[jesse_w]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Affi75 This might be correct for the ER-6/6i, but the ER-4 has a dynamic driver, so it should benefit from burn-in just as much or little as all other dynamic earphones i guess ? !

armatures are a type of dynamic driver, but people often overlook this when making rediculous claims that because of driver type it must somehow not exhibit burn in. the er6, er4, um2, e3, e5, Sensas, UE, etc basically every canalphone except the E2, md33, sony EX series are balanced armature drivers, which are indeed dynamic.

jesse

 

[bLue_oNioN]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Affi75 All three are dynamic. ... http://www.etymotic.com/ephp/er4-ts.asp

I just gave Etymotic a call and spoke to one of their engineers -- he confirmed that the driver type is indeed "balanced armature" and has been referred to as such since the day they created it 14 years ago.

An article published on Westone's website elaborates on the difference between "dynamic" and "balanced armature":
Quote:

Originally Posted by Westone There are two types of speakers in common use for in-ear musicians monitoring; the dynamic transducer, most commonly found in ear bud style headphones, and the balanced armature transducer. Each has its pluses and minuses. In 70 to 80% of the designs available today, manufacturers use the balanced armature design. The most significant functional difference between the two designs is that dynamic transducers don’t require an acoustic seal of the ear while balanced armature drivers do. This leads to a different sound for each design. The balanced armature driver delivers a “flatter” response.

EDIT: By the way, the link to the afforementioned article can be found here. Several similar articles can be found through a simple Google search. I would assume that published articles written by engineers who have spent over 20 years in the field would take precedence over the creations of a webmaster.

 

[catscratch]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Affi75 This might be correct for the ER-6/6i, but the ER-4 has a dynamic driver, so it should benefit from burn-in just as much or little as all other dynamic earphones i guess ? !

Both ER-6/6i and ER-4P/S/B use balanced armature drivers. They are dynamic in the sense that they use a magnetic field to move a diaphragm, but they are very different from traditional dynamic drivers. Burn in, as far as I know it, is the change in the physical properties of the membrane attributed to the flexing and stretching of the membrane with contunued use. I don't think the membrane materials in the ER-4 or other armature drivers are very susceptible to change through extended use.

Eh... 40 hours no sleep. Can't explain better than that

will try again tomorrow...

 

[jesse_w]

Quote:

Originally Posted by catscratch I don't think the membrane materials in the ER-4 or other armature drivers are very susceptible to change through extended use.

Yes because they're made of indestructable material that doesn't wear.

It's still a diaphragm, there is no reason for it to be any different than a 'normal' dynamic driver.

jesse

 

[ProleArtThreat]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jesse_w Yes because they're made of indestructable material that doesn't wear.

Point well taken. But then the issue becomes how quickly or gradually does the material begin to wear.

I personally don't know whether armature drivers are susceptible to physical burn in, or if the effect is more mental acclimation to a specific sound signature. I suspect it is probably some combination of the two. I went through a period lasting about a week where I thought my ER-6i had absolutely no bass at all, to being more than satisfied with its low end output by the time I had sold them and upgraded to the ER-4P. When I first listened my new ER-4P, I felt they had plenty of bass right off the bat.

I think this all leads to the best advice when trying on a new pair of phones. Give them some time. If you still find them lacking after a few weeks of constant use, chances are that you won't be satisfied with them even with whatever change physically burning them in will result in.

 

[bLue_oNioN]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jesse_w Yes because they're made of indestructable material that doesn't wear. It's still a diaphragm, there is no reason for it to be any different than a 'normal' dynamic driver. jesse

Jesse, I've actually seen you post quite a few times in multiple burn-in threads dismissing the idea of minimal change with balanced armature drivers.

If you take a look here, you will find that someone from the Shure IEM team commented on this specific topic, stating that according to their measurement equipment, "balanced armature earphones do not change over time." To elaborate, this statement made was "[not] limited to Shure earphones, but all earphones that use balanced armature (controlled magnetic) transducers. This list includes Etymotic Research, Sensaphonics, Ultimate Ears, Precision Labs and a few others."

If you personally have measurements that show otherwise, by all means, please share them with us so that we may re-evaluate our impressions.

Thank you.

 

[catscratch]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jesse_w Yes because they're made of indestructable material that doesn't wear. It's still a diaphragm, there is no reason for it to be any different than a 'normal' dynamic driver. jesse

Of course, how silly of me! Every diaphragm will behave in exactly the same way, regardless of material! After all, all materials have exactly the same physical characteristics! Please forgive my misguided opinion...

P.S. This is just my ears, but I haven't heard any change in the sound of my ER-4P over the 50 or so hours that I've used them, save perhaps for some "mental" burn-in, and the various different degrees of success in getting a good seal until I finally figured out how. Over the first 10 hours or so, I wasn't wearing them properly, and if there was any change in sound, I would have missed it.

I've heard clear differences in sound with burn-in with nearly all of the various dynamic and electrostatic headphones that I've had (HD590, A500, A900, SR-001, SR-303, SR-404). I haven't done any real measurements.

 

[jesse_w]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bLue_oNioN Jesse, I've actually seen you post quite a few times in multiple burn-in threads dismissing the idea of minimal change with balanced armature drivers. If you take a look here, you will find that someone from the Shure IEM team commented on this specific topic, stating that according to their measurement equipment, "balanced armature earphones do not change over time." To elaborate, this statement made was "[not] limited to Shure earphones, but all earphones that use balanced armature (controlled magnetic) transducers. This list includes Etymotic Research, Sensaphonics, Ultimate Ears, Precision Labs and a few others." If you personally have measurements that show otherwise, by all means, please share them with us so that we may re-evaluate our impressions. Thank you.

