Equipment break-in, myth or fact?

[PHC1]

I was just reading a topic on equipment break-in on one of the audio forums. It seems most audiophiles are convinced that equipment break-in is beneficial to sound and that new components will always sound better after 100 hours or so of use. Here is the problem I have with this:

1. One has to assume that the new equipment will undergo some kind of internal "change" in order for the sound to change. I guess that means that some of the components such as resistors/capacitors/inductors, etc.. will change their value slightly during this break-in period. Otherwise what else would cause this change in sound?

2. If there is a change, why is it always for the better? Is there a magic fairy conductor inside the equipment telling the resistors/caps in which direction their values are to be changed so as to make the sound better?

What do you guys think on this topic? Is there any rational scientific explanation for this at all?

[SolderIron]

The gray matter between the ears needs a break in period. :)

my 2 cent$

[thedelihaus]

"1. One has to assume that the new equipment will undergo some kind of internal "change" in order for the sound to change. I guess that means that some of the components such as resistors/capacitors/inductors, etc.. will change their value slightly during this break-in period"...

I've been told caps take only seconds to break in. I'll buy that. For other inner components, could it be the fact the gear is heating up, staying warm longer, and parts taking on some slight chemical change? Possibly. But I can't tell- I was unable to tell any break-in sound difference in most of my new gear (receivers) from new to 100 hours in, if I recall correctly. Speakers on the other hand may benefit from the membranes loosening or becoming less stiff. So far I have found my new Cambridge Soundworks model 6s benefitted from break in, while my Cambridge Soundworks model 17s might have, but if so, pretty minor, not dramatic like the 6s. i didn't see any difference at all in my new Polks from brand new to 100+ hours.

Most suprising to me was my vintage Design acoustics PS-10s. After I aquired them, they sounded like hell the first few hours (after being dormant for ages). I did not expect this! But after a few hours they sounded much much better. I'd have doubted this if I hadn't witnessed this myself. I can't explain why.

"2. If there is a change, why is it always for the better? Is there a magic fairy conductor inside the equipment telling the resistors/caps in which direction their values are to be changed so as to make the sound better?"

Like I said above, some little bird told me it only takes seconds for the caps to "break in" and I'll buy that. And you are right, the sound isn't always better- many claim a re-cap of gear 20+ years old will improve the sound. The vintage caps either are inferior, or have degraded with age.

Gray matter matters most, in most cases, I believe. But for now I'll stick by my guns in regards to my speaker experiences.

[goldear]

I have no idea what the physics might be behind this phenomenion. However, I do not beleive that it has anything to do with drifting component values. But many years of building, modifying equipment has confirmed that the the sound does change slighlty for after initial construction for a few days or so, before it finally stablelizes. Sometimes after break-in the sound can actually be worse that it was before break-in. So it does not always result in an improvement.

[hifi_nut]

My experience has shown me improvements in sound after the break-in period in cartridges and speakers.
I can hardly tell any difference in electronics or cables.
So, I guess anything mechanical benefits from a break-in period, just like cars do.

Jorge

[reggaenaut]

Speakers definitely need time.

[WhiteSE]

I personally dont buy it. I think its the listener that just gets his brain in line with what he expected out of the gear...When I swap gear, sometimes I am feeling a little let down at the change, but after a few hrs, my brain remembered how good this sound used to be to me, and its all OK in the world.

I am not going to say that break in is a myth or reality, but it seems that the people who support this give more creedence to an "iffy" phenomena than a well documented scientifically and anectodically, which is the brain getting accustomed to the new sound.

[pmsummer]

What do you think the break-in time for these (http://www.machinadynamica.com/machina17.htm) might be?

Here's a prime example of the psychoacoustics effect. This morning, millions of Americans will dress uncomfortably and file into poorly designed auditoriums to hear (mostly) poorly trained amateurs sing selections from George Frederic Handel's oratorio "Messiah". Many of them will leave believing that they have just heard the performance of their lives.

Did they? Yes. The effect was real to them because their ears are ONLY ONE input to their brains, and their brains modify all available inputs (including memories of past performances and their deceased mother who sang in the choir) to create a desired result.

Some of us who survived the sixties can attest to the fact that the best addition to a stereo in 1968 cost about $1, but it only enhanced the sound for a few hours. But what an enhancement it was! A Magnavox portable was suddenly hi-fi!

