[jsmiller58]

From the LP Owners Manual:


Enjoy!

Anybody ever wonder why most audio gear has a recommended 100 hour break in period, regardless of whether it is a headphone, IEM, DAC, or amp? (I say as I quietly back away… )

 

[jonathan c]

Anybody ever wonder why most audio gear has a recommended 100 hour break in period, regardless of whether it is a headphone, IEM, DAC, or amp? (I say as I quietly back away… )

…. because

….

 

[PixelSquish]

Anybody ever wonder why most audio gear has a recommended 100 hour break in period, regardless of whether it is a headphone, IEM, DAC, or amp? (I say as I quietly back away… )

Well things are different. A dynamic driver and tubes have moving parts that break in over time, whether it is the diaphragm or the tubes themselves due to impurities burning off. Dymanics seem different than planars as they vibrate much more as the much lower tolerance planars do. A non tube amp is a different story - so are balanced armatures, and of course, the biggest culprit - cable wire. It's not breaking in. Period.

 

[jsmiller58]

…. because ….

Now that’s funny!

 

[D00M]

Here my 2 cents on burn-in. And I want to address both the audio and the failure aspects. I worked for 20+ years in semiconductor (AMD, ON Semi, TI, etc) and electronics (starts with A is one of the largest in the world in terms of sales and money in the bank). So I have background on these electronics components and systems, but not in audio.

First, on burn-in for sound. There is no burn-in that will change for electrical parameters. The only possible burn-in effect might be physical or material based. Possibly for some capacitors, drivers, etc. Then the question is whether burn-in changes anything related to audio, or if it is even perceivable, or which direction is the change?

if burn-in affects audio, my take is that material change related to burn-in is random and not well controlled, if it exists at all. So the audio impact can also be random. 50% might find sound “better” after burn-in, and other 50% might find sound “worste after burn-in. Just like some like their audio with an edge, others like it more mellow and land smooth. But everyone talks about burn-in as audio sounding better. My take it is placebo effect. But who knows. If someone believes it, do burn-in. If I don’t believe it, I just start listening on day 1.

(Tubes are different and I have zero experience with this.)

Secondly, I want to talk about the early failures that Shane D and some others experienced. Electronic component has this bathtub shaped curve when failure rate is plotted against time. One contribution is early failures, often called infant mortality. Due to manufacturing defects or process issues, there is a higher failure rate at the beginning of usage.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bathtub_curve

This is not due to QC (quality control) or testing. Even if units are tested to weed out non-functional or sub-performing (not meeting spec) units, all passing components still follow these failure curves. Failures might be 1 in thousands for low quality components, to 1 in hundred thousand for higher quality ones. Then in an amp, there are hundreds of these components. So the failure rates “add” up as any component failure will cause the system to fail.

Only way to address these early failures is thru burn-in. When you buy computers, you might hear some system integrators will assemble and do burn-in (maybe hours to overnight). That is to weed out early failures. In consumer electronics industry, no one does burn-in as it cost money and takes time. The amount of hardware needed and time required will not be able to keep up with manufacturing demand, Exception is in Space, Flight, Military industries. Components used in satellites cost 1000x more and burn-in is required. Once the multi-million or billion dollar satellite goes up, damaged components cannot be replaced or repaired. Components do go thru many days to 1 week burn-in at component level depending on the grade.

Again, just want to separate true QC from burn-in failures. Burn-in failures cannot be caught by Quality control or testing. These failures only exhibit after running the units for hours, days, weeks, Cheaper products using cheaper components can have higher failure rates across the board, including more early failures. So you can say it is “quality“ related.

For me, when I buy electronics, I will definitely do my burn-in to make sure any infant mortality failures are caught during return period. So catching this is a good thing. If issues occur multiple times to same user (like Shane D), then hard to say if there is some systemic issue vs random early failure.

 

[jsmiller58]

Here my 2 cents on burn-in. And I want to address both the audio and the failure aspects. I worked for 20+ years in semiconductor (AMD, ON Semi, TI, etc) and electronics (starts with A is one of the largest in the world in terms of sales and money in the bank). So I have background on these electronics components and systems, but not in audio.

