[Tone Depth]

New research results: https://www.headphonesty.com/2025/12/tests-speakers-sound-less-identical-burn-in/

[Letitroll98]

Another article using measurements to claim we're not hearing what we hear.  The testing ignores multiple basic measurements used by virtually all speaker designers in favor of frequency response and impedance.  The testing does reveal frequency response differences in some production line consumer products, but high end products almost always use matched drivers and custom crossovers, pioneered by Peter Snell years ago.  I'm seeing a big push on social media for the reactionary views that cables don't make a difference and break in doesn't happen, etc.  It seems very much like an organized effort to shape opinion.

[toocool4]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MPy_Gqxm-iQ

[Tritium]

     Pay No attention to the man behind the screen~~!


     Do Not believe what your ears are telling you~~!

[planet10]

One only needs 2 identical loudspeakers, one well broken in and one freshly assembled.

We did this. break-in is very real. The speakers sounded quite different. After that one had some time on it, it became more or lessindistinguishable.

One prominent very experienced loudspeaker unit designer has said he has deigned spiders that take 1500 nor to break-in.

Electronics also break-in, but it is subtler.

Both sources talk about only small differences. This is telling. The small stuff is what allows a hifi to have greater ability to tell the nuances of an instrument, voice, and the important stuff that allows the illusion of sound space/image.

This small stuff, its DDR, is what makes the difference between a great hifi and a good one. And as of yet noone has figured out how to measure it yet.

Objective measures still leave a lot to be desired. Very useful, but limited.

To quote Floyd Toole:

Two ears and a brain  are massively more analytical and adaptable than an omnidirectional microphone and an analyzer.

dave

[jtwrace]

To quote Floyd Toole:

QuoteTwo ears and a brain  are massively more analytical and adaptable than an omnidirectional microphone and an analyzer.dave

Actually, he said this:

[Early B.]

The quote above puts the limitations of measurement in perspective, since they don't (or can't) simulate human hearing. Sure, measurements are useful for audio designers to some degree, but those guys who rely too heavily on measurements to justify their purchases are approaching this hobby unscientifically.   

[AllanS]

I don’t hear much (75%?) of what many do. But M4 Sapphire break in over the first maybe 25 hours was obvious enough even for me to hear - primarily center image definition.
Same with electronics.  I replaced a Ragnarok 2 and Salk Supercharged SongSurrounds with some PS Audio gear and the M4’s.  After being powered down for a few weeks I hooked up the Raggy / Salks again and was immediately shocked by how crappy they sounded - imaging was gone.  I was psyched!  Proof that PSA/M4 was a great move!  Until a few hours later when the Raggy / Salks got reacquainted with electron flow and the magic returned. 
I don’t make many definitive statements or snarky remarks where this hobby is concerned but anyone who says that only measurements matter should consider that their gear, setup, or hearing are not be up to the task.