[Shike]

@swbf2cheater
 
Tubes and subs aren't headphones - thus it doesn't matter if they break-in, it matters if headphones do and which ones.
 
As for Grado, I posted a source earlier that showed over 200hrs of a Grado GS-1000 that didn't change at all.  What's to be made of that?
 
I'm not saying it's impossible that headphones can break-in, but I'd surely like to see some proof of these extremely low mass drivers making the substantial changes before accepting some claim.  Till it's done it's rather ho-hum.

 

[beeman458]

swbf2cheater wrote:
 
Who need clean sound right off the bat and will only purchase amps for real gigs if they are tested for X amount of time prior to being boxed.
 
Being that burn-in is a reality, what's the deal; buying new and plan on burn-in, before use?
 
???
 
Shike wrote:
 
I'm not saying it's impossible that headphones can break-in, but I'd surely like to see some proof of these extremely low mass drivers making the substantial changes some claim.  Till it'd done it's rather ho-hum.
 
Okay, burn-in's a myth.  Don't burn em in and be happy.
 
The point burn-em-in, don't burn-em-in, free choice, free will; don't cost anybody a dime to do either.  Where's the rub?
 
???

 

[Prog Rock Man]

Quote:

Here's another source, long forgotten, re: headphone break-in.
 
http://headphonebreakin.blogspot.com/
 
Originally posted here....

That is an excellent summary of headphone break in. It even notes how leaving a headphone to 'rest' will mean it needs breaking in again. The missing part for me is the part that is missing from so many claims by audiophiles. OK, so there is a difference, but is it audible?

 

[Prog Rock Man]

 
Quote:

I gave audio technica a call today, and just like all the headphones companies lately that ive tried to get a statement from ( they didnt do this years ago when I asked them )  they ALL said the exactly same line " X company doesnt have a statement on burn in "
 
thats because they do not want anyone to know their headphones could be lacking something or need that time to show their true color.  Thats understandable, however after getting friendly with the agent I got him to admit their tubes required some burn in.  Grado is the ONLY one with a statement on the matter and actually includes a letter to you that says burn your headphones in naturally and enjoy the experience.  Do you think you are smarter than the R&D guys at Grado or the expert agent I spoke to at Audio Technica?  Yea, I thought not.  These are facts
 
-No company will make a statement on burn in, they do not want to look like their products arent at peak performance right out of the box
Literally all of these said almost exactly the same line to me, Audio Techinca, Sennheiser, Monster, Logitech, AKG
-Transducers and Capacitors are proven to show minimal voltage differences from stock to "used"
-Drivers, especially sub woofers, will actually move a fraction of an inch more from stock to burnt in, once that moving part becomes unstiff, the sound difference is noticeable.
-Large amps like guitar or bass amps without question are different from stock to used.  This is not debatable. Being a guitar player, I've witnessed this problem many times and its a question serious guitar players ask, especially Jazz guitarists like myself.  Who need clean sound right off the bat and will only purchase amps for real gigs if they are tested for X amount of time prior to being boxed.
 
end

Whilst headphone companies appear to be reluctant to talk about burn in, speaker companies appear to be less so, as HiFi Matrix found when they contacted various makers. The result was 38% yes, 38% no and 24% uncommitted/refused to answer.

 

[autonomous]

What I love about those numbers is that those who did not give an opinion were in the minority! Reminds me of somewhere?

 

[Nebby]

I think the actual rub here is that humans in general like to be right. It's easy to become emotionally attached to an argument/opinion and you can see that happening on many of the threads here.
 
If break-in exists, that's nice and I'll gain the benefit of it during my break-in routine of new gear.
 
If break-in doesn't exist, that's nice and I'll be happy knowing my break-in routine will not cause any changes to my gear while confirming that I didn't get a bad piece.
 
I think at this point there's not much else to argue about until someone buys a couple of pairs of headphones, sets up a proper testing and measurement rig and goes to town.
 
Quote:

 
Okay, burn-in's a myth.  Don't burn em in and be happy.
 
The point burn-em-in, don't burn-em-in, free choice, free will; don't cost anybody a dime to do either.  Where's the rub?
 

