[tinyman392]

Quote:

Isn't it nice once you've opened your eyes to new possibilities and not so close-minded and closed off in your thinking. I was skeptical myself when first joining you headfiers on this journey.

+1 to this.  Keep in mind that everyone's observations are legitimate here and valid.  No one can go about and just labeling anyone as a placebo (or anyone else for that matter) just because they don't agree with you (it's bad science).  It's better to prove (or disprove) both sides instead of disproving one side (and prove the other)...  REason being that at this point, neither side has a small crowd, and the likeliness that either side is hearing things wrong is slim to none when this many hear it and an equal amount don't hear it.  Both sides are still hearing what they hear correctly, and I stand by that statement. 

 

[lc0756]

In my experience, different sets of headphone or iem requires different amounts of burn in.  My D2000 for example sounded different every day until it finally settled down after about 300 hours of use.  I don't think it is from getting used to the their sound signature because it would alternate sounding like cheap headphones one day and amazing the next.  My DBA-02 didn't change much after one day of burn in and I believe for them it may have been related to getting used to their sound.  For iems like Soundmagic's PL50 and Sennheiser's CX300 I didn't think their sound changed at all from burn in. 
 
I feel the same way about cables and burn in.  I had three diy cables made using different wires and they all sounded horrible in the beginning and smoothed out after a 24 hour burn in.  However, I am currently using a set of BJC MSA-1 cables and they sound the same after 100 hours of use.

 

[swbf2cheater]

Quote:

Originally Posted by swbf2cheater 


Personally, I think it has to do with EMF fields, sound wave frequency and general Electromagnetism.  My theory is as such:
 
Currently, all audio drivers that I am aware of are highly magnetized and produce some type of EMF fields around themselves, naturally.  As current runs over them over a duration of a short time ( burn in ) the field itself changes and becomes less magnetized.  Yes,  I said less.  I say that because high magnetic fields can distort the very air around you and will cause lop sided sound waves to be emitted from any source, your headphones, your speakers, your voice.  The very air that all sonic waves ride on is disrupted at first due to an overbearingly powerful EMF field that will deteriorate slightly over the course of usage.  The more you burn in it, the more the sonic wave frequency generated will become less distorted, more spacious in wavelength and ends up improving sonic quality.  This is a direct result of small shifts of EMF fields over the course of the beginning of the life of your piece of audio gear. Drivers do not physically change, they are made of metal and will stay that way until something physically damages them.  The only moving parts that would reflect some type of sound quality alterations from stock would be the Diaphragm: It certainly can move more freely and get less tense over time.  It is possible this small physical change can equate to something audibly different after some use.  
 
The Earpads on larger headphones start out stiff, that is a simple fact.  As they press against your head they relieve their stress and become very tactile and loose over time, it is no different than pushing the headphones gently onto your ears, the drivers will get a smidgen closer over time and that is certainly audible.  Temperature also plays a role, I can tell you without a doubt that cold weather is sinister in nature when it comes to new headphones.  Riding on the back of a delivery truck in winter will cause them to sound terrible.  When I got my HE500 just last week, it was delivered in very cold weather, ice cold to the touch as soon as I opened it.  Plugged it in and holy crap it sounded super hazy.  I was dumbfounded and plugged my HE300 into the same source and found it to be significantly more clear.  After the HE500 got to room temperature a short time later, the sound quality did a 180 degree turn and turned into something sublime.
 
In the case of IEMs, tips play a serious role and so does the inside of your ear canal.  You stick something in it long enough and your ear will shape to it and become less constricting, thus allowing for a better insert without you even noticing.  Bottom line is that I have no doubt in my tiny human mind that Burn In results in more clarity over a short time.  I've never once noticed anything different beyond 50 or so hours of use.  I will bet my life my HE500 changed from day 1 and 2 to right now just a few days later.  I listen to my favorite songs ever single day, I know what they sound like through all my gear and I can recall my first impressions at day 2 of burn in being audibly hazier than it is now, saying to myself "this doesn't sound as clear or dynamic as I want it to be or as it should be" Today, I retract that and say something changed and it was very audible.
 
 
-Mike
 
 
Originally Posted by tinyman392 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 

That's a good explanation that does make a lot of sense.  However, you are still missing one crucial thing, why do some people hear differences and some don't? 
 
