Hi there, i'm almost set to complete my HT setup and put everything in place etc. but i've been reading in posts by other people regarding breaking in new speakers?

the speakers i have are these:

http://www.svsound.com/products-spks-scs01.cfm

and this sub:

http://www.creativesound.ca/details.php?model=SD12LT350

So how do u go about warming them up/breaking them in?

do you mainly concern yourself with the loudspeakers or do both the loudspeakers and sub need to be broken in in unisen?

the very little i've found regarding this issue seems to be coming from people who already know what they are doing, while I am clueless lol

any info/referance would be amazing, thank you

I don't have a link for you but in doing some reading a couple of years ago, the phrase, "Don't be gentle." came up in reference to speaker break-in. This was from someone in Britain in the theatrical/concert business. Being gentle doesn't break speakers in at all, apparently. Kent

Nothing to it really... just leave them playing. The break in thing isn't really to protect speakers from damage or ensure proper functioning, or anything like that. People just mean that they should sound better once they're broken in. Many leave them running constantly to get there sooner. But there is no "way" to break them in... they just get broken in as they're used. Kapeesh?

oh ok..so either way without a "break in" period, using them fairly consistantly will get them to that same stage anyways?

oh ok..so either way without a "break in" period, using them fairly consistantly will get them to that same stage anyways?

correct. its just like breaking in a new car to get all the gears moving smoothly, breaking in speakers is to lossen up so all the mechanical part of a speaker can get used to the motion.

The classic trick to reduce radiated noise during a "forced" breakin (like the kind you might have to do to get breakin accomplished and still have evaluation time all within a 30 day trial period) is to place the pair of speakers right next to one another (face to face if they're not rear ported),
but switch the wires on one of the speakers so it's exactly out of phase with the other. It's amazing how little sound escapes, yet the speakers are working just the same.
Remember to switch the wires back when you listen :)

With a mono signal....not stereo.

Speakers are made of modern materials that do not "break in". Modern chemists pride themselves with making materials with extremely tight tolerances. Manufacturers depend upon these tight tolerances to be able to predict how their products will perform over time. Why? because returns are the deathnell of manufacturers. My Rockets sound exactly like they did when I bought them. If they didn't, I would have raised hell a long time ago.

Speaker manufacturers would be freaking out if their speakers changed their sound after leaving the factory. The Quality Control guys would lose all their hair, and their jobs. Change, for manufacturing materials, is not good.

Your speakers will "break-in" the first second you play them, Sniperslayer. And hopefully they won't "warm-up" too much. :)

The reason manufacturers probably suggest a "break-in" period is that they want your ears to become accustomed to the speakers' sound, making it less likely for you to return them if you are initially unhappy with their sound.

Your speakers will "break-in" the first second you play them, Sniperslayer. And hopefully they won't "warm-up" too much. :)

The reason manufacturers probably suggest a "break-in" period is that they want your ears to become accustomed to the speakers' sound, making it less likely for you to return them if you are initially unhappy with their sound.

i work in a nightclub with subs that break glasses, i think anything with any sort of quality will sound wonderfull lol

Your speakers will "break-in" the first second you play them, Sniperslayer. And hopefully they won't "warm-up" too much. :)

The reason manufacturers probably suggest a "break-in" period is that they want your ears to become accustomed to the speakers' sound, making it less likely for you to return them if you are initially unhappy with their sound.

I totally agree, it is your ears doing the breaking-in rather than the speakers.

Speakers are made of modern materials that do not "break in". Modern chemists pride themselves with making materials with extremely tight tolerances. Manufacturers depend upon these tight tolerances to be able to predict how their products will perform over time. Why? because returns are the deathnell of manufacturers. My Rockets sound exactly like they did when I bought them. If they didn't, I would have raised hell a long time ago.

Speaker manufacturers would be freaking out if their speakers changed their sound after leaving the factory. The Quality Control guys would lose all their hair, and their jobs. Change, for manufacturing materials, is not good.

