Burn In

Status
Not open for further replies.
Member
Joined 2016
Paid Member
I'm with Jan. If you were right, and thermal effects were designed in (or rather not designed out) then the user guide should tell you, and tell you how to know it's at optimum. I used to work with some big RF stuff, that needed to warm up - it monitored itself and would not go to operate mode until ready.
 
Change in parameter with respect to temperature is referred to as tempco (temperature coefficient).

Normallly a designer will double tempco to compensate for aging if drift with time is not specified.

Proper design takes this into account.

A good design will sound best within its specified temperature operating range.
 
I'm with Jan. If you were right, and thermal effects were designed in (or rather not designed out) then the user guide should tell you, and tell you how to know it's at optimum. I used to work with some big RF stuff, that needed to warm up - it monitored itself and would not go to operate mode until ready.

I've a bit of prototype DCS bit of equipment that won't switch it's relays on until warmed up. Not sure if the commercial products do that too..

All the shoulds and shouldn'ts. Expectations, which when not met lead one to draw conclusions. My conclusion would first be that those expectations may not be met ..
 
I think the Gimp hit the nail on the head. "Burn in" used to have a different meaning, even in audio. It meant stressing devices to weed out early failures (as in stop working or just go out of spec). There were a few high-end audio companies (most of which would not qualify as high end now since they were based on engineering and were affordable to mere mortals) which advertised that they subjected all their products to x hours/days of burn in, then measured them to verify they were within spec prior to shipping. This was a QA feature and a brag about quality and durability. There was never a suggestion that it improved performance in any way. Then the bizarros came along and started saying that their burn in process improved the sound of their products, with no evidence, and then the real high end said it was our job to burn in their products for a few hundred hours before listening. Burn in ceased to be about QA and became a secret sauce. This is an example of the dumbing down of our society.
 
Jim Hagerman, who seems to be a qualified engineer and respected designer, has a device called the Frybaby. He’s given some explanation or another on his site which might be worth reading.

I don’t have an informed opinion on the matter. I also don’t have any connection to Jim besides that I built the original Bugle phono preamp. I don’t own a Frybaby or burn in my electronics. I’d rather focus my energy on less fringe / debated opportunities for advancing sound.

But he may provide a point of view that has the least magical thinking / pseudoscience involved. How much or how little that is will likely be a subject of debate.

I do however feel a (quite short) warm up / thermal stabilization period for a device on turn on can be relevant depending on the device in question.

As DF mentioned- settling of Electrolytic caps. Perhaps thermal stabilization of JFETs or Tube warm up. These are minor and resolve fairly quickly. I believe this is a different beast entirely than what the “Burn-In crowd” is advocating.

I think differentiation should be made between after turn on and some kind of long term effect lasting through power cycles, or which effects cables or whatnot.
 
Last edited:
PS, to the OP:

Something sounds harsh to me usually when I’m in an off mood. I’ve found if burn in is required it’s usually me that requires “burn in”.... I wish they made a device for that.... oh yeah, they did and it’s called scotch!

Or the volume has changed. Or the track has changed. Or my seating position has changed or something else independent of the gear has changed and the problem is one of perception.

For me, when I hear what I like- it’s immediately apparent, it’s repeatable and its rather immune to most of the things people like us get rather antsy about. Of course, you can refine from there and there’s little areas to address but the basic gist remains unchanged.

Moving parts take precedence of course- speakers, a turntable, (id also throw acoustics of a room in there).... given that the devices are competently designed.

Also this is clear (for me) whether its been hastily put together in a garage or in an immaculately designed listening room, whether I’m listening to an iPod connected with a $8 Gas Station mini to RCA splitter playing 128kbps mp3 tracks or a state of the art DAC playing FLAC files, or whether it’s been “burned in” or not, or whether it has fancy silver interconnect cables or.... well, you get the idea.

If something sounds harsh consistently there’s something wrong, is what I’m trying to say. Something is wrong either with you or your choice of listening material or with the equipment.

Start at the speakers and work your way backwards. Use measurable criteria to avoid the decent of conversation into the usual armed encampments.

Create a dialogue that reveals ways forward toward solutions rather than gridlock in opinion and conjecture.

(I.e. do some work. Measure something, provide your findings and then ask questions.)
 
Last edited:
You are probably correct, but first allow me to tickle your brain or is it warm you up

An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.


What do you see ,sir? describe in your own words

Disclaimer: I am not sure whether or not that there are images or sounds that may hack your brain, resulting in undesired or desired effects
That's the sort of claptrap that the believers in this sort of snake-oil spout.