 

 
Everyone hears differently and a lot of people do not know their hearing sucks.  I can't tell you how many times I've allowed my family to take a listen to my expensive headphones and ended up commenting in a way that just flabbergasted me.  They may hear harsh highs when I EQed it to be absolutely absent of harshness to my ears, they hear a flat response type in the LCD2 when it is known to have excellent stage depth.  Something like this happens nearly every time I allow someone to listen to my gear.  A ton of people have hearing problems and a lot of users do not understand how to actually listen to audio the right way.  They simply do not pick up on dynamics like we do until they gain enough experience as a listener which takes time.  There are yet more tons of users who FLAT OUT LIE about their experiences, never actually heard the piece they are reviewing or speaking about and may not have ever actually owned a piece of hifi gear.  
 
The majority of experiences that were posted by users who said they can't hear it, are in fact one of these three types of users.  There is also the fact that some headphones don't change to an audible degree.  A lot of people are tall or short, have slightly deformed ear canals ( I am one of them, my left ear NEVER fits properly or feels anything close to what my right side is, I recently had my first custom iem job done and that proved it, its visually different in shape on the exterior part of my ear.  Some people have mutant Xmen heads that make headphones squeeze and vice grip them, which makes that set sound a bit different from someone with a smaller head who just cant get a good fit. 
 
Tons of factors, all of them real.  
-Mike

 

[lee730]

I've had experiences like that before. Makes you wanna slap them silly for not being able to tell lol. BTW just got my IE80s in and man they are so much better than the IE8. No more mid bass issues, no more cloudy mid range. Amazing No EQ needed. This just brings me tears of joy ; -`)
Quote:

 
Everyone hears differently and a lot of people do not know their hearing sucks.  I can't tell you how many times I've allowed my family to take a listen to my expensive headphones and ended up commenting in a way that just flabbergasted me.  They may hear harsh highs when I EQed it to be absolutely absent of harshness to my ears, they hear a flat response type in the LCD2 when it is known to have excellent stage depth.  Something like this happens nearly every time I allow someone to listen to my gear.  A ton of people have hearing problems and a lot of users do not understand how to actually listen to audio the right way.  They simply do not pick up on dynamics like we do until they gain enough experience as a listener which takes time.  There are yet more tons of users who FLAT OUT LIE about their experiences, never actually heard the piece they are reviewing or speaking about and may not have ever actually owned a piece of hifi gear.  
 
The majority of experiences that were posted by users who said they can't hear it, are in fact one of these three types of users.  There is also the fact that some headphones don't change to an audible degree.  A lot of people are tall or short, have slightly deformed ear canals ( I am one of them, my left ear NEVER fits properly or feels anything close to what my right side is, I recently had my first custom iem job done and that proved it, its visually different in shape on the exterior part of my ear.  Some people have mutant Xmen heads that make headphones squeeze and vice grip them, which makes that set sound a bit different from someone with a smaller head who just cant get a good fit. 
 
Tons of factors, all of them real.  
-Mike

 

 

[liamstrain]

Quote:

A ton of people have hearing problems and a lot of users do not understand how to actually listen to audio the right way.  They simply do not pick up on dynamics like we do until they gain enough experience as a listener which takes time.  There are yet more tons of users who FLAT OUT LIE about their experiences, never actually heard the piece they are reviewing or speaking about and may not have ever actually owned a piece of hifi gear.  
 
The majority of experiences that were posted by users who said they can't hear it, are in fact one of these three types of users.  

 
Again with this old chestnut? 

 

[lee730]

Quote:

Quote:

 
Again with this old chestnut? 

Bittersweet chestnut at that lol with sour creme added. . I agree with him though....
 

 

[liamstrain]

Quote:

Bittersweet chestnut at that lol with sour creme added. . I agree with him though....
 

 
Yah, no. I provided myself as a counter example earlier (with my rationale to counter the physical and experience based criticism). Which leaves only one, and frankly, don't appreciate being called a liar.
 
It's tantamount to me saying anyone who hears burn in - either doesn't know how to listen, has hearing damage, or is making it up... which we know not to be the case as well. This is a lazy argument for his side... we should work to find the real reasons some hear and some do not - that is consistent with the experiences and evidences, before we just assume half of the arguers are ignorant or lying. 

 

[lee730]

Quote:

 
Yah, no. I provided myself as a counter example earlier (with my rationale to counter the physical and experience based criticism). Which leaves only one, and frankly, don't appreciate being called a liar.
 
It's tantamount to me saying anyone who hears burn in - either doesn't know how to listen, has hearing damage, or is making it up... which we know not to be the case as well. This is a lazy argument for his side... we should work to find the real reasons some hear and some do not - that is consistent with the experiences and evidences, before we just assume half of the arguers are ignorant or lying. 

