The Audiophile Myths and delusions thread

[moonbogg]

What about planar magnetic headphones?

I have read that planars can have a more noticeable break in effect. For dynamic headphones, it is almost 100% placebo. The term "headphone burn in" has been replaced by "brain burn in" by people who realize that the former is mostly placebo. The brain adjusts to the sound and it is perceived as being different. The person understandably concludes that the physical characteristics of the driver have changed significantly, but it hasn't. I have read that a very few dynamic headphones show any noticeable difference, but it is very slight. When people talk about headphone burn in, what they typically say are things like,

"Those cans will sound WAY better when they burn in. You can't judge those cans until you have properly burned them in for 200 hours!"

This is ridiculous and is obviously placebo.

 

[Howard]

Anyone who wants a set will have to go to their site and request the price. Apparently, only six sets in each of small, medium, and large are being made. Being more on the nerdy end myself, I am intrigued by their "field coil compression drivers".

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Western-Ele...n-Driver-in-Excellent-Condition-/252312767393

 

[Deders]

I have read that planars can have a more noticeable break in effect. For dynamic headphones, it is almost 100% placebo. The term "headphone burn in" has been replaced by "brain burn in" by people who realize that the former is mostly placebo. The brain adjusts to the sound and it is perceived as being different. The person understandably concludes that the physical characteristics of the driver have changed significantly, but it hasn't. I have read that a very few dynamic headphones show any noticeable difference, but it is very slight. When people talk about headphone burn in, what they typically say are things like,

"Those cans will sound WAY better when they burn in. You can't judge those cans until you have properly burned them in for 200 hours!"

This is ridiculous and is obviously placebo.

I know I've mentioned it before but I would say it's a bit of a generational to say no or very few dynamic headphones require any kind of burn in when they can be made of so many kinds of materials, which will have different physical properties, rigidity/flexibility which could wear down like a rubber band after continued use.

Ignoring the comment in the 1st post where the op assumes that all dynamic headphones need a burn in period, The people who own either the Sony MDR EX300 or 500 on this thread all describe exactly the same experience I had with this range.

If you had bought them based on recommendations without knowing they need to burn in, you might feel ripped off or that you had fakes. It's quite a big difference.

 

[thesmokingman]

Headphones like speakers require time for the suspensions to break in. How much the sound changes from driver to driver differs but they all change. Many manufacturers have a listed break in time too. For ex.

From Klipsch

How to: Breaking in speakers

Many audio experts and speaker manufacturers say that loudspeakers really benefit from break-in. Like anything else mechanical, the drivers—the midrange and woofers—found in almost all speakers have moving parts that move more freely with time, or effort. Two components may particularly benefit from a break-in period: The surround, which can be made of various types of rubber or foam, is what connects the edge of the cone to the speaker basket, and the spider, which connects the basket and the center of the cone.
Both surrounds and spiders are flexible; therefore, allowing them to experience their full range of motion and loosen up results in freer movement and better response. Think of it like stretching before you exercise. There are several simple ways to break a speaker in; while you could choose to buy costly gear to do so, it really isn’t required.
The easiest—and most enjoyable—way is to simply play them, choosing music with a wide dynamic range. Playing it just a bit louder than you normally might also help. Many receivers have a test tone that can accomplish the same goal; test signals are also commercially available.
A small warning here: not all speakers will sound dramatically different after break-in. Some improve only marginally, while others do change in ways that may dazzle you. Either way, it’s possible that you’ll notice an improvement.

Cambridge Audio

When running in your speakers you are effectively stretching out the spider fabric from the constant back and forth movements allowing it to be more flexible and free. Much like when you’re wearing in your new shoes, you’re stretching them out to match the shape of your foot. Don’t worry, the footwear analogies will end shortly. This flexibility will allow the speaker to create a smoother and more pleasant sound with the correct amount of bass.

Myth of no break-in - Busted

http://www.gr-research.com/myths.htm


From KEFs blog:

According to my engineering source: "The suspensions see the largest change, [as] they are made from impregnated textile and at a microscopic level the textile fibres pull apart a little when they are stressed, which leads to a softening." So there you have it, burn-in is real.
My engineering source concluded by saying, "Break-in can take from a few hours to a few days. This depends mostly on the signal used for the break-in. Louder music will break in the drivers more quickly. As typically the bass drivers break in the most, music with more bass will speed up the process too. The same effects can apply to headphone drivers too."

http://www.kefdirectblog.com/kef-bl...and-a-few-opinions-about-speaker-burn-in.html

 

[thesmokingman]

I'm not a believer in levitating-pure-silver-nitrogen-injected cables, high-res audio, or super-duper-four-digit priced DACs that process that audio in Mhz rather than Khz.

