Does iPod get better with burn-in?

[KrazyIvan]

Don't get computer burn in confused with the hocus pocus burn in assoiciated with audio components and head/ear phones. Computer burn in is an actual testing of the components to make sure it will not fail when sold. Stress testing if you will.

Burn in as associated with audio is just a bunch of snake oil in my opinion.

To quote someone from another forum:

Quote:

There is nothing to burn in on a normal dynamic headphone. On a dynamic midwoofer or woofer speaker, in the first few minutes or hours of operation, the brand new suspension components may loosen mechanically, thus causing a very slight reduction of the Fs[resonant frequency] of the transducer(s). This would result in slight[and unlikely to be audible in all but the most extreme cases] increase of low frequency extension. The use of the dynamic transducer at high rates of excursion/incursion may temporarily stress the rubber surround causing a temporary and very slilght change in it's physical properties that would return to normal when the high level of stress is reduced or stopped. The non-linearities in the magnetic gap at these extreme movements will likely be of a far greater magnitude in effect. A normal dynamic headphone has no such suspension system. The diaphragm is terminated directly to the edges of the transducer frame. Slight physical property changes may occur in the diaphragm during use at constant high amplitudes if it heats appreciably, or if used in very extreme temperature climates; but no permanent change would occur. It is unlikely that the small change that would occur temporarily would be audible. Burn in of an audible magnitude on standard headphones is something often assumed to exist without real evidence. You will adjust/compensate, mentally, for the new sound balance. So, metaphorically, you may burn in to the headphones.

 

[fewtch]

Quote:

Originally Posted by KrazyIvan Burn in as associated with audio is just a bunch of snake oil in my opinion.

The term "snake oil" is associated with selling products that don't live up to their claims. Burn-in costs nothing, and hurts nothing to try.

There's certainly something to getting used to the sound of a new piece of gear, a BIG something actually. But people have actually A/B'ed burned in headphones vs. new headphones around here, and heard clearly audible differences. I've seen this often enough that to me, it's at least a strong indication that the phenomenon exists.

Now cable burn in, OTOH... don't get me started.

 

[Quado]

One thing that could be it is the speed of the sound... The warmer the temp., the faster the sound waves move (this may act almost like crossfeed in a way/better separation of frequencies); the colder the temp. is, the sound waves move slower and this may interfere with the dynamics (too much echo, frequencies too mixed together). Perhaps, this is why many people say that at least electrostatics (and tubes?) 'warm-up'--somehow this could be integrated to a point in dynamic headphones too...perhaps using the headphones for a period of time, "matures" the signal and operation (sort of like when you turn on a lightbulb, and overtime it gets brighter). Anyways, burn-in is not a mystery and is purely scientific and natural...it's not in your head.

 

[KrazyIvan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by fewtch The term "snake oil" is associated with selling products that don't live up to their claims. Burn-in costs nothing, and hurts nothing to try. There's certainly something to getting used to the sound of a new piece of gear, a BIG something actually. But people have actually A/B'ed burned in headphones vs. new headphones around here, and heard clearly audible differences. I've seen this often enough that to me, it's at least a strong indication that the phenomenon exists. Now cable burn in, OTOH... don't get me started.

You know what I mean, call it what you will; snake oil, voo doo, hocus pocus, urban legends, myths. I don't want to offend anyone but there is no hard scientific data to prove that "burn-in" is real, except for means of weeding out defective components before they are sold to the customer. In that respect, I would take burning in an ipod to mean: running it for a set amount of time to find any manufacturer defects. Not to improve sound quality.

The mechanics of headphones just don't work that way. I am more inclined to beleive that it is all in the mind. I'll even give you that tube amps need some "burn-in" before they sound good. Specifically the first minute or so needed to warm up.

Again, don't take my post wrong. I am not going to try to convince anyone. Especially here.

All I want to point out is that there is no scientific evidence that supports this notion. I will admit that it will not hurt to do it. I prefer not to. Besides, even if it is true, my headphones will get burnt in eventually.

Cable burn in. AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 

[rextrade]

Why is "burn in" always equated with better sound? If it does exist, couldn't burn in just as likely make a component sound worse? Like nice tight bass turning flabby after stuff (highly technical term) loosens up?

