Jan 31, 2024 at 4:58 AM Post #17,131 of 19,075
So from what I'm seeing about the video: if we measure the signal as is, there's no line difference. Lets instead add lots of impedance than the FR goes down. Sorry, I'm kind of dismissing some of this video saying with authority about there being audible sound (especially after adding impedance adapters)
Mark specifically says he has never detected an audible difference between cables that don't use impedance adapters, so that seems to accord with what you said.

I specifically remembered this video because I own the FH5s, so the topic of burn in came up as a defense to how horribly sharp it is. The difference 200 hours of burn in did to Mark's specific FH5s tickled the measured FR a tiny amount, but not as much as a 15Ω adapter. Fiio relented and released a plus version that had a cable with an impedance adapter integrated into it, and that finally mitigated the problem, although it still has bad tonality issues.
 
Jan 31, 2024 at 5:11 AM Post #17,132 of 19,075
Mark specifically says he has never detected an audible difference between cables that don't use impedance adapters, so that seems to accord with what you said.

I specifically remembered this video because I own the FH5s, so the topic of burn in came up as a defense to how horribly sharp it is. The difference 200 hours of burn in did to Mark's specific FH5s tickled the measured FR a tiny amount, but not as much as a 15Ω adapter. Fiio relented and released a plus version that had a cable with an impedance adapter integrated into it, and that finally mitigated the problem, although it still has bad tonality issues.
Yeah, I'm referencing these same areas: as far as measurements, I don't own this IEM, but doubt I'd know about its presence. If we get hits, great
 
Jan 31, 2024 at 5:12 AM Post #17,133 of 19,075
I think there can be some real changes if you switch from the old pads and new ones immediately. One headphone I have that I like is the Focal Elex: kind of notice a lot of folks say differences between some of Focal models is just earpads. While ear pads can contribute to FR and soundstage, wouldn't have equated it to "great" gains.

Pads can have a significant impact on sound especially if they vary in shape. I've experienced this with D8000 when switching to thicker pads which improved stage/bass at the cost of higher mid/treble presence.

Many folks say stuff for the sake of saying it. You can spot posts in ASR that the difference between Focals is only in weight and color which can't be further from truth as I've heard all Focal lineup. Even their models as Clear/Utopia varies in sound depending on their release date. While their flagship tier is expensive the jump in sound quality is obvious for untrained year.
 
Jan 31, 2024 at 5:19 AM Post #17,135 of 19,075
I'm having trouble parsing this post. What do you mean?
That we all have to burn in the headphone at least 200 hours to be an authority.
 
Jan 31, 2024 at 9:20 AM Post #17,136 of 19,075
How do you evaluate burn-in? If it's how they sound at any given time, our perceptions are always changing. Audio is like my profession with graphics/video-I may be less focused if I'm in a bad mood or feel hungry. Critical judging of color can also be slightly different with monitor calibration or color balance of ambient light (with critical color grading, you can have an ambient sensor attached to your computer to adjust its white balance based on your room environment). Then when it comes to remembering every detail of a perception: our brains aren't really capable of that. They have specific organelles that filter different stimuli for us to focus on "important" elements (for example, how we naturally filter out ambient voices if we're conversing in a crowd). Your evaluation of a headphone can change with how engaging you find that particular music track. The only measured burn-in I've seen with headphones is that transducers can settle after many hours. The FR curve will go down maybe up to a dB. Can't see how anyone could observe that over time...especially as the whole FR curve still has the same shape Then when we get into cable burn-in: don't think there's been any measured evidence of a cable changing conductivity over time (at least one that's insulated). Conceptually, I would think that a cable's conductivity would only change if it's becoming corroded.

Like @gregorio said how can manufacturers rate and sell something that changes after use? But I've gone from owning an iem that was very disappointing: sounding peaky, thin and 'brittle' to now being a good listen. It's hard to accept that's just a result of playing with different tips especially as I'm now using ones that sounded horrible initially - last night I tried some small (very loose seal) Final tips that sounded very good but because of the small opening not quite 100%. You and a few others here are more knowledgeable than me and have years more experience so I'll go with what you say but what a difference now which I'm pleased about because these cost over $2k with discount. Looking at their graph after @redrol pointed out they have some high peaks I thought eq'ing was the answer but I don't even have to do that now: wouldn't know there are any peaks listening with them.
 
