[xnor]

Quote:

No.  But I have bought cables that I thought were new- only to listen to them and find out that they had already been burned in.  I went back to the store and expressed my anger to the salesperson.

Hehehe, can't stop laughing.
 
Looks like the thread is back to normal. The ever growing list in #1 is impressive, good work!

 

[jackmccabe]

I do believe that certain headphones and speakers can change a bit due to the driver material changing, but generally they are small changes and not theses gigantic good to bad differences people claim to hear.

 

[Prog Rock Man]

Quote:

I do believe that certain headphones and speakers can change a bit due to the driver material changing, but generally they are small changes and not theses gigantic good to bad differences people claim to hear.

Yes, whilst there is evidence to show there is burn in of speakers we don't know how much of that is audible and how much any change is actually getting used to the sound.
 
Speaker burn in is one audiophile myth that has some substance to it. Burn in of other stuff is totally unproven.
 

 

[jackmccabe]

Cable burn in ಠ_ಠ

 

[CantScareMe]

I've read so much about burn in. And the debate is endless.
 
But I often don't see a needed emphasis on ways we, as the headphone owner for example can actually make sure we answer the question 'have I experienced burn in?' with the least amount of bias and a high level of accuracy.
 
 
 
Might this be something: I buy a full size headphone and listen to it for around 4 hours. I note down what I listen to- and good music for this might be something like chesky records' ultimate demo disk. Anyway, The next time I listen to it is after 100hrs of pink noise burn in, preferably in a similar physical setting as the first listen. And now I note down what I hear.
 
I then compare the two.
 
Even better- at both of the listens, I compare the headphone to say a 2000hr old akg k271. And note down how it compares in sound (sibilance/bass/resolution).
 
 
 
This is my own personal test for burn in. If you think it's stupid, then it is stupid- leave it as that!!
Whenever I have done this, my conclusion has been  'burn in don't exist.'  But I haven't always been able to use this way- like with the IE8. It took me ages to find a right fit with tips and insertion. Each time I tried a new method, the sound changed- like it does with all iem's I guess. And with the nuforce hdp- as I didn't have another dac/amp, and so listened to this thing throughout the time it was alive.
 
 

 

[upstateguy]

Quote:

Yes, electronic test equipment tests the same thing we hear. It's a lot more sensitive, too. I've never seen anything that suggests otherwise.

Test gear doesn't measure placebo and expectation, though listening tests control for that.

Which is why no one has ever passed an unsighted test.

No significant measurements are compelling. That no one has ever passed an unsighted test is even more compelling.

Occam's Razor tells us that the "difference" in cables is imaginary.

Further, the financial aspect is damning. Cable marketers sell their "products" at ridiculous markups. That they're just trying to turn a dollar is laughably obvious. The reason they offer zero evidence that their products "work" is just more evidence of their fraud.

Quote:

That backs up measurements of car sub woofers and cinema speakers and the experience of a forum member who works in a studio, The woofer measurements found that the speakers did change in various ways such as frequency response. Then it was found, sometimes a few hours later but also weeks later, after no use the speaker would return to its original measurements.
 
The guy who worked in the studio commented about how sure he was that he had burn in on headphones. I asked if he had a pair he had not used for a while, which he did, tried and found they were more like their original sound.
 
So there is anecdotal and measured evidence that burn in does occur with speakers, it can be audible, but unless the speaker is in use all of the time, it returns to its original state.
 
I have heard enough vintage headphones that my own experience backs that up as well.
 

Don't know why that should be true Proggie?  You can't undo the deterioration that occurs with use in headphones and speakers, by leaving them alone for a while.
 
Speaker burn in has some substance to it, but speaker deterioration is a fact. 

    Your old speakers will never sound as good as they did when they were new.
 
Quote:

Yes, whilst there is evidence to show there is burn in of speakers we don't know how much of that is audible and how much any change is actually getting used to the sound.
 
Speaker burn in is one audiophile myth that has some substance to it. Burn in of other stuff is totally unproven.
 

Agreed. 
 
