[dwk]

To assert that the believers are just engaging in "magical thinking" is an insult. It implies that they are just weak minded individuals and their experience is not valid and they are just "hearing things".

This is a pretty good summation of the 'problem'. Since 'audiophile street cred' is based on hearing acuity - largely through demonstrating that you hear all these non-measurable things - it is seen as a dismissal or insult to suggest that they are not 'REAL' but rather psychological artifacts.

In my view, it is not an insult at all. In fact, there is very little personal about it. For the most part, it's basic human psychology and physiology, and something we're all subject to. 

And yes, my view is partially if not largely derived from direct experience with my own 'fallability'. Hasn't 'everyone' spent an hour tweaking the EQ to fine-tune it only to discover that it's bypassed? Hasn't 'everyone' demo'd two components and gone back and forth - "I though that one was brighter. No, ,wait THAT one is brighter. No, wait....".  Or for the DIY crowd evaluated a speaker xover change only to realize that one driver was wired in reverse polarity? Or even the 'biggie' - sat down for a listening session only to fail to get drawn into the music the way you did last week - is it because you're in a different state of mind, or is it because the power line must be contaminated?

And for the record, I don't believe that there is never anything behind these phenomenon any time ever. Simply that the entire question has grown into a self-sustaining mythology, and made it impossible to drive down to the reality. Let's face it - when the premise that these things are 'unmeasurable' is basically part of the belief system, it doesn't really leave much to discuss, does it? Middle ground has become virtually barren in most areas of debate, and sadly audio is no different.

As to the original question, I don't know that it makes much sense as it's phrased.  If we believe that our peceptions change as we get used to the sound, then that type of evaluation period is somewhat built-in to the process. I refrain from making immediate judgements on anything other than broad character since I know they're suspect, and try to let the impression develop over time. To me, this isn't really hearing a 'change', it's refining an evaluation.  So, I can't say that I've ever been conciously aware of a change in sound due to aclimatization, but I definately have had the experience of having something I originally though sounded great pale over time, and something I thought was bland at first grow on me over time as more subtle behaviors became evident.

Of course then there are the Panasonic receivers, which got some play around here as needing a lot of break-in. In my experience, though, I liked them first time I heard them, and still like them. Can't say I've heard anything change (well, except for mods)

[rajacat]

  OT---I had the Panasonic XR-55 and I thought that it had excellent imaging and dynamics but I chose to dump it when I came to the conclusion that I couldn't tolerate the high frequency digital grunge.

Back on topic. What is unmeasurable today might be measurable sometime in the future as the technology develops. What bothers me about the number crunchers is that they seem to assume that if can't be measured with today's instruments then it doesn't exist. Science and technology are not static but are constantly evolving. It is not a religious issue for me. I'm agnostic.

Raja

[Dan Banquer]

  OT---I had the Panasonic XR-55 and I thought that it had excellent imaging and dynamics but I chose to dump it when I came to the conclusion that I couldn't tolerate the high frequency digital grunge.

Back on topic. What is unmeasurable today might be measurable sometime in the future as the technology develops. What bothers me about the number crunchers is that they seem to assume that if can't be measured with today's instruments then it doesn't exist. Science and technology are not static but are constantly evolving. It is not a religious issue for me. I'm agnostic.

Raja

Have you done any reading on any of the research that has already been done in Audio? This, however, does not include marketing literature from web sites.

[rajacat]

  OT---I had the Panasonic XR-55 and I thought that it had excellent imaging and dynamics but I chose to dump it when I came to the conclusion that I couldn't tolerate the high frequency digital grunge.

Back on topic. What is unmeasurable today might be measurable sometime in the future as the technology develops. What bothers me about the number crunchers is that they seem to assume that if can't be measured with today's instruments then it doesn't exist. Science and technology are not static but are constantly evolving. It is not a religious issue for me. I'm agnostic.

Raja

Have you done any reading on any of the research that has already been done in Audio? This, however, does not include marketing literature from web sites.

Not enough time for extensive research but I read enough to feel that it is not a cut-and-dry subject and even extremely well qualified experts will, at times, disagree. Newtonian physics could not explain the discoveries of quantum mechanics and particule physics. I think it is important to keep an open mind.

[dwk]

  Back on topic. What is unmeasurable today might be measurable sometime in the future as the technology develops. What bothers me about the number crunchers is that they seem to assume that if can't be measured with today's instruments then it doesn't exist. Science and technology are not static but are constantly evolving. It is not a religious issue for me. I'm agnostic.