Jan 31, 2024 at 5:21 PM Post #17,137 of 19,075
Like @gregorio said how can manufacturers rate and sell something that changes after use? But I've gone from owning an iem that was very disappointing: sounding peaky, thin and 'brittle' to now being a good listen. It's hard to accept that's just a result of playing with different tips especially as I'm now using ones that sounded horrible initially - last night I tried some small (very loose seal) Final tips that sounded very good but because of the small opening not quite 100%. You and a few others here are more knowledgeable than me and have years more experience so I'll go with what you say but what a difference now which I'm pleased about because these cost over $2k with discount. Looking at their graph after @redrol pointed out they have some high peaks I thought eq'ing was the answer but I don't even have to do that now: wouldn't know there are any peaks listening with them.
From what i know about headphone manufacturing there are tolerances: most good headphone companies burn in a driver for 30 hours and then test it. The ones that have the best tolerance with another is what goes to be the left and right driver. That I've seen evidence that drivers still settle after the headphone manufacturing: I think that's just the nature of transducers. The flexibility of the diaphragm can change after many hours of use. But the main thing is that the overall tonal curve doesn't change. I started with the premise about how difficult it is to remember the details of of what you listened to (especially say a year). I also wouldn't have said a different interpretation is due to tips: main time you can really tell their difference is when you're switching between them at that given time.
 
Jan 31, 2024 at 5:22 PM Post #17,138 of 19,075
These iem's sound great now (today) with regular tips, you sure it's not down to burn-in, even a tiny bit?
How do you evaluate burn-in?

The effect IS measurable and I've measured it many times. However, contrary to popular belief, break-in doesn't take a long time of playing your earphones, but rather happens during the first few minutes of use. Also, the changes are rather small and overall not really significant.

Here's one example of measured break-in:
iBasso IT00 "burn-in" measurements

So this little snow-white beauty arrived yesterday and it went straight to my usual "burn-in" measurement procedure.
  • brand-new out of box = blue graph
  • after 1 minute of playing pink noise @ 110db = cyan graph
  • after 5 minutes of playing pink noise @ 110db = green graph
  • after 15 minutes of playing pink noise @110db = orange graph
  • after 60 minutes of playing pink noise @110db = red graph
(all measurements are DF-compensated)
iaca57A.jpg


Zoomed-in on midrange:
4VXlPsK.jpg


Zoomed-in on upper mids / lower treble:
aIHcd30.jpg


Bottom line: slight changes during the first few minutes, that tend to decrease with "burn-in" time. However, the IT00 seems to change a bit more than other IEMs I've measured.

@Ryokan: That's why I said it's very unlikely that your experience is due to burn-in. I've measured it on quite a few IEMs over the years and the outcome has always been the same: very slight and insignificant changes overall, the biggest ones during the very first minutes of use, steadily decreasing and pretty much settled after one hour at max.

I've remeasured several IEMs after months of use, and, on the condition of consistent tips and placement in the coupler, never observed any further changes.

From my pov, it's much more likely that something else has changed, provided it's not just a change in your perception. If you use small bore tips, they may cut down on treble and make IEMs sound less thin and aggressive. Foam tips may bend and obscure part of the nozzle, to a similar effect. A small amount of earwax may accumulate over time on the protecting mesh or in some internal filter. Your ears could have accumulated more wax inside. Heck, your hearing may even have undergone objective changes over the course of one year. Do you have it checked regularly? Last not least, and considering we're talking about opulent 10-BAs-per-side IEMs, one driver might have just stopped working without you noticing anything but them sounding a little more agreeable. Half joking, but in all seriousness, even that would imo be a more likely explanation than "burn-in".
 
Jan 31, 2024 at 6:56 PM Post #17,139 of 19,075
Pads can have a significant impact on sound especially if they vary in shape. I've experienced this with D8000 when switching to thicker pads which improved stage/bass at the cost of higher mid/treble presence.
But your impression is hearing the heaphones right when you switch pads. Can you really perceive as much difference coming from memory?
 
Feb 1, 2024 at 12:04 AM Post #17,140 of 19,075
Last edited:
Feb 1, 2024 at 12:35 AM Post #17,141 of 19,075
https://diyaudioheaven.wordpress.com/headphones/measurements/brands-a-i/dt-1990-pro/

My 1990 pros change dramatically between A and B pads. The difference is about 5dB.

