[MomijiTMO]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrGreen /img/forum/go_quote.gif bad example. This actually happens in a lot of cases

Say what. Ok let me be clear. No patches, no new drivers, everything kept equal, I've never seen an improvement due to the gpu being used.

 

[estreeter]

kontai69, that point has been made many, many times in countless threads, but I dont think it would change a single Head-Fiers mind, with the possible exception of the person with the two headphones. I dont know of anyone who has gone from total cynic to convert on the basis of a third-hand account.

DBT isnt a happy topic here, but I cant think of any other way to settle this. Ideally, the test subjects wouldnt even know that they were comparing two of the same headphone or the purpose of the exercise - again, I dont know how many here would be converted but the results would make for interesting reading, IMO.

 

[MomijiTMO]

A DBT wouldn't change anything. People would dispute the results and that's probably why it's a banned topic here. All that would happen is Group A who did the tests would infer that Group B are stupid and Group B would say Group A's tests are flawed.

 

[Audiosaurus]

No doubt that burn-in is there; it's not a matter of "belief", it's physics. Denying it is like denying gravity. Whether the change is supposed to be perceivable (or an improvement) is another issue; the reports of headphones sounding that much better after X hours of burn-in could well be psychological, sort of a "Placebo effect" to your hearing.

 

[cegras]

I'd say it's more psychological than anything. If you listen to a pair of satellite speakers with diffuse base and put on headphones with tight bass, everything will seem weird for a moment, but you will eventually adjust to these differences. It's what I've been seeing for a long time when people say new headphones are so radically different from their own, but then they settle into them with growing positive opinions.

 

[Drubbing]

I don't understand why people keep posting about it being 'sound science' when it's anything but.

Audible 'differences' are purely psychological; so what if the drivers settle in after a few hours? None of my phones have changed one iota.

You get used to, and familiar with the sound over time; you can selectively listen to, or not listen to, certain aspects of the sound and believe you're hearing something different. Or, you can just forget all of it, and let your sub conscious listen to what it wants to and 'smooth' the sound, or play certain aspects up without you realising it's happening.

If I go away from one of my phones for a while, then come back to it, any 'smoothing' my perception has formed is reduced somewhat, and I go back to hearing how they sounded out of the box for a while.

Also, with all the marketing phone companies do, burn in would be another angle they could use. But they don't do it. AKG dance around when asked the question. They know it's contentious, they know audio is an infinitely subjective market, and if there were indeed any 'sound science' they tell us, or sell it to us.

But they don't.

If people want to believe it, fine; I'm just giving my opinion, not trying to convert anyone. But that's what I object to - burn in evangelism. Presenting it as a 'natural' part of audio appreciation, and putting people down who question it, by invoking 'science' as the central argument.

It's about enjoying the music. If the phones aren't doing that, get different ones.

 

[Steve Eddy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by cegras /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'd say it's more psychological than anything. If you listen to a pair of satellite speakers with diffuse base and put on headphones with tight bass, everything will seem weird for a moment, but you will eventually adjust to these differences. It's what I've been seeing for a long time when people say new headphones are so radically different from their own, but then they settle into them with growing positive opinions.

This is a lesson I learned many years ago.

Since I was a child and into my mid-teens, I always cranked the bass and treble up on the stereo.

Then I came to know my first "audiophile," who espoused that tone controls were evil and for the best sound, they should be bypassed or set to flat.

So next chance I had, I set the tone controls to flat.

It sounded horrible. Like I was listening to my speakers through a soggy mattress.

But instead of just cranking up the bass and treble, I let myself succumb to a bit of peer pressure and left them flat.

And over the course of a week or so, it started sounding not so bad. The sound started to even up and the wet mattresses disappeared. I also began noticing things in the music that I hadn't noticed before. There was more detail.

Of course there was nothing "burning in" during this time. It was simply my brain becoming acclimated to a new "pattern."

se

 

[spinali]

You might want to continue your research by clicking the link at the bottom of this page - the most concise "pro" and "con" discussion on break-in you'll find.

 

[MrGreen]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MomijiTMO /img/forum/go_quote.gif Say what. Ok let me be clear. No patches, no new drivers, everything kept equal, I've never seen an improvement due to the gpu being used.

Modern operating systems optimize programs that are used frequently.