Agree. There is no such thing as speaker break-in -- it is you who gets used to the speakers.

The same people say that powercords "break in" and interconnects "break in." It is just silly.

Paul Barton, who started PSB and designs their speakers says that he has measured tiny changes but they are far too small to be audible, and that he believes that it is your ears getting used to the sound. This makes some sense in that, my Paradigm Monitor 11 speakers sound balanced to me, but in an A/B against my friend's previous Studio 60s, the tonal balance was different. Mine had more bass and his had more midrange and lower treble. Listening to his first and then switching to mine made mine sound like there was a hole in the midrange, but I don't get that impression when I play mine alone. Listening to mine for a while and then switching to his made his sound lacking in bass. I had the same impression when auditioning the Paradigm Studio 100 series IV against a B&W 703 or 704. The B&W sounded like it had a hole in the midrange in the A/B after playing the Paradigm for a few minutes. I think that any change often sounds wrong at first, but over time you adjust and the sonic character of the new speakers becomes what you expect. You think the recesssed treble has opened up or the harsh treble has smoothed out, but nothing of the sort has happened. You have just come to accept it as normal once you're used to it.

I am not so sure. I was recently visiting a store where a customer bought a pair of their showroom speakers because they didn't want to wait a week for the order to come in. That day they had a pair of brand new out of the box speakers and the owner was talking about how differently they sounded than the pair he had just sold. I put faith in what he said. He had no reason to lie about it, and he's definitely one who could notice the difference. At that point he was accustomed to those speakers (his ear was broken in, so to say), and the only thing that changed was the # of hours of play. He noticed a difference.

Then again, he had a chance to move demo speakers which had been on his shop floor for a while.

True, that was good for him, but I don't think that says anything to the detriment of his opinion on the sound. This guy always leaves stuff running to break it in faster, a cost which should add up. He's not doing it for nothing. I should also mention I know another dealer who WON'T sell floor models because he doesn't want to go to the trouble of breaking in more gear than he has to.

Well first off analogies with cars are way off-base; speakers don't have metal on metal moving parts that need running in so they'll function better.

JBL Pro, people who look at speakers as tools, say that the TS specs of woofers will settle in after a few hours use, they imply that the process takes a far shorter time. The first few strokes of the spider (it's the spider and not the surround that supplies most of a driver's stiffness) "crack" the stiffening agents in the cloth.

Comparisons between new speakers and "broken in" speakers of the same type must allow for production variences in the product and the fact that the speakers compared have seldom shared the same space. And we know how much much room and placement effects sound, don't we? Far more than "break-in".

In any event in over 35 years with this hobby I've never heard bad speakers get good.

Most speaker manufacturers will tell you that if any break in occurs it is within the first 5-10 seconds. It is your ears/mind that are adjusting, not the speakers. Just crank it up and enjoy. :)

Sorry to burst the bubble of the non-break-in crowd with all due respect, but Danny Richie of GR Research did some scientific experiments with measurable results proving that break-in does affect the output sound quality. You can find his results posted on his website, http://www.gr-research.com/burnin.shtm

It is a simple fact that the fibers, etc do change due to vibration, they stretch and flex, pure and simple. Virtually every manufacturer recommends that speakers break-in between 50-150 hours thru constant play at moderate volume levels. I have yet to come across one that says only a few seconds are needed

Break in is quite real, whether or not you can hear depends on you, but the differences are audible.

Here is my take on speaker break-in.

This strangest thing happened yesterday! Somehow my ERA D4 speakers found 2.5 DB after 6 months of use. I had calibrated them about 13 times over that time period and every single time I would end up with +4 DB for the mains and -1.5 for the Center.

Then yesterday I decided to recalibrate because I noticed I was not getting 75 DB at reference volume anymore. I checked to make sure the “Night” mode was not on and then recalibrated. It came out to +1.5 for the mains and -3.5 for the center channel. I thought that something must have messed up the calibration. I checked it with my SPL. It was dead on(75.0 DB all the way around). I recalibrated 3 more times. Each time it always came out the same. The weird thing is that the rears came out the same they had always been at -1.5 DB for the left and -2.5 DB for the right(The surrounds are not symmetric due to room constraints).

