[roadcykler]

I was reading an article today about someone's opinion of when the "golden age" of hi-fi took place, and I read something that I didn't know about and may have been where the whole idea of burn in started. Seems in the early 70's, some stereo manufacturers started exaggerating the WPC of their amps and receivers so the FTC stepped in and said, "quit it." They (the FTC) came up with a standard that all manufacturers had to use to more accurately determine the actual power output. What they decided was the amp had to operate at 1/3 power at 1000 Hz for an hour before any power output or distortion measurements would be taken.

So, my guess is, from those guidelines, somewhere along the line, the idea that a piece of equipment or even a freakin' cable, would sound better if it "burned in" for a while.

It's a pretty good article and I learned some stuff. Here it is.

 

[bigshot]

I think a lot of audiophile myths are based on analogue concepts that don't apply any more. Burn in goes back to tubes needing to heat up to perform at spec. Fear of lossy goes back to generation loss in analogue recording. Obsessing on distortion and noise goes back to old 50s amps that hissed and distorted. None of this applies any more with modern circuitry and digital audio.

 

[pinnahertz]

I was reading an article today about someone's opinion of when the "golden age" of hi-fi took place, and I read something that I didn't know about and may have been where the whole idea of burn in started. Seems in the early 70's, some stereo manufacturers started exaggerating the WPC of their amps and receivers so the FTC stepped in and said, "quit it." They (the FTC) came up with a standard that all manufacturers had to use to more accurately determine the actual power output. What they decided was the amp had to operate at 1/3 power at 1000 Hz for an hour before any power output or distortion measurements would be taken.

So, my guess is, from those guidelines, somewhere along the line, the idea that a piece of equipment or even a freakin' cable, would sound better if it "burned in" for a while.

It's a pretty good article and I learned some stuff. Here it is.

If you look at the "editorial" section that deals with the 1974 FTC power rating requirement, you'll see that the pre-conditioning period had nothing to do with improving performance. Quite the reverse, it caused amps with under-designed heat sinks to overheat. The result would not be an improvement, it often resulted in amp failure. Many manufacturers had to revise their amps power ratings (which were often horrifically inflated anyway) to reflect their real capabilities, or beef up heat sinks, or both.

Conditioning signals do not correspond to FTC conditioning anyway, they're very different both in content and resulting sustained RMS power.

The concept of positive improvement after "burn-in" is just another one of those audiophile mythology-based concepts that is based on 100% biased subjective testing. The list of these ideas is disturbingly long, and includes such other "cures" as miraculous improvement any component would gain by placing the Tice Digital Clock on top of it. Yes, a digital clock placed right on top of...well, anything. IIR, there was an identical clock sold by Radio Shack for a fraction of the cost, but because of the badge difference, audiophiles claimed it didn't achieve the same effect. Then there was the Audio Brick. Same idea, but now passive. Put the Brick on top of your component, it got better somehow. I'm not sure if that one has completely gone away yet, might still be out there. Then the green CD pens, and so on up to power cords and cable elevators, and even a service that would improve your system remotely without any physical changes, once their fee was paid. They might still be around too. You literally could invent any mystic concept, make a product, and sell it to the audiophile market, so long as it was marketed right, and gave the impression of some sort of unknown sophisticated concept. Like directional cables.....oops, they did that one. And it's nonsense.

 

[gimmeheadroom]

This reminds me of gross horsepower measured at the crankshift in a shop fixture as opposed to real wheel horsepower on a dyno.

And it reminds me of real miles per gallon vs. euro-imagined closed loop bizarro-world km per litre.

Around and around it goes, where it stops, nobody knows.

 

[bigshot]

I think it’s a great idea to leave any home audio electronics running for a day or so. Most defective units fail sooner rather than later, and it’s better to have sooner be when you can pack it up and return it for a refund

 

[jagwap]

There is an awful lot of myths and misinformation, which this section of the forum is here to guide with a steady hand. However burn-in comes from the measurable and audible difference drivers in speakers exhibit after playing a few 10s of hours when brand new. It is not made up audiophile nonsense, it is common practice in the industry to burn in the speakers, and is measurable.

However it has since been applied to many other parts of the system with little real evidence.

