[PhilNYC]

I was having this discussion with someone the other day about burn-in.  Wanted to get some thoughts from ACers on it, but I really don't want this to dwindle into a flame war.  I am making no judgements; I simply want to ask a question and get some opinions.

My question is directed at the people who believe burn-in is a myth.  And it is based on comments I've heard from non-believers who say that burn-in is more about your ears "getting used to the sound".  Here is the question:  When you get a new component or cables, do you think things sound different from when you first put them into your system versus a week or two later?  In other words, do you hear changes and attribute them to your ears "getting used to the new sound"?  Or do you simply not hear any difference over time?

Am truly curious about your answers...

[95bcwh]

Sometimes I hear it, sometimes I don't. It depends on the equipments.. e.g.

Those that I heard burn in: Tact preamp, VH Pulsar IC, Channel Island D200, Grover S cable, RWA modded SB3.

Those that I didn't quite notice the burn in: Bryston 4B-SST, Usher Rapport Speaker Cable, Zu Ash digital IC, Electra Cable, Salk Veracity HT3, Zu Gede IC, Gregg Straley's cables.

There's really no universal truth in this hobby..

[BradJudy]

I'd have to say that your brain has such an impact on any of your senses that one could never say that any subtle changes were real or not (except perhaps in a blind ABX, but we'll set that aside for a moment).  There have been lots of discussions here about things sounding 'better' when you have a particular attitude, at a particular time of day or after you've had a drink. 

Another, very simple, example is your alarm clock - everyone I know who uses an alarm knows the experience that some mornings it sounds much louder than others.  The reality (almost all of the time) is that the alarm is the same loudness, but we perceive the volume to be louder because we're more tired that morning. 

I'm a bit of an objectivist, so I guess I would be convinced if one took took components, blind ABX'ed them and demonstrated no statistical difference, then broke one component in and blind ABX'ed them again and demonstrated a statistical difference. 

To directly answer your question - I have not heard a difference over time in any electrical components.  I hear some difference with speakers over time and attribute most of that to 'getting used to the sound'.  Our brains, afterall, build new pathways as we learn things through repetition.

This same aspect of our brains does lead to one of the downsides of ABX - we are better at detecting subtle differences after we have done something many times.  Flipping back and forth between two 'new' things probably isn't the absolute best thing, but I think it's the best technique available because the use of statistical significance is very powerful.

[Ethan Winer]

Phil,

I have to agree with Brad - the real issue is that it's often difficult to tell if anything has even changed at all. Especially when we're talking about subtle differences. That said, I don't know why this is still a question because if anything does change over time (besides your ears), it is trivial to measure that change. All that matters are frequency response, noise, distortion, and time-based effects. All four can be easily measure to orders of magnitude beyond what anyone can hear.

So the real question is why is this even a question anymore?

--Ethan

[friend2alldogs]

I wouldn't worry too much about flame wars on AC if I were you. After all, you can flame a well respected audio journalist for 7 pages about his spiritual beliefs before the thread gets locked by the Borg, so I doubt any burn-in discussion will even show up on the radar of the crappy moderators here.

[sts9fan]

When I bought my speakers I did not even know people think these things burn in so I was not really looking for a change. My amp cam with a book with ~4 pages dedicated to burn in. I never noticed a change but I was happy with the sound very happy actually. I just listen to the music. I am not a non-believer but I don't believe in drastic changes. I don't believe that a amp can sound horrible for three weeks and then be great.

[Bob Reynolds]

All that matters are frequency response, noise, distortion, and time-based effects. All four can be easily measure to orders of magnitude beyond what anyone can hear.

Ethan, I wanted to take this opportunity to thank you for your rational contributions and to ask for a little clarification.

1) What's the definition of noise and distortion? How are they different?

2) What do you mean by "time-based effects?"

Thanks,

Bob

[JohnR]

I wouldn't worry too much about flame wars on AC if I were you. After all, you can flame a well respected audio journalist for 7 pages about his spiritual beliefs before the thread gets locked by the Borg, so I doubt any burn-in discussion will even show up on the radar of the crappy moderators here.

About time for you to grow up a little. The moderators aren't here to nanny anybody, especially you. If it bothers you that much, then go somewhere else.

[macrojack]

All such observations are subjective and therefore subject to the variable represented by the listener's experience.
This validates it for the individual and opens it up to question by all others.
How many times will this topic need to be considered before we all acknowledge its innate futility?

[toobluvr]

Phil,

I have to agree with Brad - the real issue is that it's often difficult to tell if anything has even changed at all. Especially when we're talking about subtle differences. That said, I don't know why this is still a question because if anything does change over time (besides your ears), it is trivial to measure that change. All that matters are frequency response, noise, distortion, and time-based effects. All four can be easily measure to orders of magnitude beyond what anyone can hear.