At times, we hear what we want to hear; at other times, we hear what the brain will ALLOW us to hear; at other times, we hear what we USED to hear.

It's a remarkable and thoroughly enjoyable phenomenon.

[WhiteSE]

Some of us who survived the sixties can attest to the fact that the best addition to a stereo in 1968 cost about $1, but it only enhanced the sound for a few hours. .

Wow....thats a bargain! :D

[Fisherdude]

There are people who firmily believe in the break in concept, and those who don't. Like cable threads, these posts don't have much chance of changing anybody's mind. Forging foolishly ahead, I'll toss in my thoughts...

1. Why would any competent, ethical manufacturer sell equipment that doesn't work up to specs when you buy it? Would they never have heard of break in? If they knew about it, why wouldn't there be an explanation in the instruction manual telling you to wait XX hours before forming an opinion?

2. As was mentioned in a reply above, why does everyone who believes in break in always assume that it will get better? Isn't there a 50/50 chance the change in component values or parameters will result in a degradation of the sound? Of course, this goes right to the point of whether or not "different" and "better" and "new" and "getting used to it" are all describing the same thing.

3. Regarding speakers needing break in because the surrounds are mechanical devices and will change with use...tests have been done that show neglibible changes over the first weeks/months of regular use. And, in line with No. 1 above, I'm pretty sure every compentent speaker manufacturer on the planet has run their drivers for thousands of hours and then remeasured specs to see exactly what happens.

4. And, my personal opinion...break in was developed by retailers to get you to wait until the return period had expired, so you don't give in to buyer's remorse after you realize just how much money you just spent.

[Celt]

:lurk:

[Fisherdude]

:lurk:

Figgered you'd be sniffin' around... :smoke:

[Paul C]

Speaker breakin, read em and weep:

http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/audioprinciples/loudspeakers/SpeakerBreakIn.php

http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/audioprinciples/interconnects/speakercablebreak-in.php

[bOUddha]

Considering that most component stereo systems were assembled from new components all purchased in more or less one outing, one item may have been the genesis for believing that the entire system was, indeed, "burning in". Not so many years ago, turntables spinning vinyl LPs were the MAJOR reason to go to the trouble of having a stereo system, rather than just turning on the radio. The new TT cartridges did have to acclimate themselves to the job at hand, and thus the entire system seemed to improve with a bit of play.

Impressionable minds from the '60s & '70s may have failed to note the real cause, and years later seemed to notice their CD and SACD players' performance improving, when it was actually just the ears tuning in to regularly sampled music.

Or not...

[Drizzt]

When I first purchased some Grado 325 headphones, I started listening to a song and when a sax started playing I thought I blew the headphones. I turned down the volume a little and I listened to it again with the same sound was still coming out, just terrible. After I let the headphones run for a while by themselves, I listened to that same song again, and now I could enjoy it without thinking the speaker was was going to blow up. It was unbelievable how bad that sax sounded, but after letting them break in, it sounded so much better.

[cubdog]

If only my ears were good enough to pick up on such a subtle change in sound. I can't even hear the difference between cheap and expensive CDP's.

cubdog

[M Jarve]

For what it is worth, I do believe that new equipment, especially mechanical devices (speakers, TT carts, etc.) do need some break in. In speakers, it only makes sense.

I also think that drivers need a new break-in period after new surrounds have been installed, or after long periods (years, possibly decades) of inactivity.

As far as the electronics go, there is some credence to them needing a break-in period (as well as warm-up time). It is often said that, as far as electronics go, anything that will go bad under normal circumstances will go bad within the first few weeks of operation. Capacitors are charging and discharging, components are acclimating and settling to the thermal conditions, and so on. Elements such as transistors, resistors, diodes and so on may not change in value (though the 5-10% tolerance allowed in many modern designs is a pause for thought), but a break-in period will allow any defects or seriously out of spec components to make themselves known in a controlled way.

To that end, new amps and receivers I get (or perform significant refurbishment on), do get to play full bandwidth white-noise @ 2.8Vrms in to my Realistic Solo-103’s for 48-72 hours before they are really used.

As I mentioned, I am also a believer in warm-up time. I usually turn my system on when I wake up in the morning and leave it on till I go to sleep, regardless of if it is being used or not. It is wasteful, some would argue, but I would not. It was actually in the process of trying to disprove (to my satisfaction) that my equipment needed such a warm-up that I came to the conclusion that pre-heating gear, as it were, is a good thing™.

