I find it fascinating that when the engineers who design the outstanding audio equipment of today tell you that there is no basis for believing that burn-in results in any audible change, those same engineers are suddenly shoved aside by a bunch of amateurs with no technical knowledge or background who by virtue of the internet can circulate their opinions as though they are facts.
All of a sudden, the inventor does not really understand his invention, but someone who claims to have superior knowledge of it does.
If there was ever an upside-down world, this is it.
How do we know engineers don't believe in burn-in or that prototypes aren't evaluated after extended periods of use to mirror what happens in the hands of the customer? How would engineers and designers design for a parameter that could only be perceived by some customers and only after a period of time, whether the perceived change is due to burn-in of the equipment or the ear? Do engineers listen to prototypes before a new product release or do they just measure them in a lab...?
Does your stomach ache go away if it can't be supported by any medical test?
It fine to disagree and I won't insist on what anyone should believe or perceive.
Does your stomach ache go away if it can't be supported by any medical test?
It fine to disagree and I won't insist on what anyone should believe or perceive.
It's important to remember that when self-appointed Golden Ears are actually subjected to rigorous double blind testing - even with comparisons to 'lo-fi' alternatives - they suddenly become Cloth Eared.
I feel very strongly that burn-in/green CD pens/cable lifters etc. will always remain in the realm of personal revelation, and as such have as much credence as a belief in gods, or anything else in the supernatural...
This having been said, improved enjoyment through the zero-cost process of burn-in has to be the greatest bargain of any hifi 'upgrade', and I am ultimately happy for those for who find it to be a Real Thing!
I feel very strongly that burn-in/green CD pens/cable lifters etc. will always remain in the realm of personal revelation, and as such have as much credence as a belief in gods, or anything else in the supernatural...
This having been said, improved enjoyment through the zero-cost process of burn-in has to be the greatest bargain of any hifi 'upgrade', and I am ultimately happy for those for who find it to be a Real Thing!
Because they tell you that they don't.
Some initial factory burn-in to weed out possible early component failures, yes.
Extensive user burn-in to change sonic characteristics, no.
It's that simple.
As I said in post #17, this engineer knows that burn in does happen. Not just to speakers (which everyone agrees on),
but in audio electronics as well. Having had a small business building audio equipment, this was a routine matter
to deal with.
Let's say I went ahead and did that. And let's for argument's sake say that the results were line-on-line or within what can be expected for measurement-to-measurement repeatability. Would you then believe that burn-in is not a thing or would you then argue that burn-in is still a thing it just wasn't captured by the measurement? What if I presented many such measurements?
As I described in Post #18, I found the distortion of a 300B to drift considerably for the first four hours or so from its initial power-on. The distortion of that amp did not change after that. Even after years in storage the amps measured identically to how they measured going into storage.
I did notice the other day that a the distortion measured within a few minutes of turning on the APx555 was quite a bit (8ish dB if memory serves) worse than one taken after a 15-minute warmup of the AP. But we're also talking stuff at the -140 dBc level. AP does state that their specs are valid following a 15-minute warmup.
I'm not denying that settling is a thing. It's perfectly reasonable to expect the performance to shift measurably until the equipment reaches thermal equilibrium. This rarely takes more than an hour and there are ways to ensure that the performance doesn't depend on the slowest thermal system too. Douglas Self writes about that in his power amps book.
Tom
Well, maybe it's insufficiently formulated.
An undescribed and unrated perception of difference (1), becomes a description of difference (2), becomes an rating, assessment, of description of difference (3).
We need to change the method here: I would have the participants make notes that will be discussed later.
If we see electricity as a process that can be visibly described by lightning strikes, for example, then a thesis could be derived that explains "burn-in". Then there is the question of what the ear does in order to clarify whether a "burn in" leads to audible changes. Thirdly, I would listen to two identical devices, only constructed differently, and compare them. Perhaps the audible difference is so clear that, for example, a conclusion can be drawn about the construction and quality of components on the sound and a reference to thesis (sentence 1) "burn in" can be made.
My opinion, experience, is that low-complexity devices require no or only a short burn-in. Just build it, connect it, and it sounds clean and clear and everything is on point. You can leave complex devices running all the time and still never get a clean sound.
Like this;-)
My opinion, experience, is that low-complexity devices require no or only a short burn-in. Just build it, connect it, and it sounds clean and clear and everything is on point. You can leave complex devices running all the time and still never get a clean sound.
Like this;-)
Or better yet: Not discussed at all. Just tabulate them and do the math. And maybe bring the participants in one at a time in random order. Only one participant in the room at a time. Oh, and maybe make it at least a single-blind experiment where the participants don't know what's being tested.
It still wouldn't be scientific, but at least some of the common pitfalls could be avoided. And DIY audio doesn't have to be a science.
Tom
😉
Of all things, the HiFi discussions apparently (or seemingly) disprove Asch's social experiment;-) There is no subordination or orientation towards the majority when it comes to sound, sound stuff, or bikes or cars;-)
I also like it when people discuss while listening, and it doesn't have to be double-blind or anything else. I trust in the self-discipline of the listeners. And the point is to find a common language as quickly and effectively as possible. And so on.
Of all things, the HiFi discussions apparently (or seemingly) disprove Asch's social experiment;-) There is no subordination or orientation towards the majority when it comes to sound, sound stuff, or bikes or cars;-)
I also like it when people discuss while listening, and it doesn't have to be double-blind or anything else. I trust in the self-discipline of the listeners. And the point is to find a common language as quickly and effectively as possible. And so on.
Last edited:
Any research showing the proportion of audio designers who have heard burn-in effects at least once versus those who never have?
Last edited:
This sentence is pure gibberish and reveals that you obviously do not understand much about electricity.
The closest thing that matches your description of a lightning strike is to charge up a capacitor and then purposely short it out, so that the excessive charge on one plate dissipates to the other plate. There is no equivalent in any discussion about audio that matches or relates to it.
Then the rest of the sentence claiming from it 'a thesis could be derived that explains ''burn-in"' is even more bizarre. There is no connection whatsoever between the two. Burn-in is much longer process, at normal power levels, exactly the opposite of a lightning strike or quick capacitor discharge.
Last edited:
I don't. Ultimately even audiophiles are humans.
You could try finding such research through Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.com or through the AES Library.
Tom
Didn't find anything. Maybe its anyone's guess as to whether all true/real audio engineers don't believe in burn-in?
Or maybe burn-in isn't a thing. Or maybe it's an unexplored research area that you could go research. Be the first to publish on the topic.
Tom