--Ethan

Maybe science has not yet developed a way to measure certain parameters, and changes in those parameters, that perhaps our ears/brains are able to detect.  Isn't this possible?  And if it is, doesn't it render scientific measurement as woefully inadequate in explaining what our brains/ears are hearing?  Just a thought.....

Me?  I hear the effects of burn-in.  Despite being cynical and pre-disposed to not hear them. 

And I do not believe it is a matter of long term listening and "getting used to" the sound of something.  For example....when I buy interconnects I usually give them a sneak listen brand new.  Usually sounds awful, or at a minimum, not "right".   Then I let them "cook" silently with continuous music in a second system for a solid week or two.  Then I listen to it again, in the exact same system, and it sounds like music.  If not burn-in, how is this explained?  I haven't been listening to it, so I certainly haven't "gotten used" to it.

I guess the arguement can be made that there is some brain effect going on.  That I have a pre-conceived notion...that I think burn-in occurs, therefore, I expect it not to sound good initially, and better after burn-in, and hence that is what I hear, or think I hear.   But like I say, I tend to be dismissive of most audio snake-oil, pseudo-science, and mumbo-jumbo.  Early on in my hi-end life I did not believe that burn-in was possible.  I only became convinced after my own experiences.

At the end of the day, it doesn't really matter.  This arguement goes round-and-round, never with any resolution or agreement.  People are usually entrenched and believe what they believe, and usually no amount of exertion will sway them.

[JohninCR]

I was having this discussion with someone the other day about burn-in.  Wanted to get some thoughts from ACers on it, but I really don't want this to dwindle into a flame war.  I am making no judgements; I simply want to ask a question and get some opinions.

My question is directed at the people who believe burn-in is a myth.  And it is based on comments I've heard from non-believers who say that burn-in is more about your ears "getting used to the sound".  Here is the question:  When you get a new component or cables, do you think things sound different from when you first put them into your system versus a week or two later?  In other words, do you hear changes and attribute them to your ears "getting used to the new sound"?  Or do you simply not hear any difference over time?

Am truly curious about your answers...

I don't hear a difference.  I hear some difference with new drivers.  I hear differences with warmup, especially with higher efficiency speakers I haven't used in a while.  I make changes to speakers all the time, things that I know make a difference, which are immediate, and range from subtle to very significant.  Since I make changes all the time, I don't really give cable/component burn-in much chance to be noticed. 

I've experienced psycho-acoustic differences, especially when changing from speakers lacking LF extension to those with nice full bass, and the extended ones sound like they are very bass heavy for the first day or so until my ears/brain adjust.  Maybe the whole electrical burn-in thing is "psycho-acoustic non-differences" for me, since I don't really believe in it.  I'm with Ethan, if it's there, I don't really care, because it's not significant enough to worry about.  I did my own test with cryo vs non-cryo / new vs burned-in for speaker wire (only) to satisfy myself that I shouldn't worry about it. 

If burn-in is real and as profound as many seem to believe, why do things ALWAYS sound better after burn-in?  I mean if things are really changing, how can they NEVER change for the worse?  I will say this, occasionally some of my tube amps sound absolutely horrendous when I turn them on, and usually a couple of on/off cycles corrects it, but sometimes I actually have to swap another amp in.

You asked to hear from a non-believer, so now you have one, finally.  The amazing thing about these discussions is how the believers always band together in mutual support and how closed minded they are about the possibility that their ears/brains play a big part in it.  It's almost religious in nature to them.  I guess that's why I use the term "believers".

[Daygloworange]

As I was getting more into this hobby, and doing research on the net, I kept reading about burn in, break in and was very sceptical. I thought along the lines of it being more psychological than anything else.

Since I've built a number of speakers now, I can hear burn in. I think the hard part is describing exactly what the burn in is actually doing. And it's not always in the same areas.

I recently had some more experience in this area. I loaned out a pair of my speakers, and plugged in another pair of commercially made speakers. Very well known, raved about speakers. I put them in and noticed the tilted up high end response, there was also a bump in the mid range, and a loose and not well defined bass response. The imaging and soundstage were not well defined.
 So, I also thought that perhaps I was just so used to the sound of the other speakers that perhaps things would change over time. I listened to these other speakers for 6weeks on a daily basis. (They were well broken in to begin with BTW) My perception of them didn't change one bit over that period of time. My impression of them was the same 6 weeks later as it was when I first plugged them in.

Not to confuse the issue, but last weekend I had the opportunity to listen to some Visaton B200 open baffles next to some other speakers. I have read quite a bit about this driver in an open baffle configuration. I'll tell you what I personally found that is quite interesting. When we first put them in the system, I found that aside from it not being a flat frequency response, that they beamed in the midrange. But interestingly, though at first it was a little prominent and a little troublesome, once you listened to it a while, it's almost like your ears compensate for it. It becomes less of an issue. It's almost like you start listening to the overall aspect of the speaker rather than focus on the little idiosyncrasy in it's character.