[thedelihaus]

Speaker breakin, read em and weep:

http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/audioprinciples/loudspeakers/SpeakerBreakIn.php

http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/audioprinciples/interconnects/speakercablebreak-in.php

excellent! :thmbsp: Thank you for this! :thmbsp: You're gonna make me reconsider my thoughts on speaker break-in experiences now... though M Jarve reflects my current feelings about it all. I'm not going to worry about it. For the sake of things, I'll continue to burn in any new gear even though I can't tell a difference, at least to see if the thing will work at room temperature, and for new speakers I'll let 'em run at least for the same reason- to troubleshoot any initial problems.

THEN, I'll only need to worry about what record I'm playing. :beerchug:

[melofelo]

i found the sound of my headphones improved after letting them run non stop for a couple of days...

also a little 'warm up' routine trick i use when recording from vinyl...

i let the stylus run in the grooves of a well modulated track for about a minute to 'warm up' the stylus suspension ...then cue back to the beginning of the track or side quickly and begin recording...

i dunno why...but the sound of my amplifier does improve from a cold start after an hour or so...but it could be habituation.. :scratch2:

[SolderIron]

>At times, we hear what we want to hear; at other times, we hear what the brain will ALLOW us to hear; at other times, we hear what we USED to hear.

I agree.
I don't notice any burn in effect on other electronics such as the computer or TV. There is no burn in with other electro mechanical things like electric clock, drill, table saw, door bell; etc.

>i dunno why...but the sound of my amplifier does improve from a cold start after an hour or so...but it could be habituation

Warm up heats up the box. The temperature do affect the characteristics of electronic components. Transistors get different gain and leakage current. Don't know for sure, but some caps may be a bit different as a fuction of temperature. Resistors generally not affected.

[Kegger]

Fact!

[yamahammer]

:scratch2: fiction !!!!!! sounds like hooey to me :music:

[hpsenicka]

Lets all be careful about presenting opinions or anecdotal experiences as universal absolute truths.... or this thread could swirl down the drain in a hurry!

[Donkey!]

Speakers... sure why not. Electrical components, I say you have been hanging out in recording studios too long. :D

[Kegger]

Lets all be careful about presenting opinions or anecdotal experiences as universal absolute truths.... or this thread could swirl down the drain in a hurry!

OK MY oppinion is it's a FACT!

[dingus]

in my experience the entire balance of the speakers does improve with time, after a refoam job. check out the FAQ from Totem Acoustic for break in time for each of their models.

http://www.totemacoustic.com/english/faq/faq.htm

[hpsenicka]

In my case, I have a hard time buying into "break-in" when it comes to things like wire, but I do buy in to the concept as far as capacitors are concerned.

Where elctromechnical devices (like speakers) are concerned, it seems logical that there should be some "break-in" effect occurring when the device is powered up for the first time and is excersized through the full range of motion.

Whether or not I can actually hear the difference is another matter.

I also suspect that some folks may be confusing "warm-up" and "break-in" .... I have experienced several cases where a system's sound has changed ( almost always for the better ) after a brief warm-up period. This is not a surprise to owners of tube gear, but I have also experienced tha same effect with solid state gear. .. a noticable change in sound after a 15 or 20 minute warm up.

Admidetdly, some of the effect could be psycho-acoustic.

[PHC1]

Funny thing is, I used to subscribe to the same theory of "let it break in it'll sound better". I have had many pieces of hifi come through my house over the years and lately I just don't buy this theory any more. It seems like at best I am struggling to hear the difference new vs many hours.

The last 2 pieces were HD650 headphones and Mcintosh MCD201 CD player. Neither one have sounded even remotely different after the first few minutes of playing (that's a good thing!). I used the same well recorded CD and exact same volume setting everyday for the first week as a reference to make it easier to track the differences.

I think a lot of times, people use different CD's and different volume settings to arrive at the conclusion that a device is getting burned in and therefore sounds better. I think manufacturers would like you to believe that it will get better with time to minimize returns and make the dealer's life easier.

As far as I am concerned, if you don't like the way it sounds out of the box, run back to the dealer! That's just my opinion.

