 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
70.46.7.90
In Reply to: RE: Not DO, But WHY Speakers Require A "Break-In" Period posted by andy19191 on June 05, 2007 at 01:34:14
TG1954: I've performed this test (comparing new vs broken-in speakers of the same model) at least 5X and heard a difference between fully "broken-in" speakers and the new speakers every single time.
Andy19191: How? Making recordings in an identical manner and then comparing them would seem one possibility. Is this what you did?
TG1954: No that's not what I did. Whenever I buy a "new" audio component from an audio salon. I demand on getting their demo model. My original reasoning was a demo could be on the shelf anywhere fom 6-12 months. So if I purchased their demo as my new component I'd be extending my warranty by that 6-12 months the component had already been used.
When I'd ask for the demo model most audio salons would be reluctant to let it go, insisting I get a new-in-box model instead. But if I started walking out I could usually get the demo model! When I asked one salesperson why he didn't want to sell me the demo model at first (it was an original Carver Amazing Speaker) he replied with what I thought at that time was "Because it's "broken." So I asked to hear a new-in-box vs this "broken" speaker. Being as how I was purchasing the demo and they needed to setup another pair he said "OK!" So we used the exact same recording, on the exact same system and compared the sound of a well-used demo speaker against a new out of the box speaker of the same model. The differences were quite large. I looked at the salesperson and said if that's a "broken" speaker it sure sounds better to me! The salesperson looked at me and laughed. Then he said "I said it's BROKE IN not BROKEN!" That's when I first learned about and actually heard a speaker that was "broke in". So Andy that's the process I use for this test. Same recording, same system exchanging the used speaker for a new speaker of the same model. I realize you don't believe that's a fair test, but I disagree.
=====================================================================
TG1954: However once these drivers have been flexed and moved through their normal usage they become more pliable, and they drivers adjust to a state of used flexibility that the new drivers don't have.
Andy19191: Indeed but how long does it take before the change becomes too small to be audible?
TG1954: This will depend on the materials used. I personally believe that most speakers are basically optimally broken in anywhere from 50-100 hrs, of course it could take more of less hours as well. It MUST also be stated that speakers will continue to break-in naturally throughout their lifespan, it's simply a fact that the most noticeable amount will occur early on. The reason for this is the greatest amount of change occurs at first. No one with any real understanding of the process is saying the speakers will never get worse. Eventually they will, but after they're initially broken in, that will be a long way down the road. In fact it will most likely be so slow and gradual that you won't even hear the deterioration until there's a serious problem which requires intervention to repair, that's why speakers eventually need to be reconed, surrounds need to be replaced or voice coils realigned.
========================================================================
Andy19191: How much "burn in" is typically performed before measuring to make matched pairs of drivers? Note that this operation will raise the price of the drivers and so is a good test of what is really worth paying for by people who almost certainly know what they are doing.
TG1954: Andy with this you're asking an audiophile a question that a speaker designer/manufacturer should really answer. What I believe happens is the OEM designer/manufacturer of the driver and the designer/manufacturer of the speakers that use them, developed the drivers/speakers in question by basing it's performance on what an "optimally" broken in driver/speaker sounds like. I'm sure initially they test a few pairs to be sure they sound the same when broken in. That's all part of their R&D. Once satisfied the drivers/speakers all break in as close to the same as they can possibly achieve, they manufacter the speakers with unbroken in drivers. So most of the cost is in R&D.
=====================================================================
TG1954: All anyone would has to do to verify this would be to go to their local audio dealer and ask them to directly compare a set of their well used demo speakers with a pair of the same speakers taken new out of a box in front of you.
Andy19191: This is not comparing apples with apples because the variability between speakers is far too large. You must compare a speaker with itself after "burning in" if this is the objective.
TG1954: Except for the most ardent scientific testing and the L.F.O.'s here on PHP, comparing a new-in-box speaker vs a speaker that's been used for 50-100hrs would serve as a good enough means of performing this test. Besides Andy you naysayers here are always saying how poor our audio memory is. So how is anyone supposed to remember what the speaker sounded like 50-100 hrs earlier? I believe if we took a group of people and performed the same test a few different times by comparing a demo speaker vs new-in-box speaker and "IF" they consistantly heard the same types of differences. That would be evidence enough.
