[liamstrain]

Largely agreed.
 
My response was because you presented this as a refutation of my "I don't know any studies" quip - and I'm just saying - this doesn't pass even cursory muster for a truly useful study on the question. This would not be published in a peer reviewed journal - but would certainly in an audio magazine.

 

[kingpage]

The problem is few people in the academic world are interested in "real world" issues like this. The kind of studies they are interested is  usually different from the non-academic people.

 

[fubar3]

Just when the burn-in idea is almost resolved, new information appears..
Some People Can Hear A Color Or Smell A Sound
 
So if you don't like the new headphone smell, you may not be happy with the sound. Eventually, the smell goes away, and the sound improves.  Hah, that explains burn-in.
 
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/92698.php

 

[Head Injury]

That's not new information by any stretch. Even the article's 4 years old.

 

[MegaMushroom]

Quote:

Just when the burn-in idea is almost resolved, new information appears..
Some People Can Hear A Color Or Smell A Sound
 
So if you don't like the new headphone smell, you may not be happy with the sound. Eventually, the smell goes away, and the sound improves.  Hah, that explains burn-in.
 
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/92698.php

Explains why my Grados got better as they aged a bit. On a side note... What does blue taste like?
 

 

[Uncle Erik]

The problem is few people in the academic world are interested in "real world" issues like this. The kind of studies they are interested is  usually different from the non-academic people.

Not quite.

My inner beancounter (I'm an accountant, among other things) sees huge profits in burn-in and the other audio pseudosciences.

If proven, manufacturers could burn-in for a premium.

Manufacturers would be insane not to capitalize on that. Adding another $20-$50 for something that could be done for pennies would significantly pad the bottom line. This is something that could be capitalized upon. That manufacturers aren't should tell you something. Corporations exist to maximize profits. This is a screamingly obvious profit center. Assuming there's anything to it, of course.

Academics are interested in profit, too. They might not sell something, but all major research schools hold patent portfolios. Don't think for a second that they don't capitalize on their patents. Revenue is revenue.

Same goes for all the other pseudoscience and silly nonsense products out there. If just one of them could prove their claims, they'd whup the competition and rake in the dollars.

There is monstrous financial incentive to prove claims.

That the purveryors of psuedoscience hide in the shadows and bash people who ask wuestions ought to tell you a lot. If they were on the level, they'd make a lot more money by being open with their products and patenting their discoveries. Like legitimate companies do.

If I discovered a way to burn-in that provided benefits, you better believe I'd protect the IP and then market the hell out if it.

You have to look at the financial angle. If something is legitimate, it gets protected and capitalized upon. If something is fishy, the FUD gets laid on thick and people aski g wuestions are attacked. Usually personally.

 

[kingpage]

Your logic is sound except it isn't logical in academia. I may not have been in the research area for a long time, but I have been to countless of seminars, discussions and so on and have seen and talked to many professors and researchers in my discipline as well as others, nevermind fellow students. At least in university, academic researchers don't see profits or the dollor sign when they decide what or how they approach their area of interests. The ones who do care about money get filtered out either early or they eventually leave academia after getting the qualification or some experience to gain an advantage in employment outside. The ones who stay behind for all those years, will always put their interests and ability above everything else.
 
What I'm saying is that we may never find a well-excercuted study to be conducted by independent scientists such as at universities or research institues on the existence or different effects of burn-in in headphones. Like you said, driven by profits and other monetary incentives, people who work closely with the headphone industry or are in it are much more likely to conduct research in this particular area. In many senses, it is also hard to accept those results even when it's done right because of conflict of interests and their own vested interests.
 
One day, someone may come along, and have lots of grant money and and an interest in this and doesn't care about returns but want to see results. Let's hope that person comes sooner than later, not fall before all the potential "distractions and attractions" that lure him away from this.

 

[liamstrain]

 
 
Quote:

At least in university, academic researchers don't see profits or the dollor sign when they decide what or how they approach their area of interests.

 
Maybe things are different in Australia... in the US, while the researcher doesn't get much say... the University pulls in a LOT of money, and can steer what studies get approval accordingly. 

 

[kingpage]

Burn-in effects don't sound like the kind of research the government or big private non-headphone companies are looking for. They want cutting-edge technology...especially military related.

 

[liamstrain]

Try pharmaceuticals and bio-tech... but I agree. Still money talks. It would mean a lot of money for the consumer electronics industry, which is nothing to sneeze at. 

 

[Prog Rock Man]

Scientists do do some weired and odd research
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ig_Nobel_Prize
 
I am surprised that audiophile claims have not attracted much interest.

 

[Adda]

Wavecor driver specs have values for both pre and post burn-in... but the sceptics are probably going to ignore it anyway.
 
http://www.wavecor.com/html/wf152bd03_04.html

 

[liamstrain]

Interesting, thanks. I wonder why they do not burn them in before shipping - I guess, aside from having to wire them to a source for 12 hours (per their note) - maybe that's just too much hassle. 

 

[Adda]

Quote:

Interesting, thanks. I wonder why they do not burn them in before shipping - I guess, aside from having to wire them to a source for 12 hours (per their note) - maybe that's just too much hassle. 

Yeah it would probably just add to the price, I'd rather pay less and burn them in my self.

 

[Prog Rock Man]

Quote:

Interesting, thanks. I wonder why they do not burn them in before shipping - I guess, aside from having to wire them to a source for 12 hours (per their note) - maybe that's just too much hassle. 

Could it be because there is evidence that after resting the speaker will return, if not totally then pretty much to its original state. So there is no point in doing a factory burn in.
 
http://www.thecarversite.com/yetanotherforum/default.aspx?g=posts&t=2232