[sonitus mirus]

Here is what Oscar at SoundMagic had to say about the E50. Seems like there would be some noticeable difference with refurbished headphones, but apparently that is not the case and they sound identical to new versions.

SoundMAGIC Headphones <support@soundmagicheadphones.com>
To:Shopify Notification
Apr 3 at 5:31 AM
Hi,

Burn-in is a debated subject, but I would not expect huge changes, also drivers rarely fail, and they would not go out of spec from normal usage. Many people still have full size headphones that are 20 or more years old that still work fine, it is usually the physical construction that fails first.

The refurbished will sound the same as the new ones,

Thanks,
Oscar

 

[tansand]

Oscar's makes some good iem's, I appreciate that. I almost bought some refurbished. But, you know, ears. I don't worry about bigshot, he just feels a need to express his anger his pov got disregarded. Cast aside. Abandoned. Some people can't deal with that.

I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings, bigshot.

 

[bigshot]

Ha ha! I'm having fun. If you aren't enjoying yourself, then you're doing it wrong!

 

[tansand]

Uh huh. Somebody is always doing it wrong, right bigshot? Lmao.

 

[Ramblinman]

The loosening up of moving materials is just common sense and silly to deny. The less energy it takes to move a diaphragm, the more efficient the diaphragms are. This results in greater detail in the the sound given the same source.

Does anyone really disagree with that?

Ok, let's hear the pad theory?

Loosely sealing pads would lower the Q and frequency of the resonance of the volume of air inside the shell/pad/whatever, like an aperiodic enclosure. Tightly sealing pads would raise Q and frequency. But, this is only one fundamental resonance, the others (higher) would be reflections inside the chamber (?), and would move little, if at all, up and down in frequency. They wouldn't just become more damped. And a soft, collapsing pad would make a better seal, raising Q and frequency, a hard one would not conform to the surface, and leak more.

Unless?

Pad theory seems pretty flaky as opposed to loosening up of moving materials theory, I have to say.

I mean, let's raise our hands. Who thinks there's at least a 50% chance the headphones under test are breaking in, as the term is generally understood, and this is exactly what the data is showing?

T

 

[bigshot]

If something is “loosening up” what makes it stop loosening up? ...and if it did stop, how could you guarantee that it stops right on the proper calibration? The thing that suggests to me that breaking in is placebo is the fact that no one ever seems to think break in sounds worse than new. That sounds to me like people’s ears are just acclimating to a new sound.

 

[colonelkernel8]

The loosening up of moving materials is just common sense and silly to deny. The less energy it takes to move a diaphragm, the more efficient the diaphragms are. This results in greater detail in the the sound given the same source.

Does anyone really disagree with that?

Who says “loosening up” the diaphragm doesn’t cause more IMD? Efficiency != “detail”.

 

[upstateguy]

If something is “loosening up” what makes it stop loosening up? ...and if it did stop, how could you guarantee that it stops right on the proper calibration? The thing that suggests to me that breaking in is placebo is the fact that no one ever seems to think break in sounds worse than new. That sounds to me like people’s ears are just acclimating to a new sound.

I never thought of it that way, you're absolutely right.

 

[upstateguy]

BS makes boydbrain comments, not that often, but a doosey that one was.

Jelly Fish he is now, @amn, he funny, does he know it?
Do I even need a herring?

I know you're trying to say something here but I can't make out what it is. Maybe you can help?

 

[Ramblinman]

If something is “loosening up” what makes it stop loosening up? ...and if it did stop, how could you guarantee that it stops right on the proper calibration? The thing that suggests to me that breaking in is placebo is the fact that no one ever seems to think break in sounds worse than new. That sounds to me like people’s ears are just acclimating to a new sound.

So are you aware of speaker cones becoming “too loose” ? What would you define as too loose?
So Is a baseball glove better when brand new or after it has been flexed repeatedly and loosens up?
Why?

In the case of a speaker cone, the surround stops it from loosening up beyond an engineerable point.

 

[jagwap]

Replying to the wrong message.

 

[jagwap]

If something is “loosening up” what makes it stop loosening up? ...and if it did stop, how could you guarantee that it stops right on the proper calibration? The thing that suggests to me that breaking in is placebo is the fact that no one ever seems to think break in sounds worse than new. That sounds to me like people’s ears are just acclimating to a new sound.

We went over this. You were reading it. Is this an example of that short term inability to remember details when listening that was discussed before?

 

[bigshot]

So are you aware of speaker cones becoming “too loose” ? In the case of a speaker cone, the surround stops it from loosening up beyond an engineerable point.

No, never saw a speaker cone get too loose. The surrounds deteriorate, but that isn't breaking in, it's wearing out. I would think it would be very hard to predict how far something is going to shift, if it's prone to shifting. You'd want to pick materials that don't deform as you use them, so it stays in spec. Maybe we're talking about cheap headphones here. Maybe $20 beaters evolve like that. I just got some $60 Monoprice cans and I've been using them for about $60 hours and I haven't noticed any difference. I guess it wouldn't matter though because they're nowhere near flat.

 

[Ramblinman]

No, never saw a speaker cone get too loose. The surrounds deteriorate, but that isn't breaking in, it's wearing out. I would think it would be very hard to predict how far something is going to shift, if it's prone to shifting. I would think that you'd want to pick materials that don't deform as you use them.

Sure they eventually disintegrate, but first they break in and allow the cone to move more freely. I don’t think it would be very hard to predict what the break in flexibility would be in a specified rubber compound used in a speaker surround.

You seem to be misunderstanding, I am talking about increasing flexibility, not deformation.

 

[skwoodwiva]

I know you're trying to say something here but I can't make out what it is. Maybe you can help?

Turn on your PMs