That said I think your idea of comparing a speaker with itself after "burning in" has some merit. It would be interesting to see if the same speaker measured differently if taken from new-in-box to about 50-100hrs later and then changed minimally after that. Andy in physics it's a known phenomenon that materials with mechanical movement will have a physical change and eventual deterioration over a period of time and that's what speakers are doing when "breaking in". So I have to admit it really amazes me that all the objectivists and specs/measurements crowd here on PHP who are always ridiculing subjectivists for having a "but audio is special" attitude, are by claiming speakers do NOT "break in" are in fact the group saying "but audio is special."
Thetubeguy1954
Follow Ups:
x
> So Andy that's the process I use for this test. Same recording, same
> system exchanging the used speaker for a new speaker of the same model. I
> realize you don't believe that's a fair test, but I disagree.
You have explained your experiment and the basis for your conclusions which is good. Indeed the conclusion you have drawn about one variable is not logical in the presence of the other variables. You seem to know this even though you protest. That is fine, your beliefs are your beliefs and you have not, as far as I can tell, attempted to be misleading.
> I personally believe that most speakers are basically optimally broken
> in anywhere from 50-100 hrs, of course it could take more of less hours
> as well.
What is the basis for this? Current practice is a lot closer to 50-100 seconds.
> Andy with this you're asking an audiophile a question that a speaker
> designer/manufacturer should really answer.
Not really. I was asking a question someone with a hobby interest in speakers would probably know having read a few articles on how speakers are made. Not only do drivers have to settle down or break in after manufacture but the properties also vary from driver to driver. How this is handled by the manufacturers of cheaper mass market speakers is not the same as that for low volume expensive speakers.
> So how is anyone supposed to remember what the speaker sounded like
> 50-100 hrs earlier?
The way it is usually done is to measure and/or record it.
Andy19191: You have explained your experiment and the basis for your conclusions which is good. Indeed the conclusion you have drawn about one variable is not logical in the presence of the other variables. You seem to know this even though you protest. That is fine, your beliefs are your beliefs and you have not, as far as I can tell, attempted to be misleading.
TG1954: I appreciate your acknowledging that at the very least I am tesing different things. Most poeple here on both sides of the coin have extremely strong POVs, but seldom do any of them talk about testing anything. I'd like you to explain what all these other variables you believe exist are. As I see it when using the exact same recording and the exact same system there's only one real variable, the broken in vs the non-broken in speaker. So no I don't seem to know what you're speaking about as you say and hence my protest. Nor have I attempted to be misleading which you agree with. But why would I be misleading? I have nothing to gain in this debate, no one does. Whether or not speakers break in or not won't affect my system, nor would it affect speaker sales as far as I can tell.
=========================================================================
TG1954: I personally believe that most speakers are basically optimally broken in anywhere from 50-100 hrs, of course it could take more of less hours as well.
Andy19191: What is the basis for this? Current practice is a lot closer to 50-100 seconds.
TG1954: That's your opinion Andy, but many speaker manufacturers seem to disagree with you as witnessed by these remarks taken from their owners manuels.
THIEL Break-In - The CS3.7s, like most speakers, require a period of playing before they perform optimally. The time required depends on how loudly the speakers are played; more time is required if played softly, less if played loudly. At least 50 hours at moderately loud levels are required before the speaker is performing near optimum. You should notice even more improvement after 100 hours of playing.
MARTIN-LOGAN Break-In - When you first begin to play your Summit speakers, they will sound a bit bass shy. This is due to the high quality, long-life components used in our woofer. Our custom made, butyl surround woofer requires approximately 72 hours of break-in at 90 dB (moderate listening levels) before any critical listening. The break-in requirements of the crossover components (and, to a lesser degree, the stator) are equivalent.
DYNAUDIO Break-In - The moving parts of a newly manufactured Confidence loudspeaker have been acoustically checked after production, but nevertheless are not as flexible as they need to be for optimum results to be realized. The higher the quality of any driver system, the more demanding the loudspeaker will be regarding time for running-in the system. A newly unpacked Dynaudio loudspeaker therefore requires several weeks running/playing to reach its optimum performance capability. After that period, a couple of minutes before every listening session will be helpful to ‘warm up’ the loudspeakers.