But those people would be correct since the ZXR has an outrageous output impedance of almost 40 ohms, and you're using a 150 ohm headphone. You'd need a 600 ohm headphone for that amplifier to not affect the headphone's frequency response, and even then you'd just be putting lipstick on a pig because there is no excuse for any headphone amplifier to have an output impedance of nearly 40 ohms, it's just shit design. Leaving the source out of the equation, aside from the headphone itself the amp is the only other component of the audio chain that can make a significant difference. Vacuum tubes aside, a solid-state amp will only be transparent if the output impedance is as close as possible to zero. And this isn't FUD. When the output impedance gets too high the difference is not only audible, it is measurable too.

http://nwavguy.blogspot.com/2011/02/headphone-amp-impedance.html




Correct, burn-in is a crock. Any change (if there even is any, since not all mechanical things break in the same way) will be so subtle that it is immeasurable and irrelevant. On the other hand, your brain can adjust to almost anything. If you sit and listen to music with no bass for hours, and then I suddenly return the response to flat, you're going to tell me it sounds "boomy" and there is too much bass now... true story!

Now, those who talk about cable or electronics burning in... I want some of whatever they are on.

The problem with audio is a lot of specs get mashed in with opinion. I think this is the case with the ZXR's output impedance. Also, this nwavguy was already debunked on the headphone break in as well.

Creative does not list the output impedance. From what I have read googling, it either comes up as 10 ohm or 40ohm. The 10ohm references come from ppl explaining that the ZXR has a lower impedance than the rest of the Z line of 22ohm because it is their flagship. The 40ohm number seems to come out of thin air.

There were very few reviews that have shown measurements. I did find the golden ears review of the Soundblaster Z. It was tested to 22ohm. I would guesstimate this number to be closer to the ZXR's output.

http://en.goldenears.net/17542

 

[us3rnotfound]

Then why does Bestbuy sell cables like this:

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/audioqu...gray/9892785.p?id=1218202520524&skuId=9892785

That $240 6.6' HDMI Cable has 39 reviews, some of them swearing it has better audio.

Some people obviously believe the lie.

LOL, can you imagine the type of person who'd buy that, and then go to plug it in slightly askew and cringe for 10 solid minutes, and draw up a plan to get it back on target in the HDMI slot such to minimize risk to connection damage?

People these days man.

 

[wiyosaya]

Headphones like speakers require time for the suspensions to break in. How much the sound changes from driver to driver differs but they all change. Many manufacturers have a listed break in time too. For ex.

From Klipsch



Cambridge Audio

Myth of no break-in - Busted

http://www.gr-research.com/myths.htm


From KEFs blog:



http://www.kefdirectblog.com/kef-bl...and-a-few-opinions-about-speaker-burn-in.html

Many speaker manufacturers (including my fav Paradigm) do talk about speaker burn-in, but the info at http://www.gr-research.com/myths.htm is the kind of info that makes the sciency/nerdy part of me cringe. They seem to be throwing around a lot of terms that sound as if they are important, but they do not offer definitions of the terms nor do they cover the methodology of the measurements they say they made - which makes me think that they are trying to C their A in case some of their customers (this is a commercial site selling speaker kits) don't like what they have bought. In other words, this seems to be a page written by a marketer with specious information. Speakers can and often do sound different than they do in a showroom. Perhaps saying that speakers take time to burn in are efforts to alleviate the concerns of the fact that speakers will almost certainly sound somewhat different in a user's audio room than they do in a show room.

Even Pardigm has been called out on their marketing that says the curved cabinet designs for their higher end speakers breaks up internal standing waves and, supposedly, makes the speakers sound better. In particular, this review of the Prestige 95F speaker states it outright.

There is a thread at Audioholics that specifically covers the gr-research page. In particular, this post from the thread indicates that Gene from Audioholics has busted the myth of speaker burn in.

A bit more searching reveals the article Gene from Audioholics authored, and which states, in a more scientific manner, that burn in effects are minimal for speakers at least. I tend to believe Audioholics - it was in a forum thread at Audioholics where the lack of audible difference between coat hangers and pricey speaker wire was demonstrated.