Andy
 
Last edited:
I like what am seeing so far, which is probably biased ;) and probably leading, but whichever the case, words such as secret sauce have sprung up, there are components that I have bought from young manufacturers (those in the market less than 20 years, although this phenomenon also affects some products from veteran manufacturers) ranging from triple A battery chargers , DVD players, you name it that have exhibited this phenomenon, some were returned, some burned in and work like a gem now, some were thrown in the bin without expending resources to investigate the phenomenon further.

Burn in has been mentioned from four dimensions
1. It does not exist , pure snake oil that was made up
2. Weeding out manufacture defects by stress testing the devices
3. Secret recipe to change electrical and mechanical characteristics of the devices from cables, capacitors, semiconductors, etc probably through electron redistribution
4. Warming up semi conductors to bring them up to their sweet spot

The questions still remain as post one related to dimension 3 in this list
 
Theres nothing like adding a little bias to your brains processing, normally your brain when it doesn’t recognize something and the intensity is low and it doesn’t perceive a threat will simply adjust its activation function or filter to filter out the input, look at the following image for 30 seconds and watch how quickly your brains filter kicks in to mark it as low threat noise and clean it up

235.jpg


On the other hand your brain is quick to draw your attention to a possible issue, thus we process certain types of distortion differently from how instruments measure it, believe it or not the lines below are parallel
218.jpg


PS, to the OP:

Something sounds harsh to me usually when I’m in an off mood. I’ve found if burn in is required it’s usually me that requires “burn in”.... I wish they made a device for that.... oh yeah, they did and it’s called scotch!
 
Last edited:
The only Burn In I have ever experienced was in the early 1980s while working for Texas Instruments in the Industrial Controls Division.

We had the entire back of one manufacturing module fitted with "Burn In Racks" inside temperature controlled chambers.

Newly manufactured products would be mounted on racks and power cycled at elevated temperature for 7 days (60C IIRC) with a new design to determine the time for infant mortality to be established. After the initial characterization, products usually only were burned in for 24 Hrs.

This was to eliminate component defects which resulted in early failure (which at the time were very high) before products were shipped to customers.

The defects were not shift in component value of discrete components, but rather failure of integrated circuits.

This description is what "burn in" is.Nelson Pass mentioned "burning in" his amps for a couple of days.
 
Certainly, although quality today is probably 100x better than it was in the early 1980s.

Two discrete components come to mind that we had problems with were Al Electrolytic caps and Tant Electrolytic caps.

Tant caps were also particularly sensitive to ESD damage in handling.

TI was performing 100% incoming inspection of ICs on GenRad test equipment. I saw a report once that showed a 38,000 ppm failure rate of one batch of 74LSxxx logic parts.

Yes, that was 38% failure to meet specification!
 
Perhaps I can offer my own perspective from experience upon burning in. I am running a battery powered playback system in the hayloft of our barn. It has no heating or insulation, it can be very hot or very dry or very wet or very damp, often all in the same day. It is often windy and it rains a lot, and with a tin roof just inches above head, can be deafeningly loud. In other words, there is often a lot to tune out before I can tune in.

I play WAV's from a iPod shuffle into a 7 band guitar eq pedal into a valve preamp buffer into a low powered class d mono chip amp into a front loaded horn speaker fitted with an alnico guitar speaker driver. It has taken quite awhile to set up and run in, so to speak. My past experience with electronics has shown that bedding in takes anywhere from a few minutes to maybe 24 hours at the most. The valves in the preamp took quite a bit longer, perhaps 48 hours of play time. The alnico speaker driver, with its woven cloth surround, took about 100 hours to finally reveal its capabilities, albeit with careful and judicious use of eq.

As for burn in? I'm really not sure about all that. I like to think of my playback as a synergistic expression of the sum of its parts, including the batteries and cables and interconnects, and how it all intersects with temperature, humidity and barometric pressure.

Admittedly, some days are better than others, but what I have is still very good for listening to music. Which is a two way experience, for as the playback has bedded in and settled down, then so have I. It is the music that counts, and my playback, however modest it maybe, serves the music well. I have more or less stopped thinking about the playback, so I guess I have 'burned in' along with it.

Yes, I can well believe that burn in is a demonstrable and measurable phenomenon, but the real burn in happens mostly in the heart and between the ears.
 
Burn in has been mentioned from four dimensions

3. Secret recipe to change electrical and mechanical characteristics of the devices from cables, capacitors, semiconductors, etc probably through electron redistribution.
Burn in can change mechanical properties, 'probably through electron distribution'?

Since the word 'probably' means 'almost certainly', its use is entirely inappropriate in this context.

Even the use of the word 'possibly' would be impossible to justify.

Electrons are constantly being redistributed in components such as capacitors - that's how electronics works dontcha know! :rolleyes:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.