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 27  

post #391 of 520
I noticed my headphones got better as they broke in. As a welder the same thing happened every time I bought a new welding machine. It was a dud or it keep getting better until it flat out wore out. I theorize that the molecules in the conductive materials align themselves to the flow of electrons. Thus preference to materials like oxigen free cooper. I would imagine that the flow of current would gradually make itself a better and better path through out all the mechanical connection overcoming oxidation. By the same token it would make sense that the materials used to produce the sound would be assembled tight so they would reach proper tension after being vibrated by the coil. As to the placebo effect it is true that we notice more a device that brakes in for the better by design than the dud.
post #392 of 520

Its real alright. I also heard that it has to do with the diaelectrics in the cables reacting with the copper.

post #393 of 520

Mechanical transducers, yes.  Capacitors. maybe.  Cables and everything else, utter BS.

 

Q.E.D.

post #394 of 520
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matrixnobu View Post
 

Its real alright. I also heard that it has to do with the diaelectrics in the cables reacting with the copper.


I 'heard' it was to do with the phase of the moon and synchronised menstrual cycles...

post #395 of 520
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gruffnutz View Post
 


I 'heard' it was to do with the phase of the moon and synchronised menstrual cycles...

 

I know it's hard to grasp. It's ok....

post #396 of 520
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matrixnobu View Post
 

 

I know it's hard to grasp. It's ok....

 

It's difficult to grasp hot air. :D

post #397 of 520
Can you grasp that those who know everything never learn a thing and are to be avoided by those who honestly seek the answers by keeping their minds open.
post #398 of 520
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimr101 View Post

Can you grasp that those who know everything never learn a thing and are to be avoided by those who honestly seek the answers by keeping their minds open.

Thank you for the philosophy lesson. You are not seeking answers, you are simply spouting an opinion devoid of any "proof" that is empirically relative to the argument of burn-in.

"Please sell crazy somewhere else, we are full here."
post #399 of 520
I apologize for the venting. Didn't mean to be rude you're hot air comment hit me wrong. I retired from a job of resolving all the issues that the best engineers could not resolve on paper. I dealt with minor problems like connecting a square 600ton duct to hole that was supposed to by square on paper but wasn't. And I apologize I did not figure any of this by looking at moon charts or astrology. I got you but give me a little credit. The math is most important but just as important are the factors that aren't always so obvious. I have changed headphone cables and noticed a night and day difference. But I can't begin to figure out why if I can't trust my senses just because the science says no. I am not refudiating science just looking for the science that is missing in the clear evidence that my senses are showing me. Galelleo used his observations to determine that the earth revolved around the sun in spite of the strong oppositions of the inquisition.
post #400 of 520

in a Colbert report last week on the subject of obama care (again) I heard this and couldn't help but to think about audio subjectivism:

 

Quote:
-you wanna keep on reading the fine print here.
-not really, not if it's gonna make me lose the argument!
post #401 of 520
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimr101 View Post

I apologize for the venting. Didn't mean to be rude you're hot air comment hit me wrong. I retired from a job of resolving all the issues that the best engineers could not resolve on paper. I dealt with minor problems like connecting a square 600ton duct to hole that was supposed to by square on paper but wasn't. And I apologize I did not figure any of this by looking at moon charts or astrology. I got you but give me a little credit. The math is most important but just as important are the factors that aren't always so obvious. I have changed headphone cables and noticed a night and day difference. But I can't begin to figure out why if I can't trust my senses just because the science says no. I am not refudiating science just looking for the science that is missing in the clear evidence that my senses are showing me. Galelleo used his observations to determine that the earth revolved around the sun in spite of the strong oppositions of the inquisition.

for the difference in audio cables that you heard, did you do a double blinded ABx comparison test & accurately identified which cable was which with a large enough sample size and p value less than 0.05? ...because the simplest explanation for why you thought one cable sounded better than the other was because you paid more for that upgrade cable and your brain expects a better sound.

 

accurate science has nothing to do with trusting your senses or recalling what happened to you before, but rather finding empirical evidence for objective data points that can be reliably reproduced in a controlled setting.

 

Actually the Inquisition simply used their senses (eg, watching the sun rise and fall in the sky) to say that the sun revolved around the earth, while Copernicus, Kepler, and Galelleo conducted experiments and found objective data on the movements of celestial bodies from telescopic observation to calculate a mathematical model of a heliocentric solar system which could accurately predict planetary movement.

post #402 of 520
Believe it or not I've been exposed to quite a bit of double blinded test from the boys in the office. And that's where the difference comes in. In the lab test and the tried and tru tested methods in the field are two different things. The double blind test on you tube plainly proves there is no audible differences between two file formats and they are right. So why is it that at other times the difference is like night and day. I agree with you 100% that reliable objective data is the answer. The creation of better double blind test comes from observations that leads us to better tools like the telescope. But as always it was first a theory followed by the measurements and accurate math. It takes both. By the way the better cables were the cheaper ones. What I'm good at is to propose theory to the great minds that rap their heads around the algorithms. I just make them work with their wonderful and intelligent help. Grado is a good example of this marriage of good old down to earth yankee know how with superior engenering. The topic of this thread is better sound. That is why this topic does matter to both of us that love music. Maybee what is needed here would be putting my theories in a question form. I have found that I got more results by stroking the delicate egos of my much more educated cohorts. So here goes could it be that in blind tests there will always be unknown factor that may or may not be factored in. Making the process never final but always evolving even if technology is getting closer and closer.
post #403 of 520
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimr101 View Post

I apologize for the venting. Didn't mean to be rude you're hot air comment hit me wrong. I retired from a job of resolving all the issues that the best engineers could not resolve on paper. I dealt with minor problems like connecting a square 600ton duct to hole that was supposed to by square on paper but wasn't. And I apologize I did not figure any of this by looking at moon charts or astrology. I got you but give me a little credit. The math is most important but just as important are the factors that aren't always so obvious. I have changed headphone cables and noticed a night and day difference. But I can't begin to figure out why if I can't trust my senses just because the science says no. I am not refudiating science just looking for the science that is missing in the clear evidence that my senses are showing me. Galelleo used his observations to determine that the earth revolved around the sun in spite of the strong oppositions of the inquisition.

There's also a night-and-day difference here:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tUf0672xAOU

 

Why would you trust your own senses when the human brain is designed not to?

post #404 of 520
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mambosenior View Post


Thank you for the philosophy lesson. You are not seeking answers, you are simply spouting an opinion devoid of any "proof" that is empirically relative to the argument of burn-in.

"Please sell crazy somewhere else, we are full here."

post #405 of 520
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mambosenior View Post
 

 

It's difficult to grasp hot air. :D

 

I don't like the Mambo Sir. But seriously why would do for example internet cables continuously get improved upon if the cable isn't going to make any difference?

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