 

[MongGrel]

I've had a couple sets of ear buds definitely needed break in time.

Even the last center channel speaker seemed to need it, which was something I didn't notice as much in the past.

I almost RMA'd it at first, is an Andrew Jones Pioneer SP-C21, that I caught on sale at the time for $99 when my old center died.

But used it for about a week and it became much noticeably better.

I could hear the difference myself, but I agree about the speaker wire BS etc of course.

I just have 14 or 16 gauge low oxygen copper wire ran around here, depending on the speaker.

Monoprice is great for cheaper long run HDMI cables, wire etc of course.

Have never had a problem with any of theirs myself.

 

[wiyosaya]

LOL, can you imagine the type of person who'd buy that, and then go to plug it in slightly askew and cringe for 10 solid minutes, and draw up a plan to get it back on target in the HDMI slot such to minimize risk to connection damage?

People these days man.

Well those who are saying that the audio is better are likely reviews that should be filed under false reviews. False reviews are a big problem for retailers that offer online reviews.

 

[wiyosaya]

I've had a couple sets of ear buds definitely needed break in time.

Even the last center channel speaker seemed to need it, which was something I didn't notice as much in the past.

I almost RMA'd it at first, but used it for about a week and it became much noticeably better.

I could hear the difference myself, but I agree about the speaker wire BS etc of course.

I just have 14 or 16 gauge low oxygen copper wire ran around here, depending on the speaker.

The thing about hearing is that each person hears differently. Audioholics relied on measurements with a stated "opinion" that what they measured was a difference that could not be heard.

For a long time, I kept my turntable when CDs came out because I thought vinyl sounded better, and that the sample rate of CDs could not possibly capture a 20 kHz wave accurately.

Whether the above is valid or not, I have come to realize that their is a lot that goes into audio reproduction - from how the recording is made to what is used to listen to that recording. Each step along the way can make a big difference in what is heard through a set of speakers.

 

[MongGrel]

The thing about hearing is that each person hears differently. Audioholics relied on measurements with a stated "opinion" that what they measured was a difference that could not be heard.

For a long time, I kept my turntable when CDs came out because I thought vinyl sounded better, and that the sample rate of CDs could not possibly capture a 20 kHz wave accurately.

Whether the above is valid or not, I have come to realize that their is a lot that goes into audio reproduction - from how the recording is made to what is used to listen to that recording. Each step along the way can make a big difference in what is heard through a set of speakers.

I'm not arguing, but a lot of "audiophiles" couldn't tell the difference between a middle C and a B flat either I'd bet.

()

 

[Deders]

The thing about hearing is that each person hears differently. Audioholics relied on measurements with a stated "opinion" that what they measured was a difference that could not be heard.

For a long time, I kept my turntable when CDs came out because I thought vinyl sounded better, and that the sample rate of CDs could not possibly capture a 20 kHz wave accurately.

Whether the above is valid or not, I have come to realize that their is a lot that goes into audio reproduction - from how the recording is made to what is used to listen to that recording. Each step along the way can make a big difference in what is heard through a set of speakers.

Yes, at a certain point once you get above budget level and low end equipment, the recording and mastering process will make the most difference to the sound of whatever media you are using.

 

[moonbogg]

Burn in is measurable if you measure the frequency response before and after the so called burn in. I'd imagine it would be pretty minimal in most cases. Audio is like religion. Some believe, some don't, hardly anyone has proof one way or the other.

 

[Deders]

I'm not arguing, but a lot of "audiophiles" couldn't tell the difference between a middle C and a B flat either I'd bet.

()

It takes a special kind of ear/brain to be able to do this. My Dad can, he has perfect pitch.

I can do it in certain situations, usually with guitar oriented music as I am so used to playing and hearing them. I can sometimes tell whether the whole guitar is tuned down half a step just by the lowest open note. Other times I can't. So not reliable for me.

What I do have is good relative pitch. I was usually very near the top of the class for aural perception. For example If someone played 2 notes, gave me the name of the first one, I'd be able to tell you the name of the 2nd and how far apart they were on a scale. I can usually pick up a chord sequence and play along to songs almost instantly.