[outlawmws]

On the Warm up question: Had an interesting one on a recent Sansui 2000A score. I habitually check DC offset on every system that I bring home. This one was NOT like most Sansui Gear I have brought home. It was very high, around 250mv, where every Sansui I had brought home was 25 or less, usually much less. Then I noticed it was dropping. I decided to let it run a while, and when I came back it was within specs. Tried it again later thinking possibly it was old caps not fully charged after how many years of setting, but other than a slightly lower start point, same deal.

Transistors in particular are not created equal, and can change in performance from cold to hot. (Ask any EE) between that and old caps, I think the warm up is able to affect the audible performance for better or for worse. (I could see a unit starting within spec and falling out after warm-up easy)

Speakers I am morally certain (after reading the article more than certain) that they need break-in. Tubes, probably “benefit” from it (As well as warm-up) since some hours of running will change the surface finish of a new, unused tube to some degree, and that surface dictates its performance. Caps I’m insure of, for both warm-up and break-in, but what about reforming old caps? That seems to have a basis of reality, and perhaps on net performance.

Is psycho acoustics real? I believe so. Hearing something for a period of time does make it “sound” better. As proof, how many have listened to a song for the first time and thought it stunk, or at best were unimpressed? After listening to it more, sometimes much more, it grows on you. The record companies don’t pay for play time for nothing. Soda companies used to give away free samples to try hooking people on the taste, as people like to get things free, and they acquire a taste for it. (Does ANYONE ever enjoy there first taste of scotch?)

Wow, had no Idea I had so much to say on this. Better stop now! :D

[melofelo]

"(Does ANYONE ever enjoy there first taste of scotch?)"
no...but the first taste of a fine brandy definately helps 'warm up' and once your capacitors are 'charged' after 20 minutes or so and your resistors have stopped resisting...just about anything will sound better as your whole system 'burns in' and loosens up:D

[sorenj07]

omg the clever little clock, i must have one, think of the dynamics! the headroom!

[Photobitstream]

(Does ANYONE ever enjoy there first taste of scotch?)
All depends upon the quality of the Scotch. :drunk:

[ProAc_Fan]

I'll agree that speakers do require some break in time and tubes sound "better" after a half hour or so of warm up time. Transistor amps sound the same no matter how long you leave those turned on. Just because one person can't "hear" the changes doesn't mean the changes aren't there.

Mike

[DanTana]

99% of break-in is the component between your brains. Companies realize this, that is why they recommend xx hours of listening, give time for your brain to adjust. Speakers I agree 100% that they do need break-in, they are a mechanical device with moving parts.

[Kegger]

Capacitors can change drastically in sonics after break in. I've heard it happen first
hand quite often. The higher the voltage through them the shorter the burn in time.

[Bigerik]

Speaker breakin, read em and weep:

http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/audioprinciples/loudspeakers/SpeakerBreakIn.php

http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/audioprinciples/interconnects/speakercablebreak-in.php


Man, I wish speaker design was as easy as these guys make it out to be. Just run some measurements, plug it into the software and out pops the perfect speaker. Sadly, as any competant, or not so competant speaker designer will tell you, the measurements and the formulas are the BEGINNING of speaker design, certainly not the end.

[Kegger]

Man, I wish speaker design was as easy as these guys make it out to be. Just run some measurements, plug it into the software and out pops the perfect speaker. Sadly, as any competant, or not so competant speaker designer will tell you, the measurements and the formulas are the BEGINNING of speaker design, certainly not the end.

Agreed, you start with the calculations, get it in the ballpark with measurements then finish it by ear.

It can take a long long time to get it to sound right.

[GaryP]

My tubes need at least a 1/2 hour warm up time or the music sounds 'thin'.

My CDP also sounds better after warming up for about an hour. Ever notice that DAC's don't have an on / off switch? It's because they sound terrible when 'cold'.

I noticed that new wire also needs burn in time. But not 'warm up' time.

YMMV

[Reel 2 Reel]

The idea of 'break-in' could go either way also..

I hear all this talk of components sounding better after they warm-up...or break in.

Why must it go this way?.... :scratch2:

Is it possible, givin' the charactorstics (however ya spell it!..) of individual components, ie resistors...and caps, that a piece could actually sound 'better' when cold...and get worse after warm-up or 'break-in'...because of the change of charactorstics of the components themselves..

I have heard the difference between warm tubes...and cold tubes...and yes there is a dramatic difference on sound quality....but in seniconductor technology...there are so many parts that are the same... but made up of slightly different materials... that there will have to be a change of propreties which would lead to a difference of charactorstics of the component when a temperature change occurs.


