Cos they're not covered in snake oil.
If you want it to sound better it will.
I can accept that filling an enclosure with sand might make it sound different, and the sand will settle, but after a few days of listening the sand will have settled.
Interconnects, as long as they are reasonable quality and oxide free (ie gold plated) make very little difference.
Speaker cables, as long as they are large gauge, also make very little difference.
The best speaker cable that I have ever heard is 2.5mm (UK ring main cable) T&E.
Last edited:
Just put on a tinfoil cap, it's very helpful in "burning in" things as it helps block the NSA mindcontrol rays that prevent people from detecting the changes that only golden ears can detect, but are somehow blindingly obvious.
Hahaha... I did not check back on this thread. I see it went on for a bit.
Its pointless to debate the issue. Some people refuse to believe something unless they can measure it. A good example is jitter. When the first CD shipped it was PERFECT audio reproduction. I repeat, it was PERFECT technically. Overwhelmingly tho people did not like it compared to vinyl or tape. YET the CD measured better then both. It took some years but finally we developed a whole science that showed humans can hear jitter. Incredibly small amounts too. We also discovered a whole range of perceptual science around digital audio reproduction and we have year by year made digital better.
To say something does not exist because you cant measure it is short sighted. Ask any audio reviewer of gear, a true trained audio professional, if gear/wire burns-in and you will get a 100% agreement that things do. They understand audio perceptional science as I do. I am a member of AES, SMPTE, SID and SPIE.
*MY* best guess as to the material science of burn-in is related to how electrons jump thru the crystal lattice structure of metals. Once you start pulling current thru a metal it picks a path jumping crystal to crystal. At first this is fairly random based on lots of things, then over time these jumps burn-in a path thru the metal taking up less cross section. This occurs in all metals. So wire, caps, resistors, PC boards and more. Other people believe its a relationship with the conductor and the surface of the metal. There are a number of good scientific possibilities as to why burn-in occurs.
If you think your ear/brain is not good enough to hear things we cant currently measure, can you tell a real instrument from a reproduced one ? Well according to all our measurement gear that should not be true. Yet its very easy to tell. Your ears are way better then your scope.
I think its important to realize that science cant currently measure all things that are related to human audio perception.
Burn-in occurs. Professionals in this industry all agree and they do understand the science quoted in the thread..
But its a pointless debate. Because if you dont believe burn-in can occur, then you will never allow yourself to hear it. This is called cognitive bias. Also whats in play here is something you find often on forums called the Dunning-Kruger Effect. Ive been doing super high end gear for most of my life and so have a lot of experence with all this super high performance gear. I would love to hear what gear each poster has who believes burn-in does not exist.
Its pointless to debate the issue. Some people refuse to believe something unless they can measure it. A good example is jitter. When the first CD shipped it was PERFECT audio reproduction. I repeat, it was PERFECT technically. Overwhelmingly tho people did not like it compared to vinyl or tape. YET the CD measured better then both. It took some years but finally we developed a whole science that showed humans can hear jitter. Incredibly small amounts too. We also discovered a whole range of perceptual science around digital audio reproduction and we have year by year made digital better.
To say something does not exist because you cant measure it is short sighted. Ask any audio reviewer of gear, a true trained audio professional, if gear/wire burns-in and you will get a 100% agreement that things do. They understand audio perceptional science as I do. I am a member of AES, SMPTE, SID and SPIE.
*MY* best guess as to the material science of burn-in is related to how electrons jump thru the crystal lattice structure of metals. Once you start pulling current thru a metal it picks a path jumping crystal to crystal. At first this is fairly random based on lots of things, then over time these jumps burn-in a path thru the metal taking up less cross section. This occurs in all metals. So wire, caps, resistors, PC boards and more. Other people believe its a relationship with the conductor and the surface of the metal. There are a number of good scientific possibilities as to why burn-in occurs.
If you think your ear/brain is not good enough to hear things we cant currently measure, can you tell a real instrument from a reproduced one ? Well according to all our measurement gear that should not be true. Yet its very easy to tell. Your ears are way better then your scope.