 

[thesmokingman]

Many speaker manufacturers (including my fav Paradigm) do talk about speaker burn-in, but the info at http://www.gr-research.com/myths.htm is the kind of info that makes the sciency/nerdy part of me cringe. They seem to be throwing around a lot of terms that sound as if they are important, but they do not offer definitions of the terms nor do they cover the methodology of the measurements they say they made - which makes me think that they are trying to C their A in case some of their customers (this is a commercial site selling speaker kits) don't like what they have bought. In other words, this seems to be a page written by a marketer with specious information. Speakers can and often do sound different than they do in a showroom. Perhaps saying that speakers take time to burn in are efforts to alleviate the concerns of the fact that speakers will almost certainly sound somewhat different in a user's audio room than they do in a show room.

Even Pardigm has been called out on their marketing that says the curved cabinet designs for their higher end speakers breaks up internal standing waves and, supposedly, makes the speakers sound better. In particular, this review of the Prestige 95F speaker states it outright.

There is a thread at Audioholics that specifically covers the gr-research page. In particular, this post from the thread indicates that Gene from Audioholics has busted the myth of speaker burn in.

A bit more searching reveals the article Gene from Audioholics authored, and which states, in a more scientific manner, that burn in effects are minimal for speakers at least. I tend to believe Audioholics - it was in a forum thread at Audioholics where the lack of audible difference between coat hangers and pricey speaker wire was demonstrated.

What are you trying to say? What's your point because your link to audioholics bears it out to me at least that speakers are changing.

When a newly-minted driver rolls off the assembly line it will typically not measure or otherwise perform as one of its well-broken in siblings does. In large part these differences arise owing to the fact that said driver's spider (often crafted of a varnish-impregnated linen) is not as compliant as it will become once it's broken in properly. Depending on number of mechanical factors relating to its design, construction and materials composition, a net post-burn in compliance increase on the order of 5% - 10% would not be unusual.

They are corroborating the fact that there is post change result.

We'll also see why it's in a manufacturer's best interest to ensure their products are broken in long before leaving the factory warehouse and how that bears on subsequent attempts at burning a driver in.

So are they theorizing that speakers from the maker are already pre-broken-in and they are testing what further break-in attempts can be measured?

FYI, the gr measurement is done on RAW DRIVERS fresh from the box. Their statements above actually supports the evidence from the gr link. The audioholics test is actually very unclear as to what they are doing.

What's you're point again because it's real confusing because it seems you think I'm full on these myths or something bringing up coat hangars and standing waves?

Driver testing by signal stimulus at some point (or points) in the manufacturing process - if done at levels sufficient to break in the spider - generally makes further break in unnecessary. Hence, a finished system will not - in so far as its drivers are concerned - require further break in by a consumer once taken home from the dealer.

Aha, and here we get to the audioholics true point. They think that if break-in is done sufficiently at the factory then there is little point in the consumer attempting it. However that's actually just their opinion which is ironic because even in their vague tests it belies their intent, the results do show an obviously measurable change. lol

 

[Deders]

Some speaker manufacturers will do a certain amount of burn in before the speakers leave the factory. Others don't.

 

[thesmokingman]

Some speaker manufacturers will do a certain amount of burn in before the speakers leave the factory. Others don't.

Ding ding ding! Exactly, we don't know how each make handles the QC process or if it even includes a burn-in.

 

[thesmokingman]

What makes me lol is that this is fundamental to designing a speaker. You'd never throw the measurements of a raw speaker into leap w/o breaking the drivers in first. It's like food that hasn't ripened yet!

 

[DigDog]

edit: looks like i got here late. i actually wrote this on my phone, on the train, going to work, then posted w/o reading the new answers

I call bullshit on the burn in.

First off, physics. Does this material burn in linearly? Do X hours of use denote Y change in the material, therefore 10X = 10Y and 100X = 100Y?

In this case, a 200 hour burn in requirement material would be useless after 1000 hours. So, they don’t.

If there is any change in the material, it’s because it is stressed until it adapts to the system, and then the change in material suddenly stops.
Now, I have no problem believing this. But I have problems believing that any non-insane company owner would sell their products in any state but ready to use.

Would YOU sell your expensive headphones, sounding like shit, until a 200h burn-in? When you can do the burn in at the factory?

If you want to argue that different systems burn differently, I have to remind you that it’s just electrical impulses at different time intervals and different amplitudes; it sounds different to us, but to a molecule, it’s all the same.

 

[Deders]

I call bullshit on the burn in.

First off, physics. Does this material burn in linearly? Do X hours of use denote Y change in the material, therefore 10X = 10Y and 100X = 100Y?