So how could this happen? My system has never sounded better! It was just like the first time I heard them after using that crappy Blose stuff for so many years. Is there a break-in period for these babies? Has anyone else experienced this?

I did change my room. However, it was totally insignificant. I aligned the front speakers. The left speaker was about 1 inch farther back than the right before. Other than that the room is exactly as it has always been.

I had a demo DVD that I made about 1.5 months ago. I have listened to it countless times and I actually marked what volumes I could hit with it. I would do between 8.5 and -9.5 DB for everything but the “Pulse” track. I had to drop back to -15 on Pulse because my sub was the limiting factor.

Now I got all the way to -5 DB on the regular tracks and I am still stuck at -15 for Pulse. It looks like the sub and surrounds are outputting the same sound they always have. However, the Center and mains have found some new life!

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=11504213&postcount=644

Sorry to burst the bubble of the non-break-in crowd with all due respect, but Danny Richie of GR Research did some scientific experiments with measurable results proving that break-in does affect the output sound quality. You can find his results posted on his website, http://www.gr-research.com/burnin.shtm

What is presented there is a bunch of "one-off" measurements.

What would the results look like if he measured the same parameters with the same woofer 20 times in a row? How much variability would there be between the measurements? You can't see that from a single presentation of the "data".

And what would the results look like if he had measured the same parameters on 20 different (but identical) woofers 20 times in a row? Would there be so much variability in the "data" that any differences could be considered negligible? You can't know this from simply looking at one set of measurements, done on one single woofer, one time.

What is the standard deviation of each of those measurements, both with the same woofer and between woofers? How "repeatable" are the results?

Break in is quite real, whether or not you can hear depends on you, but the differences are audible.


What?!!? It's audible whether you hear it or not?

Did you think this through before you posted it?

"Virtually every manufacturer recommends that speakers break-in between 50-150 hours thru constant play at moderate volume levels"




"Virtually every" eh?

And this outrageous claim is based on what?

Suffice to say, break-in is very real. :)

Here is my take on speaker break-in. ........................
:rolleyes: :D

Even if there is a such thing as "speaker break-in" it doesn't produce such changes in output.

Look elsewhere for what may be causing your "measuring" differences.

We're not talking about breaking in a baseball glove or a new pair of sneakers, here. :)

Tom & Silva:
I talk to speaker manufacturers weekly, every single speaker we have reviewed the manufacturer recommended break-in time. They may not list it in their literature, but if you call or email them they will confirm it.

Danny Richie is as honest as they come in this industry, his reputation with his customers is phenomenal, his competition holds him in the same high regard. If you read his paper, there is no bias, it is pure science. (I want to point out that GR-Research does not advertise with my e-zine, i have no gain in supporting his work). Yes, it would be nice to have other drivers tested, hopefully some other scientists will take this on.

We all hear differently, but I know that with the dozen or so speakers I have broken in, the difference is absolutely audible to me.

I read the Danny Richie article and it is indeed interesting. It would probably not pass a scientific journal's statistical requirements but nonetheless it does raise some interesting questions.

If, as the article and the responses to it seem to say, the primary reason is the creation of micro-cracks in the spiders epoxy so that it becomes more flexible, is this process really that well understood that speaker makers are sure that every speaker will become flexible in such a way that it sounds better after break-in? If not, then arent the manufacturers asking consumers to gamble on this? If it is guaranteed to be so, why not do a breakin for each speaker prior to sending them out so that there is no disappointment when the customer first hears the speakers in their house. I know it will be argued that it will be costly for manufacturers to do this, but if it creates a better product why not do this? Surely, the small increase in cost, especially for high-end sepakers is only a drop in the bucket. In fact, its something that could be done with the drivers even before the speaker is assembled.