I think its important to realize that science cant currently measure all things that are related to human audio perception.
Burn-in occurs. Professionals in this industry all agree and they do understand the science quoted in the thread..
But its a pointless debate. Because if you dont believe burn-in can occur, then you will never allow yourself to hear it. This is called cognitive bias. Also whats in play here is something you find often on forums called the Dunning-Kruger Effect. Ive been doing super high end gear for most of my life and so have a lot of experence with all this super high performance gear. I would love to hear what gear each poster has who believes burn-in does not exist.
Last edited:
Hi,
I hear that to work the sand not have to be too small to move on itself if it is in the same box than the woofer with a sheet of coton fabric to protect the driver (if the speaker falls) by dividing the box by two (it changes the size load and Q)... I think the attenuation is just a question of density an volume but never measured it. Many use crystal for aquarium filter or sand to flow the filter in a separate box to avoid bass vibration on caps and selfs...
You can mix with two big size of clean sand river for mortar construction. Not expensive, just boring work to full and empty...maybe the reason it is just used between two sheets of wood for cabinets sides and rear (onken...)
just 0,2 cents...it doesn't substitute a good design and doesn't improve the bad ones of course.
I hear that to work the sand not have to be too small to move on itself if it is in the same box than the woofer with a sheet of coton fabric to protect the driver (if the speaker falls) by dividing the box by two (it changes the size load and Q)... I think the attenuation is just a question of density an volume but never measured it. Many use crystal for aquarium filter or sand to flow the filter in a separate box to avoid bass vibration on caps and selfs...
You can mix with two big size of clean sand river for mortar construction. Not expensive, just boring work to full and empty...maybe the reason it is just used between two sheets of wood for cabinets sides and rear (onken...)
just 0,2 cents...it doesn't substitute a good design and doesn't improve the bad ones of course.
What you describe is the existance of traps. Charge trapping does not occur in metals on anywhere near the degree that it does in.... semiconductors. You would expect transistors to burn in way more than wires. I would suspect that oxides forming on contacts (which makes a very crude semiconductor) to far outweigh traps in the metal itself.
Well, you filled the extra cavity with sand and after 3 days it sounded better to you. OK, that might be 100% true for your perception.
But how do you make sure that it is not only an sensorial distortion?
After 3 days its hard to remember how it was before. No matter if one likes it better now. You have an identical pair without or unsettled filling/ to compare?
I've seen your video with the knuckle test. That leaves me a little bit baffled.
Once you knocked on the damped box with baffle mounted and you compared that to the knuckle sound on an undamped enclosure without the front.
That missing baffle alone makes a big difference to those sounds.
Also i tend to believe that those knuckle test are somehow the same as if someone kicks his car tires to proof the pressure.
I have only normal gear without magic, Satellite HD, BD player and PC as source, Denon 3805 for volume control, DCX2496,Yamaha P2500S (6),
Manger 107 and now ,instead of the MSW, an DE250 on Iwata600, Copper Cables. I can throw in an old Yamaha M2 or a Parasound 1202 and a pair of more front sensitive receivers ;-) but that will not make any difference to me.
I now sandfillings only as sandwich fillings for the outer enclosure and of course i'm sure your filled cavity will have some influence on the enclosure.
But, how much and in wich way and how much will the setteling change those differences? Would'nt it be possible that one can measure the box
vibration differences before and after 3 days but nobody could hear because they are to tiny at all to be recognized?
But how do you make sure that it is not only an sensorial distortion?
After 3 days its hard to remember how it was before. No matter if one likes it better now. You have an identical pair without or unsettled filling/ to compare?
I've seen your video with the knuckle test. That leaves me a little bit baffled.
Once you knocked on the damped box with baffle mounted and you compared that to the knuckle sound on an undamped enclosure without the front.
That missing baffle alone makes a big difference to those sounds.
Also i tend to believe that those knuckle test are somehow the same as if someone kicks his car tires to proof the pressure.
