[elmoe]

You're bluffing because you keep moving the goalposts and demand more proof from other people than you do of yourself.

Well yes I do that, I'm not the one claiming anything. I'm here to read what people claim and look at the evidence provided and draw my own conclusions. Again, not interested in winning an argument, but if this is the extent of the evidence gathered then I personally am not convinced, one way or the other. There is nothing to bluff about. What's the bluff?

 

[elmoe]

you're playing games my friend. You aren't interested in receiving information.


The changes you refer to from the article I linked to were smaller than the sort of changes one would get from simply re positioning the phones slightly differently on the listener's head or from environmental changes. If the changes resulting from supposed burn in are that tiny, how could you or anyone consider them meaningful. That's aside from the fact that as I indicated earlier most of the small changes evident n the tests went up and down repeatedly - again not what burn in is supposed to do.

If you want to argue in favor of burn in (and you obviously do) then you go out and prove that the tiny changes found in the tests ARE audible. Several of us have done WAY more than enough on our side of the coin.

See that's the problem here. Anyone contradicting the popular opinion is playing games, bluffing, not interested in receiving information, etc. I've been on Head-Fi a lot longer than you, you can call me a troll if you want to, but your credibility is lacking.

I'm not referring only to the changes in your article. Tyll's comparison and ability to distinguish from a new pair / a burned-in pair most of the time also shows those changes can sometimes be not so "slight". If he is able to tell them apart reliably then they are meaningful.

Your article wasn't the only material shared in this thread and I won't base my opinion strictly off of it, unlike you.

 

[bigshot]

I gave you my information and my evaluation of that information. What more do you want? More examples? No one has done serious tests on burn in because no one who knows enough to be able to do a controlled test sees it as an issue. I was able to do a check on two identical cans and did a pretty good evaluation that showed that they sounded identical. Tyll's measurements came out the same. I honestly don't see why I should continue to test in this direction any more. If you are interested, you can feel free to do that. I'll even help you and give you advice on how to put together a good test. That's what we do here in Sound Science... we test our theories and see whether it works or not. Testing is fun. You should try it. It's the best way to learn how sound works.

You don't come to Sound Science with basic questions and demand that other people do the testing for you. You roll up your sleeves and figure it out for yourself. We had a newbie here who actually did that a couple of weeks ago. He learned a lot and he understood what everyone was saying about the subject better. Try it.

 

[elmoe]

I gave you my information and my evaluation of that information. What more do you want? More examples? No one has done serious tests on burn in because no one who knows enough to be able to do a controlled test sees it as an issue. I was able to do a check on two identical cans and did a pretty good evaluation that showed that they sounded identical. Tyll's measurements came out the same. I honestly don't see why I should continue to test in this direction any more. If you are interested, you can feel free to do that. I'll even help you and give you advice on how to put together a good test. That's what we do here in Sound Science... we test our theories and see whether it works or not. Testing is fun. You should try it. It's the best way to learn how sound works.

You don't come to Sound Science with basic questions and demand that other people do the testing for you. You roll up your sleeves and figure it out for yourself. We had a newbie here who actually did that a couple of weeks ago. He learned a lot and he understood what everyone was saying about the subject better. Try it.

I'm not demanding anything, I'm asking if there is more, you answered in a belligerent way, I responded in kind. Rolling up your sleeves is great but requires a budget and time, inquiring to see if there is information first seems like a good idea to me, isn't that the point of science, to be shared freely?

So yes I'm going to come and ask basic questions like "can you back up your claim with something a little more definitive than 'there are very slight changes but we can sometimes tell reliably'?" which you are free to completely ignore, by the way.

 

[Sgt. Ear Ache]

See that's the problem here. Anyone contradicting the popular opinion is playing games, bluffing, not interested in receiving information, etc. I've been on Head-Fi a lot longer than you, you can call me a troll if you want to, but your credibility is lacking.

I'm not referring only to the changes in your article. Tyll's comparison and ability to distinguish from a new pair / a burned-in pair most of the time also shows those changes can sometimes be not so "slight". If he is able to tell them apart reliably then they are meaningful.

