[PFKMan23]

Quote:

Originally Posted by USER NAME: It is all the proof I'll ever need, considering the ears used in the test were my own. Look, it's not my job to convince anybody. I just wanted to chime in and tell you what I know, and I know I don't stand alone.

That's fine and I have no problem with that, becasue that's how you perceive it and you say you're not trying to push your view on others. I'll take you at your word. However, I think the problem is that a certain segment from this thread does feel that their way of thinking is "the truth" and that anyone who deviates from that is a liar or isn't hearing things "correctly". I think that's the whole thing about this thread.

Some are incorrectly believing that this thread is canon, and thusly the truth, when in fact it is a collection of a few people's views and experiences. Helpful yes, but as they say, your mileage may vary. And an individual may ort may not agree with the findings.

 

[909]

Quote:

Originally Posted by USER NAME: This was a loose analogy and not supposed to be taken literally.

For clarification, your analogy wasn’t taken literally, but merely use as an example as you had done.

Quote:

Originally Posted by USER NAME: Burn in actually happens when the dielectric and electrode goes through a physical change usually due to heat.

This is not really burn-in at all, but a period of time to ensure that capacitors achieve normal operation. These effects on most amplifiers are usually not substantially noticeable to the human ear.


Quote:

Originally Posted by USER NAME: It is all the proof I'll ever need, considering the ears used in the test were my own.

Are you willing to acknowledge that there could be other equally plausible and reasonable conclusions besides just burn-in to explain what you heard?

 

[Seijang]

If you people are either really out to prove or disprove burning in, why don't you guys just put your money where your mouth is and sponsor a test? I don't see the big deal. The entire argument in this thread is pointless, all you people do is raise the same points and issues over and over. I'm fairly sick of it.


I for one found a big difference between burned in and unburned in. Straight out of the box, the Hornet actually hurt my ears (dull thudding ache) within the first minute. I thought my ears were unsuited to the amp and let it play some music. It hurt less and less as the amp was allowed to burn in more - a result I was neither expecting/suspecting - I'm a complete newbie to amplifiers, so this was a fairly virgin experience for me. Just FYI I listened to my Hornet a little once every 30-50 hours.

After ~200 hours so far, I am happy with my amp. It doesn't hurt my ears, and my music definitely sounds better. With my e3c I don't notice night/day differences, but with my DT880s there are big improvements. The biggest thing I noticed was that my Hornet takes the edge off certain hurtful notes while retaining the notes quality (which is weird).

 

[USER NAME:]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 909 For clarification, your analogy wasn’t taken literally, but merely use as an example as you had done.

Ok whatever.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 909 This is not really burn-in at all, but a period of time to ensure that capacitors achieve normal operation. ?

This is what we refer to as "Burn In". Like you said "A period of time to ensure that capacitors achieve normal operation". What did you think we meant by burn in? “it depends on what your definition of is, is.” right?

Quote:

Originally Posted by 909 Are you willing to acknowledge that there could be other equally plausible and reasonable conclusions besides just burn-in to explain what you heard??

No

Quote:

Originally Posted by 909 These effects on most amplifiers are usually not substantially noticeable to the human ear.

You would know, right? Having tested for this effect on most amplifiers with your very own human ears. Maybe you don't trust your ears enough and need to borrow forty other Human Ears and a calculator.

Have you ever even heard a Hornet?

 

[USER NAME:]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seijang With my e3c I don't notice night/day differences, but with my DT880s there are big improvements. The biggest thing I noticed was that my Hornet takes the edge off certain hurtful notes while retaining the notes quality (which is weird).

I agree, with the E3C the difference is subtle, but with HD650's the grain diminishes to near zero.

 

[smeggy]

Well this debate on the merits or otherwise of burnin are all interesting but what I really want to know is whether the Hornet is indeed very good and also, given it's incredibly spartan component count is it really a good $350-$400 investment compared to other amps in the $300-400 range as an absolute.

 

[909]

Quote:

Originally Posted by USER NAME: This is what we refer to as "Burn In". Like you said "A period of time to ensure that capacitors achieve normal operation". What did you think we meant by burn in? “it depends on what your definition of is, is.” right?

This isn’t the same because as I’ve said before this process is repeated each and every time the Hornet is turned off for any period of time and turned back on until the capacitors achieve normal operation.

Quote:

Originally Posted by USER NAME: You would know, right? Having tested for this effect on most amplifiers with your own very own human ears. Maybe you don't trust your ears enough and need to borrow forty other Human Ears and a calculator. Have you ever even heard a Hornet?

Do I sense a bit of hostility? Ray already did a similar test with two completely different amps (i.e., Hornet and Raptor) and only Ray could tell the difference on a consistent basis. If just a few Head-Fiers would have posted that they couldn’t tell the difference between the Hornet-Raptor many other Head-Fiers would have been similarly skeptical. Yet when many Head-Fiers at different meets across the country shared similar experiences with the Hornet-Raptor test it provided more creditability. I've addressed your question in many of my other posts in this thread already, but no nor did I claim otherwise. At least, I am open to the possiblity that the Hornet has the potential to sound better after 300+ hours, yet you aren’t even willing to acknowledge any other plausible conclusions. Is your belief so overwhelming that you are willing to risk appearing less than objective about the subject?

Quote:

Originally Posted by smeggy I really want to know is whether the Hornet is indeed very good and also, given it's incredibly spartan component count is it really a good $350-$400 investment compared to other amps in the $300-400 range as an absolute.

Based on my research the Hornet is indeed a very good portable amp, especially if portability (small size factor) is very important to you. Just as with anything, you would be the best judge because it’s your ears after all and Ray does provide an in-home trial period, but it probably would be wise to clarify exactly how long you have to make your decision. I believe, it’s 30 days, but I don’t know if shipping time is included.