I have only normal gear without magic, Satellite HD, BD player and PC as source, Denon 3805 for volume control, DCX2496,Yamaha P2500S (6),
Manger 107 and now ,instead of the MSW, an DE250 on Iwata600, Copper Cables. I can throw in an old Yamaha M2 or a Parasound 1202 and a pair of more front sensitive receivers ;-) but that will not make any difference to me.
I now sandfillings only as sandwich fillings for the outer enclosure and of course i'm sure your filled cavity will have some influence on the enclosure.
But, how much and in wich way and how much will the setteling change those differences? Would'nt it be possible that one can measure the box
vibration differences before and after 3 days but nobody could hear because they are to tiny at all to be recognized?
Last edited:
Where is the most sensitive change after 3 days with the sand ? medium ? bass ? else ? Is not fluctuation with in wall electricity ?
Did you try spikes and a plan like granit between the floor and the speakers before ? If you have big bass with wood on the floor it helps to supress resonance between the box and the floor which increase speakers earing quality. If the weight of the speakers increase you can use sand in a box between 2 big thick medium wood plans like shock absorber : the first medium wood plan below the speakers ; sand below the wood plan lying on a box full of sand on the floor : 0.4 inches each layer to have no more of 1,2 (not change too much the height of tweeter). Of course the first plan doesn't touch the box...just the sand, the box is just a little wider for that and and just 4 felt pad for chairs between box and floor if this last has no carpet.
A way like another to isolate speakers from the floor for a cleaner sound...
Black sand of bali is of course WAFer but with the side of the box you don't see the sand...as it's WAFer it's good for woofer ! If you use white sand at left and black sand at right, you can have consistency with result and waves floating stereo imaging. But it add a Tao Ying/Yang effect.
last but not least : best effect will be target hearing the Beach Boys. With the sand into your living room, your wifves will thank you for the permanent holliday feeling. For whom leaving near a beach, doesn't work with grass instead of...better results with speakers will be target if you smoke it. It will give you the same floating wave stereo imaging result and Tao Ying/Yang one !
Try the sand shock absorber for floor (not too finn like the ashtrays one)...good with heavy speakers or heavy bass cabinets !
(what a f*****g sense of humour I have !....have to call my doctor, used too much soldering iron flux today)
Did you try spikes and a plan like granit between the floor and the speakers before ? If you have big bass with wood on the floor it helps to supress resonance between the box and the floor which increase speakers earing quality. If the weight of the speakers increase you can use sand in a box between 2 big thick medium wood plans like shock absorber : the first medium wood plan below the speakers ; sand below the wood plan lying on a box full of sand on the floor : 0.4 inches each layer to have no more of 1,2 (not change too much the height of tweeter). Of course the first plan doesn't touch the box...just the sand, the box is just a little wider for that and and just 4 felt pad for chairs between box and floor if this last has no carpet.
A way like another to isolate speakers from the floor for a cleaner sound...
Black sand of bali is of course WAFer but with the side of the box you don't see the sand...as it's WAFer it's good for woofer ! If you use white sand at left and black sand at right, you can have consistency with result and waves floating stereo imaging. But it add a Tao Ying/Yang effect.
last but not least : best effect will be target hearing the Beach Boys. With the sand into your living room, your wifves will thank you for the permanent holliday feeling. For whom leaving near a beach, doesn't work with grass instead of...better results with speakers will be target if you smoke it. It will give you the same floating wave stereo imaging result and Tao Ying/Yang one !
Try the sand shock absorber for floor (not too finn like the ashtrays one)...good with heavy speakers or heavy bass cabinets !
(what a f*****g sense of humour I have !....have to call my doctor, used too much soldering iron flux today)
Myths-loved by humanity
The references to cognitive bias made by the OP are equally pertinent to both sides of this debate. People tend to believe that which pleases them or suits their purpose, whether they are protecting their reputation, or selling a product. A good example would be Belden continuing to promote and produce "directional" wire even though it's benefits have failed to appear in blind testing. I suspect the OP is involved in sales and/or installation of "super high end" gear, and thus is dependent on sales for livelihood. On the face of it, statements that the stated effects are more obvious in the gear that he promotes seem self serving. Testing audiophile claims and myths , provides some good reading.
