This thread has morphed from @ozzy ’s original question about break in of digital components (which I would not have tried to answer) to a multi-level discussion about which I do have some observations:
First, I do experience break in, whether it is phono cartridges, speakers or tube amps (with transformers and capacitors). @douglas_schroeder raised the provocative question whether break in is really what we experience in putting together systems. This opens the discussion to system building, for which Douglas has taken some flack-- first, because of his position, and second because he offers a solution in a book he sells.
As to ethics, Audiogon rules and the like, I don’t much care-- I think on some level we are all "selling" something, whether it is our opinion, credibility or a product (in Doug’s case, a book). It used to annoy me that dealers here would bottom feed queries to offer expertise (and possibly a sale) but I’m not the rule-maker here.
The more interesting question- the one that got me to post--is the question of system building. I think we lack some "unified theory"-- much system building goes on by synergies, whether established (like my Lamms with the Avantgarde Duo) or through trial and error, resulting in a fair amount of equipment churn. I’ve never been a "spec" guy-- I learned in 1973 when I first heard an ARC SP-3 that bettered several top tier preamps at the time, specs be damned.
We don’t have a "North Star" to guide us through this other than exposure. Brick and mortar dealers of a high level, who know how to put together systems, are not on every corner (they never were) and though buying online does give you the advantage of home trial in your system (with tying up money during the trial, return shipping and some "repacking fee" loss), you are pretty much on your own, apart from what you read and ask.
Some people figure out what works for them over time, are seemingly satisfied and can get off the equipment merry-go-round.
The old timers here will remember what it was like when the first "high end" revolution occurred (after the "Golden Age"): it was HP and TAS, along with a few others--JGH, J. Peter Moncrieff, and I forget who else--we hung on every word as revelation. I think times have changed.
I don’t know if Doug believes we need an authoritative intermediary to interpret what happens in listening to systems--my approach over the years has been to evaluate results in a system-wide context. What works for one person in one case may or may not work for another. Somehow, we can, with "crowd sourced" input, get some identifiable characteristics of certain components that are constants in a wider variety of systems. But, it is still somewhat hit or miss.
I have no holistic view on all of this. I don’t spend much time in audio stores these days, and the community of audiophiles that I was part of in NYC in the ’80s is, at least for me, long gone. (We used to visit each other, listen to each other’s systems, get a wider view). I don’t really follow the legacy press or the YouTube thing, which seems to have a lot of traction these days.
I just got back from David Karmeli’s. His system does not follow the modern conventions of tomb-like inert loudspeakers, high power, fancy cable and the delivery of definable audiophile attributes. Instead, it is a huge presentation in a very large room, no one part of the spectrum more dominant, and no discernible limitation imposed by the equipment. The performance is there, in the room, life-sized and seamless from top to bottom. No fancy wire or tweaks, no exotic isolation other than sheer mass, and no revolutionary technologies, but a system build that is almost unique due to the rarity of some of the components and the magnitude of the commitment needed to run something so outrageous. David has no website, and rarely participates on the chat boards at this point.
I mention this only because it gave me new insight into what was actually achievable in music reproduction and I consider myself someone who has been around the block a few times. Too bad such systems are not available for a broader swath of listeners to experience-- just as a baseline or reference. Not sure if the WE collector who used to show at Munich still brings his big antiquarian systems to shows- I know he opened that museum in Seoul, which I have yet to visit, and have no idea what quality sound he gets from his big systems.
In some ways, I think we as listeners are more siloed than ever. I applaud anybody who gets out there, listens to various system set ups, and gets exposure. I’m all for people offering a guiding hand, and sharing their experience.
But I think we need references. HP used to talk about live music as the reference, but that’s elusive too--so many shows are heavily mic’d, amplified and sound terrible live. Not all of us live on a diet of classical music and finding a good jazz combo in a nice room is to be treasured.