So why couldnt a circuit sound better when cold?...


Just a little something to ponder whild spinnin some smooth jazz with a cold beer in hand... :D :smoke:

[matel]

The closest thing to an experiment to shed light on this was done on AK by Bigerik. If someone could post a link to his 3960 thread...

[wineslob]

All depends upon the quality of the Scotch. :drunk:
I love Lagavulin Port Wood aged! :banana:

My amp most definitely warms up. It takes about an hour, and just to prove it to myself, I play a cd that I had listened to earlier, and everytime, the vocals sound more upfront, where they should be, and the soundstage is wider and more defined. There also seems to be more of a "naturalness" to the sound.

[GaryP]

More natural, less digital sounding.

Yep. That's what I hear with CDs after the player is warmed up a bit. :)

[Bigerik]

The closest thing to an experiment to shed light on this was done on AK by Bigerik. If someone could post a link to his 3960 thread...


While hardly scientific, I did find it to be an eye opening and very fun experence. I hope this was the thred you had in mind:

http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=60469

[Urizen]

I'll agree that speakers do require some break in time and tubes sound "better" after a half hour or so of warm up time. Transistor amps sound the same no matter how long you leave those turned on. Just because one person can't "hear" the changes doesn't mean the changes aren't there.

Mike

I agree also. My Fisher 400 takes a good half hour to sound good. I also think that once a solid state amp settles, it sounds the same.

I leave some equipment, both SS and tube, on all of the time. It's so I don't have to wait so long for my gear to get to temperature.

It takes about a similar amount of time for both my tube and SS equipment to sound as I like. They both need a good warm up, to get the trannys cooking. :smoke:

[PhilMcL]

If only my ears were good enough to pick up on such a subtle change in sound. I can't even hear the difference between cheap and expensive CDP's.

cubdog

maybe thats because digital is the devil :tears: :tears: :tears:

[DanTana]

My computer is faster after it warms up for 2-3 hours. LOL

[Shinkukan]

How often do I get to use a Pink Floyd analogy, a food analogy, and a Japanese linguistics analogy in the same thread? Not often enough.

1. Years ago I was navigating through the Pink Floyd catalog looking for additional gems besides DSOTM. 'The Valley Obscured By Clouds' did not qualify on first listen, but having shelled out good green, I forced myself to try a second and third listen. Darned if it didn't become my fave. (Does it have anywhere near the production values of DSOTM? No way. Is that good or bad? Neither.)

My slant on example 2: When results are different than expectations we are inclined to reject something which takes us out of our comfort zone. When we learn to appreciate it on its own merits rather than how it compares to something else, our comfort zone shifts accordingly.

3. Observed Reality: If an English word has an 'R' or an 'L' in it, a person from Japan will invariably switch them.
Objective Reality: We pronounce 'R' with the the sides of our tongue against the roof of our mouth and 'L' with the tip of our tongue, but the Japanese have a sound which utilizes both the sides and tip of the tongue at the same time.
Resulting Stereotype: We notice the part of the sound that isn't supposed to be there, so we think they're always switching the 'R' and the 'L'.

What's this got to do with audio break-in? Dunno. Maybe it's the brain, maybe it's the brain plus.

[Shinkukan]

During a cut and paste I forgot to paste back number 2 from above...

2. Ever cook some lasagne and be underwhelmed with the result only to sample the leftovers the next day and be pleasantly surprised? Did it actually get better in the fridge?

[PHC1]

"Warm up" is different than "Break-in". Capacitors fluctuate depending on temperatures, some types a lot more than others. Here is some info on that topic: http://www.interfacebus.com/Capacitance_Temperature_Change.html

[GaryP]

Ever cook some lasagne and be underwhelmed with the result only to sample the leftovers the next day and be pleasantly surprised? Did it actually get better in the fridge?

Yep. Spaghetti sauce, too. It always tasted better the next day for some reason.

Of couse, it's not simply 'warmed up', it's 'cooled down and warmed up'. :D

[tankdonovan]

Ever hear of computer burn in{break in]?

I installed a OM 10 on my Dual 1228 and it sure did seem like after a few plays that it got better.

But,.... it could be a mind thing.

TankDonovan

[DanTana]

A cartridge is a mechanical device, the stylus and cantilever would have some sort of break-in.