First, on burn-in for sound. There is no burn-in that will change for electrical parameters. The only possible burn-in effect might be physical or material based. Possibly for some capacitors, drivers, etc. Then the question is whether burn-in changes anything related to audio, or if it is even perceivable, or which direction is the change?

if burn-in affects audio, my take is that material change related to burn-in is random and not well controlled, if it exists at all. So the audio impact can also be random. 50% might find sound “better” after burn-in, and other 50% might find sound “worste after burn-in. Just like some like their audio with an edge, others like it more mellow and land smooth. But everyone talks about burn-in as audio sounding better. My take it is placebo effect. But who knows. If someone believes it, do burn-in. If I don’t believe it, I just start listening on day 1.

(Tubes are different and I have zero experience with this.)

Secondly, I want to talk about the early failures that Shane D and some others experienced. Electronic component has this bathtub shaped curve when failure rate is plotted against time. One contribution is early failures, often called infant mortality. Due to manufacturing defects or process issues, there is a higher failure rate at the beginning of usage.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bathtub_curve

This is not due to QC (quality control) or testing. Even if units are tested to weed out non-functional or sub-performing (not meeting spec) units, all passing components still follow these failure curves. Failures might be 1 in thousands for low quality components, to 1 in hundred thousand for higher quality ones. Then in an amp, there are hundreds of these components. So the failure rates “add” up as any component failure will cause the system to fail.

Only way to address these early failures is thru burn-in. When you buy computers, you might hear some system integrators will assemble and do burn-in (maybe hours to overnight). That is to weed out early failures. In consumer electronics industry, no one does burn-in as it cost money and takes time. The amount of hardware needed and time required will not be able to keep up with manufacturing demand, Exception is in Space, Flight, Military industries. Components used in satellites cost 1000x more and burn-in is required. Once the multi-million or billion dollar satellite goes up, damaged components cannot be replaced or repaired. Components do go thru many days to 1 week burn-in at component level depending on the grade.

Again, just want to separate true QC from burn-in failures. Burn-in failures cannot be caught by Quality control or testing. These failures only exhibit after running the units for hours, days, weeks, Cheaper products using cheaper components can have higher failure rates across the board, including more early failures. So you can say it is “quality“ related.

For me, when I buy electronics, I will definitely do my burn-in to make sure any infant mortality failures are caught during return period. So catching this is a good thing. If issues occur multiple times to same user (like Shane D), then hard to say if there is some systemic issue vs random early failure.

Thank you, that was an awesome explanation… unfortunately it will change no minds. Most with engineering or physics backgrounds will already agree with this. Those without it usually (***not always***) will believe their own senses and memories. Religious war with no end.

P.S. I burn in my equipment… basically a form of Pascal’s Wager…

 

[jonathan c]

Thank you, that was an awesome explanation… unfortunately it will change no minds. Most with engineering or physics backgrounds will already agree with this. Those without it usually (***not always***) will believe their own senses and memories. Religious war with no end.***

P.S. I burn in my equipment… basically a form of Pascal’s Wager

*** perhaps not a war but a schism. Akin to theism vs atheism: ‘for those with faith, no explanation is necessary; for those without faith, no explanation will do’

 

[jsmiller58]

*** perhaps not a war but a schism. Akin to theism vs atheism: ‘for those with faith, no explanation is necessary; for those without faith, no explanation will do’

Thats a perfect summary!

 

[jonathan c]

One of the great amplifier & headphone pairings: Liquid Platinum & Audeze LCD-X. Musical rightness!

[LCD-X is 2016 vintage.]

 

[Chastity]

@jonathan c listening to my MLP + M1570, so yeah I understand your appreciation of the MLP + LCD-X. I love the Cavalli House sound, and how this amp differentiates "driving your cans well" and "driving your cans with authority".

 

[Chastity]

 

[LowBeat91]

Is it worth to get it for 450$? I have to import it from US with 100$ premium shipping they offered

 

[Chastity]

Is it worth to get it for 450$? I have to import it from US with 100$ premium shipping they offered

Yeah. This amp is special.

 

[LowBeat91]

Yeah. This amp is special.

Thank you. Comming from a Singxer SA1 i dont know if its equal in deliver the Pros of the SA1 like musicial but also clean and alot of Power. And i wanna try an amp that is not equal SA1 in terms of performance ‚ just better

 

[TheRealDz]

Thank you. Comming from a Singxer SA1 i dont know if its equal in deliver the Pros of the SA1 like musicial but also clean and alot of Power. And i wanna try an amp that is not equal SA1 in terms of performance ‚ just better

I have the Singxer. I am perfectly happy with it, and only purchased the LP as a change of pace amp - ie, to get a taste of tube goodness.

However, after about 200 hours, the LP is superior in every way. And that's without tube rolling.