Don't know about focals, I'll stay out of that one.
Yes, again I'm not denying that pads can influence overall sound (be it tonal balance and "sound stage"). My point was that it's most obvious when you're listening to the headphones right when you're doing the pad swap. What I've been trying to say is that overall character of a headphone isn't as dramatic if we're going by memory (your link would confirm this as there are variations you'd hear at the moment, but overall curves are still the same).
 
Last edited:
Feb 1, 2024 at 3:26 AM Post #17,142 of 19,075
But your impression is hearing the heaphones right when you switch pads. Can you really perceive as much difference coming from memory?

The difference on D8000 was easily noticable. G-pads for D8000 were thick basically putting driver further away from ears, while stock pads were thin and not isolating as much similar to the B/C-pads in link below:

https://snext-final.com/en/products/accessories/detail/earpads.html#:~:text=The F-type offers superior,G-type offers superior durability.&text=The earpad that comes as standard equipment to the D8000 Pro Edition.

If you'll go to thicker pads with proper seal you will get better pronounced bass slam, but to me tradeoff was not worth it. I know ZMF headphones offer multiple pads as well to play around with their HP tuning, but I haven't tried them. If pads would be similar in shape/seal I don't think there would be such shift in sound
 
Last edited:
Feb 1, 2024 at 4:17 AM Post #17,143 of 19,075
The effect IS measurable and I've measured it many times.
We have to be careful in the audiophile world because virtually any effect is pretty much always measurable. Even no effect at all produces a measurable difference, simply due to the random nature of thermal noise. Some of these measurable effects are too small to even be resolved into sound and even if they are, they have to be of sufficient magnitude to be audible.
Also, the changes are rather small and overall not really significant.
From the evidence you provided, I would go a step further and say “the changes are small and inaudible”, rather than “not really significant”. The biggest difference demonstrated by your evidence appears to be about 0.5dB, while a JND (Just Noticeable Difference) is around 0.7dB. A difference of 0.5dB maybe audible to some people under optimal conditions: A relatively wide band, a trained listener with very good hearing and fast switching but probably none of those conditions can be met by audiophiles and all of them definitely can’t. Your evidence demonstrates a narrow band and by definition there cannot be fast switching.
Heck, your hearing may even have undergone objective changes over the course of one year.
It’s almost inconceivable that someone’s hearing will not have undergone objective changes of the course of a year. Has that person flown in an aircraft, driven up a steep hill/mountain or been in a moderately fast elevator, had a cold, sinusitis or any sort of mild congestion from any cause, been swimming/diving or various other situations that can cause very significant objective changes which may take hours, days or even weeks to fully revert. Not to mention TTS (temporary threshold shifts) or any permanent changes due to an injury, noise exposure or just aging.
I've remeasured several IEMs after months of use, and, on the condition of consistent tips and placement in the coupler, never observed any further changes.
That’s where we run into difficulties, we cannot prove a negative. Although audiophile reports are typically of “impressions” of large differences, even “night and day” differences, not of extremely subtle differences near the threshold of audibility, so such claims are disprovable.

BTW, I’m not disagreeing with anything in your post, just going a bit of a step further.

G
 
Feb 2, 2024 at 11:28 PM Post #17,145 of 19,075
@Ryokan: That's why I said it's very unlikely that your experience is due to burn-in. I've measured it on quite a few IEMs over the years and the outcome has always been the same: very slight and insignificant changes overall, the biggest ones during the very first minutes of use, steadily decreasing and pretty much settled after one hour at max.

I've remeasured several IEMs after months of use, and, on the condition of consistent tips and placement in the coupler, never observed any further changes.

From my pov, it's much more likely that something else has changed, provided it's not just a change in your perception. If you use small bore tips, they may cut down on treble and make IEMs sound less thin and aggressive. Foam tips may bend and obscure part of the nozzle, to a similar effect. A small amount of earwax may accumulate over time on the protecting mesh or in some internal filter. Your ears could have accumulated more wax inside. Heck, your hearing may even have undergone objective changes over the course of one year. Do you have it checked regularly? Last not least, and considering we're talking about opulent 10-BAs-per-side IEMs, one driver might have just stopped working without you noticing anything but them sounding a little more agreeable. Half joking, but in all seriousness, even that would imo be a more likely explanation than "burn-in".
I don't have the time to read the whole context, but when conducting those IEM "burn-in" tests, have you allowed for letting the tips within the coupler to settle after a sufficient amount of time without playing any signals to see if the changes were due to small movements of the IEM within the coupler amid longer-term material compression or stretching? Could you compare the results of conducting the usual test both with and without any burn-in signals playing between measurements?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top