It's obvious that some components, most notably speakers, do burn in. On the other end of the spectrum, that speaker wire does so is highly doubtful. With sand, there are at least 2 distinct functions at play, dampening of the air mass (as in stuffing with wool) and physical bracing of the enclosure. Packing down of the sand would lessen the benefit of the first while increasing the second.
The scientific method evolved to counter the affects of cognitive bias. Logic shows that proving a negative existential assertion is impossible. You can prove there are ghosts by simply displaying their existence in a repeatable way. Proving they don't exist, impossible. Ask someone who believes they saw one.
The references to cognitive bias made by the OP are equally pertinent to both sides of this debate. People tend to believe that which pleases them or suits their purpose, whether they are protecting their reputation, or selling a product. A good example would be Belden continuing to promote and produce "directional" wire even though it's benefits have failed to appear in blind testing. I suspect the OP is involved in sales and/or installation of "super high end" gear, and thus is dependent on sales for livelihood. On the face of it, statements that the stated effects are more obvious in the gear that he promotes seem self serving. Testing audiophile claims and myths , provides some good reading.
It's obvious that some components, most notably speakers, do burn in. On the other end of the spectrum, that speaker wire does so is highly doubtful. With sand, there are at least 2 distinct functions at play, dampening of the air mass (as in stuffing with wool) and physical bracing of the enclosure. Packing down of the sand would lessen the benefit of the first while increasing the second.
The scientific method evolved to counter the affects of cognitive bias. Logic shows that proving a negative existential assertion is impossible. You can prove there are ghosts by simply displaying their existence in a repeatable way. Proving they don't exist, impossible. Ask someone who believes they saw one.
+1
Allthough to be precise I actually prefer solid core over high thread count. Thickness can make a (small) difference, different thickness for different frequencies. For me that's decent cat5 threads for the tops and solid core installation cable for the woofers.
Thanks for the coffee chat btw
Really? Do we need another stupid thread like that? Why not build something instead?
And vice-versa. Pointless indeed.
Wood, glue, solder. Those are real enough.
@ teh OP:
If burn in occurs, why does it stop? When does it stop? Why does it always seem to stop at exactly the right level for perfection (or at least highly acceptable performance) to be obtained?
Surely, if it can "burn in" an item can also "burn out"? I have yet to read any reviews that tell me how over time a tweek became unlistenable due to burn-out.
If you "guess" what is going on, why does your guess preclude psycho-auditory effects? More to the point, what makes your guess right and the rest not?
These questions and more fascinate me.
Nice appeal to authority with your associations, but membership of all the societies you quote is based more on the ability to write a cheque than on an auditory excellence assessment.
In any other situation, burn in would be accepted as a psychological acclimatisation - you get used to something and accept it as normal. This is a far more beleivable (and better researched and documented) process than elctro-acoustic burn in.
Still, as you say, there is no telling some people - they are so sure in their beliefs that no amount of guidance will change them.
If burn in occurs, why does it stop? When does it stop? Why does it always seem to stop at exactly the right level for perfection (or at least highly acceptable performance) to be obtained?
Surely, if it can "burn in" an item can also "burn out"? I have yet to read any reviews that tell me how over time a tweek became unlistenable due to burn-out.
If you "guess" what is going on, why does your guess preclude psycho-auditory effects? More to the point, what makes your guess right and the rest not?
These questions and more fascinate me.
Nice appeal to authority with your associations, but membership of all the societies you quote is based more on the ability to write a cheque than on an auditory excellence assessment.
In any other situation, burn in would be accepted as a psychological acclimatisation - you get used to something and accept it as normal. This is a far more beleivable (and better researched and documented) process than elctro-acoustic burn in.
Still, as you say, there is no telling some people - they are so sure in their beliefs that no amount of guidance will change them.
