Being that this is the Sound Science Forum, I humbly ask folks who own Sony Walkmans to report about sound changes after the first 50 hours of use, and after 200 hours of use.
In the firmware, Sony actually recommends 200 hours for the single-ended 3.5mm output, and 200 hours of burn-in for the 4.4mm balanced output.
Feel free to describe your subjective listening impressions. Also if anyone stumbles upon verifiable evidence the capacitors truly change in a measurable way; please post the results.
When I was at canjam New York I spent 2.5 hours at Sony booth and yes! I couldn't pass without comparing a 5 hours brand new unit vs mine who has 1500 hours probably.. .
And I can confirm fresh units dont sound as good. Actually to a point where I totally disliked the sound!
My 1z had deeper longer bass decay, more resolving and sounded just better overall.
The way that same test could have been even better was having random players plugged in, as in our minds we can actually view the known burned in player as being better. It’s a known bias that we will actually hear things different as to what are expectations are before.
I myself of course totally believe in burn-in but even all my own side by side tests have been sighted.
The way that same test could have been even better was having random players plugged in, as in our minds we can actually view the known burned in player as being better. It’s a known bias that we will actually hear things different as to what are expectations are before.
I myself of course totally believe in burn-in but even all my own side by side tests have been sighted.
When I was buying my IER-Z1R IEMs they had a pair with 200 hours on them, if I remember right. As I taking my new ones out of the box for a test, I first tried the burned-in ones. The zero hour to 200 had a night and day difference!
When I was buying my IER-Z1R IEMs they had a pair with 200 hours on them, if I remember right. As I taking my new ones out of the box for a test, I first tried the burned-in ones. The zero hour to 200 had a night and day difference!
There you go ) its not a brain burn-in hehe its a real thing devices need to run threw 200h mark ussualy but people dont believe in it....
And 200h can be long to do if you dont leave your device running 24/7 for a weak...
The two units probably sounded different from the start. Some products have a very wide latitude for sample variation. There are some things where two of the exact same make and model sound quite different. A walkman is the sort of thing that would likely have variation because tape's a loosy goosey format anyway. It wouldn't be common with CD players where they have to hit CD specs. I've heard reports that Sony's control over manufacture has slipped a lot over the past decade. It may be even worse now.
The two units probably sounded different from the start. Some products have a very wide latitude for sample variation. There are some things where two of the exact same make and model sound quite different. A walkman is the sort of thing that would likely have variation because tape's a loosy goosey format anyway. It wouldn't be common with CD players where they have to hit CD specs. I've heard reports that Sony's control over manufacture has slipped a lot over the past decade. It may be even worse now.
Someone declaring no bias in a sighted listening cannot be taken seriously. Ignorance of self is a big problem here and it has to be addressed before we can hope to use our impressions as evidence of anything objective.
From those anecdotes I can make a few hypotheses as to why you may experience those changes:
- Perhaps the sound of certain DAPs does change in a significant way over time. We have not ruled out that possibility. It exists.
- Expectation bias. You already believed at the time of those experiences that burn in of DAPs was a thing. So it's perfectly possible that you felt what you wanted to feel.
- I see in the pic that those DAPs have 2 different colors. That's a difference, one we do feel, one that can very much affect our impression of sound even if the difference comes from sight. Not long ago I read something about how ipods of certain colors had a tendency to "sound" a little louder to some people. There has been more general research on this, where I seem to remember that green could often sound a little quieter, while red or black could be perceived as a little louder, I think? I'd have to find those papers again. But I'm only unsure about the specific colors, not about the potential influence.
- Maybe the DAPs had some audible differences since day one? Wouldn't we need to rule out that possibility before declaring that if any change is perceived then it can only be burn in?
I could list more hypotheses but they all gravitate around the same issues of poor testing conditions and a typical overconfidence about the validity of impressions gathered from those poorly controlled conditions. A weak test should not result in absolute certainty just because I'm the one feeling something and it agrees with my ready made opinion.
The two units probably sounded different from the start. Some products have a very wide latitude for sample variation. There are some things where two of the exact same make and model sound quite different. A walkman is the sort of thing that would likely have variation because tape's a loosy goosey format anyway. It wouldn't be common with CD players where they have to hit CD specs. I've heard reports that Sony's control over manufacture has slipped a lot over the past decade. It may be even worse now.
As said above, those are digital players. I perfectly understand the confusion, them being called walkman and being about as big as the last Sony K7 player I owned. ^_^
LoL mr. I know everything i am so happy for you you seem to be the perfect candidate why dont you go and make us an unbiased expertise of burn in and or 1 may sound different then the other from day 1!
Dude I am not a joe with random crap that talks without certainty. If say there is a difference well there is one. Sorry for you but I do hear it and trust me I aint the only one!
U may keep believing in your theories but I prefer trust my own ears and they are 100% sharp precise I can spot differences and nuances quiet easily.
And when I did the a/b I was not thinking who what and whixh dap had been burned in. I could easily perceive how each dap sounded its really easy to hear.
A 5 hour dap vs 1500hours is huge difference. Enough for me to dislike the fresh dap. It needs 200 hours to perfectly mature reach its full blast of quality.