I could probably describe it better verbally than typing at the keyboard. But it was an interesting experience.

Over the course of then next year I will be totally changing my system and will probably add to this as I put new things in my system. I will be getting a Bolder modded Squeezebox which apparently changes quite a bit over a period of 1000hrs. I'll be auditioning some new IC's in the next few days. And at some point new amps in my system. I'll only change components one at a time, and only when I feel I have a stable impression of the sound before making the swap.

I have other examples of A/B tests, that should shed some light, and perhaps aid sceptics in understanding that it's entirely possible that the phenomenon could exist.

I still have more questions than I have answers regarding burn in. But, I do hear changes.

As far as flame wars, I really don't get why people take it so personally as to whether it is real or not. I mean, how many times in your life have you said " Hmm, you know, I never noticed that before! " . Sometimes I find it has to do with your frame of mind more than anything. How preoccupied you might be, your mood, and perhaps not being able to see the forest for all the trees .

Cheers

[JohnR]

The amazing thing about these discussions is how the believers always band together in mutual support and how closed minded they are about the possibility that their ears/brains play a big part in it.  It's almost religious in nature to them.  I guess that's why I use the term "believers".

Thanks John. Good way to not encourage a flame war, comments like that.

[toobluvr]

The amazing thing about these discussions is how the believers always band together in mutual support and how closed minded they are .......

And of course, "non-believers" don't so the same.     

[Daygloworange]

If burn-in is real and as profound as many seem to believe, why do things ALWAYS sound better after burn-in?  I mean if things are really changing, how can they NEVER change for the worse?  I will say this, occasionally some of my tube amps sound absolutely horrendous when I turn them on, and usually a couple of on/off cycles corrects it, but sometimes I actually have to swap another amp in.

I posed the same question here on another thread. Of course that would be logical that it could possibly go in an opposite way. No one gave any experience that indicated that after burn in, it sounded worse. I was a little perplexed by that.

You asked to hear from a non-believer, so now you have one, finally.  The amazing thing about these discussions is how the believers always band together in mutual support and how closed minded they are about the possibility that their ears/brains play a big part in it.  It's almost religious in nature to them.  I guess that's why I use the term "believers".

Just for the record. I'm not one to get offended if someone disagrees with me. I was sceptical at first. I am always open minded, and really don't get when people get bent out of shape on the topic. I still have more questions than answers. I like healthy discussions, and would like to see that here. This topic comes up every once in a while, and sometimes doesn't go so well. But everytime it does, I learn something new anyways. That's the purpose of AudioCircle.

Cheers

[LightFire]

Well. here we go:
1) Burn in of cables, wires, power cords, interconnects that are not damaged and are properly connected.
    Never heard any difference.
    It is absurd from the scientific point of view.
    ABX tests will show there is no difference.

2) Burn in of analog electronic circuits.
    Never heard any difference until it becomes defective and (obviously) gets worse.
    Capacitors will eventually burst, transistors will become "noisy" , carbon resistors values will decay and
        inductors will remain the same.
    Note:  the "burn in" or formation of electrolytic capacitors lasts only for micro seconds.
    A burn in will just consume the useful life of the equipment.

3) Burn in of digital electronic circuits:
    Never heard any difference.
    It only degrades with time of use, as the analog circuits do. However, due to the nature of digital
       systems, there will be no sound degradation until it shuts down completely.
    ABX tests will show there is no difference.

4) Burn in of electromechanical devices (loudspeakers).
    Never heard any difference.
    I've heard it may take a few seconds to break in!
    Things could be completely different from speaker to speaker, depending of the material that they are
       made.

OBS.: Extensive burn ins (hundreds of hours) to improve equipment quality are unheard in the electronic industry. This type of burn in is only to force component failure to avoid shipping "weak" components to consumers. One sample unit from a batch that has been assembled is submitted to the burn in. If it fails the whole batch is refused (statistically they all could fail too.) If it passes the batch is approved but that specific unit is discarded because it's useful life was consumed.
Just because your brand new car's engine needs a 10000 km break in it doesn't mean your electronic equipment will need it too. An intuitive association here is invalid.

[Daygloworange]

4) Burn in of electromechanical devices (loudspeakers).
    Never heard any difference.
    I've heard it may take a few seconds to break in!
    Things could be completely different from speaker to speaker, depending of the material that they are
       made.

For those interested, here is a link on some driver burn in findings.

http://www.gr-research.com/burnin.shtm

Cheers

[JohnR]

    ABX tests will show there is no difference.

This is incorrect -- ABX tests cannot demonstrate this.

[Daygloworange]

Flames On ! 

That didn't take long. Perhaps this topic should be avoided along with religion and politics. 

It always cracks me up.....

Cheers

[zybar]

As long as the discussion remians civil, the thread will stay open.  As soon as that changes, it will get locked.

George