Can it be that overly advanced equipment may actually have a burn in period? I remember having some fancy equipment some years ago, before the exciting world of diy captured my focus, that actually seemed to have some amount of burn in period, about the time it takes to open your new speakers and find out they are wired wrongly. Even though they cost a lot of money.
And the amp that had to much metal on the speaker connectors, actually sounded better with the wire soldered from the pcb straight to the xo.
Do not seem to have those problems anymore.
And the amp that had to much metal on the speaker connectors, actually sounded better with the wire soldered from the pcb straight to the xo.
Do not seem to have those problems anymore.
Great responses.. Super long responses to everyone's posts follows.. If you can read all this without falling asleep your a better man then me, hahaha.. But I wanted to respond to each person that posted..
Yes I agree semiconductors for sure burn-in.
Another big thing in this general debate is the lattice structure of the metal i feel makes a difference. Silver, copper, gold are all cubic, when things like lead, tin ( solder ) aluminum ( Cap foils, The wire from the chip/transistor lead to the dice of the actual chip ), carbon ( some types of resistors and pots ) and various other bits inside parts like resistor end caps and just all sorts of bits. I think its important to be aware of the types of metal you push the electrons thru. That is IMHO of course. Im less sure of insulator science.
Ive been crazy enough to do point to point wiring and welding rather then soldering. But hey, im crazy. I also had some op-amps done with gold wire from the dice to the leads. But that was long ago.
The missing back panel made no difference, the rest of the box with the drivers is sealed. Why i left it off was that when it was on it CREATED more resonances inside the box. Leaving those back cavities open was better.
I use 2 things with the cabinet to listen ot it. I use a doctors stethoscope which allows you to listen to any part of the enclosure with direct contact. I also have a surface accelerometer that has a freq response up to around 1khz that is scary sensitive as it uses MEMS. Hooking that to a headphone amp with some op-amp help make it easy to listen to any part of the enclosure.
So the knuckle test is just a simple easy way to judge, at least for me. Its like knocking on concrete, where before there was distinct pitch to the knocking.
The real question is.. Does the sand absorb energy that should be delivered to the motor in the driver. Also obviously its very complex what the sand actually does.
I really dont know.. But something happened that had not happened in the week prior.
Im using a Proceed Amp-5 that has been modded. It no longer has internal connectors between the transformers and the boards, I solder everything. I used Wireworld Mini Eclispe 7 for a number of high current runs jumping out PC board traces with far higher gauge connections thru the wire. I also jumped out all fuses and use the same wireworld wire for all internal wiring. Im using 4 channels. driving the tweeter and mid-woofs from separate cards in the amp chassis which are isolated and have thier own torids for power.
The amp is very stable. Levinson knew how to make a amp. LOTS of regulation. So I dont think wall voltage variations make any difference at all. BUT YES I AGREE, you never know. I just think the odds are the sand settled.
Yes I use spikes. 3 point. YES my floor could be better. I was more thinking that making each speaker/stand weigh 175lbs they would kinda be stable even if the foolr was not. However im sure this is not true. Im sure having a solid concrete foundation to bolt them to would be better.
As far as how the sand reacted and what happened see my previous post.
Im up for debate on this. But I build my own gear all the time and I play with how caps sound, how all sorts of things sound. Ive been doing this all my life. So I feel I have aquired skill at hearing changes. The same skills I use in listening to electronic differences apply to speakers and, the sand..
Yes. I 100% make money of doing labor for my clients. I do make some money on a few products im a dealer for. However most of my clients get their products thru other local dealers. Im only a dealer for Datasat, Ayre ( D5 BluRay ) and Sim2. None of those products have any bearing on audio. My clients get their products thru other people. So I do not make any money on the audio side of things.
I have in the past tho made the world best CRT projector as reviewed by a number of reviewers and took product of the year in a few major magazines. So I do know something about circuit design and I have also trained my eyes to see things with different caps and parts. This I have reviews as the best ever made, so I did a fairly good job at being unbaised and in choosing the right parts.