Your article wasn't the only material shared in this thread and I won't base my opinion strictly off of it, unlike you.

Yeah, and you are disregarding everything anyway. You have the info you were looking for. It hasn't changed your view - you still believe in the magic of burn in. Fine. Go in peace.

No, there isn't anything more. Because burn in is a myth, and you believe the myth. No evidence is going to change that for you.

 

[elmoe]

Yeah, and you are disregarding everything anyway. You have the info you were looking for. It hasn't changed your view - you still believe in the magic of burn in. Fine. Go in peace.

No, there isn't anything more. Because burn in is a myth, and you believe the myth. No evidence is going to change that for you.

Actually I don't believe either way. From what I've seen here, seems like there are some makes/models where burn-in changes the sound significantly enough so that the ear can reliably tell a difference, however in the majority of cases, no difference could be heard.

So my conclusion is that we lack enough data to come to a proper conclusion and it is still up in the air.

 

[Sgt. Ear Ache]

Actually I don't believe either way....

yes you do.

 

[elmoe]

Ok buddy.

 

[bigshot]

For someone who doesn’t like semantic arguments, you’re using an awful lot of words to say very little. I told you about a test I did, and you said it wasn’t good enough. And doing controlled testing yourself is too much bother. Honestly, we see that kind of blathering around here a lot. I could provide gold plated evidence and you’d just say it isn’t good enough and demand more, and become progressively ruder and ruder. Been there, done that, nothankyouverymuch.

Usually we can dismiss people who aren’t interested in participating in a real conversation pretty quickly. We’re even better at dismissing than they are at generating blather. Efficiency comes with practice I guess.

Next!

 

[elmoe]

For someone who doesn’t like semantic arguments, you’re using an awful lot of words to say very little. I told you about a test I did, and you said it wasn’t good enough. And doing controlled testing yourself is too much bother. Honestly, we see that kind of blathering around here a lot. I could provide gold plated evidence and you’d just say it isn’t good enough and demand more, and become progressively ruder and ruder. Been there, done that, nothankyouverymuch.

Usually we can dismiss people who aren’t interested in participating in a real conversation pretty quickly. We’re even better at dismissing than they are at generating blather. Efficiency comes with practice I guess.

Next!

My previous post was 2 words long.

There's nothing progressive about your rudeness however, but if the self-sufficient dismissals flatter your ego, I will leave you to it.

 

[castleofargh]

do you guys want me to lock the thread? because that's how you get a thread closed.
let people have whatever opinion they want to have. being fact checker is not the same as being the thought police. forget unsubstantiated claims, or just ask for evidence and let the reply do the work. ideally, share evidence if you have some. the game isn't that hard. but attacking individuals and saying that his father smelt of elderberries, that's rapidly annoying and it has nothing to do with burn in.

 

[bigshot]

He’s playing tag.

 

[elmoe]

do you guys want me to lock the thread? because that's how you get a thread closed.
let people have whatever opinion they want to have. being fact checker is not the same as being the thought police. forget unsubstantiated claims, or just ask for evidence and let the reply do the work. ideally, share evidence if you have some. the game isn't that hard. but attacking individuals and saying that his father smelt of elderberries, that's rapidly annoying and it has nothing to do with burn in.

We're of the same opinion.

 

[upstateguy]

Actually I don't believe either way. From what I've seen here, seems like there are some makes/models where burn-in changes the sound significantly enough so that the ear can reliably tell a difference, however in the majority of cases, no difference could be heard.

So my conclusion is that we lack enough data to come to a proper conclusion and it is still up in the air.

I see you guys are still yacking about this so I'm going to throw in my 2 cents. First a disclaimer: I've been around too long to believe that things burn in or believe any of the other garbage people 'think' they hear. But.....

When the T-1 came out years ago, I bought one of the first models from Amazon. They were way more treblely sounding than my 880s. A lot of guys posted about it and sold them because of that. I remember posting complaints about the over treblely T-1s as well as the foobar EQ curve I used to tame it. Fortunately, the left driver failed within the warranty period and Beyer replaced the headphone. The new ones they sent me sounded like 650s with a rolled off high end and I posted that apparently Beyer had 'over' fixed the treble problem of the T-1 and included the foobar EQ curve I was using to boost the treble back to satisfying levels. It's been a long time now so I don't remember how long it took, but with in a short time I posted that the new T-1s with their 650 sound had reverted to the Beyer house sound and that they sounded like super 880s.

