[sampson_smith]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kwkarth /img/forum/go_quote.gif Hi Vince, Good question you ask. First off, I would like to suggest that your choice of words in the beginning of your second paragraph, should probably subjectively, not objectively. If the phenomenon we're discussing were an objective fact, then there would be no controversy, alas, there is a great deal of controversy surrounding this observation, hence the term subjective is the more appropriate choice. Cheers!

Done and done. My point, before realizing that there is so much debate about whether or not burn-in is a good or even real thing, was to emphasize the subjective and not objective nature of our understanding of the physical processes that happen to a driver and its immediate housing during burn-in. I also thought it ironic that the potentially measurable changes to the materials and therefore mechanics of the headphone were understood, at best, subjectively. I don't have a clear idea what you would best do to empirically observe this phenomena (apart from doing one's best to objectively listen), but in theory, it must be possible. Many different materials exposed to regular use, wear and tear are quantitatively evaluated each day in R&D laboratories, to ensure a reasonable qualitative outcome in the hands/eyes/ears of those using them. Regardless, I now know a lot more about the subjective nature of burn-in and revised my first post for clarity's sake. Thanks again!

 

[nor_spoon]

FWIW, I will post my break-in experience with the HD800:

While I was waiting for my preordered pair to arrive, I managed to spend the money on a guitar instead, since they were delayed anyway

The final weeks before they came, I actually lost interest and did not care much, as I was happy with my HD650's, and I had a new toy to play with anyway. So, when they finally came, I really just needed an excuse to send them back, save the money (I did not have, hi Mastercard

), and maybe get them at a later point. Kind of opposite to the thing about wanting to justify the expense. I was really looking for the flaws...

Well, at first listen I thought they sounded harsh, thin, edgy and stiff. I listened for some days, playing just above listening level with pink noise through them in between. I guess 20-30 hours or so maybe. Not much happened, they were good, but still edgy and all that to my ears. I went many rounds with myself during these days because of the expense, and almost decided to send them back.

Finally, I ran some pink noise, measured to 100dB(A) on my SPL meter, for about 6-7 hours. When I listened again, they had changed considerably. With that I mean mellowed down, and softened up. The harsh and edgy sound was replaced with fuller and softer sound.

This was not something that happened during a period of several hundred hours. No, I heard the difference the same day, with the same "set of ears", no rest in between.

I don't know... but I think anyone would be able to hear the rather large change this rather ruthless "massage" made to them.
I do not believe this was, and still is, all placebo. If nothing happened with the headphones, and all this is placebo, well, then my hearing is pretty effed up.

 

[estreeter]

Quote:

Originally Posted by nor_spoon /img/forum/go_quote.gif FWIW, I will post my break-in experience with the HD800: While I was waiting for my preordered pair to arrive, I managed to spend the money on a guitar instead, since they were delayed anyway The final weeks before they came, I actually lost interest and did not care much, as I was happy with my HD650's, and I had a new toy to play with anyway. So, when they finally came, I really just needed an excuse to send them back, save the money (I did not have, hi Mastercard ), and maybe get them at a later point. Kind of opposite to the thing about wanting to justify the expense. I was really looking for the flaws... Well, at first listen I thought they sounded harsh, thin, edgy and stiff. I listened for some days, playing just above listening level with pink noise through them in between. I guess 20-30 hours or so maybe. Not much happened, they were good, but still edgy and all that to my ears. I went many rounds with myself during these days because of the expense, and almost decided to send them back. Finally, I ran some pink noise, measured to 100dB(A) on my SPL meter, for about 6-7 hours. When I listened again, they had changed considerably. With that I mean mellowed down, and softened up. The harsh and edgy sound was replaced with fuller and softer sound. This was not something that happened during a period of several hundred hours. No, I heard the difference the same day, with the same "set of ears", no rest in between. I don't know... but I think anyone would be able to hear the rather large change this rather ruthless "massage" made to them. I do not believe this was, and still is, all placebo. If nothing happened with the headphones, and all this is placebo, well, then my hearing is pretty effed up.

The alternative explanation is that your subconscious worked overtime to justify your purchase, and you subsequently started hearing what you needed to hear. Either way, whether it *is* all in our heads or not, does it really matter ? If someone new to this hobby/obsession is deterred from buying a new set of cans because they keep reading tales of 'exceptionally long burn-in required', I suspect that they were better off without those cans anyway. Can you imagine if you went to buy a new car and the salesman told you that you probably wouldn't like it for the first thousand hours, but after that it would be the slickest thing on 4 wheels ?