That goes for both sides though. "before we just assume half of the arguers are ignorant or lying." Its not fair to say the ones who don't hear a difference are liars. Ignorant is more the right word, as they don't know or have not experienced it themselves. And the fact is some people can hear better than others, just as others can see better. Could be a reason why my hearing is good because I can't see for **** lol.
 

 

[liamstrain]

I thought my phrasing was clear that my statement applied to both sides. It should not be said that because someone has not heard burn-in, that they are ignorant (or have bad hearing) - if it is proven later that there was nothing physical/measurable to hear, how can they have been ignorant of it? 
 
I have never doubted that the burn-in crowd hear changes... what is at debate is why. 

 

[lee730]

Quote:

I thought my phrasing was clear that my statement applied to both sides. It should not be said that because someone has not heard burn-in, that they are ignorant (or have bad hearing) - if it is proven later that there was nothing physical/measurable to hear, how can they have been ignorant of it? 
 
I have never doubted that the burn-in crowd hear changes... what is at debate is why. 

I feel it to be due to the drivers settling down. And I can easily believe some can't pick it up. I mean my dad thinks his Bose IE2s are comparable to my former IE8s. Most people just don't have a sense of audio and don't care.
 

 

[liamstrain]

 
 
Quote:

And I can easily believe some can't pick it up. I mean my dad thinks his Bose IE2s are comparable to my former IE8s. Most people just don't have a sense of audio and don't care.

 
 
I don't disagree with that statement. What I disagree with is a blanket attribution, even to the audiophiles here who have stated they did not hear burn in - that they must not know how to listen, or have damaged hearing (or are lying), etc. etc. 
 
It should be taken as a fact that some well qualified listeners hear burn in. Just as it should be taken as a fact that some do not. What we need to determine is what is going on, that allows for both of these to be true. 

 

[lostid]

It's useless to argue about this IMHO. If you believe it from your experience, then it works for you. Vice versa.
 
What really matters is what works for YOU - whether $5 earbuds or $500 IEM's. I personally found the best (oddly and fortunately the cheapest) for my iphone 4s. I couldn't be any more happy for the couple and they just like each other.

 

[tinyman392]

Quote:

 
Everyone hears differently and a lot of people do not know their hearing sucks.  I can't tell you how many times I've allowed my family to take a listen to my expensive headphones and ended up commenting in a way that just flabbergasted me.  They may hear harsh highs when I EQed it to be absolutely absent of harshness to my ears, they hear a flat response type in the LCD2 when it is known to have excellent stage depth.  Something like this happens nearly every time I allow someone to listen to my gear.  A ton of people have hearing problems and a lot of users do not understand how to actually listen to audio the right way.  They simply do not pick up on dynamics like we do until they gain enough experience as a listener which takes time.  There are yet more tons of users who FLAT OUT LIE about their experiences, never actually heard the piece they are reviewing or speaking about and may not have ever actually owned a piece of hifi gear.  
 
The majority of experiences that were posted by users who said they can't hear it, are in fact one of these three types of users.  There is also the fact that some headphones don't change to an audible degree.  A lot of people are tall or short, have slightly deformed ear canals ( I am one of them, my left ear NEVER fits properly or feels anything close to what my right side is, I recently had my first custom iem job done and that proved it, its visually different in shape on the exterior part of my ear.  Some people have mutant Xmen heads that make headphones squeeze and vice grip them, which makes that set sound a bit different from someone with a smaller head who just cant get a good fit. 
 
Tons of factors, all of them real.  
-Mike

I'll agree that people hear differently (which can lead to different perceptions; that is what my hypothesis is about anyways), but to say they aren't listening correct is a direct insult, it's as bad (in actuality much worse) than the placebo.  I'm all for proving burn in, but not by calling others liars and invalidating the other's argument (whether it be our side, or their side; both are valid and should be accepted).  Calling others liars will not help your case, it will actually hurt it.
 


Quote:

Quote:

 
Again with this old chestnut? 

As much as I'd love to believe in that chestnut, I don't.  I don't agree with it, I think it's a direct insult towards people who don't hear it (even if that isn't me).


Quote:

 
Yah, no. I provided myself as a counter example earlier (with my rationale to counter the physical and experience based criticism). Which leaves only one, and frankly, don't appreciate being called a liar.
 
It's tantamount to me saying anyone who hears burn in - either doesn't know how to listen, has hearing damage, or is making it up... which we know not to be the case as well. This is a lazy argument for his side... we should work to find the real reasons some hear and some do not - that is consistent with the experiences and evidences, before we just assume half of the arguers are ignorant or lying. 