ENERGY Break-In - It is VITAL that your new Veritas i™ Series speakers be allowed to break In properly before you perform any precise set up procedures, system adjustments, and before you play them at higher volume levels. The best method of performing the break in is to play a full range musical passage at a moderate level as long as possible. Utilizing the repeat function on your CD or DVD player can assist greatly. Optimum sound will not be achieved until approximately 100 hours of playing time. After break-in, the volume level can be increased. Do not play the speakers at higher levels until the break in process has been completed. The transducers need to “loosen up”, and until this occurs, damage can result to the transducers.
Andy what advantage is there for a speaker manufacturer to tell a client in so many words Our speakers won't sound as good as they can for 100 hrs or so? If this was an audiophile myth as objectivists would have us believe wouldn't it be a marketing advantage for a speaker manufacturer to proclaim: Unlike many other speakers our Ecstasy speakers sound great right out of the box with no break-in period required? Afterall objectivists are always telling us audiophiles hear what they're told to hear, no? So if a person read that statement in their Ecstasy speaker manuel they should hear the speakers sound great out of the box, no?
I believe this disclosure about the speaker's break-in period by these different speaker companies (and I choose some fairly expensive speakers) illustrates they know their speakers require a break-in period. Therefore they don't want their clients who heard fully broken in demo models in an audio salon to be disappointed by the sound of a new unbroken-in speaker added to their system at home.
=========================================================================
TG1954: So how is anyone supposed to remember what the speaker sounded like 50-100 hrs earlier?
Andy19191: The way it is usually done is to measure and/or record it.
TG1954: The problem with your idea is that once the speaker has broken-in it sounds different. So playing the original recording of that speaker unbroken-in on that now broken in speaker will sound different just because it's broken in. What I propose as a possible better test would be to take two identical sets of new unbroken-in speakers and play one song on both to see if they sound the same. If they do, disconnect one set and leave it next to the pair breaking in (that way they're both exposed to the same effects of heat, humidity, sunlight etc) Now continue playing the other set for 50-100hrs. After 50-100hrs reconnect the set that was disconnected and play the same song on both. If they now sound different, it has to be due to the one pair being broken in, because they originally sounded the same and the ONLY thing that has changed is one pair was played for 50-100hrs.
Thetubeguy1954
> I'd like you to explain what all these other variables you believe exist
> are.
The variability between drivers, not having speakers in the same place, slow switching, etc... A rational approach would be to measure the changes since this is both more sensitive and more informative about what is changing.
> But why would I be misleading? I have nothing to gain in this debate, no
> one does.
Hmmm... so people are posting here to dispassionately learn?
> Andy what advantage is there for a speaker manufacturer to tell a client
> in so many words Our speakers won't sound as good as they can for 100 hrs
> or so?
It is an interesting question and I do not have a wholly satisfactory answer. I made a brief effort to find out from people that work with methods for measuring speaker driver parameters but without success. The only reasonable data I found after a very brief google was 10 seconds to effectively break in the suspension which is consistent with my prior knowledge but it is difficult to find reliable information among the audiophile nonsense. A possibility exists that new materials for some drivers may have an influence in this respect but I have no evidence to support it.
One can speculate about reducing the number of returned speakers, keeping up the audiophile credentials and similar but it is not a wholly satisfactory answer without a bit of substance and my knowledge on the marketing side of things is small.
> The problem with your idea is that once the speaker has broken-in it
> sounds different.
It is not my idea, it is what engineers do.
TG1954: I'd like you to explain what all these other variables you believe exist are.
Andy19191: The variability between drivers, not having speakers in the same place, slow switching, etc... A rational approach would be to measure the changes since this is both more sensitive and more informative about what is changing.
TG1954: Andy I think you're picking at nits now. Most if not all highend speaker manufacturers keep driver variability to a minimum. I doubt many, if any people could tell the difference with any reliabilty between two sets of identical speakers that are broken in or between two sets of identical speakers that are unbroken in, so no I don't believe that's an issue of course it could always be tested if the need be. As far not having speakers in the same place when comparing two sets of identical speakers with one set being broken in & the other set unbroken in, one need simply exchange the positions of the speakers when comparing them. I've heard the difference between broken in & unbroken in speakers and the differences are sufficient enough as to allow the time to exchange postions.
