Do we break in our componets or do our componets ?

Eldartford does make a good point which does coexist with the obviously correct notion that we observe things that are not currently subject to measurement. People do make inaccurate observations, and can cued in to doing so. Rsbeck was the one who understood the point, Twl posts about this as much his opposition, and Redikiwi started the argument with no one: "I won't insist its reality, if you don't insist that because something is not explained by exixtsing knowledge, then it cannot be reality." As much as hate to talk about it, we sure are eager to.

I think TWL did rather well at avoiding being impolite, in circumstances where it is hard not to feel exasperated.

Rsbeck, I approach all new claims that do not fit my preconceptions with a good deal of scepticism - perhaps even unhealthy scepticism when it suggests I have spent my money on my existing system unwisely. But I would hope you would also approach claims that might lead to greater enjoyment of reproduced music with a healthy degree of open-mindedness that would at least let you listen for yourself.

If it is possible that we do not know everything that is meaningful in the reproduction of music (which I would judge a near certainty rather than just a possibility), then the value of these forums ought to be that posters can report their experiences, and if several posters report similar experiences, then the rest of us will have the opportunity to decide to try for ourselves or ignore the new possibility.

If it is possible that break in exists, then it is also possible that many audiophiles that do not know about it have made gross misjudgements of products that they have had at home for an overnight trial. Such poor audiophiles will have wasted their time and missed out on some otherwise excellent products. Do you not think that these forums ought to serve to improve the way we select products?

I am reminded in this debate of the observation that libertarians have high opinions of their fellow "man", and socialists are the reverse. Do the "it is in your head" posters perhaps have a low opinion of their fellow "man" and feel the need to protect the poor suckers from charlatanism and decry any new possibility simply because people have to be saved from themselves? Is it lack of respect for posters of new ideas? Or do they want to close down possibilities because it scares them - after all we are hurtling through space at frightening speed on a rock we cannot control, you know?

I have no problem with having scepticism. But I don't think that is the same thing as rudely, stupidly, closed-mindedly stating "it is in your head" to someone that has reported accurately here what they they have perceived happening in over 30 years in this hobby.

Would you have it that no poster should report their experiences and beliefs unless there has been scientific corroboration of the effect first? I would have it that we can each state our beliefs about what reality is - whether for or against a new possibility. I don't believe this forum is benefitted by posters that post their beliefs about others based on what those others believe.

Check my post of 8/11 and you will see that I expressed the thought that at some level we are all of the same view about breakin, but we draw the line of "ridiculous" at different points.

Does anyone doubt that speakers change with use?

Does anyone think that listening room air needs breakin?

I tried to pick the extreems in both directions.

>this is an old debate with fairly clearly drawn sides<

That's an interesting idea. That one can trot out all of
one's old arguments regardless of the stimulus. I think
it would be better to follow the thread at hand and deal
with points that have been made rather than railing
against phantom "measurement people."

But hey -- maybe that's just me.

Rsbeck, sorry you didn't approve of my "straw man" tactics. Upon re-reading the thread, it appears I did go off on a bit of a tangent, that didn't directly address the point of the thread. I guess it is because I have had this type of discussion so many times that I know where it comes from, and don't really have hear a certain phrase to realize it.

However, I do apologize, because others may not have been particularly interested in reading about what the root of the problem is, and would prefer to discuss other aspects. That is perfectly fine, and I will relent based on that.