Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › VSONIC VC02 - Info & Appreciation Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

VSONIC VC02 - Info & Appreciation Thread - Page 26

post #376 of 761
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inks View Post

lots of wishful thinking in this thread lol. 

If you don't believe in burn in and have a few bucks to burn. Buy two pairs of JVC Ha fx1x. Do not listen to them. Burn one in for 5 days at 24 hours a day and leave the other one alone. At the end of the 5 days listen to both of them side by side. You'll notice a big difference between the two. The one that hasn't been touched will have very piercing highs. To me I couldn't listen more than 20 seconds before my ears started hurting. The one that was burned in will sound much smother, at least for a $16 IEM. After the 5 day burn in I did with them (I didn't listen to them during the burn in because the highs were killing me) they didn't hurt my ears and I used them at the gym for between an hour and an hour and 45 min for the next couple of weeks. This confirmed for me that burn in is real.

My source was an un amped iPhone 4 playing lossless files.
Edited by JonnyRocket - 1/29/13 at 9:39pm
post #377 of 761

please, there no point for more of this. Your test is hardly scientific. 

post #378 of 761
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inks View Post

please, there no point for more of this. Your test is hardly scientific. 

 

How so?  Same everything, one difference is the time for burn in.  We have our dependent and independent variables cleared out.  If you are worried about the driver inconsistencies do multiple trials to average them out.  You'll either see a general direction of no change or a general direction of change or both.  If you see both, that means we need to do more trials. 

 

I have to say that I don't feel that the way you analyze data isn't scientific either.  The way it's taken, portrayed, and shown by Rin actually is pretty scientific.  However, you make many assumptions that have yet to be proven, or accepted by any scientific community other than your own small one. 

 

Some statements you make seem to really boggle the mind and contradict what we already know.  I quote what you said in Rin's blog:

 

Quote:
...impedance and resonant change were just due to the heating of the coil, they go back to normal after cooling down, thus no change in practical terms and even then, tiny.

 

At first glance, this statement makes 100% sense.  Until you look at the actual impedance graph.  Your statement was  that the heating caused the impedance to change.  Possible, actually proven by many to show that impedance and resistance increases directly with temperature change.  In other words, higher temperature = higher impedance.  Lower temperature, lower impedance.  I have dozen's of sources for this, from physics books, WikiPedia, and even information from Stereophile. 

 

However, looking at the data, we see that as the coil heated, temperature went up, the impedance dropped, when down.  This already contradicts what has been accepted in the scientific community.  You go further to state that after cooling down, the impedance will return to normal.  So your statement says that as the temperature drops, impedance goes up.  Secondary contradiction.  Now, don't say the data is off, Rin did 10 trials (his statements) to average and confirm his findings were accurate.  The chances of all 10 showing similar information, but being wrong is very low unless Rin used inaccurate software to measure (if that is so, the data is null, and so is much of the rest).

 

Inks, you also made the statement that CSD is just "merely shifted".  I do see this shift you are talking about, and as stated in the FR graph, it does revert (that has been proven and demonstrated).  However, look at the decay times.  d(dB)/dt for frequencies under 500 drop at least a few dB directly after 2.59 ms.  We see slower decay in the 1-2 k range as well as frequencies extending up to 5 k.  Then at the 8 k region, we see a slightly quicker decay.

 

 

Now, I'm willing to agree to the fact that this can change after cooling down, but would require that Rin upload updated graphs for the CSD information.  If you would like to make the statement that all this has to do with the little shift, I can't agree with you there until there is evidence that has been released to show that. 

 

Inks, I made a question before that asked if the changes above can make a difference in sound combined.  I was aware that it was possible that if each of these were singled out, it may not make a difference.  I wanted to know combined.  Your response was a quick no stating that each of things (singularly) were too tiny.  Had nothing to do with combined.  We have only begun to scratch the surface of how these relationships tie into one another in terms of final sound.  However, you still decided to make the statements anyway, which are assumed and unverified.  Verification of the question I asked cannot be answered using the VSonic VC02 burn in data alone.

 

I've said it once, and I'll say it again.  We have to let the evidence create our worldviews, not our worldviews create the evidence.  If the evidence isn't there, then it's wisest to claim ignorance. 

post #379 of 761

Now that's what you call an intelligent scientific explanation :) props to sir tinyman and rin for this precise info. :) I wonder how will the highly rank "Anti Burn-in GOD" Ink react to this one?? :P

post #380 of 761
Quote:
Originally Posted by papijoe08 View Post

Now that's what you call an intelligent scientific explanation :) props to sir tinyman and rin for this precise info. :) I wonder how will the highly rank "Anti Burn-in GOD" Ink react to this one?? :P

+1. Wow!

post #381 of 761
Quote:
Originally Posted by tinyman392 View Post

 

How so?  Same everything, one difference is the time for burn in.  We have our dependent and independent variables cleared out.  If you are worried about the driver inconsistencies do multiple trials to average them out.  You'll either see a general direction of no change or a general direction of change or both.  If you see both, that means we need to do more trials. 