The main thing in your case is that you are enjoying your 600s, and many here seem to be huge fans of same, with or without pink noise.

 

[aimlink]

Quote:

Originally Posted by sampson_smith /img/forum/go_quote.gif Well put, aimlink! On that note: What are the detectable differences, if any, between your Grado SR-325is and RS-2i? I'm actually curious about upgrading from my pair of SR-325is's to that model or the RS-1i, and while we are being as honest as we can about the ability to discern subtle nuances, I thought I'd ask for your expert opinion. Thanks!

Thanks sampson_smith.

I find the RS2i to have a very similar overall sound signature to the SR325is in terms of the forwardness in sound with regards to the mids and highs. So both give you that intimacy when listening to vocals or lead instrumentation. The bass response is also pretty much the same. The critical difference to my ears and which is quite significant, is that sparkle at the top end. The SR325is has definitely more pronounced highs which can be fabulous with some recordings, that needs good amp'ing to control, and which can be overbearing with some recordings and artists. For example, I find listening to some Metallica and Iron Maiden recordings to be harsh on the highs with the SR325is, but just fine with the RS2i. Finally, the RS2i's do a lot better without amping than the SR325is. So all in all, if I were to pick just one, I'd go with the RS2i since it's the better all-rounder and is more comfortable to wear. However, the SR325is is the better of the two for me with a lot of recordings. However, better is just by a small margin though one that, at times, improves on the fun as well as clarity in the sound.

I'm curious about the RS1i, but have a sneaky feeling that they aren't that much different from the RS2i and that I'll be hearing a discernable though not significant difference from my personal POV, that others would consider to be like night and day. I hope to one day soon, confirm whether or not this is really the case.

 

[kwkarth]

Quote:

Originally Posted by estreeter /img/forum/go_quote.gif The alternative explanation is that your subconscious worked overtime to justify your purchase, and you subsequently started hearing what you needed to hear. Either way, whether it *is* all in our heads or not, does it really matter ? If someone new to this hobby/obsession is deterred from buying a new set of cans because they keep reading tales of 'exceptionally long burn-in required', I suspect that they were better off without those cans anyway. Can you imagine if you went to buy a new car and the salesman told you that you probably wouldn't like it for the first thousand hours, but after that it would be the slickest thing on 4 wheels ? The main thing in your case is that you are enjoying your 600s, and many here seem to be huge fans of same, with or without pink noise.

The fact of the matter is, that good cars do improve quite a bit with break in, and that's not a subjective matter.

 

[aimlink]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kwkarth /img/forum/go_quote.gif The fact of the matter is, that good cars do improve quite a bit with break in, and that's not a subjective matter.

I do appreciate your balanced POV on the subject in that the difference with burn in may well be more pronounced with some cans as opposed to others.

One thing I notice is that the reported experiences with differences in sound offered by burn-in, are invariably positive. What would be your comments on this?

 

[estreeter]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kwkarth /img/forum/go_quote.gif The fact of the matter is, that good cars do improve quite a bit with break in, and that's not a subjective matter.

I've pulled a couple of V8s down and rebuilt them - I know that the friction between new piston rings and freshly honed cylinder bores (not to mention the camshaft/crankshaft spinning in new bearings) means that you have to run the engine in : no question. Perhaps I'm just not sufficiently familiar with the internal of headphone drivers, but I would be very surprised if they experience that degree of friction between moving parts in the first few hours of operation. If so, I'll have to invest in a few gallons of Pennzoil.

 

[DanielCox]

The fact of the matter is there is no value in burn in (physically) because it's all in the mind.

 

[sampson_smith]

Quote:

Originally Posted by aimlink /img/forum/go_quote.gif I find the RS2i to have a very similar overall sound signature to the SR325is in terms of the forwardness in sound with regards to the mids and highs. So both give you that intimacy when listening to vocals or lead instrumentation. The bass response is also pretty much the same. The critical difference to my ears and which is quite significant, is that sparkle at the top end. The SR325is has definitely more pronounced highs which can be fabulous with some recordings, that needs good amp'ing to control, and which can be overbearing with some recordings and artists. For example, I find listening to some Metallica and Iron Maiden recordings to be harsh on the highs with the SR325is, but just fine with the RS2i. Finally, the RS2i's do a lot better without amping than the SR325is. So all in all, if I were to pick just one, I'd go with the RS2i since it's the better all-rounder and is more comfortable to wear. However, the SR325is is the better of the two for me with a lot of recordings. However, better is just by a small margin though one that, at times, improves on the fun as well as clarity in the sound. I'm curious about the RS1i, but have a sneaky feeling that they aren't that much different from the RS2i and that I'll be hearing a discernable though not significant difference from my personal POV, that others would consider to be like night and day. I hope to one day soon, confirm whether or not this is really the case.