Raja

Well, there may be some 'radical number crunchers' that say this, but I haven't seen anyone in this thread do that, nor anyone with any true insight.

The problem is not measurement. We can already measure acoustic pressure or electrical signals down to below any audibility threshold. The problem is that at that level every single test run will measure differently, even if only due to thermal noise or ambient effects. The problem is correlating these variations to audibility.

I would turn your statement around and say that the absolute categorical refusal of the 'audiophile community' to be open to ABX style tests on most of these parameters is far more of a barrier to progress in understanding them than the unwillingness of the 'number crunchers' to be open to new phenemena. There are several PhD's in here if even 1% of the anecdotal evidence is true, but it has to be demonstrated to be repeatable and predictable.

[rajacat]

How do account for the popularity of super tweeters which most of their output is well beyond the human hearing threshold? Could the output affect other hi fi qualities such as depth and width of the sound stage and imaging? Has the audiophile community totally rejected ABX testing? I doubt it. Of course, who has the leisure time to conduct these tests with a sufficient number of participants to be valid?

[Dan Banquer]

  OT---I had the Panasonic XR-55 and I thought that it had excellent imaging and dynamics but I chose to dump it when I came to the conclusion that I couldn't tolerate the high frequency digital grunge.

Back on topic. What is unmeasurable today might be measurable sometime in the future as the technology develops. What bothers me about the number crunchers is that they seem to assume that if can't be measured with today's instruments then it doesn't exist. Science and technology are not static but are constantly evolving. It is not a religious issue for me. I'm agnostic.

Raja

Have you done any reading on any of the research that has already been done in Audio? This, however, does not include marketing literature from web sites.

Not enough time for extensive research but I read enough to feel that it is not a cut-and-dry subject and even extremely well qualified experts will, at times, disagree. Newtonian physics could not explain the discoveries of quantum mechanics and particule physics. I think it is important to keep an open mind.

Care to be more specific on what you have read or not read?
                d.b.

[Daygloworange]

Care to be more specific on what you have read or not read?

I know I've read quite a bit, but there is so much info out there, it's hard to retain everything. I think that at a certain point you become exhausted and just want to conclude. So you turn to others who along with their findings, you hope you can finally put it to rest. But then there is no concensus, so it gets frustrating.

Personally, I think a lot of people kind of lean more towards one side or the other simply because they want to resolve the matter in their own minds. They don't want the question lingering. They would just rather move on to other things. Perfectly normal.

Cheers

[fredgarvin]

Okay Phil, since you have clarified the question (for me) I'll say this: I had a pair of speakers that sounded too tilted up. Bright. After having them for several months they sounded pretty good, airy, not bright. Did they 'break in'? I soon replaced them with new speakers and garaged them. The new speakers sounded a little less airy up top. Later I sold those and temporarily put my old speakers from the garage, back in. Boy, were they bright. They had not changed. So yes, ones brain gets "used to  the sound", as you said. So I heard a change.        To Rajacat: Of course buying equipment on published specs would be silly. but that's not the issue, that has nothing to do with alleged break in. I wonder though, from your point of view is it silly to buy equipment at all, since the sound will soon change anyway? With your interest in Quantum effects, how do you Know you are doing the choosing?

[rajacat]

Correct me if I'm wrong but you can return the equipment for any reason during that 30 day period and I believe that burn-in is not discussed. So Mr. Price, are you saying that these manufacturers are charlatans and if so prove it or quit your slanders! Are you willing to confront these manufacturers in person  and accuse them of being charlatans?

Raja

[bprice2]

Correct me if I'm wrong but you can return the equipment for any reason during that 30 day period and I believe that burn-in is not discussed. So Mr. Price, are you saying that these manufacturers are charlatans and if so prove it or quit your slanders! Are you willing to confront these manufacturers in person  and accuse them of being charlatans?

Raja

Easy Chief...reread my post.  I'm on your side.

[rajacat]

Correct me if I'm wrong but you can return the equipment for any reason during that 30 day period and I believe that burn-in is not discussed. So Mr. Price, are you saying that these manufacturers are charlatans and if so prove it or quit your slanders! Are you willing to confront these manufacturers in person  and accuse them of being charlatans?

Raja

Easy Chief...reread my post.  I'm on your side.

Sorry, I flew off the handle.

[Daygloworange]

Way to go Frank!  You are the first to proclaim it so.  You didn't use the word "charlatan", but you certainly defined it.  Finally, a manufacturer calls out his peers!