 

[scompton]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kontai69 /img/forum/go_quote.gif From what I've seen, it seems like 99.9% of people who claim massive changes after burn-in never compare their "burned-in" headphone to one that is brand new out of the box. This would really substantiate their claims that physical changes in the headphone are occuring and "100% real" as often times described. IMO, burn-in effects are psychological. You just get used to the sound (as well as any faults) over time.

x2. I don't doubt there is some effect, but when I bought a 15 year old, NOS, MB Quart QP85, I never noticed a change.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MomijiTMO /img/forum/go_quote.gif Why do we need to 'adjust' to the sound as said by people who don't believe in burn in. Is there a scientific reason? I don't understand what happens in this adjustment phase. I mean it's one thing to say burn in is false but to then suggest another theory with little or no proof is really just going around in circles. The more I think about it the more confused I get. I'll just be listening to music from now on.

We have to adjust because it's different than what our brain is used to. When I switch between the QP85 and my DT880, the DT880 sounds muddy and awful. But only because I'm used to the sound from the QP85. After 15 minutes the DT880 sounds fine.

 

[Mink]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Koyaan I. Sqatsi /img/forum/go_quote.gif This is a lesson I learned many years ago. Since I was a child and into my mid-teens, I always cranked the bass and treble up on the stereo. Then I came to know my first "audiophile," who espoused that tone controls were evil and for the best sound, they should be bypassed or set to flat. So next chance I had, I set the tone controls to flat. It sounded horrible. Like I was listening to my speakers through a soggy mattress. But instead of just cranking up the bass and treble, I let myself succumb to a bit of peer pressure and left them flat. And over the course of a week or so, it started sounding not so bad. The sound started to even up and the wet mattresses disappeared. I also began noticing things in the music that I hadn't noticed before. There was more detail. Of course there was nothing "burning in" during this time. It was simply my brain becoming acclimated to a new "pattern." se

Agreed.
I think this is what break-in means for me: 'a getting used to'.
Although I am not 100% sure about this...

 

[Uncle Erik]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MatchFire /img/forum/go_quote.gif Just curious, but why don't you believe in this? I've seen many people posting about their disbelief of this seemingly (to me at least) logical idea that headphone drivers, being moving, flexible units undergo some form of physical change (loosening up, stretching, etc) that does, in fact, have an impact on the sound. Since this concept makes perfect sense to me I was wondering if some of you could possibly explain your viewpoint, so I could better understand.

Why should someone believe without evidence?

There are any number of wild-eyed, unsubstantiated claims out there. Shockingly, most of those involve sending someone money. "We have no idea what's going on, but send us money. Trust us, and you need to believe."

Wild-eyed aside, there's also a lot of plausible claims out there that, when closely examined, turn out to be grade A horse feces. Sure, it's plausible that there's burn in, but precious little evidence. Further, people have developed elaborate rituals, ceremonies and traditions around it that don't mean a damned thing. You might as well light candles and walk in a circle backwards while chanting.

Before you believe in something, no matter how plausible, start asking questions. You'll get one of two reactions.

If your questions are calmly answered, examples given, proof offered, explanation on how you can test it yourself, and so on, then it's probably legitimate.

If your questions are met with anger, no real answers, being told that you're a "hater," accusations of "trying to ruin the fun for others," and that sort of nonsense, then whatever it is you're looking into is probably bullcrap. Typically, bullcrap that makes money for someone. The reason they won't answer your questions is because they know they're selling bullcrap and simply want your cash.

If you'd like an excellent explanation of why you should question things instead of automatically believing, pick up a copy of The Demon-Haunted World, by Carl Sagan.

 

[jaycalgary]

So what do you think cause the improvement in sound break in? K702's sounded horrid at 1st that for sure. I only had them plugged into an mp3 and laptop for the 1st month. They would break up in the bass a lot more when I 1st got them. That has to be because they were underpowered and the cones getting worked in,less resistance.

 

[Audiosaurus]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drubbing /img/forum/go_quote.gif Audible 'differences' are purely psychological

Totally! Why bother shelling out $2000 for "high-end" audio equipment when you can get the same sound quality for $10, since the only audible difference is psychological? Everyone will save so much money thanks to your announcement, you should get someone to post it on the homepage!

 

[Mink]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Audiosaurus /img/forum/go_quote.gif Totally! Why bother shelling out $2000 for "high-end" audio equipment when you can get the same sound quality for $10, since the only audible difference is psychological? Everyone will save so much money thanks to your announcement, you should get someone to post it on the homepage!

He meant audible differences concerning break-in