I'm not saying that balanced armature drivers must burn in; I'm saying there is no reason for them to be any different than typical dynamic drivers. I would fully expect their measurements to show the same lack of change in dynamic drivers (his measurements of the E2 even suggest this, but I won't extrapolate that far)--there is no comparison and thus what he says is not contrary to what I am suggesting. I dont know and don't care if burn in changes the sound (it definately exists from a physical standpoint, any engineer will tell you that), what I am saying is that the argument that balanced armatures somehow act different than normal dynamics (whether that means they do or dont burn in) is baseless.

jesse

 

[Edwood]

Is the Indigo Echo the only source you've used them with?

You might want totry them out on a better source before making a final verdict.

-Ed

 

[donaldekelly]

Oh Nooooooooooooo!

Another useful thread hijacked by the burn in question! Although, maybe that is where the thread needs to go?

I have read experts that say burn in on speakers DOES NOT HAPPEN and then I think other experts (speaker engineers on both sides) that say it does.

Can this issue ever be resolved???

Anyway, still a good thread. Seems like the UM2 and the Ety4P can both be eq'd and both need certain seals to sound good. And both may require burn in of either materials or gray matter.

 

[catscratch]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jesse_w I'm not saying that balanced armature drivers must burn in; I'm saying there is no reason for them to be any different than typical dynamic drivers. I would fully expect their measurements to show the same lack of change in dynamic drivers (his measurements of the E2 even suggest this, but I won't extrapolate that far)--there is no comparison and thus what he says is not contrary to what I am suggesting. I dont know and don't care if burn in changes the sound (it definately exists from a physical standpoint, any engineer will tell you that), what I am saying is that the argument that balanced armatures somehow act different than normal dynamics (whether that means they do or dont burn in) is baseless. jesse

Without getting technical (not that I know how...)

Burn in is the physical change in the kinetic characteristics of the diaphragm, right? Therefore, if one material changes through wear differently than another, then wouldn't a diaphragm made out of one material change through burn-in differently than another diaphragm that's made out of a different material? You cannot possibly argue that one material will change through flexing exactly the same way as any other material, because that simply isn't true. Balanced armatures use different diaphragm materials from dynamics and electrostatics, even different dynamics use different materials, and all of these are affected by burn-in to different degrees and produce different effects. From what my ears have told me, the effect in balanced armature drivers is either non-existant or too minute for my ears to detect.

 

[jesse_w]

Quote:

Originally Posted by catscratch Without getting technical (not that I know how...) Burn in is the physical change in the kinetic characteristics of the diaphragm, right? Therefore, if one material changes through wear differently than another, then wouldn't a diaphragm made out of one material change through burn-in differently than another diaphragm that's made out of a different material? You cannot possibly argue that one material will change through flexing exactly the same way as any other material, because that simply isn't true. Balanced armatures use different diaphragm materials from dynamics and electrostatics, even different dynamics use different materials, and all of these are affected by burn-in to different degrees and produce different effects. From what my ears have told me, the effect in balanced armature drivers is either non-existant or too minute for my ears to detect.

I'm not disputing what you hear, but there are far too many variables to be sure of what is really going on. The diaphragms in balanced armatures still have to work the same way as any other dynamic, so why would they be so different? Nevermind the possibility of coil windings adjusting or wire burning in etc etc. All I'm concerned with is the myth growing on headfi that armatures are somehow magically different and can't possibly be affected by burn in--in the same breath as night and day differences with normal dynamics. If you hear it thats cool, but struggling to justify it with vague physical notions is utterly groundless and impossible to prove.

jesse

 

[Affi75]

I was wrong about the ER-4 driver type. It's down to the variations in choice of driver descriptions, Etymotic describes the ER-4 as a dynamic system, while Westone uses that description for regular coneshaped drivers.

I will differ them as Westone does, since it's the terms i'm used to. So if i'm talking about dynamic again later, i mean a regular coned driver

Anyway, i haven't dived into the science of burn-in much, and if and how much influence it has. One thing has passed my mind though; most or maybe all of the posts and reviews i can remember to have read over the years almost always ends with either concluding that the sound doesn't change, or it's getting better. Has anyone experienced anything that gets worse..?

And what do you think the designers ment the product should sound like?
Should it be like the new design prototype they just finished, that measured the way they wanted and sounded like they hoped it would when they designed it, or should it be like the same new design hopefully will sound to them after a few months of use?

Just a thought..

You're talking about dynamic versus balanced armature burn-in, and why dynamic drivers does change more. From a technical point of view i'd just like to try make a suggestion of why it differs. I'm not trying to make or think i have the correct answer, i'm just giving my thoughts.

Just a simple (?!) description: A dynamic driver (the coned one

), as most of you probably know, consists of a stiff cone that's suspended over a magnet with a spider and a surround of some material as suspension, and it's coil floats inside the magnet. The spider is often made of fabric or plastic, and the surround are often made of soft plastic, rubber or foam. The thing burn-in would relate to is probably much down to how these suspensions are softened up more and more over time when used, just as your just-washed jeans are softening up when you have worn them a while.

In a balanced armature driver, there's also a (pretty flat) cone and a suspension, but the're is no free-floating coil. Instead, there is an u-shaped metal reed (some sort of spring-steel) called the armature, that's sits with one "leg" in between a pair of magnets. The reed is then connected to the speaker cone through a thin metal drive rod. (look at the picture)
To cut to the point, the current through the coil makes the upper leg of the armature to bend back and forth between the magnets and so pushes the cone. This means that the main moving part in the speaker is the metal armature leg, and since i guess metal wouldn't soften up over time as plastic, rubber etc does, it wouldn't change the speaker caracteristics over time.

And that was one more humble suggestion in trying to answer the big burn-in mystery..