My Press coverage back then
Yes, sorry for even posting this whole thread. I should have known better.
Ive said what i needed to say, so I will be pretty much done after this post. Lets just all agree to disagree ! And lets go build stuff. I have some caps to play with in my DAC on my Oppo..
Ive had "Burn out".. Where things settled and sounded worse. But yes, you bring up interesting points indeed..
__________________________
You guys are smart and fun. I like this forum !
I seem to be moving into making my own amps and preamps while also modding the **** outta source gear. So I will enjoying posting here. You guys have a lot of experience.
Im right on the edge of my physics competence. I would have to do some research and post back. There was a specific physics study of how electrons jump thru the lattice structure. It was mainly to further research into how room tempture super conductors work, but its showed a clear pattern of how electrons initially choose a random path but as more use occurs this settles down to a specific path. But im playing with science I just barely have a handle on, so count me as dangerous on material science.
Yes I agree semiconductors for sure burn-in.
Another big thing in this general debate is the lattice structure of the metal i feel makes a difference. Silver, copper, gold are all cubic, when things like lead, tin ( solder ) aluminum ( Cap foils, The wire from the chip/transistor lead to the dice of the actual chip ), carbon ( some types of resistors and pots ) and various other bits inside parts like resistor end caps and just all sorts of bits. I think its important to be aware of the types of metal you push the electrons thru. That is IMHO of course. Im less sure of insulator science.
Ive been crazy enough to do point to point wiring and welding rather then soldering. But hey, im crazy. I also had some op-amps done with gold wire from the dice to the leads. But that was long ago.
Well over a long time you can train yourself to listen for things. It was actually really easy in this case, there were new instruments I could not hear before, there was noises in the recording room I did not hear before. It was reproducing a clearly better image and defination. It was not subtle as say compairing digital sources is.
The missing back panel made no difference, the rest of the box with the drivers is sealed. Why i left it off was that when it was on it CREATED more resonances inside the box. Leaving those back cavities open was better.
I use 2 things with the cabinet to listen ot it. I use a doctors stethoscope which allows you to listen to any part of the enclosure with direct contact. I also have a surface accelerometer that has a freq response up to around 1khz that is scary sensitive as it uses MEMS. Hooking that to a headphone amp with some op-amp help make it easy to listen to any part of the enclosure.
So the knuckle test is just a simple easy way to judge, at least for me. Its like knocking on concrete, where before there was distinct pitch to the knocking.
The real question is.. Does the sand absorb energy that should be delivered to the motor in the driver. Also obviously its very complex what the sand actually does.
Possibly. That would be a fun test. It would also be interesting to put some mic IN the sand and see what it picks up..
Thats what I said when I heard a clear difference and why I posted as it was really crazy.
Well it went for 3 days on 24-7. I always burn-in gear and speakers when stuff is new and all this is new. So it had sounded exactly the same for days up till then. It sounded the same with other changes. Changes i expected to hear more of a difference. I put the sand in and immd imaging focus improved, instruments were better delineated, You could pick them out from each other better, bass seemed less but more defined and tighter. These changes occurred immd. I listened again the next day and there was no change i could tell. I left the system for a few days and came back to it and was really surprized. I had regained bass and everything had tightened up. Imaging, detail. I attributed most of this to the speaker being more stable and not moving during mid-bass excursion - i think this was mostly weight. But something had happened. My only guess is the particles of sand kinda settled and made better contact with the surfaces of the enclosure and with each other to better transmit and dissapate the energy in the cabinet.
I really dont know.. But something happened that had not happened in the week prior.
Im using a Proceed Amp-5 that has been modded. It no longer has internal connectors between the transformers and the boards, I solder everything. I used Wireworld Mini Eclispe 7 for a number of high current runs jumping out PC board traces with far higher gauge connections thru the wire. I also jumped out all fuses and use the same wireworld wire for all internal wiring. Im using 4 channels. driving the tweeter and mid-woofs from separate cards in the amp chassis which are isolated and have thier own torids for power.
