[RacerX]

Burn-in is 90% mental, 20% real and 10% popular opinion.

 

[JaZZ]

Burn-in does have a real, physical effect, without a doubt – beside the also undoubted psychic accustomization. The greatest difference I experienced was with the HD 600 and possibly with the Etymotic ER-4S; but the latter in turn requires such a great psychic adaptation from an unfamiliar listener that it's hard to judge which effect is the dominant one. Nevertheless, all headphones I bought and with which I paid attention to this effect changed their sonic signature considerably during the first several hours of operation – as far as I can rely on my own judgement.

The physical effect is easily measurable with speakers: An unused woofer e.g. with a system resonance of say nominal 30 Hz usually resonates with 45 Hz in the beginning. It takes hundreds of hours of operation to increase the compliance of its suspension until it's settled down and achieved the nominal resonance frequency. There may also be some increases of elasticity in the membrane itself. Which is something that applies even more to headphone membranes which usually are designed to act as partial vibrators, in contrast to many loudspeakers.

JaZZ

 

[sacriste]

I can't understand electronics burn-in and I'm an electronic engineer, but I can see clearly the logic of speaker burn-in: they are electromechanical devices, the use (just call it that) give more flexibility and eases the responsiveness of the transducer. Actually I think there are good and bad burn-in: some speakers could get worse after burn-in.
And now my personal experience:
HD-497 (great since the beggining, excellent after some weeks, and they even benefit of some warming up before you put it on)
KSC-35 (fantastic all the time, but they become a little sweeter with use, no good proof for the burn-in case)
MX500 (ugly sounding at first, a little better than stock ones, but are the best proof for burn-in, they're cheap (for you americans

) so you can buy it to experiment if you don't believe in burn-in, but don't expect them to become HD600s)

And just for fun:
I have a pair of old and very cheap computer speakers. I think they´re sweet for low level office listening (wearing cans at work is not well seen in my country

). They used to be in my old home PC, when I sold it I bought new ones and sounded so crappy that I prefered to keep my old ugly-looking but nice sounding speakers.

 

[phonatic]

It seems to happen more with some phones than others. I've tried to be scientific about this with the last four sets bought at my house. I made it a point not to spend too much time listening to them to try to avoid psychological compensations, and more time just leaving them alone with music playing through them.

Sennheiser HD580s shifted a bit more in the direction of their supposedly characteristic sound after about a week... fortunate, because they sounded way too much like Grados during the first week, and that's not why I bought them.

497s sounded too bright about the first eight hours, then steadily and rapidly evened out. They sounded a little worse again for a day or so, then improved. Strange.

My spousal equivalent and I got each a set of MX500s. I got mine a few days before she got hers. Mine were again overly bright and lacking bass initially. They sounded better after being let alone overnight to run in. Hers, brand new, exhibited the same brightness as mine had, and going back and forth between the two sets we could both hear a difference. Now that she has them for a while they sound about the same as mine.

I don't know why there wouldn't be such a thing as break-in for headphones. Guitar strings break in, reeds sound better after you play them for a bit (I know... moisture changes their character, but still...), automobiles break in, for a variety of reasons, so why not headphones...

 

[bong]

Quote:

Originally posted by JKohn If you really want to test the break-in theory for yourself, buy two sets of identical headphones. Break one set in and not the other, and then do some blind listening to see if you can tell the difference. I bet you can't.

i don't think this will work out that simple. there are other variables involved, like manufacturing differences, the slight differences or quality of materials used, etc.

i just received my fourth pair of MDR-E888s recently, and none of them sound the same, although they obviously have similar sonic qualities. they sounded terrible right out of the box; really tinny, distorted treble, and no bass extension whatsoever. i also compared them with my everyday pair and there is a clear difference between the two. after 48 hours of burn in, the new ones sound drastically better.

and in case you guys are about to ask why i have four pairs of E888s, one MDR-E888lp is an everyday pair for my iPod and MZ-N505, one MDR-E888lp (which has better soundstage than the everyday pair) is used around the house, one fairly new MDR-E888sp is usually attached to the remotes of an MZ-R900 or a D-EJ915, and the new MDR-E888lp is the vintage "champagne gold" version, which i'm told is better than the current crop of silver ones. and it's quite true! this gold verson matches the soundstage of the bedroom E888lp and has deeper bass extension.

cheers.

 

[Frag|LE-]

Quote:

Originally posted by RacerX Burn-in is 90% mental, 20% real and 10% popular opinion.

I have Senn HD600s that Ive been burning in since december (every night plus the time i use them during the day). When I went to the HeadFi meet in Seattle and listened to some HD600s I could tell that they were almost right out of the box. This was a disappointment because the two pairs were upgraded with clous and EQs. The highs of fresh HD600s are unbearable and the bass is flat no matter what cable you are using. I wish I had remembered to bring my cans to test out those cables

Oh well.. my ears were happy again when I got home

 

[Lisa]

It seems quite logical that it would exist. The drivers move when you use the headphones and therefor get more flexible in time. So the drivers move differently after burn in making the 'phones sound different.

