Headphone Graphs - After Period of Break-in?

[Jamey Warren]

Hello again,

My appologies TKO for not answering the question. Most of our measurements are taken with headphones having a substantial amount of play time on them. When we get a new headphone, usually the first thing I do is have a quick listen, then take them upstairs for photo's before we destroy them or loose some of the accessories. Then we try to get as much play time in as possible in a variety of environments. Any new pair of headphones gets listened to by about 20 different people and I usually ask for input from all of them. Somewhere in there, we try to fit in some quality measurement time and if we're prepared for a new release of a headphone, we'll be prepared to take measurements quickly. We can get spread a bit thin as our electrical engineer also measures our headphones. So, sometimes the headphones get measured right away and sometimes it takes longer.

All that said, we do try to re-evaluate our measurements periodically and we update them if we find something has changed. We also run multiple test to verify our measurements are correct. This is more difficult with traditional sealed headphones as the coupling to the ear has a dramatic effect on the frequency response. Certain open headphones present similar characteristics but they are more of an exception to the rule. We still double check ourselves.

 

[Jamey Warren]

And then of course a lot of it is the fine workings of the human brain.

 

[IPodPJ]

Not knowing much about anything too high end in the world of headphones (and would not prefer a $6,000 home headphone set-up to a set of well balanced speakers and a good amplifier that would present excellent sound staging), I wonder if IEMs with armatures have burn-in.

I am pretty sure that IEMs with diaphragms have burn-in potential just simply due to the fact that my pair of crappy Shure e2c's sounded better after about 40 hours of play time, and also of course that they expand, contract, and move under pressure like any other speaker.... just like a fine guitar can take 50 years to age into a piece of beautiful wood capable of resonating a glorious, warm sound texture and quality to it.

Now with my UE Super.Fi 5 pro, I really couldn't tell much of a difference after at least 100 hours of burn-in time, and even still after 9 months. However, when I shipped them back to UE because of a manufacturing defect (my clear ones cracked), they sent me new ones. The new ones, which they claim they only improved on the outside casing and the thicker more durable cables, they don't give you a soft case anymore, [size=small]RANT SESSION AHEAD[/size] and the harder case (if you can even dare call it that).......well.... they got rid of the good hard case and replaced it with a piece of crap tinfoil-almost case that dents and the cover wont even stay on - you can turn it upside down and everything will fall out - and painted with silver stuff that flakes off, and has some kind of cheap velvet-like cloth inside that sheds and black fuzz and dust gets all over the earcups and I imagine inside the headphones as well, all because they said the wire-wrapping assembly inside the case was damaging the headphones.... ok, I can understand that, THEN REMOVE THE FREAKING ASSEMBLY AND KEEP THE SAME GOOD HARD CASE YOU HAD BEFORE!!! IT'S NOT ROCKET SCIENCE, YOU "UE TECHS IN THE LAB!!" But NOOOOO, they had to get cheaper on us... they removed the soft case and remanufactured the hard case in some factory (my guess would be somewhere in Mexico, Taiwan, or China) all to save a few bucks! And here I am being the #2/180 limited to order the Triple.Fi's, and I can't even get a conclusive ship date which I've been asking for for a long time now, and it's October 16, and from what I've read elsewhere, the tentative ship date is only then 11 days away on the 27th of October. I sent her a check and told her specifically I needed notice by a week or two to make sure I deposited ample funds in the account. At least the Triple.Fi's limited edition come with some hardshell roadie case... yeah... how hard IS IT REALLY GOING TO BE???? [size=small]Rant Session has come to a conclusion.[/size]

I'm sorry about that brief interlude, I just get a little upset at times. But back to what I was saying about the new headphones Super.Fi 5 Pro clear
(2.0 revision) -- these new ones sound at least (and its a big gap, I know) somewhere between 30% - 60% better (depending on the frequency) than the previous pair ever did, even when I had taken the previous original pair right out of the "hard-to-open plastic impregnaseal" and listened to them through all my trials and rigors of sound, including full 100% digital audio AIFF or WAV files as they were mastered, and the other songs that I had reduced by -2db (which mind you, I hadn't discovered for quite some time yet). I was somewhere bewteen the realms of what I though was a perfect tonal balance - a sonic marvel, and yet at the same time was completely stricken by a cacophany of audio infidelity. Eventally some of my distrought mental cabaret dissipated into a quiet nothingness, as I unplugged the cable from the source iPod (5th gen Video 30gig). Within days, they began to become ever more pleasurable to listen to, and at present time (due to the replacements), are one of the best IEM I have ever owned or auditioned.

These new headphones that they sent to me, right out of the box, sounded splendid. Maybe that 30% - 60% ballpark figure was cutting the figures too short. These headphones were by far and away spectacular, and if I didn't know any better, I would think I was listening to a completely different model of headphone. They needed no burn-in. They were primed to go right out of the tightly sealed package.

So again, I ask myself, is burn in real, or not real, and while "yes, I know there is a headphone burn-in FAQ site", does it exist in high end IEM like any dual or triple Ultimate Ears or Shure armatures?

[size=medium]P.S.[/size] Can someone PLEASE explain to me how armatures actually work, and how they differ from diaphragms?

Thanks, love, and patience,

PJ

 

[TKO]

Jamey,

Thanks very much for weighing in and providing additional insights into the testing process at Headroom. It is much appreciated.