 

I have to say that I don't feel that the way you analyze data isn't scientific either.  The way it's taken, portrayed, and shown by Rin actually is pretty scientific.  However, you make many assumptions that have yet to be proven, or accepted by any scientific community other than your own small one. 

 

Some statements you make seem to really boggle the mind and contradict what we already know.  I quote what you said in Rin's blog:

 

He, JohnyRocket, didn't have a controlled environment, too many variables will lead to such a change in sound. There is no scientific community that has looked into IEM burn-in, only very few 3rd party tests have been done and lead to pretty much no change. I didn't assume, the results are tiny, that's simply what they are, not only that they reverted after a cool down in Rin's tests. Also engineers aren't simply sure because most don't bother to test, I know 2 whose names I won't mention and neither weren't sure and doubted it occurred, I think Vsonic is taking advantage of the bigger factor, placebo. 

 

At first glance, this statement makes 100% sense.  Until you look at the actual impedance graph.  Your statement was  that the heating caused the impedance to change.  Possible, actually proven by many to show that impedance and resistance increases directly with temperature change.  In other words, higher temperature = higher impedance.  Lower temperature, lower impedance.  I have dozen's of sources for this, from physics books, WikiPedia, and even information from Stereophile. 

 

However, looking at the data, we see that as the coil heated, temperature went up, the impedance dropped, when down.  This already contradicts what has been accepted in the scientific community.  You go further to state that after cooling down, the impedance will return to normal.  So your statement says that as the temperature drops, impedance goes up.  Secondary contradiction.  Now, don't say the data is off, Rin did 10 trials (his statements) to average and confirm his findings were accurate.  The chances of all 10 showing similar information, but being wrong is very low unless Rin used inaccurate software to measure (if that is so, the data is null, and so is much of the rest).

 

Ask Rin, it simply reverted, simple as that. What he checked were the changes during the moment of heating and afterwards, the revertion wasn't posted and I won't bother Rin with that, pointless. 

 

Inks, you also made the statement that CSD is just "merely shifted".  I do see this shift you are talking about, and as stated in the FR graph, it does revert (that has been proven and demonstrated).  However, look at the decay times.  d(dB)/dt for frequencies under 500 drop at least a few dB directly after 2.59 ms.  We see slower decay in the 1-2 k range as well as frequencies extending up to 5 k.  Then at the 8 k region, we see a slightly quicker decay.

 

 

Now, I'm willing to agree to the fact that this can change after cooling down, but would require that Rin upload updated graphs for the CSD information.  If you would like to make the statement that all this has to do with the little shift, I can't agree with you there until there is evidence that has been released to show that. Reverted

 

Inks, I made a question before that asked if the changes above can make a difference in sound combined.  I was aware that it was possible that if each of these were singled out, it may not make a difference.  I wanted to know combined.  Your response was a quick no stating that each of things (singularly) were too tiny.  Had nothing to do with combined.  We have only begun to scratch the surface of how these relationships tie into one another in terms of final sound.  However, you still decided to make the statements anyway, which are assumed and unverified.  Verification of the question I asked cannot be answered using the VSonic VC02 burn in data alone.

 

That's my point, they're too tiny even when combined, if the changes were at least remotely significant in some ways, I'll give benefit of the doubt, but it's simply not there. 

 

I've said it once, and I'll say it again.  We have to let the evidence create our worldviews, not our worldviews create the evidence.  If the evidence isn't there, then it's wisest to claim ignorance. 

Evidence is simply showing that there is no burn-in, specially to the extent many claim here. Burn-in has become the remedy to most issues. Distortion issues, burn-in. Too much bass, burn-in. Sibilant, burn-in. If burn-in did exist, it will be a mechanical change that may even make some undesirable sonic changes, yet every burn-in report I've read, leads to good results. Why? Cause it's mostly placebo. There are more important aspects of this IEM to explore rather than waste time with a unproven methodology. 


Edited by Inks - 1/30/13 at 1:53am
post #382 of 761
Quote:
Originally Posted by putente View Post

 

 

I can only find them with one seller on eBay: http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/w-Tracking-Number-VSONIC-VC02-/261130018304?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3ccc8fde00

 

Still, the price is good! 

It seems the sales are still on primary status...

post #383 of 761
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inks View Post
 

 

Too many variables?  Name them.

 

As for your statements about everything reverting, I'd love to believe your word, but it's like they say.  Show proof or it didn't happen. Especially with the impedance curves, it contradicts all of what science says should happen when they cool down. I also do want to see the CSD reverting too.  Ask Rin to post it (not you, Rin) or it didn't happen. Now if you can give me a theoretical reason (backed by known proof) that the impedance should go up with cooling and down with heating, I'll accept that too.  Every electrical equation known to man says the opposite Inks!  Every one. If you found a way to lower resistance of a conductor with heating, I'm sure every cable manufacturer and every computer manufacturer would love to know how it works.  It could potentially save money in the long run. 