 
 
USG
 

 

[Mambosenior]

It seems plausible that audio equipment such as speakers do have/need an adaptive period. Since speakers are composed of more than electronic components—wood, metal, padding, cloth—the temperature and humidity level, to name just two factors, of a listener's room would conceivably have an effect on the sound. I've noticed that if temperature and humidity fluctuate drastically (i.e.: a long power outage) in my audio room, the sound does obviously change. I don't understand how this could be make-believe on my part. Could cable and/or audio equipment performance be also susceptible to these factors?
 
Since I have very little opportunity to listen to my speaker-based system, sometimes for months at a time, the initial listening session gives me a sound that is flat, with the sound-field extremely narrow. After 48 hours of leaving the system on and playing music through it repeatedly without sitting and listening to it, the presentation returns to what I had remembered: a wide and deep sound-stage, very precise imaging and recognizable instrumental timbres. (Whether this Holy Grail was achieved at the 26th- or 34th-hour of continuous play, I don't know.) The room is a professionally treated acoustic space with dedicated electrical circuits. Except for the occasional replacement of a preamp driver tube (with same manufacturer) nothing has changed for the last 6-7 years. If this is common sense and I waste the reader's time (and patience), I apologize. My point is that if measurements of my equipment were to be made at the start and end the above-described “change” period, the scientific and quantifiable data would, probably, demonstrate no change in the laws of electrical conductivity between source and speakers, yet my hearing does acknowledge a difference...a BIG difference. It is an experience that I've tried with a number friends who are into audio and know my system. The perception of change has been unanimous. This was done by allowing only one person at a time to sit and listen so as to avoid any peer influence.
 
Well, that's my story and I am sticking to it.

 

[Heidegger]

 
Quote:

 

Evidence? I don't need no EVIDENCE cos I CAN HEAR THE DIFFERENCE!
 
 

That is exactly how I feel.
 
Think of it this way: You dine at a restaurant with somebody you like. You're having a good time with this person, and the meal tastes great. A week later you return to the same restaurant and sit at the very same table and order the very same meal made exactly the same way with the same exact ingredients by the same exact chef, but this time you're dining with somebody who gets on your nerves, or maybe you're trying to eat after receiving some bad news. The food no longer tastes that good, and you don't enjoy the meal. Yet it was the very same meal that, according to a scientific analysis of the food, should have tasted the same as it did before -- only it didn't.
 
As long as I hear an improvement, that is what matters. Whether the improvement is due to physical or psychological factors, that's a fairly unimportant consideration as far as my musical enjoyment is concerned. This thread basically boils down to: You're not supposed to hear a difference between your Cardas and stock Sennheiser headphone cables, or you're not supposed to hear an improvement in your amp. The fact is that I do hear an improvement. Could the improvement be imaginary? Sure. But so what? As long as it adds to my enjoyment, the effect -- whether physical or "merely" psychological -- is welcome.
 

 

[JadeEast]

Quote:

 

That is exactly how I feel.
 
Think of it this way: You dine at a restaurant with somebody you like. You're having a good time with this person, and the meal tastes great. A week later you return to the same restaurant and sit at the very same table and order the very same meal made exactly the same way with the same exact ingredients by the same exact chef, but this time you're dining with somebody who gets on your nerves, or maybe you're trying to eat after receiving some bad news. The food no longer tastes that good, and you don't enjoy the meal. Yet it was the very same meal that, according to a scientific analysis of the food, should have tasted the same as it did before -- only it didn't.
 
As long as I hear an improvement, that is what matters. Whether the improvement is due to physical or psychological factors, that's a fairly unimportant consideration as far as my musical enjoyment is concerned. This thread basically boils down to: You're not supposed to hear a difference between your Cardas and stock Sennheiser headphone cables, or you're not supposed to hear an improvement in your amp. The fact is that I do hear an improvement. Could the improvement be imaginary? Sure. But so what? As long as it adds to my enjoyment, the effect -- whether physical or "merely" psychological -- is welcome.
 

 
But why depend on an object to make a subjective change; would it not make more sense just to make the adjustment in the subjective domain? 

 

[BlackbeardBen]

Quote:

 
Don't know why that should be true Proggie?  You can't undo the deterioration that occurs with use in headphones and speakers, by leaving them alone for a while.
 
Speaker burn in has some substance to it, but speaker deterioration is a fact. 