[PHC1]

I wonder if NASA breaks electronic components in before assembly. Judging by how much of a difference it makes in HIFI, I would imagine their Mars rovers would wind up on Pluto instead of Mars, or maybe that's why they have had so many bad experiences? Someone should call them! :D

[WhiteSE]

I think its all hopeful thinking....just because we broke in our cars gradually, we assign that mentality to everything. unless there is a moving part that requires hot oil to operate at is best, I am skeptical of all others.

I mean, the whole scientific world should be in doubt because the machinery used wasnt documented to be warm or broken in...

[PHC1]

Overheard in a hospital "Doctor, I wouldn't use that pacemaker on Mr.Jones, it's not fully broken in yet!" :D :D :D

[outlawmws]

OK, I’ve heard enough silly parallels being made in defense of an argument, both ways... Not to pick on this one in particular, but it set me off, since I have over 20 years experience with spacecraft design... I know it was probably meant as a joke, but it is illustative of the arguements being made. Sorry PHC1, not aimed at you personally, this rant applies to many of the examples made both here, and in other threads and articles, on and off of AK.

I wonder if NASA breaks electronic components in before assembly. Judging by how much of a difference it makes in HIFI, I would imagine their Mars rovers would wind up on Pluto instead of Mars, or maybe that's why they have had so many bad experiences? Someone should call them! :D

Actually they do exactly that, not so much for audio purposes, but as burn-in. Most electrical parts get burn in before assembly, ands after assembly at the sub assembly level. All spacecraft, manned or unmanned, get this treatment. The difference is ability to repair, and safety of our astronauts.

It's not so easy, (or cheap) to send a repairman up there! It has been done, (Hubble, a couple of times, the space stations, a very few others) but mostly if the system and the redundant backups fail, then either the spacecraft is dead, or a section no longer performs its function if it is a non critical portion.

Commercial products generally do not have that issue. Easy to repair or replace.

Some of the parallels being used for illustrative purposes on both sides of this argument get pretty far out there in peoples desires to “win” the argument. It’s much better to consider facts and relevant comparisons, not irrelevant ones. And frankly most of us, including me, aren’t equipped with the knowledge and/or experience to judge the factual materials. I have a lot of design experience on analog circuits, but damn little formal theoretical training. Only what rubbed off from the literally hundreds of EE’s I have worked with over my career in engineering.

Audio and analog circuits are very different than AC or digital circuits. Its part science and part black magic, and for all the fancy analysis tools that are out there, most, if not all of it falls short for certain analog forms. Things that ordinarily don’t matter in a real world situation with non analog electronics do matter in analog. And even there, once you get off the main signal path by one or two passive components, it’s far less likely to have an effect. Does that mean all the smoke and mirror concepts have an audible effect if it is on the audio sig path? No. It means some of it can. Simple switching circuits don’t much care about much of anything, but once you are trying to make a signal do specific things at a particular frequency, it gets much trickier.

2 different transformer designs, both with the same theoretical specs, won’t necessarily perform the same acoustically. 2 makes of tubes, same deal. Different caps, on the sig path, can be different. If it was as black and white as some are arguing, there wouldn’t be the need for the thousands upon thousands of different components that, theoretically, have the same specs. How many different capacitor designs does one need at a given value and voltage? But they are made and selected for a reason. Sometimes its economics, sometimes its performance, and sometimes it is what was available at the time, due either to parts or technology availability.

Bottom line, making comparisons to unrelated subjects as “proof” that something works or doesn’t can either be a powerful argument, or simply show a person’s ignorance on the subject. And let’s face it, on these obscure subjects there are no experts, other than the self appointed ones. If there were, I think by now we would have heard them, seen the logic of the arguments, and come to solid conclusions. On the other hand given the lack of technical understanding of esoteric phenomenon, maybe there have been experts, and collectively we simply didn’t recognize it.

Rant off

[Billfort]

Great post Outlaw, thanks for that.

[tentoze]

Great post Outlaw, thanks for that.

Co-signed. Even though I doubt it will, that post should kill this thread.

[outlawmws]

Great post Outlaw, thanks for that.

Thanks Bill. :music:

[Lefty]

I wonder if NASA breaks electronic components in before assembly. Judging by how much of a difference it makes in HIFI, I would imagine their Mars rovers would wind up on Pluto instead of Mars, or maybe that's why they have had so many bad experiences? Someone should call them! :D

Well when I worked for a mini-computer manufacture in the 70s it was standard for newly assembled systems to burn in for 120 hours in the final test/assembly area. This was not to improve the sound of the system however :no: , but to try and flush out early component failures. The famous reliablity bathtube curve showing most failures of electronic parts are in their first several hours and then again only after many years..