You certainly sound gleeful there. I personally don't have any emotions wrapped up in this. It's just a cuiousity for things I can't conclude on my own. One way or the other doesn't matter for me.

I had a pair of speakers that sounded too tilted up. Bright. After having them for several months they sounded pretty good, airy, not bright. Did they 'break in'? I soon replaced them with new speakers and garaged them. The new speakers sounded a little less airy up top. Later I sold those and temporarily put my old speakers from the garage, back in. Boy, were they bright. They had not changed. So yes, ones brain gets "used to  the sound", as you said.

fredgarvin,

I had some similar circumstances but had different observations. I wrote about it earlier in a earlier post.

Here is what I found:

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.

Cheers

[bprice2]

Sorry, I flew off the handle.

 

That's alright.  Its funny how attached we get to our equipment and the one's who manufacture it.  Actually, this whole thread is a little funny.  It seems like folks have blinders on when discussing this topic and don't see that there is a level of agreeance.  In other words, there seems to be fewer folks seeing this as merely black and white than there are those in the middle.  Kinda like politics.

[bprice2]

You certainly sound gleeful there. I personally don't have any emotions wrapped up in this. It's just a cuiousity for things I can't conclude on my own. One way or the other doesn't matter for me.

Rarely am I gleeful...sarcastic and antagonistic?  Maybe a little.  I, quite frankly, don't care what any of you think on this topic.  All I really pay attention to is a) do I trust the manufacturer?, and b) is it his recommendation that I burn-in my device before I make a final conclusion about its sound quality.

The only reason I responded the way I did, was b/c Frank also sounded a little gleeful.  And, it fit with my previous argument.

I'll make all of you a bet.  As the week wears on and you all feel the pressure of work and family, someone is going to loose it, and this thread will be locked.  Its too predictable.

[Daygloworange]

Maybe a little.  I, quite frankly, don't care what any of you think on this topic.

I'm the same way, that's why I commented. I don't get emotional over this topic.

All I really pay attention to is a) do I trust the manufacturer?, and b) is it his recommendation that I burn-in my device before I make a final conclusion about its sound quality.

Yup. Trust is a big deal. I've developed a lot of respect for the manufacturers on AC that I've had exposure to. I'm also finding that I am trusting members views and opinions as far as being able to make the right decisions for me. In general, I like this place. It has helped me a ton, and my whole system will be built from components from the AC manufacturers and modders.

This thread is already 20 pages long, with a lot of useful contributions from people, I'm hoping it doesn't get locked as I know a lot more people would want to contribute but from previous experience avoid these topics like the plague.

Just avoid it becoming an arguement, and treat it like a poll. Do you or don't you....what are your findings?

I'm not here to argue or debate.

Cheers

[WEEZ]

I think what it all boils down to is; whether you hear 'break-in' or not- what difference does it make? I mean, if it sounds good right out of the box, then great. If it doesn't..and you let it play for a week..and it STILL doesn't...send it back.

I hear it with some equipment and I don't with other equipment. So what?

Maybe we should debate whether the girls get prettier at closing time....

 

WEEZ

[warnerwh]

Interesting that we have arguements but no conclusion. I also find it interesting that audiophiles will argue forever on tiny differences in sound that may or may not exist. The fact that it's arguable is should be enough to make it a low priority.

When it comes to discussing something that can make a huge audible difference like room treatment or bass traps there's little discussion. I've never seen a comparison of bass traps from company A to company B yet I've seen people compare cables that are only capable of minor differences in contrast. Or even more minute of a difference is the burn in of said cable.

I'm not saying differences don't exist between wire or changes due to burn in just that they're not nearly as important as acoustic treatments.

This tells me that the audio press has major power. They do the same and it has influenced the majority of audiophiles, just my .02 cents.

Why is this?

[gooberdude]

i'm with Warnerwh,

room acoustics, draining internal chassis vibrations, degaussing, AC current delivery, RFI/EMI, etc...

there are quite a few topics that affect audio reproduction in profound ways, but often aren't mentioned or discussed.   


best system upgrade?    tune your room...

matt

[Daygloworange]

I read the stuff but I don't know how much it influences me. I've read too many long drawn out glowing reviews only to find out when I heard it that, it was just not the case.

My exposure might start there, as in the case of the Squeezebox, but then went elsewhere to determine if I thought it was right for me.

There will always be ubiquities as a result of advertising.

Cheers