Are you saying that you don't hear components break in or that you do and just don't know why? |
I wouldn't waste too much time on explanations. These posts are from people who don't like audio and start arguments for fun. |
"Changing out parts for different effect has nothing to do with so-called burn in. The same issue would apply."
Like I said, don't take my word for it. Call some manufacturers and see what they say. |
"I love audio and I still out no stock in burn in for electronics or cables. What it comes down to IMO is that with high end audio it's extremely easy to be self deluded."
I respect your opinion, but I would also suggest that just because you haven't been able to hear break in doesn't mean that others are deluded and what their hearing is not real. If you think about it, another issue with audio, is bridging what is fact and what is not real, based on personal experience. (I'm not trying to single you out here. We've all done it, myself included.) |
"And by the way, I never said I didn't hear break in differences."
It looks like you did.
"I love audio and I still out no stock in burn in for electronics or cables."
Assuming you meant to say put instead of out, I can't think of any other way it can be taken.
"Your measuring device (ears and brain) are not accurate enough or reliable enough to be trusted for such subtle differences. To think it is, is simply an inability to believe an unpleasant truth. Few people are willing to submit to a blind ABX test for 2 wildly different amplifiers. Would love to see someone volunteer for a blind ABX test on new vs broken in cables.
I've heard these arguments before. Again, I'm not trying to be mean, but can you back them up? When it comes to the measurement/science/objective type of people, they never produce anything. For all the talk of science and blind test's, they never have anything real to support their claims.
I'm willing to keep an open mind. If you can show me some real tests that were done and documented somewhere, I'll set the test up myself and see if I can get the same results. If it turns out that I'm wrong, I have no problem admitting it. |
"06-16-14: Jaxwired
Dragon I completely agree with you. My point is not whether or not the sonic differences are real my point is that we don't know for sure and that there is a possibility that we can be fooled or deceived by our ears. Since this is true, I like to consider more than just "did I hear a difference" when evaluating the worth of a product or concept like burn in."
Fine. I agree.
" For one thing, I throw common sense into the mix. Certain products and concepts certainly are counter to common sense. For instance, cable risers, expensive feet under components with no moving parts, totem beaks, $1000 / ft cable, etc..."
Common sense has nothing to do with this. There are plenty of things in science that don't make sense to us, but are still correct. If you want to disagree about what kind of differences you can hear with different cables, fine. But just because something like an expensive cable or tweak doesn't make sense to you, that doesn't mean you are right just because you are basing your answers on common sense. So if you want to get to what the truth really is, I think the only way to get there is with some well conducted listening tests. I've done them before and if carefully planned, I don't see why you can't get accurate results.
The only thing I would add is that you can't just lump everything all together. All cables, all components break in, all tubes, ... that kind of thing. I take everything on a case by case basis. Results vary. Sometimes you can hear a big difference, and some things, small or none. |
"06-16-14: Ptmconsulting
To those who don't believe in, or who haven't heard a difference, with burn in:
- please sell me that brand new bad sounding $2500 phono cartridge with only 10 hours on it for 40% of what you paid for it"
In all fairness to some of the other posters, I believe they were mainly talking about cable break in. Typically, a new phono cart breaks in more than any other component. To me, they sound broken when they are new. Cable break in is usually much more subtle (but it definitely happens). But they're not all the same. For example, I don't notice that much break in with my AQ cables. There is some, but they get to where they should be fairly quickly. I have some Cardas cables that take forever. 100's of hours. |
"Ok lets say things do change after "burn in", how does any designer compensate for this, in his calibrations, measurements, tests and design????"
They compensate for this by breaking the prototypes in before they listen and measure. For example, a designer may want to try several different capacitors when building an amp to see which one sounds the best. If they want to try 5 different options, they break the amp in 5 different times. They don't do any serious listening or measurements until they break the amp in first. This is the way they all do it. I don't think you could find one company that doesn't break their equipment like this. You don't have to take my word for it, either. Call some manufactures and ask them.
|
"06-16-14: Almarg
06-16-14: Zd542
I have some Cardas cables that take forever. 100's of hours.
ZD, as I'm sure you realize I have great respect for your experience and your sonic perceptions. But a question: How do you know that the improvement you are perceiving after 100's of hours is due to the cables, and not to something else in the system that has changed in the meantime? Or, for that matter, something that has changed in the AC power, or even the temperature or humidity of the room?"
