What someone rarely mentions - if at all - is that the supposed burn-in for the brain occurs in a relatively short time - a matter of hours, if that long. Anyone who's purchased a new pair of glasses with a different shape, or driven a new car with a different perspective of vision, mirrors, etc. can attest to this. So IMHO, the
excuse that burn-in is mental is a huge stretch. Nevertheless, there is quite a lag until the brain catches up - therein lies the fallacy with DB testing.
At the same time, anyone who believes that our measurements fully define the sound quality of an amp that can be heard with human ears - hasn't lived long enough to experience the scope of our technical shortcomings when it comes to modeling human capability and senses. If frequency response, SNR, and distortion fully described an amplifier's sound qualities as heard by an
experienced human ear, then we'd all be using CMoy's - end of story.
As for double-blind testing, again - just another example of our shortcomings in attempting to model human response, a Jeopardy game with a game show host is about as useful. There's a noteworthy fellow who uses this construct to his advantage to prove how low the amp quality preferences can result in a DB test.
Anything where heat develops is going to experience some break-in while the molecules re-align themselves with the repeated heating/cooling. This will have an effect on sound quality. Is it measureable and noticeable? That depends on a myriad of factors. I think it's safe to say that a low power CMoy is going to experience much less change (if any) than a high-current MOSFET or high-voltage tube amp. I have a hard time believing it runs into hundreds of hours, but all the same, have experienced the
long delay with breaking in Black Gate capacitors (large ones) repeatedly.
Just thought I'd add my 2 cents to this interesting discussion.