Do you believe in break-in?

WerTicus · « **Reply #20 on:** 9 Sep 2009, 04:44 pm »

i dont think break in is in your head i think its the gear.

A friend just got the nuforce icons, I heard them first setup, thought they were pretty average. Heard them again a few months later and was blown away. Two separate listening sessions, no breaking for my brain but the gear was at his house for a month being used daily before i heard them the 2nd time.

Tyson · « **Reply #21 on:** 9 Sep 2009, 04:54 pm »

Generally break in gives you better sound, but not always. I've heard some gear that went from pretty balanced at first, only to end up too sharp or too dull after breakin. Tubes in particular seem to not always get "better" with burn in. On the other hand, power supplies almost universally do sound better after burn in.

Pez · « **Reply #22 on:** 9 Sep 2009, 04:59 pm »

Quote from: sts9fan on 9 Sep 2009, 03:01 pm

I think its 98% mental and getting used to the new sound.

Quote

Yes, the human mind finally surrenders to the idea that something sounds different.

Wayner

So you're telling me rubber surrounds on woofers don't physically change and loosen? Spiders on drivers don't loosen? Capacitors dont change their electrical properties after many hours of use??? Well shoot! All of that can be physically measured, so these measurements must be the illuminati obfuscating the reality of the physical realm, which apparently is unchanging, only the human mind changes.

MttBsh · « **Reply #23 on:** 9 Sep 2009, 05:24 pm »

Last Friday I received a blackgate-heavy Audio Sector Dac that had only been played for about 20 hrs total. When I plugged it in, it sounded great, at least the equivalent of my Scott Nixon Tubedac plus w/power supply. I did notice that the highs were just a little etched and the sound a bit forward. Last night with another 50 hours on it and an ice cold gin martini in hand, the highs were silky smooth, the soundstage relaxed and holographic, notes remained in the air longer and bass was weightier, even thunderous.

The improvements are not in my imagination, nor the product of gin-enhanced appreciation. It wasn't "my ears getting used to the new sound". The Dac just plain sounded better in every way, it's "opened up" like a fine wine that's ben given some time to breathe. I have experienced this to one degree or other with virtually every new piece of audio gear I've bought.

PhilNYC · « **Reply #24 on:** 9 Sep 2009, 05:54 pm »

Quote from: sts9fan on 9 Sep 2009, 03:01 pm

I think its 98% mental and getting used to the new sound.

One of the reasons why I don't buy into this theory is because, with 4 separate systems in my house, I don't believe my mind really has an opportunity to "get used to the new sound". In this particular situation, when I change something in one system, I have 3 other reference points that I can use to compare sound and hear changes that take place over time.

I'm not saying that the mind doesn't play a factor at all in hearing differences...but imho it's nowhere near 98%...

K Shep · « **Reply #25 on:** 9 Sep 2009, 05:59 pm »

I asked my wife if she would "listen to how wonderful our new audio product sounds". I played Diana Krall "Girl in the Other Room" through the Ayre DAC then I played the CD on my Arcam FMJ CD17 player. The same passage then switched same passage then switched etc. This was with about 100 hours of break-in. She prefered the sound of the Arcam. She is not as sophisticated a listener as I think I am, but she is correct the Arcam had a larger, noticably larger sound stage.

I now know that break-in is true for the Ayre DAC in my system, as it continues to impove in what I describe as sound quality. I will keep on posting my impressions moving forward.

Kirk

Browntrout · « **Reply #26 on:** 9 Sep 2009, 07:00 pm »

I have heard things break in. I have also heard the benefit of leaving your stereo on all the time, lovely smooth sound. Turn it off for a minute or two then on again and notice the difference. The spike created by the switching off causes 'damage' to all components. Believe it or not that is what happens.

sts9fan · « **Reply #27 on:** 9 Sep 2009, 07:29 pm »

Quote

I asked my wife if she would "listen to how wonderful our new audio product sounds". I played Diana Krall "Girl in the Other Room" through the Ayre DAC then I played the CD on my Arcam FMJ CD17 player. The same passage then switched same passage then switched etc. This was with about 100 hours of break-in. She prefered the sound of the Arcam. She is not as sophisticated a listener as I think I am, but she is correct the Arcam had a larger, noticably larger sound stage.