The amp is very stable. Levinson knew how to make a amp. LOTS of regulation. So I dont think wall voltage variations make any difference at all. BUT YES I AGREE, you never know. I just think the odds are the sand settled.
Yes I use spikes. 3 point. YES my floor could be better. I was more thinking that making each speaker/stand weigh 175lbs they would kinda be stable even if the foolr was not. However im sure this is not true. Im sure having a solid concrete foundation to bolt them to would be better.
Im making these for my own use. Im using things because I know they matter. IMHO.. But see im aware of what bias is. That very important. You have to know that you can have bias. So you try and be objective. To not fall into the trap that many people do that if you cant measure it, it does not exist.
As far as how the sand reacted and what happened see my previous post.
Im up for debate on this. But I build my own gear all the time and I play with how caps sound, how all sorts of things sound. Ive been doing this all my life. So I feel I have aquired skill at hearing changes. The same skills I use in listening to electronic differences apply to speakers and, the sand..
Yes. I 100% make money of doing labor for my clients. I do make some money on a few products im a dealer for. However most of my clients get their products thru other local dealers. Im only a dealer for Datasat, Ayre ( D5 BluRay ) and Sim2. None of those products have any bearing on audio. My clients get their products thru other people. So I do not make any money on the audio side of things.
I have in the past tho made the world best CRT projector as reviewed by a number of reviewers and took product of the year in a few major magazines. So I do know something about circuit design and I have also trained my eyes to see things with different caps and parts. This I have reviews as the best ever made, so I did a fairly good job at being unbaised and in choosing the right parts.
My Press coverage back then
HELLZ YEA. I have NEVER heard directionality. Ive done A/B with people. No one can. Its funny cuz thats supposedly the one thing that can be measured and its the one thing I have never been able to hear. In any kind of cable - Line level, digital, speaker.
Hehehe. so true. You just never know. You gotta listen. It all depends on so many things like source impedance, sink impedance and just all sorts of damn near mystical things. You just gotta listen cuz test equipment CANT measure as well as your ears.
I agree. There is science behind what your doing with the wire. Litz for the high end and more cross section area for the lower end. Its all about current density. The tweeters use less current and so like smaller cross section wire - IMHO. Ive used cat 5. It can sound pretty amazing and its dirt cheap
Both good points. Interesting about what you said about minus side. That makes no sense technically, but ive learned to ignore my technical training and try things anyway just to see what happens. Your trying that is interesting.
OMG I sure dont need another debate on wire.. Ive been doing those for 30 years. Its like politics. No one is changing thier minds. Lets just not talk about it..Quote:
Originally Posted by xymox1
I would love to hear what gear each poster has who believes burn-in does not exist.
Really? Do we need another stupid thread like that? Why not build something instead?
Quote:
But its a pointless debate. Because if you dont believe burn-in can occur, then you will never allow yourself to hear it.
And vice-versa. Pointless indeed.
Wood, glue, solder. Those are real enough.
Yes, sorry for even posting this whole thread. I should have known better.
Ive said what i needed to say, so I will be pretty much done after this post. Lets just all agree to disagree ! And lets go build stuff. I have some caps to play with in my DAC on my Oppo..
Wow.. Awesome.. Of course we all know that observing something alters it. This is basic quantum mechanics. Soooo our observing our system changes it. Then things just get freaky
Ive had "Burn out".. Where things settled and sounded worse. But yes, you bring up interesting points indeed..
__________________________
You guys are smart and fun. I like this forum !
I seem to be moving into making my own amps and preamps while also modding the **** outta source gear. So I will enjoying posting here. You guys have a lot of experience.
Last edited:
Yea if anyone here thinks we understand how a elctron really gets thru a conductor you need to watch the vid I linked to above. No one understand this. No one.. Our best physics cant explain this basic principle. And how observation, listening and percieving, changes this is a freaky thing indeed.
I will relink the vid
I will relink the vid
As everybody know here: n our hifi hobby (or job) we must have to prioritize to build a good system.
