[wahsmoh]

Get the Alpha Dogs. Enough said :] I still use my DT880 for gaming primarily and some music listening. The Alpha Dogs have the more realistic vocals and liquid midrange and ortho bass. They are cheaper LCD-2's but more neutral <--best way to describe them

 

[i luvmusic 2]

 Since i have the Q701,HD 650 and the DT880 600 ohms,I would love to get the Bottlehead S.E.X. and HD800 in the future.I like all these three headphones each one of them have their own characteristics that i like they maybe not the  perfect headphones out there but i love them these three are a keeper for me No offence but i don't really believed in burn in.To me it's more like you get used to certain things that  it made you think some thing changed.My example was the DT880 at first they are bright to my liking then as time passed by i got used to it then it's not that bright to me anymore.Again these is just my opinion.THANK YOU!

 

[ccash]

Get the Alpha Dogs. Enough said :] I still use my DT880 for gaming primarily and some music listening. The Alpha Dogs have the more realistic vocals and liquid midrange and ortho bass. They are cheaper LCD-2's but more neutral <--best way to describe them

Hey wasmoh! I finally got to hear the Alphas. I went to the meet in LA mainly just to hear them. Nice, for sure, especially for closed hp. If I buy another closed in the future, they would be at the top of the list. After listening for a while (through a $5,000 dac/amp setup I put on my DT-880s. Man, they never sounded so good! Kinda ruined the alpha dog demo

 

[pp312]

   No offence but i don't really believed in burn in.To me it's more like you get used to certain things that  it made you think some thing changed.My example was the DT880 at first they are bright to my liking then as time passed by i got used to it then it's not that bright to me anymore.Again these is just my opinion.THANK YOU!

 
 
So how do you explain that my pair of (virtually unused) headphones sounds distinctly brighter than my well worn in pair? Or that headphones distinctly change sound even when left to play music in a cupboard or drawer, so that you don't actually get used to them? Not challenging you, it's just that I've heard this very easily refuted 'get used to' argument so many times yet no one ever seems to take it further and explain how a headphone not listened to for many hours appears to change sound even when one is not expecting it.
 
Actually there's nothing very odd or mystical in the concept. Didn't we used to have to 'burn in' cars year ago? Drive them very carefully the first few thousand miles until everything settled in? Here we have elastic materials (suspensions) almost guaranteed to change characteristics with use. In fact I have a theory that headphone drivers may perform differently depending on temperature, so that what you hear in Winter may not be the same as what you hear in Summer? That would certainly explain that lattitude of opinion around here as to the sound of certain phones. We've all had the experience of finishing a listening session fully satisfied with the sound of our headphones, only to start the next session a day or two later and think, What the hell's happened--this is crap?
 
Don't want to start a debate--just my 2c. THANK YOU!   

    

 

[i luvmusic 2]

As my name says I LOVE MUSIC 2 it doesn't say I AUDIOPHILE 2........

 

[stanleyshmanley]

   
 
So how do you explain that my pair of (virtually unused) headphones sounds distinctly brighter than my well worn in pair? Or that headphones distinctly change sound even when left to play music in a cupboard or drawer, so that you don't actually get used to them? Not challenging you, it's just that I've heard this very easily refuted 'get used to' argument so many times yet no one ever seems to take it further and explain how a headphone not listened to for many hours appears to change sound even when one is not expecting it.
 

Manufacturer variation. 
 
In all other cases, it's the result of confirmation bias. 

 

[Keithpgdrb]

  Manufacturer variation. 
 
In all other cases, it's the result of confirmation bias. 

unbelievable.

 

[Airlight]

It's probably likely the cause for 90% of burn-in effects.

I've had cases where I've gotten a new IEM (I own 4 Vsonic GR07s), and before a night of burn-in I've compared it to an existing, well-used pair and noted that the new pair is comparably a bit tamer in the high treble (just an example, all 4 of my pairs have different profiles by about +-2dbs or so, probably within specifications).
 
So I've had them playing overnight, and in the morning after a nice sleep I've listened with them again and found them to now have nicely filled out treble by what I'd judge to be maybe a db or so. Nothing much, but a noticeable change.
 
Then I've compared them again to the same pair as yesterday, and they're still the exact same relation to one another, meaning no change actually happened, other than my perception.
 
As someone who has spent countelss hours mixing, EQing and mastering, as well as composing, your perception of EQ and sound balance changes alot as you progress through a day of music listening.
It's a bit like your smell can adjust to make sure that if you have to work in stinky conditions, eventually your brain will just realize that the constant sensory input isn't really worth registering as much, so the smell will seem to fade more and more. And it takes a while away from the stimuli for your brain to "reset".
 
Also I've got a very good sense of absolute balance from my experience with sound, and I've had countless cases where at one point I've felt a pair of headphones sound a bit too dark for some reason, then after a quick dinner and 20 minutes later I sit down and listen again to the same piece of music, and I can't really believe it's the same pair of headphones because now they have a sense of air and clarity they didn't have before.
 