I'm pretty skeptical about burn in for the most part.

 

[discord]

lol this is hilarious how all you guys argue over this crap. It really isn't that big of a deal, geez.

 

[D555]

Don't forget the cumulative "burn-in" effects on the organic reception device and the neural transmission fibers let alone the aural processor. Changing humidity and temperature also affects transmission speeds. Micro-vibration to surrounding materials affects reflection and absorption. The introdution of chemicals to the aural processor and auxialliary equipment can also affect all aspects of the device.

Thank goodness we have subjective reviews to make sense out of all of this.

Paul

 

[K2Grey]

I find that properly controlling the introduction of chemicals can lead to a extremely significantly improved listening experience.

 

[Quado]

Wow...at least I try to be informative (and yes, temperature is scientificly proven to affect the speed of sound; temperature changes the density of the air, without changing the pressure, lower density gases transmit sound faster, every Celsius degree increase makes the speed increase by 0.6 meters per second; the sound travels faster through solids and liquids, relating to elasticity and density; the speed of sound through solids and liquids does not get changed as much with temperature as with gases, the densities of them are less affected by temperature; this could be why many high-end headphones use large foam; speed = frequency x wavelength--I took a physical science class--sound is basically just audible vibrations from matter. That was not subjective--at least not with the sound waves in general and not the equipment. What was subjective, however, was that frequency thing...yeah, I was just relating it to how molecules move faster in heat; and how they slow down in cold; etc. Just saying stuff for fun, basically...I'm dumb and confused; yet slightly interested in this kind of stuff). By the way, most of us here do not like corny; annoying/geeky LIES... Please...at least try to be helpful, people (this board could seriously use less of those kinds of messages; so please stop writing anything that doesn't try to be helpful, and is ignorant). If I have made any of you mad, then please go ahead and say anything you want to me...I really don't mind; and will not say anymore bad things, besides from this message. I have made messages before--like the ones you guys are making; and trust me, it doesn't make you feel good in the long run.

To me, burn-in just means the sound changes in general (and I mean ANY change); it can make something sound better or worse, but generally, most here will say the equipment goes through some transitions before finding a resting sound/place...this resting place is the peak of burn-in, when you can say "my geeky stuff is finally burned-in!". And assuming since almost all of us here on this board have heard ANY change, that means stuff DOES "burn-in". I really think people are mostly skeptical of the actual word and all its varied meanings, and not what it is truly intended to mean when we use it to describe things in relation to audio (this makes things confusing...perhaps they sub-consiously just want to use another word to describe change?). Anyways, I got into most audio equipment stuff through looking at HeadRoom's site; they should know more about audio stuff than most people...so why not trust them when they say that things can burn-in? I really don't see why it's so hard to understand...unless you don't notice ANY change at all within a time period, you just shouldn't make such judgement (that equipment doesn't burn-in). Basically, I'm just assuming the headphone drivers/other parts get more elastic and dense with more use; causing the speed and quality of the sound waves to vary. Interesting stuff, no matter how you think about it, huh!

Edit-Note: less dense...

 

[halcyon]

YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

1st wen I gets my ipod, it's got NO BASS!!!....

i say What lolz!!!!

... but burn it on church burn metal from norway!!!!!!!!!!!

amAzing!!!!!!

after 2 months base is

!! OMG LOLZ!!!!

cant git enuff!!!! ... now da bass belong to us

... i telll u man ... use M-E-T-A-L its da best!!!!

apple shouldve done it 4 all stock models!!!!

n000bs!!!!

 

[akerman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Veggie_Musician CPU's burn in - its a well known fact - dac's are cpu - so will burn in!

If it's a well-known fact, you shouldn't have any trouble providing us with some studys that show this fact

 

[halcyon]

While it's true that the characteristics of silicon transistors may change somewhat during overvolting burn-in period (as testified by many cpu overclockers), this has nothing to do with the bit-level output of the device. The output of the DAC or CPU remains the same on bit level.

Hence, the audible differences in DAC chip output, burn-in or no burn-in, should not exist.

 

[Manveer]

It's easy to find out...just do a double blind A/B test and see what the results are. Use 1 brand new iPod and 1 that has been used for over 200 hours, same exact music files at the same volume.