Lefty

[styler]

sometimes fact. if a unit has huge capacitance like Blue Circle products, you will indeed notice audible differences day by day within the first week. some other stuff i'm not so sure about. i recently had my La Scala xovers rebuilt, and the capacitors are double what they used to be. i noticed more detail a day or two after keeping them running at low volume. my iPod didnt need any break in time though.

[PHC1]

Outlaw, not sure why you would get "set off" by my remark on NASA but I asure you it had humorous intentions and nothing more. A little humor never hurt anyone, (or has it???)

Being of electronics background myself with a degree, although my career path has taken me away from electronics and I have not touched a soldering iron in 15 years, I do know a little about the topic.

While break-in is not a subject of discussion in household appliances, it certainly has it's place in HIFI as we can see from this long topic with numerous posts.

What bothers me the most about this whole theory is that it implies that if you break in a component, the sound will be better. Then it is reasonable to assume that if this phenomena does occur, then the electronic components populating that particular piece of audio gear have strayed quite a bit from their original values. This of course will completely negate the whole theory of high priced audio gear with their superior and exotic 1% or better tolerance devices.

Since the break-in allows a change, what is to stop these components from changing further? Why do they always stop changing when the system sounds it's best? Why do they always change for the better? Why not for worse?

As far as I am concerned there never was any "scientific" explanation for this "esoteric phenomena" as you put it and I don't think there will ever be.

A human mind is very impressionable, we are at the mercy of our moods, we get sad, happy, cranky, etc.. and therefore react differently to different stimuli including auditory from day to day.

There have been quite a few posts on "why does my system sound different from day to day?" Sometimes it sounds great, sometimes not. What do you think, is it the 1% tolerance components changing or our perception of the sound eminating from the loudspeakers??? I bet the good old oscilloscope would tell us the truth at those moments.

I am done with this topic.

[PHC1]

Sorry, could not resist just one more post on this topic, just find this very amuzing.

From the French Audio Magazine on a Bryston amp.

"The main system switch is also on this panel. It cuts in or cuts out the current coming from the very heavy- gauge wire cable that links the 14B SST to the power supply. When you get it fresh from the factory, this amp is, for all intents and purposes, unlistenable. It requires at least a two-week break-in period before it shows its real stuff I was able to hear it both before and after its two- to three- week high volume workout: the difference is colossal! Of course my real test was done with a system that was well "broken in" and that was connected to a high-quality source and first-class speakers."

From the 10audio review on Bryston amp:

"If there was a break-in period, it was probably less than 10 hours. I used the amp for background music for a day before attempting any serious listening, and was not aware of a change in the character of the amp afterwards. I’ve remarked in other reviews that almost every component sounds pretty bad for the first 10 hours or so. That observation probably does not apply here due to the extensive run-in every Bryston product receives at the factory before shipment. Don’t you wish that every other maker of high-end electronics would deliver a product that you could actually use as intended upon receipt?"

So what we have here is one guy who finds a "collosal" difference after 3 weeks and another who finds nothing after 10 hours.

The truth is Bryston "burns in" their amps at the factory extensively for over 100 hours in order to make sure they are stable, meet the specs and so they can give you their 20 year warranty!!!

[SolderIron]

>Well when I worked for a mini-computer manufacture in the 70s it was standard for newly assembled systems to burn in for 120 hours in the final test/assembly area. This was not to improve the sound of the system however , but to try and flush out early component failures. The famous reliablity bathtube curve showing most failures of electronic parts are in their first several hours and then again only after many years..

This is right on. The only reason for burn in for electronics.
Some electronic system goes further by going into temperature shock, vibration, humidity, leak & seal test.

[SolderIron]

>Audio and analog circuits are very different than AC or digital circuits. Its part science and part black magic

Non audio analog circuits have measurable parameters an engineer can design to. No magic there. Audio cicuit has only one requirement that is to sound good to the listner.. can't design one to satisfy everybody...story of the 3 bears come to mind.
Very high frequency RF circuits on the other hand, I will admit there is a bit of unknown/magic there.

[Bigerik]

Co-signed. Even though I doubt it will, that post should kill this thread.

Me too. Awesome post. Enough said.