    Your old speakers will never sound as good as they did when they were new.
 
 
USG
 

 
It's not deterioration we're talking about - "warm up" is a better term to describe this sort of change, similar to a cold engine warming up.  The compliance of the suspension, stiffness of the diaphragm, conductivity of the electrical components, and other particular aspects affecting performance are, depending on the particular thing, either known to change with the increasing temperature of a running component or potentially may impact it.  The significance of any particular aspect is a bit more murky.
 
There's no doubt that car engines run far more efficiently after warmup because the oil used in engines is tuned to have the right viscosity at expected operating temperatures - just viscous enough for startup in cold weather, optimal efficiency at steady-state running temperatures, and not becoming too viscous at high operating temperatures (of course that all depends on the car/oil/conditions, but you get my point).
 
On the other hand, speakers and headphones obviously don't have that same critical level of high dependance of performance on temperature - so differences are smaller.  We know, for example, and can predict how electrical components behave at changing temperatures.  The differences are usually small but measurable.  The same goes for rubber and foam suspensions, and so on.
 
The same goes for the other environmental conditions mentioned - although heat is certainly the largest operating difference.
 

 

[Mkubota1]

Quote:

Don't know why that should be true Proggie?  You can't undo the deterioration that occurs with use in headphones and speakers, by leaving them alone for a while.

Like most everything I think it's a matter of degree.  Basically like a rubber band: If you stretch it and let go, it will return back to it's original shape- more or less.  If you really examined it up close you would probably find that it didn't return to its exact dimensions, nor will it ever.  The same can be said for moving drivers, except that drivers are typically composed of multiple materials- some which will rebound fairly easily like rubber or foam.  Things like paper or cloth might not regain their original form as easily.

 

[BlackbeardBen]

Quote:

That is exactly how I feel.
 
Think of it this way: You dine at a restaurant with somebody you like. You're having a good time with this person, and the meal tastes great. A week later you return to the same restaurant and sit at the very same table and order the very same meal made exactly the same way with the same exact ingredients by the same exact chef, but this time you're dining with somebody who gets on your nerves, or maybe you're trying to eat after receiving some bad news. The food no longer tastes that good, and you don't enjoy the meal. Yet it was the very same meal that, according to a scientific analysis of the food, should have tasted the same as it did before -- only it didn't.
 
As long as I hear an improvement, that is what matters. Whether the improvement is due to physical or psychological factors, that's a fairly unimportant consideration as far as my musical enjoyment is concerned. This thread basically boils down to: You're not supposed to hear a difference between your Cardas and stock Sennheiser headphone cables, or you're not supposed to hear an improvement in your amp. The fact is that I do hear an improvement. Could the improvement be imaginary? Sure. But so what? As long as it adds to my enjoyment, the effect -- whether physical or "merely" psychological -- is welcome.
 

The thing is, the meal you're paying for isn't advertised, promoted, and sold with the pretext that it will taste better if you enjoy it with a friend, and charge you extra to have a friend there (not meaning charging them for their meal - just charging extra to have someone else in your party at the restaurant).  Your analogy is entirely irrelevant as regards to the value proposition.
 
That differs from snake oil salesmen, which either directly state or at the very least imply that there are actual, measurable differences that the snake oil is making.  If snake oil products were sold as audio jewelry for those that only want the best, sure, that's fine - as long as they're not falsely purporting (even passively) to do something that they don't.  As long as buyers are understanding that they're buying audio jewelry - not being falsely conned (by anyone including internet forum users and shop salespeople) into thinking that what they are purchasing makes a difference beyond what they imagine to be the difference, that's fine.  But that's not what's happening.  That's what the problem is.  People buying things that they are told and believe make objective differences to the sound, despite all evidence to the contrary.  Lies told or perpetuated in order to make profits (and for those who are entirely deluding themselves, somehow seek happiness), in other words.
 
Sorry, I realized I was just taking your bait again.  This thread is for the discussion of the testing of audiophile claims and myths through the scientific method, not arguing about the ethics of those who do in fact sell audio products that make no significant measurable difference (but purport to do so, whether directly or indirectly).
 
So if you want to talk about that, make a thread concerning that.  A dedicated thread for hearing perception would be appropriate.