If size isn’t as much as a factor Ray does offer the SR-71. Some other portable amps or manufacturers I am aware of (but I don’t believe this is a complete list): Headamp AE-1; Pocket Reference II; Porta Corda; Portaphile; Xin Supermicro and Supermacro; (total) Airhead and (total) Bithead.

 

[USER NAME:]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 909 This isn’t the same because as I’ve said before this process is repeated each and every time the Hornet is turned off for any period of time and turned back on until the capacitors achieve normal operation.

I know that sometimes, some people choose to debate just for the sake of excersise. I'm not one of those people. I've already tried to explain what happens physically inside of a capacitor and you keep telling me that a capacitor charges when a unit turns on. Yes, this happens every time the amp turns on, but there are other effects that happen over time. Let me use another analogy.

Think of a capacitor as a grilled cheese sandwich. It starts out as two pieces of bread and a piece of cheese. You can use it (take a bite) or apply some heat and the cheese melts and the bread toasts. Now I'm not going to argue that after the sandwich is "burned in", it tastes better when you use it again (take another bite), but it does taste different and it's because a change took place.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 909 At least, I am open to the possiblity that the Hornet has the potential to sound better after 300+ hours

Again, I know that sometimes, some people choose to debate just for the sake of excersise.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 909 Is your belief so overwhelming that you are willing to risk appearing less than objective about the subject?

I'd like to answer that with an inteligent quote:
Quote:

Originally Posted by PFKMan23 your mileage may vary. And an individual may ort may not agree with the findings.

But do get back to us when you can make a conclusion based on your findings using your own ears.

 

[909]

USER NAME:

Since you didn’t directly answer this question the first time, I’ll ask it again: Is your belief so overwhelming that you are willing to risk appearing less than objective about the subject?

It appears as if you are attempting to minimize or quail my comments, which are truly nondependent upon a Head-Fiers time with the Hornet. I don’t believe I’ve been as presumptuous to make any firm conclusions, but have raised reasonable questions, which do open the door to other possibilities to explain what you and others are reporting they have experienced with the Hornet. And you realize others have not experienced the same beneficial results with the Hornet even after +300 hours, but may not wish to engage team RS Head-Fiers because of the possible repercussions of doing so.

Grill Cheese real good eats!

If you let it cool down and don’t eat it in time the bread and cheese are still meshed, but another change takes place the cheese hardens back up. The Hornet’s capacitors may change beyond just regular warm-up; I do agree with you about this. And therefore, you probably realize that capacitors continue to change anytime the Hornet or any amp for that matter is turned on or off for any significant period of time even beyond +300 hours of Hornet burn-in as these changes continue to occur for the life of the amp.

I am not posting just for the sake of debating, but when you indirectly point the finger, next time remember three of your own fingers point back. I am just responding as are you. I think we both can agree that we are beating a dead horse at this point, but each of us have made some salient commentary on the subject that others might find useful, even though, you may think otherwise.

 

[USER NAME:]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 909 USER NAME: Since you didn’t directly answer this question the first time, I’ll ask it again: Is your belief so overwhelming that you are willing to risk appearing less than objective about the subject?

My belief that capacitors do change and continue to change through the whole lifespan of the capacitors is exactly that. I also believe that all capacitors are in the signal path in one way or another and they do have sonic signatures that are forever changing until they fail. I hope this answers your question.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 909 And you realize others have not experienced the same beneficial results with the Hornet even after +300 hours, but may not wish to engage team RS Head-Fiers because of the possible repercussions of doing so.

As long as you realize that others have experienced the same beneficial results as the "Team RS Head-Fiers" (Just remember I am a member of different team)

So I guess we can agree to disagree, but you should still try the Pepsi Challenge.

 

[markl]

Quote:

Do I sense a bit of hostility? Ray already did a similar test with two completely different amps (i.e., Hornet and Raptor) and only Ray could tell the difference on a consistent basis.

Ray also says that there are differences between a virgin and burned-in Hornet. He obviously hears those differences, too, so if you accept his ability to hear differences between a Raptor and a Hornet, you ought to be open to the possibility that *some* people can hear these differences in burn-in as well.

 

[PFKMan23]

Quote:

Originally Posted by markl Ray also says that there are differences between a virgin and burned-in Hornet. He obviously hears those differences, too, so if you accept his ability to hear differences between a Raptor and a Hornet, you ought to be open to the possibility that *some* people can hear these differences in burn-in as well.

I accept that. I never said I didn't accept other's abilities to hear differences. My issue is the issue of blanket truth that is associated with this issue. I personally don't hear these profound differences. However I'm glad that some people have heard them. My main issue is the fact that the OP seems to think his view is an absolute truth and that anyone who differs seems to be hearing incorrectly.

 

[RnB180]

Ive listened to a pre burned in hornet but never a new one.
Either way, I was using it out of an iPod line out today with apple lossless, and I was very impressed by the little amplifiers sound.

 

[WILLIE]

I just received my Xin Supermini and I can tell you that in this case burn in makes a difference. When I listened to it last week on arrival, the sound was grainy, uneven, a bit weak. But after a full week's burn in, the sound is sharp but booming, dramatic, and it has become very quiet. I'll tell you this is one hell of sound system in a minute package. Amazing.

Bill

 

[gordie]

Just received mine. What a miniature miracle. I'm listening to it with my Grado HP-2s (a notoriously hard headphone to drive) and they sound fantastic. I won't be able to tell if the sound changes over time, since I already think it sounds great, and I won't remember the nuance of any difference between now and then...