Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Is burn in real or placebo?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Is burn in real or placebo? - Page 3

post #31 of 461
Quote:
Originally Posted by BetaWolf View Post

What I've concluded is that is HAS to exist. How is it such a big, scientific, controversial discussion amongst audiophiles if it doesn't exist? Or else, how was it discovered?

Bigfoot is also a big, controversial discussion, but that doesn't mean he exists, haha. On a serious note, I think it depends on the listener's state of mind and more what he hopes to hear, a change, or no change, and also the headphones themselves. For instance I'd think that drivers made from flimsier materials probably have somewhat of a burn in, and that drivers made from more robust materials are less susceptible to the effects of prolonged use.

post #32 of 461
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pp312 View Post

 

 

No it doesn't. I still hate broccoli. biggrin.gif

I LOVE broccoli. But I guess in all fairness I always loved broccoli. I eat whole stalks of the stuff steamed and plain. 

post #33 of 461

Broccoli is alright.
Also i think it is much more brain in than burn in.
As stated on the first page about switching between the HD600 and SR325i,
I experience the same effect between the HD558 and MS1i  w/L-cush though my thoughts were a little different.
From the MS1i -> HD558 i felt the sound was dull and veiled, then in a while it was smooth and relaxing.
Doing the reverse i felt the sound to be thin and harsh, but then soon found it to be lively and fun.

Particularly when i look at claims where 'the bass really opened up' I dismiss it and rephrase it as 'brain getting used to new lesser and probably more neutral bass levels'.
 

post #34 of 461
Quote:
Originally Posted by BetaWolf View Post

What I've concluded is that is HAS to exist. How is it such a big, scientific, controversial discussion amongst audiophiles if it doesn't exist? Or else, how was it discovered?

My theory is it's a rumor spread by a manufacturer who wanted people to keep their headphones past the return period even if they didn't like them biggrin.gif

post #35 of 461
I think if you listen out of the box for half an hour or even less, and then burn them in for 100 hours and listen to them again, your brain has already had enough time to "adjust" to the sound. that mixed with expectations is bound to be 90% of burn-in.

Only way to really try this out is to burn in headphones for 100 hours, listen to them and try out another same model headphone (from the same manufacturing batch etc) to even get close to a comparison. YMMV.
post #36 of 461
Quote:
Originally Posted by chewy4 View Post

My theory is it's a rumor spread by a manufacturer who wanted people to keep their headphones past the return period even if they didn't like them biggrin.gif

 

Now here I think you've got something. Only I don't think the rumour started with the manufacturers but with the retailers.

post #37 of 461
Quote:
Originally Posted by chewy4 View Post

My theory is it's a rumor spread by a manufacturer who wanted people to keep their headphones past the return period even if they didn't like them biggrin.gif

ha, yes. Or, less sinister, they knew if people keep listening, they will adjust to the different sound and actually like it.

post #38 of 461
Quote:
Originally Posted by chewy4 View Post

My theory is it's a rumor spread by a manufacturer who wanted people to keep their headphones past the return period even if they didn't like them biggrin.gif

... That actually makes great sense. I retract my earlier theory in that statement, though I still believe burn-in exists.

post #39 of 461
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brooko View Post

How are the conditions of the pads on both?  Differences in pads have a very noticeable effect on sound.

Not something I considered when doing the test. I just redid the test using the more worn (more comfortable) pads. Same outcome as before. There is a noticable difference between the two, but one wouldn't mistake them for a different model.

post #40 of 461
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill-P View Post

Not to say I'm an expert on the matter...

 

But given that headphones are physical objects, they get worn out over time, too. Especially as they're in use, since the drivers are constantly accelerating and decelerating.

 

So from a scientific standpoint, I'd think burn-in SHOULD be real. Unless someone somewhere is claiming that there exist objects that retain its physical properties forever...

Physical burn in does exist, but even for the most "burn in required" headphones, the differences are very small. Day and night differences are all from psychology. Think of it this way, if headphones got several times better after being, or even just changed significantly after a few tens of hours use, shouldn't the companies be burning in drivers before they sell them? 

 

 


Quote:
Originally Posted by jaycee1 View Post

However, the igrado change was not subtle nor psychological. They were unlistenable and tediously bright. After 60 hours, the very harsh treble had basically disappeared, replaced by a full, warm, bright sound that was exceptionally pleasant. 

