Latest Thread Images

JVC HA-FXZ 100/200
Jan 29, 2013 at 12:52 PM Post #2,356 of 3,271
Burn in time for Rockit Sounds R-50:  0 hours.  Sound doesn't change with use.
 
 
Burn in time for ATH-CKS77:  500+ hours.  Improvements in sound quality were very gradual and still noticeable and needed after 500 hours.
 
If burn in was just a brain process then it would be likely that I would have found some changes on the R-50.  I did not.
 
Jan 29, 2013 at 1:04 PM Post #2,357 of 3,271
Quote:
alberto01 said:
Burn in time for Rockit Sounds R-50:  0 hours.  Sound doesn't change with use.
 
 
Burn in time for ATH-CKS77:  500+ hours.  Improvements in sound quality were very gradual and still noticeable and needed after 500 hours.
 
If burn in was just a brain process then it would be likely that I would have found some changes on the R-50.  I did not.
Click to expand...


I'm a bit of a burn-in agnostic.
 
The scientist in me knows for a fact that materials undergo wear and tear, and that the driver will change after a while. The only catch for me is that the reported changes are always positive. 
 
By the same logic, armatures also undergo burn-in. They don't have a large diaphragm like the dynamics, but the arm of the armature (
biggrin.gif
) also undergoes wear and tear. 
 
Moral of the story: The brain is a powerful thing. Don't underestimate what it can do to how we perceive sound.
 
Jan 29, 2013 at 2:04 PM Post #2,358 of 3,271
I like to think of them like Dr Martens boots. They are horrible when you first wear them, but once broken in, they're great. You never hear someone say that the comfort gets worse, because that would be illogical. Some of the comfort may be attributed to you developing calluses, but you can't say that is all it is. Just like you can't really say that burn-in is only down to someone's brain getting used to it.

That's just how I try to rationalize it :).
 
Jan 29, 2013 at 2:36 PM Post #2,359 of 3,271
Quote:
hatefulsandwich said:
I like to think of them like Dr Martens boots. They are horrible when you first wear them, but once broken in, they're great. You never hear someone say that the comfort gets worse, because that would be illogical. Some of the comfort may be attributed to you developing calluses, but you can't say that is all it is. Just like you can't really say that burn-in is only down to someone's brain getting used to it.

That's just how I try to rationalize it
smily_headphones1.gif
.
Click to expand...

 
Tell that to a pair of basketball shoes that is worn down at the end of the season. :)
 
Never said that. All I'm saying is that the brain plays a huge role in sound perception. For instance, I was away from my GR07 for a while, and I was using an Etymotic HF5 for the time being. When I got my GR07 back it sounded to me like bassy muddled mess. As I continued to listen, all became right again, and it was the Ety that sounded anemic and weak. Someone might have said that it was the GR07 undergoing burn in.
 
Jan 29, 2013 at 2:47 PM Post #2,360 of 3,271
I didn't say that's what you said, it's just something that a lot of people do say and is often the argument against burn-in. You sort if hinted at the notion, that's why I said what I said. It wasn't an attack on what you said.

Basketball shoes ain't Dr. Martens either... The analogy referred to them rather than *all* shoes, which is why I mentioned them specifically. I'm aware that not all shoes require breaking in and some get uncomfortable and broken after much wear.

They're just how I imagine the driver burn-in. It doesn't exactly explain why drivers don't wear out and sound worse, but the same can be said of many things. Not all things follow the same rules, I guess.
 
Jan 29, 2013 at 5:07 PM Post #2,363 of 3,271
apostolic said:
Well, here's my very short mini-review (if you can call it that) after 2 weeks with the FXZ100. Fully burnt-in:

The subwoofer does deliver a real punch in your face like Mike Tysin in its best. Reminds me the Sony XB500 old times, but with a (huge) difference: the bass is completely separated from the mids and highs. Theres LOTS of clarity, detail, definition and air across the mids and highs. Mids are very good, very clean, pure and forward. Highs have alot of detail/resolution and air. They're very natural and realistic. The 3 drivers do a great job separating all the frequencies. Instrument separation  is huge, massive, 3D'ish. Reminds me the UM3X. But the FXZ100 have much more (and better) bass than the UM3X. They're also more energetic, with better dynamics. More fun. The 2.1 speaker comparison does apply here. Indeed. In fact they're much more similar to speakers than full size cans IMO. So far so good, I'm loving them and looking forward to try out the 200's. The 100's are better than many of my full size phones (MDR-1R, DT770 PRO, etc)
Click to expand...

The FXZ100s are better than the MDR-1Rs? I planned on buying the FXZ200s and the MDRs. Is that a bad idea?
 
Jan 29, 2013 at 5:15 PM Post #2,364 of 3,271
Can anyone compare the soundstage between the 100 and 200? Similar or different?
 
Jan 29, 2013 at 5:29 PM Post #2,365 of 3,271
Quote:
treal512 said:
Can anyone compare the soundstage between the 100 and 200? Similar or different?
Click to expand...

Soundstage? What soundstage? That's my biggest gripe with the 200's....vocals are in your head. No sense of soundstage whatsoever. Very disappointing since the rest of it's attributes are great.
 
Jan 29, 2013 at 5:40 PM Post #2,366 of 3,271
Quote:
alberto01 said:
Burn in time for ATH-CKS77:  500+ hours.  Improvements in sound quality were very gradual and still noticeable and needed after 500 hours.  
If burn in was just a brain process then it would be likely that I would have found some changes on the R-50.  I did not.
Click to expand...

I  just can't imagine noticing changes after 500 hours, almost 21 days. I listen to my IEMs out of the box, then 2 hours later, that's were I notice the biggest changes actually, then 24 hours later and don't listen to anything between. After this, changes are mostly subtle, you have an idea of the signature.
 
Jan 30, 2013 at 3:24 AM Post #2,368 of 3,271
Quote:
ratfarm said:
Soundstage? What soundstage? That's my biggest gripe with the 200's....vocals are in your head. No sense of soundstage whatsoever. Very disappointing since the rest of it's attributes are great.
Click to expand...

I love when the vocals are in your head; just like the S500s. It gives the sound a more intimate experience.
 
Jan 30, 2013 at 9:40 AM Post #2,369 of 3,271
Quote:
ratfarm said:
Quote:
treal512 said:
Can anyone compare the soundstage between the 100 and 200? Similar or different?
Click to expand...

Soundstage? What soundstage? That's my biggest gripe with the 200's....vocals are in your head. No sense of soundstage whatsoever. Very disappointing since the rest of it's attributes are great.
Click to expand...

 
I thought they did a lot better than many other IEMs I've tried. What IEMs do you reckon given you an impression of soundstage, out of interest (if any)?
 
Found a nice combination just now: Audioquest Dragonfly powered via an Aurorasound USB BusPower Pro to the 200s. The effect rather reminds me of a rock/pop concert sound system (though it has been a while, so I could be talking out of my rear a bit here).
 
Jan 30, 2013 at 10:20 AM Post #2,370 of 3,271
Quote:
eke2k6 said:
 
Tell that to a pair of basketball shoes that is worn down at the end of the season. :)
 
Never said that. All I'm saying is that the brain plays a huge role in sound perception. For instance, I was away from my GR07 for a while, and I was using an Etymotic HF5 for the time being. When I got my GR07 back it sounded to me like bassy muddled mess. As I continued to listen, all became right again, and it was the Ety that sounded anemic and weak. Someone might have said that it was the GR07 undergoing burn in.
Click to expand...

I guess there's a fine line between burn-in and entropy!  
ksc75smile.gif

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 5 (members: 0, guests: 5)
Back
Top