 

[DJGeorgeT]

It depends on the degree of burn-in and it is very specific on the component. I have headphones that never changed sound, but I have my Shure E2, which made so much change after burn in that I was convinced. If you have never had a chance to compare a new and fully burned in headphone, no matter the hard facts, you will not believe it and that's your position so far.
 
Quote:

That is an excellent summary of headphone break in. It even notes how leaving a headphone to 'rest' will mean it needs breaking in again. The missing part for me is the part that is missing from so many claims by audiophiles. OK, so there is a difference, but is it audible?

 

[p a t r i c k]

Quote:

I think at this point there's not much else to argue about until someone buys a couple of pairs of headphones, sets up a proper testing and measurement rig and goes to town.
 

I think this is a very good point.
 
I would also like to see a good well controlled blind ABX test.
 
The funny thing for me about this thread is that I have a new pair of AKG K702s. I've had these for a couple of weeks and I do have a "burn-in" procedure which is that I leave them plugged into a transistor radio all night. The sound level from the radio is set lower than I normally listen.
 
It is absolutely true that I can report a "burn-in experience". It could describe in great detail the changes that are being made. It would impress the "golden ears" no end.
 
But how do I know this experience is not auto-suggestion?
 
It would be interesting for me to try my AKG 702s against another identical set now but which are brand new.
 
I know very well that in hearing just because we seem to experience something doesn't necessarily mean it is really happening.
 
I think it is very likely that burn-in of some sort does occur with headphones, but I also suspect that the actual burn-in experience reported by many is auto-suggestion.
 
Until something like this is properly tested we can't know what is actually happening.

 

[autonomous]

I had a very similar experience with my K702's. I only did this for one night and noticed that they seemed to improve enough that I could listen to them. I let any further break in/burn in take  it's course over time while I enjoyed the music. 

 

[Prog Rock Man]

Quote:

It depends on the degree of burn-in and it is very specific on the component. I have headphones that never changed sound, but I have my Shure E2, which made so much change after burn in that I was convinced. If you have never had a chance to compare a new and fully burned in headphone, no matter the hard facts, you will not believe it and that's your position so far.
 

 

You are wrong, check this thread 
 
http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/505113/my-theory-as-to-why-headphones-appear-to-burn-in
 
where I put forward a theory, get lambasted for it though with no evidence presented to the contrary. So then I went and found evidence myself and as a result of that I have changed my theory. I now regret airing my theory due to the abuse it resulted in. However, some are here just for that kind of thread which just involves theory and the chance to be abusive. So now I go with the hard facts and stay away from theories. Which is sad as you should be able to air theories without being flamed.
 
My position is that there is evidence of burn in. There is evidence that burn in will reverse when a  speaker is not used for a time. There is no blind testing evidence that I can find that burn in is audible. All such evidence is reported experiences of it. We do need to do more to link the change measured in speakers with audibility. I am not in a position to do that at the moment.

 

[swbf2cheater]

Quote:

You are wrong, check this thread 
 
http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/505113/my-theory-as-to-why-headphones-appear-to-burn-in
 
where I put forward a theory, get lambasted for it though with no evidence presented to the contrary. So then I went and found evidence myself and as a result of that I have changed my theory. I now regret airing my theory due to the abuse it resulted in. However, some are here just for that kind of thread which just involves theory and the chance to be abusive. So now I go with the hard facts and stay away from theories. Which is sad as you should be able to air theories without being flamed.
 
My position is that there is evidence of burn in. There is evidence that burn in will reverse when a  speaker is not used for a time. There is no blind testing evidence that I can find that burn in is audible. All such evidence is reported experiences of it. We do need to do more to link the change measured in speakers with audibility. I am not in a position to do that at the moment.

 
Welcome back to the light side.  Cake and Cookies are served on Tuesdays and Fridays are bring your pet to headfi day
 
 

 

[Anaxilus]

Quote:

You are wrong, check this thread 
 
http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/505113/my-theory-as-to-why-headphones-appear-to-burn-in
 
where I put forward a theory, get lambasted for it though with no evidence presented to the contrary. So then I went and found evidence myself and as a result of that I have changed my theory. I now regret airing my theory due to the abuse it resulted in. However, some are here just for that kind of thread which just involves theory and the chance to be abusive. So now I go with the hard facts and stay away from theories. Which is sad as you should be able to air theories without being flamed.
 