As far as knowing for certain that the sound I get with Cardas cables before and after break in, is actually due to break in, is that I can't know for certain. That said, its the only explanation that makes sense; at least to me. My system's usually don't change too much, so I don't have to deal with trying to listen around other changes in equipment (For the most part. I'm sure that there were some cases where I changed equipment during the burn in process.). The main thing that leads me to believe the results I get are due to break in is consistency. With my Cardas cables (Golden Reference), the cables have a sound when they are new, and a different sound when they are broken in. But its always the same. Also, they all take about the same time to notice the change. I wouldn't say 800 hours, though. Somewhere between 300-400. That's with a CD player on repeat playing white noise, 24 hours a day.
Could the break in really be due to a change in the AC? Its possible, but I don't think its very likely. I've done multiple pairs of the exact same cable, all with the same results. If the AC was to blame, you could just as easily get the sound that is the end result (after burn in) first, and then burn in to what the cables sound like originally, when new. Or, there could just be no change at all. Even if you've had issues with sound changing due to AC, it doesn't mean it has to be a factor every time. So, that's why I rule out AC. The results seem to be too consistent.
Temperature and humidity? Al, you have me on that one. I never checked. lol. I have no idea how much of a factor that will be. Some of my equipment is in FL, and the rest in NY. Humidity and temp in FL is fairly consistent. In NY it is not.
Just to sum up, break isn't something that any audiophile should be worried about. I feel that time is much better spent focusing on other topics. In the end, everyone gets the same results. If break in does happen, it doesn't matter if you believe in it or not. It will take care of itself all on its own, with a little time. And if it doesn't happen, or you can't hear it for some reason, you still have the same end result. |
"Prescription drugs are marketed to us continuously these days. You get a brief summary of the drugs benefits and then you get the many possible side-effects.
At least companies that push drugs are regulated to the extent that they have to disclose pros and cons fully. No such luck with high end audio. THe stakes are just not high enough to regulate anything so its pretty much the wild wild west where anybody can claim anything at anytime with no substantiation and get away with it perhaps."
That's a good point, but I do get a good laugh sometimes when I read the list of side effects. They say just about anything that could ever possibly happen; known and unknown. Of course, its done for CYA purposes. This drug: may make you hot, may make you cold, may give you a headache, may make you head numb, may make you happy, may make you sad.... the list goes on. What I really like about claims audio companies make, is that they're always positive. lol. No way out cables are going to give you headaches. Not even the silver ones.
"THe stakes are just not high enough to regulate anything so its pretty much the wild wild west where anybody can claim anything at anytime with no substantiation and get away with it perhaps."
With regards to that statement, in particular, it may be true in some cases, I don't think the overall situation is quite that bad. Up till this point, I don't think anyone has mentioned patents. Most audio companies do get patents on their work. I'm not a legal expert, but I'm pretty sure you can't just get a patent on anything you want. There has to be some qualifications. The patent has to be on something unique and not conflict with any other patents. Also, I think that you need to show that whatever you are getting a patent on has to do what you say it will. Even is its only on paper and in the design stages.
Just to be clear, I'm not saying that patents are guarantee's that you will get a certain level of performance from your audio gear. They may, however, give some credibility to a design and maybe even take it out of the wild west category. Something to consider, that's all. |
I know this won't be good enough, but I'll try one last time.
This is directly out of the manual for my Ayre V-5.
"Break-In
100 to 500 hours of music
played through the system will
ensure full break-in.
Due to the manufacturing processes used for the
printed circuit boards, wires, and capacitors, a
break-in period is necessary for the amplifier to
reach its full performance potential."
Here's one from Pass Labs.
"Amplifiers
Do the amps need to break in. Yes. Most improvement comes in the first 24-36 hours, after which the amps will continue to improve as long as they are left on.
Preamplifiers
How long do the preamps need to break in?
That depends. The XP-10, XP-20 and XP-15 need about 24 hours to fully warm up. The XP-25 and XP-30 take closer to 36 hours. After initial warm up period the preamps will continue to improve as long as they are left on."
If you want more examples like this, there are thousands. All you have to do is look for them. If you read reviews from magazines like TAS and Stereophile, break in details are included in almost every equipment review they publish. (I haven't read reviews for about 10 years now. I'm assuming they still talk about break in.). You can also call a manufacturer directly. They are usually happy to answer any break in questions pertaining to their equipment.
Other that that, I don't know what more I can offer on this topic. |