Quote:

Originally posted by RacerX Burn-in is 90% mental, 20% real and 10% popular opinion.

But to say, I'm 120% sure...

 

[Mike Scarpitti]

Quote:

Originally posted by Lisa It seems quite logical that it would exist. The drivers move when you use the headphones and therefor get more flexible in time. So the drivers move differently after burn in making the 'phones sound different. But to say, I'm 120% sure...

There could also be a factor of temperature, with them getting warmer and "looser" therefore.

 

[ProFingerSk8er]

i belive in burn-in,
when i first got my D66, i was a little disappointed. sound was very nice but was a little short on bass.
after 30+ hours of burning in, D66 eggos sound like heaven. very very smooth and clear sound and very tight bass

 

[Mike Scarpitti]

Quote:

Originally posted by ProFingerSk8er i belive in burn-in, when i first got my D66, i was a little disappointed. sound was very nice but was a little short on bass. after 30+ hours of burning in, D66 eggos sound like heaven. very very smooth and clear sound and very tight bass

I repeat there is no real basis for this belief.

 

[bioxeed]

Quote:

Originally posted by sacriste I can't understand electronics burn-in and I'm an electronic engineer, but I can see clearly the logic of speaker burn-in: they are electromechanical devices, the use (just call it that) give more flexibility and eases the responsiveness of the transducer. Actually I think there are good and bad burn-in: some speakers could get worse after burn-in.

ditto.. i don't understand What people are on about when they talk about electronic devices needing burn in. mechanical devices on the other hand tend to need to "settle" (for lack of a better word)

and like sacriste said there's always the chance it could be worse after burn in.

as for break-in of headphones - i believe it is there, but not to the extent that people make it out as. Alot of it is psychological imo. but hey.. so long as in the end it sounds good that's all that matters does it not?

 

[KCrimson1972]

Individual opinions mean very little in subject matter like this. To be conclusive it would have to be done under laboratory circumstances in very high volume. Followed by high volume blind testing. Every time this is done it becomes inconclusive and few people can pick time and again with unwavering consistent accuracy. This is true for many audio components in general.

From an engineering point of view I cannot see much of a break in happening simply because the main material breaking in that is audible would have to continue the process into deterioration of sound. If it can break in, it will continue right into wearing out. Now how can every one of these components involved in the break in process stop at the optimum break in point in a couple of days and go no further? Just stay there with optimum sound until they mechanically fail. Have the headphones broken into you or you into the headphones?

I am of the mind that until you have heard several new and several "broken in" on the exact equipment and source music BLIND for different periods of time under different circumstances you have no true multiple points of references. Blind testing has made many a fool out of audio engineers and audiophiles alike.

I think "BREAK IN" is the equivalent to "PLUG AND PLAY". The more you test it the less you believe it. It all comes out in the high volume numbers of testing and not individual incidents and opinions. Hearing is a very psychological thing even to the most highly trained ears. Some people could shake voodoo beads over their phones and swear they notice a positive difference. Sound being subjective who is to say it is not so? One person may perceive change where many do not.

Being an engineer I favor the voodoo beads for break in, and when someone in the company says "It's O.K. it is plug and play" the whole IT department starts laughing.

 

[Ozric]

Quote:

Originally posted by KCrimson1972 Have the headphones broken into you or you into the headphones?

That is the million dollar question!

 

[Sol_Zhen]

I’m not going to debate how much of burn-in is psycho acoustics or physically related to the gear. This is just my $0.02.

I think it’s mostly the gear.

I’ve noticed it with speakers, cables, headphones, and interconnects.

Rather than give examples, I want to give you guys this to mull over:

My physics are not all that up to date so forgive the layman-ness of this – All electronics and interconnects have conductors in them. On a molecular level the conductor (usually copper) may not be aligned. I think that as a current passes through the conductor the molecules align a tad with the current and fill in some gaps making for better conduction.

I think it’s a combination of that happening in the interconnects, wires, circuit boards, crossovers, et al that contribute to the burn in thing.

That is in addition to gear with moving parts (speaker drivers, motors) settling in after some hours of use.

But then again, half of audio is voodoo anyway... I think this is more of a religious discussion than anything. I'm a believer.

 

[TMC]

I believe in burn-in when it comes to the drivers and for the first bunch of hours. The first 10-20 hours of using new headphones can loosen up the drivers and maybe a couple more hours further depending on drivers. But when it comes to differences after 200h compared to 100h I have to say it's more of a mental burn-in.

If we're talking about cables and circuits there is no burn-in, because these things are made to keep a certain value with no moving parts and unless for example a capacitor is damaged, you won't get any significant change with time. You might get a small difference as the parts are heated up in a circuit, but that's something that needs to be done every time you switch the thing on and won't stay because you've used the amp or whatever for a certain amount of time before switching it off and let it go cold again.