My position is that there is evidence of burn in. There is evidence that burn in will reverse when a  speaker is not used for a time. There is no blind testing evidence that I can find that burn in is audible. All such evidence is reported experiences of it. We do need to do more to link the change measured in speakers with audibility. I am not in a position to do that at the moment.

To be fair Prog Rock Man, the flaming always goes both ways.  At the time, the impression I got was that you and many others were set into one camp and out once again for the regular anti-burn-in crusade. I see now we are much closer to each other in understanding the phenomena and am glad you are open to the possibility.  If I had to solely rely on empirical data I would probably be in the agnostic camp but personal experience is the deciding factor for me.  Thankfully we are talking headphones here and I don't get an express ticket to Valhalla for conversions.
 
To others, Skepticism allows for the questioning and analysis of personal experience, not the arbitrary dismissal of potential evidence based on pseudo psychoanalysis from unknown random 'experts'. 
 
As for 'well-controlled' blind ABX tests I wonder if that's even possible.  You create another data point but conclusiveness?  Doubtful.  I think it's a larger issue related to science and epistemology as was pointed out earlier.

 

[autonomous]

At the risk of getting scientific hear (sic), take two identical cables EG for an AKG 702*. Burn one of them in with pink noise at a suitable level and time for the test, the other no burn-in. Then listen to them on your preferred track of reference at your preferred listening level. Will you hear a difference? I'm thinking probably not. (My lab chimp Mort says no)
 
[size=14.0pt]But if you did the same test with no music track at all and increased the volume to double the reference level would you hear a difference between the two cables then. And if not then, increase the volume again, and then again. I think at some point you would hear some difference between the cable that was burned in and the cable that was not burned in. (My lab dog Sonic says yes, he's super!)[/size]
 
[size=14.0pt]At that point you will have proven that there is a difference between a cable that was broken in with pink noise and one that was not. There will be no Nobel Prize awarded for this because in any measure of significance it does not matter. [/size]I will now put on my asbestos treated lab coat and lock myself in a cryogenic chamber for 10,000+-1 years at which time I will reemerge only to find this thread still running. Cryogenics…hmmm I wonder if that would…oops, off topic, never mind!
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NcNFjy2Vk9M
 
 
*My reference headphone and the cable is easy to change. Indulge the K702 for this test even if you hate it.

 

[swbf2cheater]

The mistake people are making in this debate is that there is some new increase or decrease in frequency response that the ear picks up on.  I hear that tossed around more often than anything else, like after burn in a 5hz increase will appear.  Thats nonsense.  There was a guy who tested this out on youtube and gave us frequency response differences from stock to burnt in, and i just sit there shaking my head.  Burn in doesn't effect that, and im skeptical that actually happens, im not opposed to it but rather open to that possibility.  But burn in does change clarity and that typical echo factor, as well as some bass.  
 
Sometimes its really significant like in the ATH-es7.  Anyone who disagrees, go buy two of them lol.  Burn one in and leave the other alone then come back and report your findings.  The stock will have noticeably more echo and reverb going on. I use the es7 when asked to give examples because it was the most significant change from stock to burnt in that i ever witnessed.  The ATH ws70 did the same thing.  

 

[p a t r i c k]

Quote:

Sometimes its really significant like in the ATH-es7.  Anyone who disagrees, go buy two of them lol.  Burn one in and leave the other alone then come back and report your findings.  The stock will have noticeably more echo and reverb going on. I use the es7 when asked to give examples because it was the most significant change from stock to burnt in that i ever witnessed.  The ATH ws70 did the same thing.  

But have you done this ?
 
Have you done a blind ABX test of a brand new ATH-es7 against one that has been in used for a period of time?
 
You keep making absolute assertions about these issues but I don't think you realise how significant a factor auto-suggestion is in assessing differences in audio.
 
Please note, that I'm not saying "burn in does not happen", I am saying that reporting personal experiences unverified by blind ABX testing really does not advance knowledge in this regard.