5. It exists and no one has a clue how and why it works.
The first few hours for wire, transformers, chokes and capacitors are usually excruciating for me. After 5-6 hours of usage i can listen to a component, after 20 it has pretty much stabilised as far as my ears are concerned. The sound definitely changes but harshness often remains, no matter how long is the break-in. Often changes are not in the direction i would like them to be.
How this process works, we sadly have no idea, despite a lot of hand waving.
I wish we knew even obvious stuff, like per example what breaks wire in? Is it current? Is it voltage? Is it important that the voltage is high? What about wire which never sees much of voltage or current: why does it not sound horrible?
A lot of questions and practically no answers. Sometimes i wish for the smug satisfaction the deaf exhibit in these threads.
Because it is wire, and it conducts, and passing current through it does not change its conductivity or impedance.
Indeed, I am thankful that I do not suffer from your affliction. Most things sound good to me, and changing wires or burning in have never produced a change I could care about.
Are you referring to humble and modest old me? P.S. You should be aware that some of the members of this forum suffer from hearing problems and may well be insulted by your comment!
Wire is almost incapable of sounding of anything.analog_sa said:
Why do people invent myths then demand that others explain the myths?
Has anyone ever done a proper test whether listeners can reliably distinguish (double-blind, of course) amplifiers which have been 'run in' from those which have not? Can amplifiers distinguish listeners which have been 'run in'?
Oh, but there are so many variables in the reproduction stage -well, also the caption stage and the media, not to mention digital or analog 
-
So you are aiming to listen to the"sound" of an amplifier, that is to say that you have perfect components before ( source, some processing like EQ, gain ) and after ( loudspeakers, which are affected mostly by non-linear problems that happen to the voice coil >>heat ) and then there are the interconnects, yes- cables. So double blinding yes/maybe/no ! tests but necessary for good test is to isolate every component and trust confidently in it.
Faith
1+ for the capacitors of course
-So you are aiming to listen to the"sound" of an amplifier, that is to say that you have perfect components before ( source, some processing like EQ, gain ) and after ( loudspeakers, which are affected mostly by non-linear problems that happen to the voice coil >>heat ) and then there are the interconnects, yes- cables. So double blinding yes/maybe/no ! tests but necessary for good test is to isolate every component and trust confidently in it.
Faith
1+ for the capacitors of course
and we are humans after all
It means that after all the processing done electronically then transduced there's the brain that processes what arrives at the ears, and that's another matter.
So I have to quote
It means that after all the processing done electronically then transduced there's the brain that processes what arrives at the ears, and that's another matter.
So I have to quote
because....
The thing to do would have been to measure the components you had qualms with as well as your behavior and other tertiary conditions and attempt to find correlations.
We’ve all seen optical illusions, you are posting the obvious same old song and dance in an attempt to appear insightful.
Yes these issues exist, but you will ensure they continue unabatedly obscuring the truth by not compiling any data or being scientifically rigorous.
Without novel information this thread will likely end ambiguously, inconclusively and generally a waste of time for all participants like the other two you referenced in the OP- *because it started the same*
The burden of revealing a different ending is on you. There’s enough armchair philosophers here to fill an Olympic stadium- no shortage there.
What's the mean temperature? It changes with ambient temp, airflow, output power and when someone puts another piece of gear on top.
Where to start. Maybe some education. A transistors gain ( transconductance ) increases exponentially with temperature. It also depends on the exact transistor your using. The beta ( current gain) of a BC650 ( or whatever ) can vary from 100 to 400 from one BC650 to the next even from the same manufacturer. Look at the data sheets. So how can 2 identical circuits with transistors that can vary so much sound the same? Engineering.
One of the first steps in circuit design is to minimize these variances. (compare single transistor bias schemes). Mostly by using elements that don't change characteristics with temp, resistors to set gain etc. And then there's feedback. Most circuits gain is set by the global feedback. The only elements that set the amp gain are the 2 resistors in the feedback network. These have very little temp. dependence and they usually both change the same amount with temp.
So once more: the only reason a amplifier will change its sound with time is if it's poorly designed, unfortunately many audiphool designs fall into this catagory.
No it dosnt. There I said it so now it dosnt. Thats my proof. I said it so it's true. I have as much proof as you do. And you come across as smug as anyone else, only they don't claim super human hearing.
So you accept an amp that sounds different in winter or summer? Because that's what it is - temp rise is always with respect to ambient.
Of course parts change parameters with temp, especially active devices like transistors and FETs. But I don't think we should have our sound at the mercy of whatever the temperature those parts happen to be at one time or another.
I design in such a way that temp changes don't matter. Not perfectly, but surely inaudible.
After all, active parts off the shelf are also all slightly different. Neither do I want my sound to change depending on a specific part that I happen to get from the shop.
Jan
Nobody can prove a negative. You can't prove you don't have a million dollars stashed away. Nobody can prove burn-in doesn't exist.
But it's good common sense practise that whoever makes a claim, provides the proof. If you claim you do have a million dollars stashed away, only you can prove it, obviously.
If someone claims burn-in (of equipment) does exist, naturally they are the best person to proof it, and it is reasonable of others to ask that.
If they don't provide good proof their claim is pretty worthless.
Jan
Last edited:
Voltage between that wire and what, exactly? I have a negative 500V supply here, your wire might be 500V relative to that. Or 0V, since we're quite a distance away. And maybe -1200V relative to the anode supply of an amp a friend here has. Voltage isn't a stand-alone quantity, it is a potential DIFFERNCE between one conductor and another.