I agree it's insulting, which is why I don't use that against you.  I still stand by the basis of sensitivity of change of sound.
 


Quote:

That goes for both sides though. "before we just assume half of the arguers are ignorant or lying." Its not fair to say the ones who don't hear a difference are liars. Ignorant is more the right word, as they don't know or have not experienced it themselves. And the fact is some people can hear better than others, just as others can see better. Could be a reason why my hearing is good because I can't see for **** lol.
 

Yes, this goes for both sides, naming placebo is just as bad as calling someone a liar, remember that.  Even ignorant is still labeling to remove evidence, how do we know which side is the ignorant one?  We really don't.  The only thing we do know is some people hear this, some don't.  Possible reasons thus far:

1. Hardware break in (tips, pads, etc).  However, in my test with the ADDIEM (granted it's a small one) I found using the same tips from old ADDIEM to new ADDIEM to still cause a huge change in sound.  Please do not label this a placebo, it shouldn't be used either direction since the placebo can actually be used for either case (for or against burn in) like being called a liar.  I do accept the idea of hardware break in, but don't think it's the underlying reason due to the above reasons.
2. Hearing differences cause us to hear differently.  We all have different sensitivities, and these differences also occur to the changes over time.  What happens if the headphones change too slow for one person to hear it, but the other person is sensitive enough to hear it?  Well neither are lying when the other person say I hear change and the first person says they don't. 
3. Other reasons?  Post them. 

 
My problem here is not whether or not driver burn in exists, it's why we hear these differences where many hear the change while others don't.  Does this problem involve burn in?  Yes, is that the focus of the question (should it be the focus of our question)?  No.

 

[lee730]

Quote:

 
 
 
 
I don't disagree with that statement. What I disagree with is a blanket attribution, even to the audiophiles here who have stated they did not hear burn in - that they must not know how to listen, or have damaged hearing (or are lying), etc. etc. 
 
It should be taken as a fact that some well qualified listeners hear burn in. Just as it should be taken as a fact that some do not. What we need to determine is what is going on, that allows for both of these to be true. 

Can't argue with you there. Everyone has the right to their own opinion. Its just not right though when someone throws their opinion as fact and attempts to invalidate everyone else' opinion (trolling). At the same time I also have a hard time believing some can't hear changes in the IE8 (at least for me it was so drastic and so much changing throughout 300+ hours of time). I just hope these new IE80s don't change as drastically as the IE8 (I have a feeling they won't according to reviews so far).
 
 

 

[swbf2cheater]

Quote:

 
Yah, no. I provided myself as a counter example earlier (with my rationale to counter the physical and experience based criticism). Which leaves only one, and frankly, don't appreciate being called a liar.
 
It's tantamount to me saying anyone who hears burn in - either doesn't know how to listen, has hearing damage, or is making it up... which we know not to be the case as well. This is a lazy argument for his side... we should work to find the real reasons some hear and some do not - that is consistent with the experiences and evidences, before we just assume half of the arguers are ignorant or lying. 

 
The idea that someone who hears burn in doesn't know how to listen or has damage is an absolute mute point and if anything, it is the laziest reply of the past few pages.  Calling my reprise lazy for having answered someones question?  Liam, I doubt you even read my post on the last page and that was quoted again right at the top of this one.  How does one consider that type of thing "lazy"?    You are arguing and making counterpoints to my own for the sake of making a counterpoint and nothing more.  It is neither helpful nor respectful in the slightest.  Your counter point to my own, in regards to anyone hearing burn in having damaged hearing or lying, is absolutely mute and a fallacy.  Burn in changes sound as a result of many factors, if you can't hear that, the fault is yours.  It is "tantamount" to nothing in reality, you made that up to sound cool and that is a result of you ( and now apparently Lee simply not at all reading beyond one post above your own.  I had already explained a few physical aspects that could change and result in something audible.  You and Lee neglected that entire post and counter pointed to the next reply I made to another users question, which ended up being one possible explanation that applies to a small % of those who might not hear and differences.  You made it seem like that was my only reason and that I am somehow branding everyone as having damaged ears.  Please learn to read before you reply, you too, Lee.
 
In case Liam is unaware, this is the internet.  There are tons of people who lie and have lied right here on Head Fi about products they've never used.  If Liam believes everyone on the net is trustworthy, that is his delusion.  Best to listen to users with real life experiences who know better.  ( Ya, Liam.  I am definitely giving you a taste of your own medicine in verbal form.)