1 : Money-Time-knowledge-possibilities (waf, room neighboors acceptance factor, psychological mix between tuning or hearing music,....)
2 : The mix of these 4 factors are difficult : one can increase, another can decrease, everything can be removed by the change of one material (speakers, source,...) or the live of one of these factor (more time, less money...more money, less time to optimize or hear music, new girl you want to keep but she doesn't like the 2 meters speakers and wires everywhere in the room,....)
3 : Knowledge can be better and better but time factor can be reset when you avoid errors which spent to you a lot of time...and reset the time counter (it's a loss but for knowledge...and not sure because you progress with tuning hifi systems but your music knowledge suffer to have not enough time to listen more music)
I am lucky twice to be tolerant (i hope) and like my hobby, so the time, the money spent is the price I agree to waste. But like one life is not enough for this hobby, prioritize is the way.
With one of my speakers, if I change a cap in the source, or just add or remove something I can hear a difference and I love that...but the goal can be far away. because sometimes you have to reduce the size of your speakers in your room and not spend time with wires, amps, tubes, solid state,... If you loose to much time with details, you loose the enjoyment goal...it's time management. I know it I spent 16 years with a too brighty speakers but learn a lot with that, but loose time with pleasure to listen better system.
I think you heard something, but what correlation between the change and the way it's possible to do with that to have consistency with results is another story (like wires, we know all the theory, practice is another story but come in last in the set up chain). but We can talk of that because it's an hobby.
All this thread remenber me a french guy who maid an magnetic optimizer for negative and postive ions in air load...all people said Hurra, there was press reviews, most of them ran to make this gadget but their systems was most of the time poor and had to be optimized above in the prioritize chain in regard of the 1) point.
Pano is right in the sense that most change is question of more solid set up (glue, drivers, layout, shematics, mix of that… and you can spend a lot of money and time here too…but for surely better results than sand).
The positive way is that our knowledge is rising with tools like Internet and forums.
sorry here to be too long and write that everybody already know...but better sometimes when said again !
1 : Money-Time-knowledge-possibilities (waf, room neighboors acceptance factor, psychological mix between tuning or hearing music,....)
2 : The mix of these 4 factors are difficult : one can increase, another can decrease, everything can be removed by the change of one material (speakers, source,...) or the live of one of these factor (more time, less money...more money, less time to optimize or hear music, new girl you want to keep but she doesn't like the 2 meters speakers and wires everywhere in the room,....)
3 : Knowledge can be better and better but time factor can be reset when you avoid errors which spent to you a lot of time...and reset the time counter (it's a loss but for knowledge...and not sure because you progress with tuning hifi systems but your music knowledge suffer to have not enough time to listen more music)
I am lucky twice to be tolerant (i hope) and like my hobby, so the time, the money spent is the price I agree to waste. But like one life is not enough for this hobby, prioritize is the way.
With one of my speakers, if I change a cap in the source, or just add or remove something I can hear a difference and I love that...but the goal can be far away. because sometimes you have to reduce the size of your speakers in your room and not spend time with wires, amps, tubes, solid state,... If you loose to much time with details, you loose the enjoyment goal...it's time management. I know it I spent 16 years with a too brighty speakers but learn a lot with that, but loose time with pleasure to listen better system.
I think you heard something, but what correlation between the change and the way it's possible to do with that to have consistency with results is another story (like wires, we know all the theory, practice is another story but come in last in the set up chain). but We can talk of that because it's an hobby.
All this thread remenber me a french guy who maid an magnetic optimizer for negative and postive ions in air load...all people said Hurra, there was press reviews, most of them ran to make this gadget but their systems was most of the time poor and had to be optimized above in the prioritize chain in regard of the 1) point.
Pano is right in the sense that most change is question of more solid set up (glue, drivers, layout, shematics, mix of that… and you can spend a lot of money and time here too…but for surely better results than sand).
The positive way is that our knowledge is rising with tools like Internet and forums.
sorry here to be too long and write that everybody already know...but better sometimes when said again !
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.