When I read things like the quote above I have to wonder how much understanding the writer has of the words he is using.
1. Is the harshness all in the head ? (Thats what were here to measure and quantify, with cute looking charts by measuring both the emi that the device is producing as well as the distortion from the output signal from dc to light) plus the other things originally asked)
2. Are audiophile speaker cables snake oil ?
Some basic chemistry
Atom - Wikipedia The physicist J. J. Thomson measured the mass of cathode rays, showing they were made of particles, but were around 1800 times lighter than the lightest atom, hydrogen. Therefore, they were not atoms, but a new particle, the first subatomic particle to be discovered, which he originally called "corpuscle" but was later named electron, after particles postulated by George Johnstone Stoney in 1874. He also showed they were identical to particles given off by photoelectric and radioactive materials.It was quickly recognized that they are the particles that carry electric currents in metal wires, and carry the negative electric charge within atoms. Thomson was given the 1906 Nobel Prize in Physics for this work. Thus he overturned the belief that atoms are the indivisible, ultimate particles of matter.Thomson also incorrectly postulated that the low mass, negatively charged electrons were distributed throughout the atom in a uniform sea of positive charge. This became known as the plum pudding model.
What is the speed of electrons in a transistor? - Quora
You mean the drift-speed during electric currents? Short answer: the speed is thousands, up to millions of times faster inside transistors, when compared to the speed inside wires. In wires, the common electron-cloud is very dense: one or two mobile electrons provided by every atom. But in semiconductors, only the dopant atoms provide mobile charge-carriers. The amount of doping is typically between 1/10,000 to a few millionths. (So if metals are like water-filled pipes, then semiconductors contain a compressible low-pressure gas.) Example: for every milliampere in wire, the drift-velocity inside silicon will be 200,000X faster than in copper, if the silicon is doped at a level of one dopant atom per 200,000 silicon atoms. In lightly-doped silicon, the electrons go fast. In heavy-doped or “metallic” silicon, the electrons go slow.
Also electron mobility is affected by voltage and heat, electrons are fastest in a vacuum tube
Vacuum channel transistor combines best of semiconductors and vacuum tubes
Introducing the Vacuum Transistor: A Device Made of Nothing - IEEE Spectrum
2. Are audiophile speaker cables snake oil ?
Some basic chemistry
Atom - Wikipedia The physicist J. J. Thomson measured the mass of cathode rays, showing they were made of particles, but were around 1800 times lighter than the lightest atom, hydrogen. Therefore, they were not atoms, but a new particle, the first subatomic particle to be discovered, which he originally called "corpuscle" but was later named electron, after particles postulated by George Johnstone Stoney in 1874. He also showed they were identical to particles given off by photoelectric and radioactive materials.It was quickly recognized that they are the particles that carry electric currents in metal wires, and carry the negative electric charge within atoms. Thomson was given the 1906 Nobel Prize in Physics for this work. Thus he overturned the belief that atoms are the indivisible, ultimate particles of matter.Thomson also incorrectly postulated that the low mass, negatively charged electrons were distributed throughout the atom in a uniform sea of positive charge. This became known as the plum pudding model.
What is the speed of electrons in a transistor? - Quora
You mean the drift-speed during electric currents? Short answer: the speed is thousands, up to millions of times faster inside transistors, when compared to the speed inside wires. In wires, the common electron-cloud is very dense: one or two mobile electrons provided by every atom. But in semiconductors, only the dopant atoms provide mobile charge-carriers. The amount of doping is typically between 1/10,000 to a few millionths. (So if metals are like water-filled pipes, then semiconductors contain a compressible low-pressure gas.) Example: for every milliampere in wire, the drift-velocity inside silicon will be 200,000X faster than in copper, if the silicon is doped at a level of one dopant atom per 200,000 silicon atoms. In lightly-doped silicon, the electrons go fast. In heavy-doped or “metallic” silicon, the electrons go slow.
Also electron mobility is affected by voltage and heat, electrons are fastest in a vacuum tube
Vacuum channel transistor combines best of semiconductors and vacuum tubes
Introducing the Vacuum Transistor: A Device Made of Nothing - IEEE Spectrum
Last edited:
Other dimensions to think about when thinking about the harshness as well as burn in
What is meant by half-life? - It's a Question of Physics - The Atomic Age - Linda Hall Library - Kansas City, MO
Doping: n- and p-semiconductors - Fundamentals - Semiconductor Technology from A to Z - Halbleiter.org
What is meant by half-life? - It's a Question of Physics - The Atomic Age - Linda Hall Library - Kansas City, MO
Doping: n- and p-semiconductors - Fundamentals - Semiconductor Technology from A to Z - Halbleiter.org
Sorry, for the benefit of those of us who are a bit slow, could you explain the relevance of your posts 77 and 78? I can't see anything in them which bears on the subject of this thread. Otherwise someone might form the impression that you were merely blowing smoke in the eyes of those readers who know little or no physics.
burn in ovens were used extensively in the semicon fab houses for military spec products, several cycles of hot +100C and cold cycles -40C with power applied to devices.....after this is completed, 100% functional testing on devices are done.....the object is that failed devices are uncovered by testing and discarded on site....better they fail in house than at the hands of the costumer...
how the audiophile crowd got wind of this and adopted it as their own escaped me...
how the audiophile crowd got wind of this and adopted it as their own escaped me...
- Status
- Not open for further replies.