[ratinox]

Getting back to M-100, that same article goes on about enhanced bass and when it's useful. M-100's clarity and prominent bass is really good when listening at relatively low volume levels. Our ears are less sensitive to low frequency sounds so boosting the bass can make the whole thing sound much better when the master volume is below deafening. There's a similar effect when riding the subway where low-frequency noise can interfere with what you're hearing through the headphones. Back when I was experimenting with tape mods I found that the only time that I felt a need for more bass was when riding the train.

So, yeah, score another one for the engineer and for M-100.

 

[SomeGuyDude]

Very true! It's actually kinda interesting if you do car audio. There's kind of a "criss cross" that happens with the frequency balance as the volume goes up. At low volumes, you might not hear any bass to speak of, but turn it up and the bass gets more and more prominent, then at ultra high volume it sounds like it's ALL bass. 
 
^ spoken in reference to audio systems with burly subwoofer setups.

 

[ratinox]

We have measurements (from Rin and Tyll) showing that burn in reduces distortion...  It does something.  I don't think anyone has tested it on a BA-based IEM yet though.  But it has moving units (arms), and the multi-driver ones have multiple... 

Last I knew, Tyll wasn't sure what it was that he was measuring. There's something there. I'll agree with that. Objective measurements don't lie. What that something is? I don't know. Tyll doesn't know.

On the other hand, we have engineers from headphone manufacturers -- people who have the most to gain by promoting the idea that burn-in makes their equipment sound better -- saying that burn-in is largely a myth, hokum, a marketing gimmick.

Sure, older analog equipment had a burn-in period. Glue on speaker drivers. Flux on solder points in amplifiers. The burn-in process was... not literally burning but it did involve a lot of heat and a lot of evaporation of manufacturing residue. But contemporary consumer electronics? No way. For one, they don't get that hot. For two, even if they did the evaporating residues are toxic and not permitted in consumer electronics in the US and Europe, YMMV elsewhere.

 

[SomeGuyDude]

Y'know what I think we could do?
 
If someone says they're not in love with a headphone sound, just tell them "give it a week or so" and leave it at that.

 

[howdy]

So, how are the M100s?

 

[ratinox]

So, how are the M100s?

Really good. And if you don't agree then give 'em a week or so.

 

[kyuuketsuki]

Really good. And if you don't agree then give 'em a week or so.

 
Only a week?! Give em 7 weeks! You have 8 before you can send them back!

 

[howdy]

I was just trying to politely get us back on topic of the great burned/unburned V-MODA M100s.

 

[tinyman392]

Last I knew, Tyll wasn't sure what it was that he was measuring. There's something there. I'll agree with that. Objective measurements don't lie. What that something is? I don't know. Tyll doesn't know.

On the other hand, we have engineers from headphone manufacturers -- people who have the most to gain by promoting the idea that burn-in makes their equipment sound better -- saying that burn-in is largely a myth, hokum, a marketing gimmick.

Sure, older analog equipment had a burn-in period. Glue on speaker drivers. Flux on solder points in amplifiers. The burn-in process was... not literally burning but it did involve a lot of heat and a lot of evaporation of manufacturing residue. But contemporary consumer electronics? No way. For one, they don't get that hot. For two, even if they did the evaporating residues are toxic and not permitted in consumer electronics in the US and Europe, YMMV elsewhere.

 
As quoted from his article burning in the Q701:
 
Quote: http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/measurement-and-audibility-headphone-break-page-3

 Ka-ching! Here we can see a clear downward trend of IMD products over time. While the data is a bit noisy, all IMD products are reducing in level about 1.5dB each over the course of the test. I included IMD in the test because I thought that the type of differences I've heard over time might be due to this type of distortion.

 
He makes a statement that distortion goes down with time...  It's a clear trend.  He does also make a statement saying it could be what it is, but it isn't conclusive.  Tyll knows what he was measuring, he just didn't know the cause of that change.  But the fact is there is change, we just don't know what caused it. 
 
It's like knowing there is gravity, but not knowing the exact cause of gravity.  We can see it's change with respect to mass and distance, we just don't know what causes it.  That doesn't mean it doesn't exist. 
 
Rin has been able to reproduce this result with other Dynamic-based headphones and IEMs.  Some have more change than others (the Aurvana Live! 2, for example does show much change at all).  http://rinchoi.blogspot.com/search/label/The%20effect%20of%20break-in
 
The change is measurable, and its there.  The question becomes how big of a difference does it make?  That is something that isn't measured, that's no one is sure about. 