In this case, a 200 hour burn in requirement material would be useless after 1000 hours. So, they don’t.

If there is any change in the material, it’s because it is stressed until it adapts to the system, and then the change in material suddenly stops.
Now, I have no problem believing this. But I have problems believing that any non-insane company owner would sell their products in any state but ready to use.

Would YOU sell your expensive headphones, sounding like shit, until a 200h burn-in? When you can do the burn in at the factory?

If you want to argue that different systems burn differently, I have to remind you that it’s just electrical impulses at different time intervals and different amplitudes; it sounds different to us, but to a molecule, it’s all the same.

What about a good pair of leather shoes? At first they might be stiff, they often need to be worn in to loosen the leather up but once they are comfortable, they don't then fall apart at the same rate, they can last for many years.

I would imagine that if you run a certain amount of current through speakers, they will loosen up at a certain rate. But unless you increase the current once they have gotten as loose as the initial current will allow, then they won't react at the same rate. This last paragraph is just theoretical.

Some headphones I've had, I've felt they lost their oomph after a year or 2. Although it's difficult to know if it's just that my ears are used to them, or if it has happened very slowly over time. Either way this is very minimal compared to the huge difference I and others hear within the first 12 hours of break in for these particular headphones.

 

[thesmokingman]

I call bullshit on the burn in.

Fundamentally, or hypothetically you would design a speaker cabinet with the measurements you got off a raw driver w/o breaking it in first? D:

 

[exar333]

I call bullshit on the burn in.

First off, physics. Does this material burn in linearly? Do X hours of use denote Y change in the material, therefore 10X = 10Y and 100X = 100Y?

In this case, a 200 hour burn in requirement material would be useless after 1000 hours. So, they don’t.

If there is any change in the material, it’s because it is stressed until it adapts to the system, and then the change in material suddenly stops.
Now, I have no problem believing this. But I have problems believing that any non-insane company owner would sell their products in any state but ready to use.

Would YOU sell your expensive headphones, sounding like shit, until a 200h burn-in? When you can do the burn in at the factory?

If you want to argue that different systems burn differently, I have to remind you that it’s just electrical impulses at different time intervals and different amplitudes; it sounds different to us, but to a molecule, it’s all the same.

Audio drivers do change, albeit minutely, during a burn-in. Studies have supported some properties of burn-in (link below to a number referenced in that article) but they aren't 'gigantic'. Understand though that many audiophiles are truly gifted listeners and can tell the difference, have more $$$ than sense, or both (or even neither). Considering many audiophiles will spend tens of thousands of $$$ for a single audio component, they are are already in the habit of making VERY big deals out of small or even questionable 'gains', be it true or just placebo.

I wouldn't discount someone's testimony that it may work for them, but empirically it is likely very small. However a 'small' difference to them may be a big deal to them, so I don't think it is fair to discount the phenomena entirely.

http://www.tested.com/tech/accessories/459117-science-and-myth-burning-headphones/

 

[moonbogg]

The issue is not about minor physical changes to the driver material after extended use. The issue is whether or not headphones sound way better, with better bass and much more "opened up" and all sorts of other crap simply due to an adequate "burn in". The sonically deluded have mistaken brain adjustment for something happening with the headphone. People make the claim that headphones are not ready for optimal listening and that a real, significant difference will occur after burn in. Those claims, right there folks, are BS.

 

[Deders]

The issue is not about minor physical changes to the driver material after extended use. The issue is whether or not headphones sound way better, with better bass and much more "opened up" and all sorts of other crap simply due to an adequate "burn in". The sonically deluded have mistaken brain adjustment for something happening with the headphone. People make the claim that headphones are not ready for optimal listening and that a real, significant difference will occur after burn in. Those claims, right there folks, are BS.

Except for the times when it does happen, and several people from different parts of the world can describe the same experience, with the same hardware.

 

[RampantAndroid]

If you want to argue that different systems burn differently, I have to remind you that it’s just electrical impulses at different time intervals and different amplitudes; it sounds different to us, but to a molecule, it’s all the same.

I don't think people are talking about the coil itself changing (though that WILL happen depending on use. Super small gauge wires don't take much to heat up, for example.) They're talking about material physics here, with how the spider & surround will loosen up over usage. If you starch a shirt, it's stiff for the first few hours of use. After 20 hours of use, it no longer is as stiff and doesn't look/feel like it was starched. The shirt is still perfectly fine and can continue to be used as normal despite this "wear in" period however.