 

BTW, I chose those two properties that changed because Rin didn't make any statements about them changing back in the blog post, go ahead and check again.  He did say that the impedance drops were seen in other headphones as well though. 


Edited by tinyman392 - 1/30/13 at 5:55am
post #384 of 761
We don't know if he changed tips, source. We don't know if he controlled his insertion depth and seal, making it the same each time. He is also using auditory memory when burning I'm that old pair, that's never good for a concrete comparison. We are pretty much taking his word for these chamges, there's nothing concrete that he can present.

In regards to the graphs
Rin mentions it in a comment, saying that he hopes to not have to post the revertion waste of time, will only entertain silly skeptics. He is likely to do another test on a IEM, though a BA, its driver and price tag are one of a kind.

Don't get why you're really clutching at straws here, you're fighting for changes that are too insignificant. Even if i were to imagine the changes stayed and consider them alltogether, heck imagine they're twice of what they are and they're still insignificant. Listen to what anonymous mentions in his comment, then you'll be able to read that CSD properly in relation to FR and realize there's pretty much no change.
Edited by Inks - 1/30/13 at 9:17am
post #385 of 761

Back on topic, I just got these and they are really good, though not better than my FXT90 where the it beats it in bass and mids, but on the highs the VC02 holds it ground. The VC02 are more comfortable though and if placed right they almost disappear.

 

I think I'll gift them to my sister since she still uses the Apple stock earbuds.

post #386 of 761
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inks View Post

We don't know if he changed tips, source. We don't know if he controlled his insertion depth and seal, making it the same each time. He is also using auditory memory when burning I'm that old pair, that's never good for a concrete comparison. We are pretty much taking his word for these chamges, there's nothing concrete that he can present.

In regards to the graphs
Rin mentions it in a comment, saying that he hopes to not have to post the revertion waste of time, will only entertain silly skeptics. He is likely to do another test on a IEM, though a BA, its driver and price tag are one of a kind.

Don't get why you're really clutching at straws here, you're fighting for changes that are too insignificant. Even if i were to imagine the changes stayed and consider them alltogether, heck imagine they're twice of what they are and they're still insignificant. Listen to what anonymous mentions in his comment, then you'll be able to read that CSD properly in relation to FR and realize there's pretty much no change.

 

No (published) evidence = it never happened, welcome to the scientific community (otherwise, I'd go around saying I solved P versus NP).  There is much reason for me to believe the impedance won't go back up with cooling, instead (according to all the prior findings and models physics has handed us), it'll go further down.  ALL evidence prior to now points that direction.  Show me otherwise.  Regarding CSD, you are aware that it's a 3D graph right?  We aren't just talking frequency and SPL, there is a time aspect to it to.  The time, frequency, SPL relationship changes within the hundred hours.  I am well aware that the frequency SPL relationship doesn't change at t=0 because the frequency vs dB graph shows that.

 

You can't just assert that a bunch of small things added together will remain small, there is no proof for that.  That is the question I ask.  The dependance and independence on everything that is measured is so complex and intertwined and a small change here resonates to create small changes everywhere.  So my two measurements above that I spoke about will have effects on other things as well that may not show up as clear cut as you say it is. 

 

I want to believe your words Inks, but you are making it impossible to do.

 

Regarding the variables you listed.  First off, we can use the same tips on both *SMH*.  With multiple trials and multiple IEMs we can get rid of the insertion depth variables as well as the memory isolation almost completely, minimizing error between the comparison.  Even further, I want to quote the last statement from Rin's blog post:

 

Quote:
As previously confirmed by others, 1 2 3 4 5 6 , and by myself, 1 2 3 , the physical effect of break-in is quite evident. Moreover, the psychoacoustic aspect of Vsonic VC02's break-in has been demonstrated for ABX comparison so that listeners could verify the audibility of 100 hours of what-so-called 'warming-up'.

 

Now, I don't know if this is audible in a 100 hour time span, but Rin's shown that it is audible for a given time span such that time is nearly zero (t = lim as x -> 0 of x).  Your failure to show that all the measurements not only go towards the original recorded data, but instead, become the original data set after cooling doesn't disprove anything.  Inks, it seems like your hiding things, and it simply won't hold up. 

 

So unless you have the graphs to show me, I think we're done here.  Results inconclusive either way. 


Edited by tinyman392 - 1/30/13 at 12:21pm
post #387 of 761

would there be a version of the gr07 bass edition with a removeable cable? i practically beat my earphone,but not on purpose...point is,durability is a huge concern XD

post #388 of 761

No removable cable for any of the GR07 versions. Make it a point to be extra careful with them. I make it a point to be extra careful with all my phones, even cheap ones.   


Edited by kahaluu - 1/30/13 at 12:53pm
post #389 of 761
Removable cable version is comming out in feburary ....also found out the vc1000 is a limited edition model which might be sold or not.
post #390 of 761

absolutely fantastic,but is the bass edition also going to have the removable cable option?

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › VSONIC VC02 - Info & Appreciation Thread