 

[upstateguy]

 
Quote:

It seems plausible that audio equipment such as speakers do have/need an adaptive period. Since speakers are composed of more than electronic components—wood, metal, padding, cloth—the temperature and humidity level, to name just two factors, of a listener's room would conceivably have an effect on the sound. I've noticed that if temperature and humidity fluctuate drastically (i.e.: a long power outage) in my audio room, the sound does obviously change. I don't understand how this could be make-believe on my part. Could cable and/or audio equipment performance be also susceptible to these factors?
 
Since I have very little opportunity to listen to my speaker-based system, sometimes for months at a time, the initial listening session gives me a sound that is flat, with the sound-field extremely narrow. After 48 hours of leaving the system on and playing music through it repeatedly without sitting and listening to it, the presentation returns to what I had remembered: a wide and deep sound-stage, very precise imaging and recognizable instrumental timbres. (Whether this Holy Grail was achieved at the 26th- or 34th-hour of continuous play, I don't know.) The room is a professionally treated acoustic space with dedicated electrical circuits. Except for the occasional replacement of a preamp driver tube (with same manufacturer) nothing has changed for the last 6-7 years. If this is common sense and I waste the reader's time (and patience), I apologize. My point is that if measurements of my equipment were to be made at the start and end the above-described “change” period, the scientific and quantifiable data would, probably, demonstrate no change in the laws of electrical conductivity between source and speakers, yet my hearing does acknowledge a difference...a BIG difference. It is an experience that I've tried with a number friends who are into audio and know my system. The perception of change has been unanimous. This was done by allowing only one person at a time to sit and listen so as to avoid any peer influence.
 
Well, that's my story and I am sticking to it.

I've noticed that if temperature and humidity fluctuate drastically <snip> in my audio room, the sound does obviously change
 
It's not your imagination, I've noticed similar fluctuations with my speakers due to temperature and humidity, but I can't think of a reason why power outages or lack of use would affect them.
 
....the presentation returns to what I had remembered...
 
I think it's just a function of your audio memory... after not listening to it for a while, it takes a little time before you're used to your sound field again.
 
Quote:

It's not deterioration we're talking about - "warm up" is a better term to describe this sort of change, similar to a cold engine warming up.  The compliance of the suspension, stiffness of the diaphragm, conductivity of the electrical components, and other particular aspects affecting performance are, depending on the particular thing, either known to change with the increasing temperature of a running component or potentially may impact it.  The significance of any particular aspect is a bit more murky.
 
There's no doubt that car engines run far more efficiently after warmup because the oil used in engines is tuned to have the right viscosity at expected operating temperatures - just viscous enough for startup in cold weather, optimal efficiency at steady-state running temperatures, and not becoming too viscous at high operating temperatures (of course that all depends on the car/oil/conditions, but you get my point).
 
On the other hand, speakers and headphones obviously don't have that same critical level of high dependance of performance on temperature - so differences are smaller.  We know, for example, and can predict how electrical components behave at changing temperatures.  The differences are usually small but measurable.  The same goes for rubber and foam suspensions, and so on.
 
The same goes for the other environmental conditions mentioned - although heat is certainly the largest operating difference.
 

I was under the impression the topic was "break in" not warm up.  I agree with you that a "warm up" period can exist for many types of equipment, but the the number of hours required for "break in" is something else.  My feeling is that what's going on is a gradual deterioration rather than a "break in".
 
I hate to post this in the middle of a thread because it could get lost, but there is one documented  instance of gradual deterioration over time, that I know of.
 
We've all read the Carver Challenge so I won't repeat it.  What I will bring up is that 6 months after Bob Carver won the Challenge by making his SS amp sound like the tube amp, the magazine had an opportunity to evaluate the two amps a second time.  What they found was that the two amps didn't sound the same any more.  The reviewers attributed it to the gradual deterioration of the tubes in the tube amp during the 6 month period, but it could have just as well been a combination of both.  Regardless, the net result was that the null effect Carver had achieved was no longer there.
 
 
Quote:

The thing is, the meal you're paying for isn't advertised, promoted, and sold with the pretext that it will taste better if you enjoy it with a friend, and charge you extra to have a friend there (not meaning charging them for their meal - just charging extra to have someone else in your party at the restaurant).  Your analogy is entirely irrelevant as regards to the value proposition.
 