Let me leave you with an interesting fact: electrolytic capacitors' ESR (electrical series resistance) reduces significantly within the first 10s of hours of being powered up from new, which will improve the electrical performance of the product. Having whacked the hornets nest with that scientific fact, I'm not foolish enough to claim it is an audable effect or not, as the trolls here will get too excited.

 

[Bfh29]

I know I will get bashing from this, but saying something is not true just because it was not yet scientifically proven is not completely right. Because you know in the past people were saying earth is flat based on the science knowledge they had at that time and they were not right

But I know all of us, that here the burn in effect on our equipment are suffering from mass hysteria and self delusion. (That includes a lot of acclaimed audio equipment reviewers.)

 

[gimmeheadroom]

I know I will get bashing from this, but saying something is not true just because it was not yet scientifically proven is not completely right. Because you know in the past people were saying earth is flat based on the science knowledge they had at that time and they were not right

But I know all of us, that here the burn in effect on our equipment are suffering from mass hysteria and self delusion. (That includes a lot of acclaimed audio equipment reviewers.)

True, sometimes science does not have the tools to assess the truth of a given proposition; other times YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!

You're off to a good start, welcome to the forums

 

[bigshot]

I know I will get bashing from this, but saying something is not true just because it was not yet scientifically proven is not completely right. Because you know in the past people were saying earth is flat based on the science knowledge they had at that time and they were not right

I'm not going to bash you! I'll just point out the second part of that concept... If there is no evidence to prove that burn in exists, the burden of proof lies with the person claiming the difference, because you can't prove that no difference exists in all cases- that would be proving a negative. All you can point to is a case where there is a difference. But audiophiles aren't particularly logical and believe lots of things where there is no evidence. (Or made up evidence.)

 

[KeithPhantom]

And please don't start with cable or fuse burn-in. That's a can I would never open again...

 

[bigshot]

Human perception has been proven to burn in.

 

[Bfh29]

I don't know about fuses, but...

You know that proving wrong/right goes both ways. I've read your posts and they did not really convince me that I'm just deluding myself and I know that I can't get enough evidence to convince you that the burn in process for some audio equipment is real. And actually I don't feel a need to do that. If you guys don't hear any difference I'm fine with it. I can't tell a difference between a good brandy and great brandy either

I owned 30+ headphones, did burn-in on the new ones, somewhere the difference was subtle on some really significant (I'm looking at you Beyerdynamics T5p, Ultrasone Edition 5 and Campfire Cascade!).

It was not my perception burn in as I did not listen to them during the 150 hours and I did not care if I will have to return them or not, so did not feel a need to convince myself to like them.

So if you guys out there buy new headphones and you read good things about them give them 100-150 hours before you return them and you will see. If you still don't like the headphones, return them. In both cases you wasted just a few dollars on electricity and did insignificant use of them.

And even if I'm deluding myself it still is worth it as I'm happy with the headphones after the 150 hours

 

[bigshot]

How could I convince you if you’ve already made up your mind? If you’re convinced by a complete lack of scientific evidence and anecdotal impressions, I wouldn’t even know how to go about convincing you.

 

[protoss]

I believe it came from the 'Bathtub curve' theory.
Based on the failure rate of things.

There is a funny story that, somebody burned in a headphone for 100hrs, and the very thing he hooked it up to was a brand new amplifier, and instantly judged and claimed that his headphone changed sound because of the burn-in.

..and the "golden age period" was from 1980 to 1996. No way earlier or after. Its all about the CD-player

 

[Bfh29]

How could I convince you if you’ve already made up your mind?

It is funny going from you about me making up my mind. You are disregarding experiences of tens thousands of people because you are unable to explain something.
Maybe the problem is not that it is not true but the scientific methods are not right or going into insufficient level.

If you’re convinced by a complete lack of scientific evidence and anecdotal impressions, ...

Here comes the bashing So my multiple experiences over time are "anecdotal impressions", but yours are the only real truth

I don't know who from the two of us is right. I'm just writing my experience and the experiences of some people I know, which were the same though without me influencing them or vice versa.

But as I wrote, if I'm even deluding myself it is worth the few dollars for electricity as my enjoyment of music after that is higher. And I encourage people to try it out and decide for themselves. Because it does not matter, if it is the equipment change, or a change in their mind, it is often to better