If the phenomenon of "burn-in" just means that one is "getting used to the sound", then the opposite should be true also, ie "burn-out". For example, I have a tube pre-amp and after a year or so music gradually became brighter, harder, and more fatiguing. Over a couple of months it got worse and worse, and finally to the point where I just didn't want to listen anymore. But being persistent, I kept looking for a reason for the increasingly terrible music. It finally dawned on me that that I had NEVER changed the tubes in my pre-amp. Duh!! So, I put in a new set of stock Sovtek 6922s and Viola' the music was back, and over the next couple of weeks, it even got better as the tubes burned in. It seems to me that if a person just "gets used to" whatever sound his system is making, then my perception of the music should have just changed to accomodate the gradually changing (worsening) music quality caused by the tubes reaching the end of their useful life. And if this is true, an audiophile should be just as happy with a $799. complete Circuit City system-- after all, he would just get used to whatever the music quality was. No? Cheers. Craig.
Burn In = Voodoo?
I have been an obsessive and enthusiastic audiophile for 20 years, I am not averse to tweaking and The Audio Critic infuriates me. However, I must admit I get a little uncomfortable reading so many posts about "burn in". While I understand that amps may need to warm up, speaker components may need to loosen up, the idea of burning in a cable or say, an SACD player just seems ludicrous to me. Unless of course, the party suggesting the burn in is a snake oil equipment peddlar and needs to make sure someone owns and uses your product for a couple of months before they decide it's really no good. At that point, of course, no one could actually remember what it sounded like in the first place and even if you wanted to return it, it would be too late. Am I being too cynical here?