



Do you have anything objective to support that claim?

No. Just my experience with magnum drivers. As well as several other people, such as the man that builds the drivers. The magnums change a lot. You would just have to experience it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mauricio View Post

Assuming the break-in is real, what evidence is there to support the idea that headphones actually sound better rather than worse after break-in?

Well, it could certainly sound worse after break in. When magnums are in the process of of breaking in, the sound moves around.. then finally settles after about 300 hours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tinyman392 View Post

There isn't, but that tends to be the pattern. I've heard of 2 IEMs get worse with burn in, then better. Dunu Hephaes and Aurisonics ASG-1.
I believe in lots of forms of burn in: mechanical, tip/cushion, psychological, etc. the main reason I think headphones tend to sound better with time is that the cushions/tips tend tgoo seal better with your ear or head with time. This better deal can only (normally) lead to a better fit which normally will lead to a better sound.

Good theory with tips. Fit is so important with iems.
post #22 of 59

If you read the "reviews" and impressions threads here, they are replete with statements to the effect that the unit, be it a DAC or a headphone, "opened up" and sounded better after several hours of use.  In no instance has there been a person who's said that it sounded worse.  Me thinks people are hearing things due to self-suggestion rather than to real, perceivable differences.  Yet another instance of the illusions that pervade these so-called "reviews" around here.


Edited by Mauricio - 4/4/12 at 9:42am
post #23 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mauricio View Post

If you read the "reviews" and impressions threads here, they are repleted with statements to the effect that the unit, be it a DAC or a headphone, "opened up" and sounded better after several hours of use.  In no instance has there been one person who's said that it sounded worse.  Me thinks people are hearing things due to self-suggestion rather than to real, perceivable differences.  Yet another instance of the illusions that pervade these so-called "reviews" around here.

Yeah, your skepticism is probably right in most cases. Amps and dacs shouldn't burn in. Cables neither. Headphone drivers can, in my experience. I wish everyone could just hear what I heard with the magnums. The debate would be over. Oh well. I guess when it comes down to it. No harm in burning stuff in.
Edited by chrislangley4253 - 4/6/12 at 4:36pm
post #24 of 59
... Unless you're in the sound science forum and all you've got for your argument is "I heard it guys!". With all due respect, you are expected to elaborate on your testing and substantiate your claims with more than subjective experience.
post #25 of 59

Assuming burn in exists, what is it about it that makes everything generally better? If headphone manufacturers don't take it into account for the design and of their products, then any trend of perceived positive effects as opposed to negative will be purely accidental or imaginary. And if they do, then there will exist a technical paper that quantifies the effect

post #26 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by bellsprout View Post

Assuming burn in exists, what is it about it that makes everything generally better? 


As said, half of it is psychological. As for the other half, it hasn't been scientifically proven.

post #27 of 59

Everyone perceives sound differently , regardless if that variation is large or small. That means that even if you swear on your first born that you can't or can hear a difference , it will always be user subjective and never truly conclusive. Its pretty much pointless to debate over it as there simply and logically can never be a universal truth to individual user subjective experiences. 

 

How your headphones sound should only matter to YOU. Don't not waste time needlessly agonizing over other opinions on this matter. The best course of action in this matter? Buy your headphones from a business that allows you to return them if you do not find them satisfactory.

post #28 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrislangley4253 View Post

Yeah, you're skepticism is probably right in most cases. Amps and dacs shouldn't burn in. Cables neither. Headphone drivers can, in my experience. I wish everyone could just hear what I heard with the magnums. The debate would be over. Oh well. I guess when it comes down to it. No harm in burning stuff in.

They could also read Tyll's article and see the data, there are concrete, measurable changes on an auditory level going on.

But yeah, burning in cables, amps, and sources is bunk. However, there's so much snake oil in hi-fi that it's really hard to tell where the line is at times.
post #29 of 59

What I find interesting is that they chose one of the 701 variants (presumably because they have been widely known for burn-in claims?) and one of the main claims of the K701 that I have often read, is the "bass really opening up" after 300-whatever hours. On the measurements shown, bass is the only thing that doesn't change. If anything, the headphones became brighter, which goes directly against what most people say (and the argument against a K701 out of the box.) I realize it's not a K701 exactly, but still.

post #30 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vkamicht View Post

What I find interesting is that they chose one of the 701 variants (presumably because they have been widely known for burn-in claims?) and one of the main claims of the K701 that I have often read, is the "bass really opening up" after 300-whatever hours. On the measurements shown, bass is the only thing that doesn't change. If anything, the headphones became brighter, which goes directly against what most people say (and the argument against a K701 out of the box.) I realize it's not a K701 exactly, but still.


Really makes you think.. maybe it's just all in their head? A simple matter of getting used to the (initially bright) sound signature.


Edited by xnor - 4/6/12 at 3:46pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Breaking-in headphones, the final verdict!