A non-typical question about burn in
Sep 22, 2012 at 11:57 AM Thread Starter Post #1 of 17

roadcykler

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jun 28, 2009
Posts
1,239
Likes
724
Why does burning in seem to result in better sound 99% of the time? (It's 100% of the time from what I've read but I wanted to allow some room for a difference).
 
Sep 22, 2012 at 12:11 PM Post #2 of 17
How is "better" better?
And does that apply to BA drivers IEM as well?
 
Sep 22, 2012 at 9:50 PM Post #5 of 17
adopting a Live and Let Live posture, asking "What is the demo period and what restocking fees (if any) are applied?" will serve you well in your audiophile adventures!
 
 
Currently listening to Joe Morris "Age of Everything"
 
Sep 22, 2012 at 11:45 PM Post #6 of 17
Eisenhower got it.  Because people expect it to, literally the only time I've heard about people complaining about possible burn-in effects was an M50 owner once, and he was brand new to the hobby, and not a well experienced and (most likely biased) enthusiast.
 
Sep 23, 2012 at 1:39 AM Post #7 of 17
I listened to my SRH840 right out of the box, it's as good as anything I know it could.
I listened to my T70 right out of the box, the peak is as intolerable in pianos and didn't improve after 4 months consistent playing.
 
However, I listened to IEMs and they do mellow out the peak and trebles. And also a thinner sounding.
 
I don't understand dynamic driver and my brain at all.
 
Sep 24, 2012 at 9:00 AM Post #9 of 17
Expectation is surely a part of the equation, but if it'd be the only part, well then we probably wouldn't have one person claim to hear burn-in on device X and not on device Y. I've heard earphones where burn-in helped; other which were beyond helping; other where there was no difference; yet other which didn't improve at all (despite the reports) and later I found I got not a new, but refurb copy. So, go figure. But if it would be just in the mind, I guess the reports wouldn't be so consistent.
 
Why does it occur? Who cares really... Since the effect can't be measured, it might very well be magical properties of some materials
biggrin.gif

 
Sep 24, 2012 at 9:13 AM Post #10 of 17
Its like eating weird food, sometimes you get used to it. The same goes for your other senses like touch, smell etc. Our ears ain't electronics, they learn and recalibrate themselves and sometimes not for the better.
 
Sep 24, 2012 at 10:42 AM Post #11 of 17
The only things that burn in are things that move (i.e. speakers and headphones). There's a really good post on here somewhere (that I can't find any more) where the response of a brand new headphone is compared to the response after some burn in. IIRC the bass response improves a bit, but the difference is rather small (as in, probably not easy to hear at all).
 
The rest is psychological.
 
Sep 24, 2012 at 11:34 AM Post #12 of 17
Quote:
The only things that burn in are things that move (i.e. speakers and headphones). There's a really good post on here somewhere (that I can't find any more) where the response of a brand new headphone is compared to the response after some burn in. IIRC the bass response improves a bit, but the difference is rather small (as in, probably not easy to hear at all).
 
The rest is psychological.

 
You mean the test ran by Tyll?
 
Well, psychological or otherwise, it does sound good and that's all that matters.
But there's no reason why we should've wait till the headphone is "fully burn in" in order to enjoy it. I'd rather the manufacturer burn in them for me if that's the case.
 
Sep 24, 2012 at 1:25 PM Post #13 of 17
Quote:
Expectation is surely a part of the equation, but if it'd be the only part, well then we probably wouldn't have one person claim to hear burn-in on device X and not on device Y.

 
Logically speaking this is incorrect. The problem is human hearing is not reliable. The same person might hear something one time but miss it five minutes later. It's also common for people to report a change in sound quality even when nothing changed. This is the real issue. This article was written for mixing engineers, but it surely applies here:
 
Perception - the Final Frontier
 
Since the effect can't be measured, it might very well be magical properties of some materials
biggrin.gif
 
I assure you that everything audible can be measured. There is no magic.
 
--Ethan
 
Sep 24, 2012 at 4:22 PM Post #14 of 17
Quote:
Logically speaking this is incorrect. The problem is human hearing is not reliable. The same person might hear something one time but miss it five minutes later. It's also common for people to report a change in sound quality even when nothing changed. This is the real issue. This article was written for mixing engineers, but it surely applies here:
 

Well, sure, no arguing about that. Still, I find it odd that there's such a strong consensus that (for example) dynamic earphones require/benefit from burn-in while BA don't. Mind you that's from a group of people who will never agree on anything. Strange coincidence. And it's not just people who are aware about this phenomenom - I know people who expected burn-in from their first BA phones but didn't hear it. Go figure.
 
Either way I won't argue whether the burn-in effect physically exists or it's just in ones head. I say - if you hear it, it exists for you. If you don't, it doesn't matter. Audio equipment is made for listening music and music is about enjoyment - and enjoyment is always just in ones head.
 
Sep 24, 2012 at 10:06 PM Post #15 of 17
Here's another question. Manufacturers of speakers and headphones choose the materials they do and make their items a certain way, after listening to them. Don't you figure they play music through those things for more than just a few minutes?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top