Thanks for your input, aimlink. Insightful stuff. I think I should likely appreciate my 325is's as best I can over the next few months, while keeping a keen eye on the FS/FT forums for it "older" siblings. Not sure if I even need one of the "i" versions of the RS 'phones, as there seems to be mixed reports about what sounds better. Still, I'll get at least one of them one day, I'm sure.

Now, back to the "burning" question.

 

[Geek]

I hear subtle changes in the sound of a piece of equipment over the first month or two of listening, but it's mostly probably my ears adjusting to it, sadly. I do get better dynamics if my equipment's been running for a while - components perform better in a certain temperature range...

 

[kwkarth]

Quote:

Originally Posted by estreeter /img/forum/go_quote.gif I've pulled a couple of V8s down and rebuilt them - I know that the friction between new piston rings and freshly honed cylinder bores (not to mention the camshaft/crankshaft spinning in new bearings) means that you have to run the engine in : no question. Perhaps I'm just not sufficiently familiar with the internal of headphone drivers, but I would be very surprised if they experience that degree of friction between moving parts in the first few hours of operation. If so, I'll have to invest in a few gallons of Pennzoil.

LOL! That's a good one! STP, the audiophile's edge!

Anyway, the break in "friction" to be found in a headphone is actually the mechanical suspension of the driver (speaker). As the driver "flexes" back and forth, the material providing the suspension breaks in as it loosen's up with the flexion back and forth. Depending upon diaphragm design, and material chosen, this effect of breaking in can make a significant to insignificant difference in the character of the sound.

I'm currently working with some other engineers (not at Monster) on a new design that should exhibit no break in change at all, or at least so little, as to be sonically insignificant. This is specifically due to the nature of the diaphragm material chosen, and the diaphragm geometry itself. Exciting stuff!!

 

[Fido2]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DanielCox /img/forum/go_quote.gif The fact of the matter is there is no value in burn in (physically) because it's all in the mind.

Yeah, haven't you heard? Nothing is real. We're not even really typing on a bloody internet forum right now....

 

[jacdan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jawang /img/forum/go_quote.gif Also, to repeat Uncle Erik's comment, why don't manufactors pre-"burn-in" their headphones before shipping? it costs them virtually nothing to do so, and if such a drastic change occurs, then they clearly have justification to do it. Doesn't it make financial sense to make their product sound good out of the box (to prevent some returns and bad reviews)?

I'm wondering this about the K701s. Supposedly, from what I've read, AKG recommends 300 hours minimum burn in for that HP. Why doesn't AKG do that on their end before shipping the product?

 

[haloxt]

It costs money to do that and it would lower the lifespan of the headphones.

 

[thathertz]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uncle Erik /img/forum/go_quote.gif Burn in is mostly about allowing the owner to participate in a meaningful ritual prior to listening. Not that there's anything wrong with that. People perform wedding and funeral rituals, too, but they're only incidental to marriage and death. The ritual certainly isn't necessary. But if X number of hours with pink noise makes you happy, go right ahead. You won't hurt anything and the ceremonial aspect might make you appreciate your headphones a little more.

100% agree Eric

But, for me burn in has made a huge difference with certain components.
My DacMagic being the best example...out of the box it was awful:
dull, flat, uninvolving...a couple of hundred hours later and it was singing.
By 'singing' I mean the bass had tightened up, there was a greater sense
of space, attack and overall tonal warmth.

Just my opinion of course.

I've 'burned in' many other components waiting for CHANGE and been
disappointed that I wasn't hearing the differences reported by others.

There are alot of factors affecting the results from the burn in phase:

Your expectations
Your system synergy
Time between listening sessions
Your state of mind at any one time
Etc etc

You can't really apply science convincingly to this ritual.
Bottom line: try it and report what you hear.

Me? I enjoy the ritual. It's part of the bonding process