Keep believing in your crap but I know this is real stuff thats the real life man things are different then your theories...
LoL mr. I know everything i am so happy for you you seem to be the perfect candidate why dont you go and make us an unbiased expertise of burn in and or 1 may sound different then the other from day 1!
Dude I am not a joe with random crap that talks without certainty. If say there is a difference well there is one. Sorry for you but I do hear it and trust me I aint the only one!
U may keep believing in your theories but I prefer trust my own ears and they are 100% sharp precise I can spot differences and nuances quiet easily.
And when I did the a/b I was not thinking who what and whixh dap had been burned in. I could easily perceive how each dap sounded its really easy to hear.
A 5 hour dap vs 1500hours is huge difference. Enough for me to dislike the fresh dap. It needs 200 hours to perfectly mature reach its full blast of quality.
Keep believing in your crap but I know this is real stuff thats the real life man things are different then your theories...
With all due respect, you are a random joe. I am too, in fact, pretty much everyone is. Even if Sean Olive said that, unless he came up with proof, no-one will listen to him. Well, audiophiles will, but everyone else will scoff and move on.
LoL mr. I know everything i am so happy for you you seem to be the perfect candidate why dont you go and make us an unbiased expertise of burn in and or 1 may sound different then the other from day 1!
Dude I am not a joe with random crap that talks without certainty. If say there is a difference well there is one. Sorry for you but I do hear it and trust me I aint the only one!
U may keep believing in your theories but I prefer trust my own ears and they are 100% sharp precise I can spot differences and nuances quiet easily.
And when I did the a/b I was not thinking who what and whixh dap had been burned in. I could easily perceive how each dap sounded its really easy to hear.
A 5 hour dap vs 1500hours is huge difference. Enough for me to dislike the fresh dap. It needs 200 hours to perfectly mature reach its full blast of quality.
Keep believing in your crap but I know this is real stuff thats the real life man things are different then your theories...
QED.
Let's hope that you don't usually misinterpret reality the way you just did my post...
I'm not testing this myself, because I don't have a new Sony DAP to test. It's that simple. But if someone wants to send me a new one and let me keep it for those allegedly significant 200hours, I'd be willing to try and demonstrate sound change in a more controlled and conclusive way than you and your 100% sharp ears.
[1] LoL mr. I know everything i am so happy for you you seem to be the perfect candidate why dont you go and make us an unbiased expertise of burn in and or 1 may sound different then the other from day 1!
[2] Dude I am not a joe with random crap that talks without certainty.
[2a] If say there is a difference well there is one. Sorry for you but I do hear it and trust me I aint the only one!
[2b] U may keep believing in your theories but I prefer trust my own ears and they are 100% sharp precise I can spot differences and nuances quiet easily.
[2c] Keep believing in your crap but I know this is real stuff thats the real life man things are different then your theories...
1. Hey, you're the one who "know this is real" with "certainty" and anyone who disagrees with you believes "random crap". That makes you the "Mr I know everything" here! So, a perfect example of hypocrisy that doesn't stop there: As you are certain of a massive "night and day" difference, that makes you the ideal candidate to make some objective measurements, because a "night and day" difference would produce a very large, easily measured difference with even cheap/free comparison tools!
2. If you go to the Flat Earth Society, you'll find plenty of people who believe they are "not a joe with random crap", talking WITH certainty. Does that mean YOU would believe the Earth really is flat? If not, why would you think we would believe you any more than we would believe a Flat Earth Society member who claims not to be "a joe with random crap" who is "certain"?
2a. And, if a Flat Earther looks out of their bedroom window and say's the Earth looks flat, well, the Earth is flat. Sorry for you but a Flat Earther does see a flat Earth and trust me they ain't the only one (pretty much everyone sees a flat Earth)!
2b. And you keep believing your theories that the Earth is round, while Flat Earthers prefer to trust their own eyes, that are 100% sharp precise and they can see the Earth is flat "quite easily", "it's really very easy to" see! So there we have it, applying YOUR logic, you would HAVE to believe the Earth must be flat. Do you really believe the Earth is flat?
2c. If you don't believe the Earth is flat, why don't you? If you're rational, it's because you have knowledge of the "theories"/science that the Earth is round and therefore discount what you can see with your own eyes. So, why don't you apply that same logic to your own posts? Because you sound EXACTLY like a Flat Earther!
Obviously, you are missing a great deal of "knowledge of the theories/science" of hearing perception, in fact it appears that you are missing pretty much ALL OF IT! And in addition, you seem to be missing knowledge of solid state manufacturing tolerances and various other facts (such as, Sony having a history of making exactly this type of false claim/marketing). There's clearly a problem with your approach here, that should be OBVIOUS to you:
Making posts in a Sound Science forum that lack and contradict pretty much any knowledge of science is NOT a bright move. You'll come across EXACTLY the same as an ignorant Flat Eather posting in a science forum and surely you don't want to be viewed as an ignorant fool, do you? Presuming you don't, the solution would be to gain some knowledge (of the actual facts/science). A good place to start would be this short video, which will demonstrate to you that you're hearing is not "100% sharp and precise", that in fact it's quite easily fooled by biases.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
