[Vinyl]

If burn in is indeed so important, why companies aren't selling headphones that are already burnt in from the factory (not even as an option, as far as I know)?
They could also compute/find out the best sound wave and routine that suits each model, or at least give some advice to buyers upon this matter.

 

[Redo]

They run various tests on the headphones to make sure they pass QC, but they aren't in the business of stocking thousands of headphones hooked up to thousands of amps running for hundreds of hours before shipping them out. It's not economical

 

[m1abrams]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vinyl /img/forum/go_quote.gif If burn in is indeed so important, why companies aren't selling headphones that are already burnt in from the factory (not even as an option, as far as I know)? They could also compute/find out the best sound wave and routine that suits each model, or at least give some advice to buyers upon this matter.

Simple reason $$$$ even for high-end gear doing even 24hours burn-in which is less than most of the people hear recommend would be extremely expensive. Things that make it pricey:
1. Space - space is not free and storage of product is pricey overhead for most companies. They want the product out of the building as soon as it is boxed.
2. Power - it takes electricity to do and that adds up fast
3. Equipment - You now have to have equipment to perform the burn-ins and maintain the equipment
4. Logistics - 1 more step from manufacturing to selling always will add cost

I would guess most consumers even fairy dust believing audiophiles would rather just do the burn-in themselves than pay someone to do it. Now keep in mind most consumers would look at you as if you had horns coming out of your head if you even mentioned "burn-in" never mind the people who know what it is and just give it little to no weight.

 

[Vinyl]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Redo /img/forum/go_quote.gif They run various tests on the headphones to make sure they pass QC, but they aren't in the business of stocking thousands of headphones hooked up to thousands of amps running for hundreds of hours before shipping them out. It's not economical

Not even for those high-priced, luxury models? What would that cost, $5 per unit? That's a 1% increment over a $500 phone that would let the customer enjoy his new purchase out of the box.
As for a word of advice, that would cost nothing: two more lines on the manual or on the box.

 

[m1abrams]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vinyl /img/forum/go_quote.gif Not even for those high-priced, luxury models? What would that cost, $5 per unit? That's a 1% increment over a $500 phone that would let the customer enjoy his new purchase out of the box. As for a word of advice, that would cost nothing: two more lines on the manual or on the box.

Ok lets say it only costs $5 per unit (I have no idea how much it would cost but I would wager more than that if we are talking just 24hrs). $5 of cost to the company translates to an added cost of about 2-3x that to the consumer, not because they want to screw the customer but because they are in the business of making money not giving things away. Personally I would not pay an extra $10-15 so that someone can play pink noise through my can for 24 hours even on a $1k pair of cans.

IMHO - I would hazard to state that the added cost to the company would be closer to $50. Space and Electricty are not free, far from it. If you are dealing with high volume phones like the mid-tier Senns you could be talking about a LARGE number you need to support.

Think about the whiskey business they charge huge premiums for the older whiskey. All they are doing is storing it. But when you start having to store something for extended periods your production line is affected, you now have a fixed ceiling on production. So they make less of the older stuff to free up space to move the cheaper stuff through. I bet they actually make less per bottle of the expensive older whiskey than they do on the cheaper whiskey, they sell the older whiskey for the prestige.

 

[m1abrams]

Oh forgot one point, there is zero magic to burn in. No perfect way to do it. Pink noise is probably the most efficient but does not produce a "better sounding can" just gets the burn-in point faster. The idea is that the new driver is stiff and just needs to be used, make sure not to over drive it and it play some music, it will happen naturally with time.

Unlike whiskey where it does need to age in a specific environment to yield proper results, and most consumers probably would not want the large oak cast sitting in proper storage facility in their home.

 

[eneloquent]

Another consideration is that the idea of burn in is not universally accepted in the industry. I don't want to ignite the controversy here, and I'm not sure which side of the fence I fall on to begin with.

None the less, a convention that is not completely accepted - and is frequently debated - is a risky idea to formally adopt as a business. It would ultimately create more liability for a company than potential profit.

 

[m1abrams]

Quote:

Originally Posted by eneloquent /img/forum/go_quote.gif Another consideration is that the idea of burn in is not universally accepted in the industry. I don't want to ignite the controversy here, and I'm not sure which side of the fence I fall on to begin with. None the less, a convention that is not completely accepted - and is frequently debated - is a risky idea to formally adopt as a business. It would ultimately create more liability for a company than potential profit.

Not so sure burn-in in regards to dynamic drivers is all that debated. The amount burn-in changes things maybe highly debated but I think most people will agree that some drivers are affected by burn-in. Again the amount a driver is affected will vary from model to model.

 

[eneloquent]

Quote:

Originally Posted by m1abrams /img/forum/go_quote.gif Not so sure burn-in in regards to dynamic drivers is all that debated. The amount burn-in changes things maybe highly debated but I think most people will agree that some drivers are affected by burn-in. Again the amount a driver is affected will vary from model to model.

That's probably a better view of the idea I was trying to get across. How long is "enough," what's the "best" way, what level of amping is appropriate vice what amping the end user will be using? Do elevation, humidity, barometric pressure, and particulates in the atmosphere make a difference? Is it best done in a climate controlled clean room?

The concept of burn in seems to be the most "organic" aspect of this hobby, perhaps second only to tube rolling. If it's all in the ear of the listener and incredibly subjective, it's risky for a company to market it.

 

[m1abrams]

Quote:

Originally Posted by eneloquent /img/forum/go_quote.gif If it's all in the ear of the listener and incredibly subjective, it's risky for a company to market it.

I agree with all you said except for this. If ever there was an industry that made more money off that statement than audio. I mean they sell ROCKS to place on your equipment at good awful prices!

 

[prone2phone]

how can we know that factories don't do it, maybe some do but its their secret and they try to convince us (overwhelming naysayers on head fi) burn in is a myth. and when you buy unburnt headphone from another company, you return it after listening for a few moments, becouse you don;t believe in burn in

 

[m1abrams]

Quote:

Originally Posted by prone2phone /img/forum/go_quote.gif how can we know that factories don't do it, maybe some do but its their secret and they try to convince us (overwhelming naysayers on head fi) burn in is a myth. and when you buy unburnt headphone from another company, you return it after listening for a few moments, becouse you don;t believe in burn in

Those black copters still chasing you around?

 

[Napilopez]

Well Maximo at least tells you to burn in for like 8 hours or something for their iM590, I believe.

But personally, even if the company strictly does believe in burn in, I don't see the point in burning them in at the factory in most cases.

Like was mentioned, on mass produced products it would be too expensive, and on luxury/high-end products, well, I'm quite sure 95+% of them know the importance of burn-in. Plus, I personally like listening through the burn-in process =P

 

[Andrew H]

We recommend 8-10 hours, but only because there's a chance that novice users will actually consider doing it. Suggesting 50+ hours may not sound out of line to an enthusiast, but is also more likely to cause a novice to blow it off entirely.

 

[Lil' Knight]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vinyl /img/forum/go_quote.gif If burn in is indeed so important, why companies aren't selling headphones that are already burnt in from the factory (not even as an option, as far as I know)?

If a company told that their headphones were burnin 1000 hours before selling, how can we make sure about that?