It would be very interesting if Headroom, or someone else, could develop a test that would explicitely target the after-effects of burn-in. In other words a true headphone listening test that an owner, given similar equipment, would experience.

Another question for you...

What is the damping factor of the amplifier used when you compile your datasets for the graph measurements?

Thanks once again. Cheers.

Tony (Ottawa)

 

[Mike Scarpitti]

Quote:

Originally Posted by maarek99 Burn in is all in the head. That's why measurements won't change.

Right you are.

 

[robm321]

Quote:

Originally Posted by maarek99 Burn in is all in the head. That's why measurements won't change.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Scarpitti Right you are.

Well, I'm 36 years old. How much longer is it going to take before my brain is optimal then

 

[kramer5150]

We will NEVER really know if burn in physically exists untill there is a way to measure the transient nature of the driver diaphragm. Frequency response plots only measure frequency amplitude across the spectrum. They do not measure the transient response... the drivers ability to react to signal input, and attenuate upon signal stop.

So... to say it does or doesn't physically exist is incorrect... when theres no way to measure it.

Just because the measurement system can not measure it does not mean it doesn't exist.

 

[amartignano]

Quote:

Originally Posted by robm321 Well, I'm 36 years old. How much longer is it going to take before my brain is optimal then

They mean that it is more your brain that get used to the new sound of your new headphones than real changes in sound of the headphone.
I tend to agree with this, also I think that it is not "all" in the brain, but for the most yes.

Andrew

 

[Mike Scarpitti]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kramer5150 We will NEVER really know if burn in physically exists untill there is a way to measure the transient nature of the driver diaphragm. Frequency response plots only measure frequency amplitude across the spectrum. They do not measure the transient response... the drivers ability to react to signal input, and attenuate upon signal stop. So... to say it does or doesn't physically exist is incorrect... when theres no way to measure it. Just because the measurement system can not measure it does not mean it doesn't exist.

Since objective evidence is lacking, we must remain skeptical. That is always the default position. It is safest to say there are no abominable snowmen or Loch Ness monsters until we catch one.

 

[kramer5150]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Scarpitti Since objective evidence is lacking, we must remain skeptical. That is always the default position. It is safest to say there are no abominable snowmen or Loch Ness monsters until we catch one.

Totally agree... However I would make an exception for the RS1 and K701. Both of which sound very different, new versus used.

 

[spinali]

From the Ultrasone website:

Quote:

What is burn in? All professional headphones require a burn-in period to make them sound better. During the period you are essentially breaking in the driver and allowing it to loosen up. Once the driver has been broken in, the headphone will sound more even and more like it is supposed to sound. See the individual headphone pages for recommended burn in times. Recommended times are the minimum burn-in times, more burn-in will improve the sound even more.

View in original context here: http://www.ultrasoneusa.com/faq.html

 

[Mike Scarpitti]

Quote:

Originally Posted by spinali From the Ultrasone website: View in original context here: http://www.ultrasoneusa.com/faq.html

.........and you actually believe this?

 

[spinali]

Quote:

.........and you actually believe this?

Interestng way of putting your statement..."actually believe" is usually a phrase reserved for disbelief. Is your stand that you disbelieve in break-in, or or that you have insufficient information?

 

[hwc]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kramer5150 We will NEVER really know if burn in physically exists untill there is a way to measure the transient nature of the driver diaphragm. Frequency response plots only measure frequency amplitude across the spectrum. They do not measure the transient response... the drivers ability to react to signal input, and attenuate upon signal stop.

Actually, transient measurements are pretty much the tool that that driver designers use these days. They hit the driver with an instantaneous burst of all frequencies (it sounds like a single click).

The measurement starts with a frequency response graph. And then another one a millisecond later. And another. And another. And another. So you have a "waterfall" plot of successive frequency response plots until the sound has died out completely.

Ideally, you'd like to start with a smooth curve and have it remain smooth as it dies out quickly. In practice, you usually get areas that have resonant peaks that remain higher in amplitude and take a longer period of time to decay. Those are the areas the engineers work on.

The waterfall plots would probably change if a driver becomes more compliant (from use). How much? Probably not that much. If we want to hear big improvements, we probably will hear them!

At least with transducers (unlike say a piece of wire), there is some rational physical basis for "burn-in" making a difference.

 

[cclragnarok]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Scarpitti Since objective evidence is lacking, we must remain skeptical. That is always the default position. It is safest to say there are no abominable snowmen or Loch Ness monsters until we catch one.

There is no conclusive evidence that burn-in is "all in the head" either. Actually, I don't remember seeing any objective evidence that people need 100+ hours to get acclimated to headphones at all. And yet a lot of burn-in disbelievers (this doesn't necessarily include you) go around telling people "it's all in your head," as if they are 100% sure about it.

Of course, the effects of placebo and confirmation bias are well documented, but that doesn't explain the large number of people that became burn-in believers through their own experiences.

Anyway, I'm not 100% convinced that physical burn-in exists, but I'm even more skeptical about the "all in the head" theory. In situations like this, I just pick whichever theory makes the most sense to me. My guess is that both physical burn-in and psycological effects play a role in this. Psycological effects might be the bigger factor, but this probably varies from headphone to headphone.