I now know that break-in is true for the Ayre DAC in my system, as it continues to impove in what I describe as sound quality. I will keep on posting my impressions moving forward.

Kirk

What if she is right and you are just getting used to it? How do you know? Maybe the Arcam is better? Is that impossible due to price difference?

Quote

So you're telling me rubber surrounds on woofers don't physically change and loosen? Spiders on drivers don't loosen? Capacitors dont change their electrical properties after many hours of use??? Well shoot! All of that can be physically measured, so these measurements must be the illuminati obfuscating the reality of the physical realm, which apparently is unchanging, only the human mind changes.

drivers loosen fast imo. I do not think the speed of light forming of caps is an issue.

K Shep · « **Reply #28 on:** 9 Sep 2009, 07:43 pm »

Quote from: sts9fan on 9 Sep 2009, 07:29 pm

Quote
I asked my wife if she would "listen to how wonderful our new audio product sounds". I played Diana Krall "Girl in the Other Room" through the Ayre DAC then I played the CD on my Arcam FMJ CD17 player. The same passage then switched same passage then switched etc. This was with about 100 hours of break-in. She prefered the sound of the Arcam. She is not as sophisticated a listener as I think I am, but she is correct the Arcam had a larger, noticably larger sound stage.

I now know that break-in is true for the Ayre DAC in my system, as it continues to impove in what I describe as sound quality. I will keep on posting my impressions moving forward.

Kirk

What if she is right and you are just getting used to it? How do you know? Maybe the Arcam is better? Is that impossible due to price difference?

Working backwards in order of questions.
No, it is not impossible due to a price difference. Price has nothing to do with it for me, if I am able to pay less for a piece of equipment and get the same or greater sonic quality out of it I will choose to save money.
The Arcam was "better" to my ear too.
I don't know anything. I hear all kinds of different sounds in my listening room, vocals, instruments, soundstage, dynamic range, detail etc.
Your first question I don't understand. My wife was sitting in the sweet spot and I was switching between our Arcam and the Ayre. She was comparing 2 different musical passages. We were doing our best to compare the 2 albeit in a crude way. I don't know what we could have become used to.

Kirk

Wayner · « **Reply #29 on:** 9 Sep 2009, 08:04 pm »

So how do you know that what you think you hear is not a result of a temperature, humidity or barameteric change on your own hearing system. Yes, rubber surrounds and spiders need slight amounts of breakin...I suppose. But capacitors, or any other electrical component? They are all just going to slowly breakdown from the time they were new. I doubt anyone could even tell if a cap lost a few uf.

Matter has that tendensy to break down into it's basic elements over time. Nature takes care of those things. Perhaps I'd agree if the subject line read: Do you believe in break-down? Then, the answer would be yes.

Wayner

BobM · « **Reply #30 on:** 9 Sep 2009, 08:11 pm »

Ahhh Wayne. You're such an engineer. We need to blow a little pixie dust your way and convert you to the dark side.

K Shep · « **Reply #31 on:** 9 Sep 2009, 08:16 pm »

Wayner, I was being sarcastic about not knowing anything.

a temperature, humidity or barameteric change on your own hearing system. Yes, rubber surrounds and spiders need slight amounts of breakin...I suppose. But capacitors, or any other electrical component? They are all just going to slowly breakdown from the time they were new. I doubt anyone could even tell if a cap lost a few uf. Matter has that tendensy to break down into it's basic elements over time. Nature takes care of those things. Perhaps I'd agree if the subject line read: Do you believe in break-down? Then, the answer would be yes.

is directed to Pez this is his post.

Wayner · « **Reply #32 on:** 9 Sep 2009, 09:00 pm »

Your fine, shep. What the hell do I know? I can't even fix my damn computer! And my computer is soon going to experience a "break-in" with my foot to the screen.

Wayner

Pez · « **Reply #33 on:** 9 Sep 2009, 09:06 pm »

Quote from: Wayner on 9 Sep 2009, 08:04 pm

So how do you know that what you think you hear is not a result of a temperature, humidity or barameteric change on your own hearing system. Yes, rubber surrounds and spiders need slight amounts of breakin...I suppose. But capacitors, or any other electrical component? They are all just going to slowly breakdown from the time they were new. I doubt anyone could even tell if a cap lost a few uf.