 

[epithetless]

So, how are the M100s?

 

 

[tinyman392]

I was just trying to politely get us back on topic of the great burned/unburned V-MODA M100s.

 
Understood, I'm done talking about break in then... 

 

[howdy]

So then I have a question, I read somewhere on here that these will kind of form to your head. I have a big noggin, so is this true?

 

[tinyman392]

So then I have a question, I read somewhere on here that these will kind of form to your head. I have a big noggin, so is this true?

 
All pads will start to form to your noggin due to the un-even force on the pads from your head.  Remember, the clamping force goes both ways, headphone to head, head to headphone (Newton's 3rd).  So as you use a pair of headphones, the foam will get spots where its more tender than others due to the shape of your head (as some parts protrude out more than others, the more in protrudes, the more force will be exherted onto the pads).  Tips also experience this as your ear canals are more ovular in shape  I've actually got some really ovular shaped triple flange tips to show this XD 

 

[elvergun]

Last I knew, Tyll wasn't sure what it was that he was measuring. There's something there. I'll agree with that. Objective measurements don't lie. What that something is? I don't know. Tyll doesn't know.

On the other hand, we have engineers from headphone manufacturers -- people who have the most to gain by promoting the idea that burn-in makes their equipment sound better -- saying that burn-in is largely a myth, hokum, a marketing gimmick.

 

 
And on the other, other hand, we have engineers and headphone manufacturers saying that burn in is real...right on their instruction manuals.   
 
 
 

   
As quoted from his article burning in the Q701:
 
 
He makes a statement that distortion goes down with time...  It's a clear trend.  He does also make a statement saying it could be what it is, but it isn't conclusive.  Tyll knows what he was measuring, he just didn't know the cause of that change.  

 
Ratinox probably believes that Tyll was measuring bias, perception and expectation.

 

 

[kyuuketsuki]

   
And on the other, other hand, we have engineers and headphone manufacturers saying that burn in is real...right on their instruction manuals.   
 
 
 
 
Ratinox probably believes that Tyll was measuring bias, perception and expectation.

 

 
Most engineers I've talked to (real people) don't believe burn-in exists for the very reason I stated. If any device of moving parts changes to a greatly measurable degree (within that of human perception) it is a flawed product, as that would signify great deterioration. The best explanation is actually the one that he stated, they are trying to induce expectation bias.
 
As for Tyll, you really should read the entirety of the second article that I linked...
 
"Have I shown that break-in exists? No. I wish I could say the slowly descending IMD products is clear evidence ... but it's not. Who knows what that measurement represents. I do think, however, that if break-in is measurable, it would be this type of measurement that would show it. I'm pretty happy something showed up at all.

Have I shown that break-in doesn't exist and is not measurable? No. The slight changes around 9kHz on the CSD plots, and the significant change in IMD products over time do indicate that something is happening, and happening in a way that seems to me to be properly indicative of the things I've heard with break-in effects. I think the nay-sayers need to acknowledge something might be happening here.

The one thing I think I have proved, however, is that if break-in does exist, it is not a large effect. When people talk about night and day changes in headphones with break-in, they are exaggerating. This data clearly shows that the AKG Q701 --- a headphone widely believed to change markedly with break-in --- does not change much much over time."
 
So to sum up, and hopefully put this to bed... Do drivers change overtime? Yes, any moving part will exhibit some wear over time. Is this wear burn-in? Probably not. The changes are so minor that measuring apparatuses can detect them, but are likely far too low for humans to perceive them. If drivers did change that much they are bad drivers because that would show what is likely to be greatly heightened degradation. Something is happening to the drivers during burn-in period, but as to what, no one quite knows. What we do know is that it is so incredibly small that it is a nominal change that most people won't be able to hear. And it certainly won't make a headphone you don't like suddenly good and within your tastes. If that occurs, it will, in all likelyhood, be because it is your brain adjusted to the sound of the headphones, or you believed something would occur and your brain created the placebo effect. 

To somehow get back on track with the thread... Pretty much everyone agrees that M-100s don't have any burn in, but what is up in the air is the impact of the XL pads. 
 
Personally the only thing I heard was a slight variation in bass, and larger soundstage. Both can be attributed to the bigger chamber that the XL pads created. But they still sound awesome.