That differs from snake oil salesmen, which either directly state or at the very least imply that there are actual, measurable differences that the snake oil is making.  If snake oil products were sold as audio jewelry for those that only want the best, sure, that's fine - as long as they're not falsely purporting (even passively) to do something that they don't.  As long as buyers are understanding that they're buying audio jewelry - not being falsely conned (by anyone including internet forum users and shop salespeople) into thinking that what they are purchasing makes a difference beyond what they imagine to be the difference, that's fine.  But that's not what's happening.  That's what the problem is.  People buying things that they are told and believe make objective differences to the sound, despite all evidence to the contrary.  Lies told or perpetuated in order to make profits (and for those who are entirely deluding themselves, somehow seek happiness), in other words.
 
Sorry, I realized I was just taking your bait again.  This thread is for the discussion of the testing of audiophile claims and myths through the scientific method, not arguing about the ethics of those who do in fact sell audio products that make no significant measurable difference (but purport to do so, whether directly or indirectly).
 
So if you want to talk about that, make a thread concerning that.  A dedicated thread for hearing perception would be appropriate.

Good call. 

 

 

[Mambosenior]

Quote:

I've noticed that if temperature and humidity fluctuate drastically <snip> in my audio room, the sound does obviously change
 
It's not your imagination, I've noticed similar fluctuations with my speakers due to temperature and humidity, but I can't think of a reason why power outages or lack of use would affect them.
 
....the presentation returns to what I had remembered...
 
I think it's just a function of your audio memory... after not listening to it for a while, it takes a little time before you're used to your sound field again.
 

1. A power outage takes out AC systems as well as the automatic humidity control system.
 
2. I would like to think it's my audio memory that is faulty and there is really no difference. However when I listen to a large symphonic score and hear the woodwinds coming from right above my knees, with all instruments bunched together and 3 feet away from me, I am quite sure that's not what I remembered from years of listening. In a couple of days the same passage is emanating from ear level, about 8 feet away from me and with almost visible instrumental separation. Go figure! (Call me Ishmael or call me crazy.)

 
 

 

[eucariote]

Quote:

That is exactly how I feel.
 
Think of it this way: You dine at a restaurant with somebody you like. You're having a good time with this person, and the meal tastes great. A week later you return to the same restaurant and sit at the very same table and order the very same meal made exactly the same way with the same exact ingredients by the same exact chef, but this time you're dining with somebody who gets on your nerves, or maybe you're trying to eat after receiving some bad news. The food no longer tastes that good, and you don't enjoy the meal. Yet it was the very same meal that, according to a scientific analysis of the food, should have tasted the same as it did before -- only it didn't.
 
As long as I hear an improvement, that is what matters. Whether the improvement is due to physical or psychological factors, that's a fairly unimportant consideration as far as my musical enjoyment is concerned. This thread basically boils down to: You're not supposed to hear a difference between your Cardas and stock Sennheiser headphone cables, or you're not supposed to hear an improvement in your amp. The fact is that I do hear an improvement. Could the improvement be imaginary? Sure. But so what? As long as it adds to my enjoyment, the effect -- whether physical or "merely" psychological -- is welcome.
 

 
You're almost there!  And the final step is..  Given that human experience and enjoyment is so strongly influenced by ones' current state, ideas, expectations  etc.  this factor could be accounted for and completely eliminated by simply removing one's knowledge of the hardware/cable/amp they're hearing.  The genius of this step is that it renders these (inescapable, natural, powerful) psychological factors mathematically independent*  of the particular hardware that is being evaluated.  And so with enough samples, these psychological factors are completely averaged out and all that is left is the influence of the actual hardware on one's judgement.  Ta da!
 
* , which here means the probability of A (the choice of better hardware) given B, (knowledge/bias/expectation during the listening session) is equal to the probability of A.  Meaning that B has no influence on A and A is an independent probability. 
 
Nobody believes that psychology doesn't affect experience, pleasure and judgement.  In fact that is our starting premise.  But to get on with discussions of actual hardware efficacy, we want to eliminate this influence.