========================================================================
TG1954: But why would I be misleading? I have nothing to gain in this debate, no one does.
Abdy19191: Hmmm... so people are posting here to dispassionately learn?
TG1954: I don't know Andy do you have hidden agendas? Perhaps you simply like arguing or refuting anything a subjectivist says? I personally come here out of a love of audio and music. I come here to learn. I come here to speak of what I've learned through my experiences via 40 years in this hobby. I come here to speak about tests I've done. When I said why would I be misleading I was refering to the topic of speaker break in. What do I possible stand to again if they do or don't break in? It would certainly be to my advantage as an audiophile/music lover to have my new speakers sound their optimum new out of the box rather than some 50-100hrs later, no? It would also an advantage as a speaker manufactuer/dealer to have their new speakers sound their optimum new out of the box rather than some 50-100hrs later too, no? That's what I meant when I said: "I have nothing to gain in this debate, no one does." Maybe you come here for different more malicious reasons than I do?
=========================================================================
TG1954: Andy what advantage is there for a speaker manufacturer to tell a client in so many words Our speakers won't sound as good as they can for 100 hrs or so?
Andy19191: It is an interesting question and I do not have a wholly satisfactory answer. I made a brief effort to find out from people that work with methods for measuring speaker driver parameters but without success. The only reasonable data I found after a very brief google was 10 seconds to effectively break in the suspension which is consistent with my prior knowledge but it is difficult to find reliable information among the audiophile nonsense. A possibility exists that new materials for some drivers may have an influence in this respect but I have no evidence to support it.
TG1954: Andy you readily admit that you don't have a wholly satisfactory answer and you've only made a a brief effort to find out from people that work with methods for measuring speaker driver parameters but without success. Yet you chalk up speaker break to being audiophile nonsense? Your brief effort found something that said it takes only 10 seconds to effectively break in the suspension and that's the only reasonable data you found? Why is that reasonable because it's consistent with your prior beliefs? I've already given you direct quotes from speaker manufacture's with prices ranging from a minimum of $4K to $12K which certainly aren't cheap speakers by anyone's definition. I guess this is all more audiophile nonsense because it doesn't agree with your previous beliefs even though you cannot find any evidence to dispute their claims?
I've also noticed you've completely ignored my suggested proposal at how to investigate and examine this phenomenon further. I further suggest this test be done with the speakers hidden*
1) Take two identical sets of new unbroken-in speakers and play one song on both to see if they sound the same to a group of people who:
a) listen to the speakers individually.
b) record whether the speakers sound the same or not individually.
c) leave individually.
2) If the consensus is the two identical sets of new unbroken-in speakers do sound the same:
a) disconnect one set.
b) play the other set for 50-100hrs.
c) leave the disconnected pair next to the pair breaking in (that way they're both exposed to the same affects of heat, humidity, sunlight etc)
3) After 50-100hrs reconnect the one set that wasn't broken in, have the original group of people return and have them:
a) listen to both sets of speakers using the same song used in step #1 individually.
c) record whether the speakers sound the same or not individually.
d) leave individually.
4) If the two sets of identical speakers now sound different to these same people that previously thought these speakers sounded the same, it would make sense that the differences heard would be due to the one pair being broken in for 50-100hrs. For in this case the ONLY thing that has changed between the two sets of speakers is one pair was played for 50-100hrs. Other than that both sets have been exposed to the same affects of heat, humidity, sunlight etc.
If that isn't a satisfactory test for you than that we'll just have to agree to disagree. It's the best this non-scientist can do. But I'm definitely not going to continue debating this topic with someone who cannot find any proof to dispute what the speaker manufacturers say and what I hear, simply because it doesn't conform with your previous beliefs, thus it must be audiophile nonsense. Those actions are your part are hardly following the scientific approach you espouse and hold so dearly...
* the reason I suggest hiding the speakers is to prevent any biases objectivists are always complaining about from interfering with the tests. This is one time where I'll agree that seeing two identical sets of speakers might bias the people in the test from believing there could possibly be a difference in how two identical sets of speakers sound. Especially if they are objectivists!
Thetubeguy1954
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
