[thislittlepiggy]

I don't mean to incite a flame war, but i'm just curious if anyone ever had an instance where burn-in made your headphones sound worse instead of better. Please, indulge me.

 

[silverrain]

I've burned-in many, many cans -- I never heard any where the SQ got worse in any way, ever.
But, some show only a little bit of improvement, whereas some show a rather large improvent.
None of my cans have shown NO improvement at all -- so burn-in is a worthy thing to do -- as far as *I'm* concerned -- even though some peeps swear thay can "hear no difference".

 

[chouman]

I'd say burn-in can be a bad thing if it prevents you from listening to your music. After all, that is the end-goal, right?

 

[intoflatlines]

I don't think that burn-in/break-in is ever bad. Sometimes it won't help at all, and sometimes it will make an enormous beneficial difference. I agree with chouman that if you're preventing yourself from listening to your headphones just to burn them in, then it's a bad thing.

I think people should break in their headphones by listening to music through them and maybe playing music through them when they're not being used. But, I guess if you absolutely hate the sound of the brand new cans you should just burn them in for a couple days alone..

 

[greydragon]

Burn-in can be bad if you continuously burn in your phones without break, and/or too loud to the point of music clipping. In both instances, they drivers of your headphone can get damaged from overuse. I suggest continuous burn in for 4 hours and a 20 min break, and at volumes a tad above comfortable listening levels.

 

[Rednamalas1]

I never had instances where burn-in is bad for the headphone/earphones. All of my 'phones improved in quality with exception of B&O A8s - from what I understand, they come burned in...

 

[Brian loves music]

i listen to my hd595s about 5 hours a day and burn them in about 6 hours a night. I think continued use is fine...i keep it at listenable volumes even whem burning in over night.

Got about 100 hours in them and I can tell an improvement...though it's difficult to say cause i got an emu 0404 usb about 30 hours in...which has done wonders.

 

[GTanaka]

I'd have to say burn in is great. I got my DT770/80s with a heavy, heavy bass. After leaving it on for about 20 hrs total over the course of a week, it sounded mounds greater than it originally did.

 

[thislittlepiggy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by chouman /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'd say burn-in can be a bad thing if it prevents you from listening to your music. After all, that is the end-goal, right?

I had this theory in my head that the burn-in phenomenon was mostly a psychological effect. Even if that doesn't fit the mechanical definition of breaking in a headphone diaphragm, I think that it still contributes a lot towards the very real effect that is break-in.

I suspected this when I switched from headphone to headphone. When I first get a headphone, I could tell why people on the forums described each phone the way they do (e.g. the DT880s are bass light), but those initial impressions gradually fade. Only when I recall the posts on Head-Fi am I reminded that my headphone sounds so and so, and I remember. Strange.

Just a thought to all those with new headphones.

 

[Danfried]

Quote:

Originally Posted by thislittlepiggy /img/forum/go_quote.gif I don't mean to incite a flame war, but i'm just curious if anyone ever had an instance where burn-in made your headphones sound worse instead of better. Please, indulge me.

You raise a really funny point, because that's something I've always wondered. Burn-in, if it is real (and I tend to believe it is real with many headphones), should only be good _if the manufacturer intended it to be good_, i.e., they deliberately designed their cans to take burn-in into account. If a manufacturer designed some headphones to have the best sound when first taken out of the box, then naturally burn-in would NOT be good.

As for whether manufacturers take burn-in into account, have we had any definitive answers from them on Head-Fi?

 

[1117]

Setting burn-in aside, does normal use over the years cause the drivers or any other sonic part of the headphone to degrade?

 

[Danfried]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1117 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Setting burn-in aside, does normal use over the years cause the drivers or any other sonic part of the headphone to degrade?

Isn't that what burn-in is? Physical changes in the headphones due to usage, resulting in changed sound characteristics?

Whether it is called degradation or not depends upon whether you like the new sound better or less!

OK, I'm being a bit facetious. Perhaps, even if the sound signature is more pleasurable, you could say that the headphone is "degraded" if some measurements are worse (e.g. range reduced, even if you can't hear it). But you get the idea.

 

[DSlayerZX]

yes to hurt your headphone by burn in.
if you ever play them too loud or too long.

and also, yes, after long usage, drivers are destine to fail, nothing last forever you know
my father's stax failed after around 8 years of constant usage. (probably have something related to his listening value also)

 

[thislittlepiggy]

The focus of this thread is split between those that are talking about damaging the headphones by burning in and those who are talking about changes in sound from burn-in that may make it sound worse. I'm sure that burning-in at inappropriate volumes and circumstances will damage the phones, but I wasn't asking about that. I was concerned with changes in the sound from burn-in, not about damaging headphones.

 

[1117]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danfried /img/forum/go_quote.gif Isn't that what burn-in is? Physical changes in the headphones due to usage, resulting in changed sound characteristics? Whether it is called degradation or not depends upon whether you like the new sound better or less! OK, I'm being a bit facetious. Perhaps, even if the sound signature is more pleasurable, you could say that the headphone is "degraded" if some measurements are worse (e.g. range reduced, even if you can't hear it). But you get the idea.

Well, I agree, to a point. See, there is a difference between someone who reaches the 10,000 miles on their brand new car after 3 years versus the one who did it in the first 6 months. Yes, they are both 10,000 mile vehicles, but, you'd think one wa spushed waaaaaaaaaay more than the other, wouldn't you?

Of course, this is all in the assumption that the same wear-and-tear principle is applicable to headphones, and I am not sure if that is true myself.