That was a long time ago but that is my recollection. I don't recall any other headphone doing that and I've never noticed anything similar from an electronic device or wire.

The other bone I have to pick is that all DACs sound the same. Years ago I took part in some double blind tests at one of the meets and I was not able to reliably tell a Stello D100 DAC from a Benchmark. However, that same Stello D100 DAC had a 192 upsample switch. When this switch was thrown, there was less bass. I didn't pursue it because it because the Stello was moved to a secondary rig, but one day I got curious and recorded the sound from the bypass position and the upsample position and ran it through the DiffMaker to see what was going on. What I heard was additional treble. The point being that although similar circuits will probably have similar sounds, different circuits may have different sounds. I noticed a similar thing with USB to SPDIF converters. The HiFace seemed to be more resolving but didn't have the 'tone' of a Blue Circle and the Peachtree X1, although resolving, sounded like a cross between the two.

 

[elmoe]

I see you guys are still yacking about this so I'm going to throw in my 2 cents. First a disclaimer: I've been around too long to believe that things burn in or believe any of the other garbage people 'think' they hear. But.....

When the T-1 came out years ago, I bought one of the first models from Amazon. They were way more treblely sounding than my 880s. A lot of guys posted about it and sold them because of that. I remember posting complaints about the over treblely T-1s as well as the foobar EQ curve I used to tame it. Fortunately, the left driver failed within the warranty period and Beyer replaced the headphone. The new ones they sent me sounded like 650s with a rolled off high end and I posted that apparently Beyer had 'over' fixed the treble problem of the T-1 and included the foobar EQ curve I was using to boost the treble back to satisfying levels. It's been a long time now so I don't remember how long it took, but with in a short time I posted that the new T-1s with their 650 sound had reverted to the Beyer house sound and that they sounded like super 880s.

That was a long time ago but that is my recollection. I don't recall any other headphone doing that and I've never noticed anything similar from an electronic device or wire.

The other bone I have to pick is that all DACs sound the same. Years ago I took part in some double blind tests at one of the meets and I was not able to reliably tell a Stello D100 DAC from a Benchmark. However, that same Stello D100 DAC had a 192 upsample switch. When this switch was thrown, there was less bass. I didn't pursue it because it because the Stello was moved to a secondary rig, but one day I got curious and recorded the sound from the bypass position and the upsample position and ran it through the DiffMaker to see what was going on. What I heard was additional treble. The point being that although similar circuits will probably have similar sounds, different circuits may have different sounds. I noticed a similar thing with USB to SPDIF converters. The HiFace seemed to be more resolving but didn't have the 'tone' of a Blue Circle and the Peachtree X1, although resolving, sounded like a cross between the two.

See I recently replaced my old non USB benchmark dac1 with an rme adi2 dac and I thoroughly tested both (not blind) with different headphones while volume matching and I could not tell them apart one bit. I have an amp with dual inputs and an input switch which allows me to switch between the two DACs instantly so I found it worthwhile to test things out. I used a USB to SPDIF interface on the DAC1, and USB out on the RME. This is with stock settings on both units, no resampling.

I'm a little less inclined now to believe that DACs sound different. I think if the implementation is sound, they'll sound the same. I'll keep the RME because I'm growing to really like the features and EQ capabilities, but from a sound quality perspective it made no difference.

I did a similar test with cables years ago and now, aside from a couple of expensive pairs I still have, I only buy cheap monoprice cables which to my ears, make no difference in sound.

Headphones I am of the same mind, I've never noticed any of the headphones I own changing, sound wise, after many hours of use. Doesn't mean it doesn't happen as my ear could be adapting, who knows. I recently bought a pair of hd6XXs which supposedly sound dramatically different after hundreds of hours, so we'll see. I made note of my first impressions on it so I have something to reference to in the future.