 

You'd be surprised what your brain can get used to. If you really think that the iGrados physical improve, you should probably tell that to Grado Labs so they know their product changes a lot with some use, and maybe ask Tyll or someone else with equipment to measure pre/post burn in iGrados. 

 

 


Quote:
Originally Posted by BetaWolf View Post

What I've concluded is that is HAS to exist. How is it such a big, scientific, controversial discussion amongst audiophiles if it doesn't exist? Or else, how was it discovered?

 

As someone else mentioned, bigfoot. As for how it was discovered, someone probably noticed audio equipment sounded better after several hours of use. Burn in is a very logical conclusion to describe what happened if the measurements didn't near disprove it for most pieces of equipment. 

post #41 of 461

Inaccurate. As I have stated repeatedly, 60+ hours of burn-in made a dramatic difference in the sound signature of a pair of igrado's. The extremely bright, unbearable, exaggerated treble was reduced to a pleasant, mild sparkle with a lush, warm upper midrange and lower treble. Unbearable and grating to very pleasant and musical to me, is a 'day and night' difference.

 

It is true that the effects of burn in have been modest to non-existent on my other headphones. 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThinkAwesome View Post

Physical burn in does exist, but even for the most "burn in required" headphones, the differences are very small. Day and night differences are all from psychology. Think of it this way, if headphones got several times better after being, or even just changed significantly after a few tens of hours use, shouldn't the companies be burning in drivers before they sell them? 

 

 


 

You'd be surprised what your brain can get used to. If you really think that the iGrados physical improve, you should probably tell that to Grado Labs so they know their product changes a lot with some use, and maybe ask Tyll or someone else with equipment to measure pre/post burn in iGrados. 

 

 


 

As someone else mentioned, bigfoot. As for how it was discovered, someone probably noticed audio equipment sounded better after several hours of use. Burn in is a very logical conclusion to describe what happened if the measurements didn't near disprove it for most pieces of equipment. 

post #42 of 461
Quote:
Originally Posted by ev13wt View Post

I think if you listen out of the box for half an hour or even less, and then burn them in for 100 hours and listen to them again, your brain has already had enough time to "adjust" to the sound. that mixed with expectations is bound to be 90% of burn-in.

Only way to really try this out is to burn in headphones for 100 hours, listen to them and try out another same model headphone (from the same manufacturing batch etc) to even get close to a comparison. YMMV.

 

I listened to my igrado's out of box for 2 minutes, maybe less. It was long enough to recognize how bizarrely exaggerated the treble was. I listened again after a day of burn-in. They sounded the same. I waited again until nearly 3 days in (60+ hours). Completely transformed. 

post #43 of 461

The effect of burn in is very very real. Physical burn in is not. The human brain is a ridiculous contraption. 

 

 

Quote:
Inaccurate. As I have stated repeatedly, 60+ hours of burn-in made a dramatic difference in the sound signature of a pair of igrado's. The extremely bright, unbearable, exaggerated treble was reduced to a pleasant, mild sparkle with a lush, warm upper midrange and lower treble. Unbearable and grating to very pleasant and musical to me, is a 'day and night' difference.

Except that is your mind adjusting to the sound. 

 

 

 

Quote:
I listened to my igrado's out of box for 2 minutes, maybe less. It was long enough to recognize how bizarrely exaggerated the treble was. I listened again after a day of burn-in. They sounded the same. I waited again until nearly 3 days in (60+ hours). Completely transformed. 

Why is this important. If you cloned yourself, had one listen to the audio for two minutes then leave it burning in for 3 days, and had the other never listen to them until they finished burning in, that would be interesting. This, no. 

 

And again, if a physical change in the headphone caused a day and night difference in sound. Why does Grado not suggest you burn in for 60 hours before listening to the iGrados? Why does Grado not simply play music through them for 60 hours before selling them? 

post #44 of 461
The brain is a very flexible thinking... thing.
Most notably is how it adjusts to warm/bright sounds as stated earlier. It will constantly adept to new signatures and once exposed long enough the brain would get used to it and begin to enjoy it. (there are limits to this of course)
post #45 of 461

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Is burn in real or placebo?