Matter has that tendensy to break down into it's basic elements over time. Nature takes care of those things. Perhaps I'd agree if the subject line read: Do you believe in break-down? Then, the answer would be yes.

Wayner

So simultaneously you are disregarding the effects of break in, AND verifying that miniscule changes in enviroment can lead to sonic differences? That doesn't seem to serve your contention that small things in the signal path do not make a difference (i.e. barometric shifts vs rubber surrounds and spiders) Saying it could be either or only furthers what I am arguing.

Wayner · « **Reply #34 on:** 9 Sep 2009, 09:15 pm »

No, I'm saying that many perceived sound changes are from things that affect our hearing such as weather conditions.

Wayner

Wayner · « **Reply #35 on:** 9 Sep 2009, 09:26 pm »

If components broke in to such extremes that we could hear changes, how would equipment designers ever know that they are done or that the Ohms law would have a break-in variable to it making the required resistor (or what ever) value have a skew to it depending on break in time. I = E/R sometimes.

Wayner

Pez · « **Reply #36 on:** 9 Sep 2009, 09:31 pm »

Some designers do break in components before finalizing a design. And just because a given value doesn't change does not mean squat to the other changes that may occur. When I was younger I weighed 185 lbs. Now that I'm older I weigh 185 lbs. Guess which one has a higher BMI.

Quote

No, I'm saying that many perceived sound changes are from things that affect our hearing such as weather conditions.

and I don't nor ever have disputed that fact. A bad mood can effect sound quality or a stuffy nose for that matter. That said I hold fast to my contention that all of these apparently minor things can have major effect and affect in a systems performance and perceived performance. all things variable.

avahifi · « **Reply #37 on:** 9 Sep 2009, 09:38 pm »

Yes I believe in break in time. However its not the equipment that is breaking in, it is your ears. It can take hours of listening time to discover all the good (and bad) about a new piece of equipment.

However I even more agree with Jim Winey's rule, "if you can't hear the difference in the first three notes it isn't there". Jim, the designer of the Magnepans, helped me a lot in learning how to listen in my younger and dumber years.

By the way, Wayne, keep the folks here informed up to date as to how long it takes to break in your new computer and get it to compute really well.

Regards,

Frank Van Alstine

P.S. Loudspeakers and vacuum tubes, both being made of a bunch of mechanical parts fitted and fastened together in some sort of way, likely will require a bit of break in time, but how much of this you can really hear has not been examined carefully with double blind testing methodology as far as I know.

tanchiro58 · « **Reply #38 on:** 9 Sep 2009, 09:41 pm »

I agree with Pez. But I also believe some designers have built their own components to test for their design before they have a final production (with many hours of break-in time) and they also warned their consumers of changing different components would also change sound which is not their preferable design.

Pez · « **Reply #39 on:** 9 Sep 2009, 09:48 pm »

Quote from: avahifi on 9 Sep 2009, 09:38 pm

Yes I believe in break in time. However its not the equipment that is breaking in, it is your ears. It can take hours of listening time to discover all the good (and bad) about a new piece of equipment.

However I even more agree with Jim Winey's rule, "if you can't hear the difference in the first three notes it isn't there". Jim, the designer of the Magnepans, helped me a lot in learning how to listen in my younger and dumber years.

By the way, Wayne, keep the folks here informed up to date as to how long it takes to break in your new computer and get it to compute really well.

Regards,

Frank Van Alstine

And what 3 notes might that be exactly? 60hz bass note from a bassoon, 300 hz pluck of a cello, and a 1.6 khz note from a piccolo? No offense intended, but that seems like a pretty arbitrary rule that completely ignores the complexity of both the audio signal as well as the audio chain as a whole.

Quote

P.S. Loudspeakers and vacuum tubes, both being made of a bunch of mechanical parts fitted and fastened together in some sort of way, likely will require a bit of break in time, but how much of this you can really hear has not been examined carefully with double blind testing methodology as far as I know.

And again, you contend that there IS a break in period for devices and simultaneously contend that it doesn't matter or isn't audible?

Is it possible that it is? Even if you aren't hearing it?