Now don't get me wrong, like wearing a pair of new shoes, all physical materials are bound to change with usage, however the amount and whether it is perceivable or not is highly debatable. Our ears are generally not the best instrument to use to judge it.
 
Probably way too long a reply, and OT, but wanted to share.

 

[xkonfuzed]

Had a dream that I cut my DT880's cable and it could never be replaced. Woke up and thanked God it was a dream.

 

[i luvmusic 2]

I may have started a fire it start to BURN-IN.

 

[pp312]

 

   
 
So how do you explain that my pair of (virtually unused) headphones sounds distinctly brighter than my well worn in pair? Or that headphones distinctly change sound even when left to play music in a cupboard or drawer, so that you don't actually get used to them? Not challenging you, it's just that I've heard this very easily refuted 'get used to' argument so many times yet no one ever seems to take it further and explain how a headphone not listened to for many hours appears to change sound even when one is not expecting it.
 

Manufacturer variation. 
 
In all other cases, it's the result of confirmation bias. 

 
Manufacturing tolerances would tend to be all over the place, whereas burn in shows a clear tendency: un-burnt in = bright, burnt in = less bright. To me this indicates something settling in, finding its ideal operating range. Confirmation bias is irrelevant here. You missed my words "...even when one is not expecting it." People who have nothing to prove and have never taken a position on the issue often express surprise at changes in their phones after maybe 50 hours of pink noise in a drawer. Others who were hoping for and expecting a change report none at all, which suggests to me that the manufacturer may have already performed some burn in or the material used is not subject to change (or the phone just sounds so horrible that subtle changes aren't detectable). I have nothing to prove by defending the concept of burn in. I've just heard the evidence of it so many times I'd be an idiot to deny it.

 

[Airlight]

   
Manufacturing tolerances would tend to be all over the place, whereas burn in shows a clear tendency: un-burnt in = bright, burnt in = less bright. To me this indicates something settling in, finding its ideal operating range. Confirmation bias is irrelevant here. You missed my words "...even when one is not expecting it." People who have nothing to prove and have never taken a position on the issue often express surprise at changes in their phones after maybe 50 hours of pink noise in a drawer. Others who were hoping for and expecting a change report none at all, which suggests to me that the manufacturer may have already performed some burn in or the material used is not subject to change (or the phone just sounds so horrible that subtle changes aren't detectable). I have nothing to prove by defending the concept of burn in. I've just heard the evidence of it so many times I'd be an idiot to deny it.

 
I understand what you are saying, but I'd like to point out that it's just anecdotec, not evidence in that sense.
 
Also, keep in mind that another explanation of the huge prevalence of reported burn-in might also be the fact that that type of variation is inherent in human auditory perception.
 
As humans we tend to treat our sensory input as absolute, when there's so much filtering and processing going on that we aren't aware of. Going back to the analogy of someone getting used to a bad smell, that person might think the smell is all but gone after spending an hour around it, and be surprised or even doubtful when someone just stepping into that environment reacts alot stronger than seemingly reasonable.
 
Ask any person who does sound mixing or mastering, you can't really entirely trust your ears with the minute judgments over the course of a single day, let alone while waiting for 50 hours for something to burn in.
 
I've also read many who noticed extended treble after burn-in and loosening/settling of the materials, which would equate to more bright, not less bright. So there's not even a single consensus of any reliable effects of burn in in that sense (less bright the more it's used).
 
I respect your opinion though even if I don't agree with it.
 
Again, sorry for derailing the thread.

 

[Rem0o]

I might do a comparison soon between my 6 months+ DT880 with a new pair that one of my friend is buying this week. Really curious if there is any obvious difference. 

 

[Airlight]

Just keep in mind that you cannot really judge how or why the differences you find came to be, only that they are there. However that'd be a very interesting test to see Beyers production consistency. 

 

[Strangelove424]

There are mechanical explanations for driver break in. The degree of effect is debatable, but the rubber suspension material on drivers can become less rigid after some use. This allows the diaphragm to move more freely. Probably doesn't require the massive amounts of burn in people do tho. The rubber can also stiffen in the cold, over night, etc. So a driver might sound different under all sorts of circumstances, not just when it's new. Keep in mind this only applies to traditional driver with a rubber suspension.

From wiki on driver surround materials:

The cone surround can be rubber or polyester foam, or a ring of corrugated, resin coated fabric; it is attached to both the outer diaphragm circumference and to the frame. These different surround materials, their shape and treatment can dramatically affect the acoustic output of a driver; each class and implementation having advantages and disadvantages. Polyester foam, for example, is lightweight and economical, but is degraded by exposure to ozone, UV light, humidity and elevated temperatures, limiting its useful life to about 15 years.