I

You've already answered that one. It's like the posters in Ikea that say:

"'Why do I have to assemble this myself?'

So you don't have to pay for someone in a factory to assemble it for you."

The factory has limited space, specialized machinery, blah blah blah. Using their facilities on break in the consumer can do at home is a waste of their capital. Not to mention that having every driver need to spend 100 extra hours @ the factor is bad for turnover and introduces another limiting variable to the # of units that can be manufactured per run.

Tom & Silva:
I talk to speaker manufacturers weekly, every single speaker we have reviewed the manufacturer recommended break-in time. They may not list it in their literature, but if you call or email them they will confirm it.You assume, naively, that their recommendations are rooted in audibility issues and not for the consumer to keep them longer in the hopes that they are kept and not returned.

Danny Richie is as honest as they come in this industry, his reputation with his customers is phenomenal, his competition holds him in the same high regard.
Pure speculation upon your part that entirely overlooks lemming-like fan behavior.

If you read his paper, there is no bias, it is pure science. (I want to point out that GR-Research does not advertise with my e-zine, i have no gain in supporting his work). Shameless plug noted for your e-zine. As far as bias or perhaps a through lack of comprehensiveness on your part, one could with equal validity say that your embracement of speculative matters furthers your ability to obtain products for review that also make speculative claims. They can be assured they will not be challenged or critiqued. As you stated earlier, you talk to speaker manufacturers weekly. You would do well to bone up on science and hit the papers before you state with such assurance that there is no bias and that it is pure science.

We all hear differently, but I know that with the dozen or so speakers I have broken in, the difference is absolutely audible to me.Perhaps your technique is lacking being that it's rooted in the same old sighted comparisons.

A while back, I wrote the following.


Speaker break-in is not an unusual question to see on any audio forum. Generally someone's bought speakers and they're trying to figure out if those speakers are really for them. There's a lot of issues that come into play here: positioning, calibration, effects of the room. Often the person who posted the question is somewhat inexperienced and hasn't done the best job of placing the speakers. Or perhaps they've just bought the wrong speakers (but they sounded good in the store!) for the room that they're going in. The purpose of this post though, is not to deal with those issues, deserving as they may be of an in-depth discussion.

This is about the issue of speaker break-in. Scientifically, the topic of speaker break-in has been studied rather extensively using techniques such as laser interferometry, measurements of speaker parameters, and controlled listening tests.

David Clark, an AES Fellow presented "Precision Measurement of Loudspeaker Parameters", which was published in the March, 1997. Abstracting from that paper is the following quote:
"5.1 Break-In"

"A break-in process is recommended. Drive-unit storage may cause the diaphragm suspension to drift away from its normal or in-use position. Break-in, with the drive-unit axis in the in-use orientation (usually horizontal), restores the normal diaphragm position. The recommended procedure pneumatically stretches the suspension to one excursion extreme, then the other and continues to alternate, decreasing the excursion each time until x is at zero. This process can be completed in less than 1 min."

Mr. Clark also indicated that drivers which had been stored face-up or face-down sometime need 1 minute of pink noise to restore the original center position. This could also be accomplished by a few strokes of the suspension which many manufacturers do routinely when the speaker is at the end of the assembly line. This suggests that most speakers, are in fact broken in when you get them.

Further work has been performed by Tom Nousaine who has measured speaker parameters pre and post break-in as well as having conducted controlled listening tests. He has found that the Fs of the speaker falls however that is offset by a rise in Vas. Both these parameters were related to the changes in compliance that occurred. During the playing or excercising if you will of the speaker both the spider and the surround become more compliant (they move easier if you will). Additional measurements on samples of identical drivers indicated that the changes that occured pre and post breakin on a single driver were smaller than the variations within a particular lot of drivers. Since there are manufacturing tolerances for drivers this indicates that whatever changes are that occur are smaller than those of manufacturing tolerances. This further indicates that the net effect of speaker breakin is nada, nothing, zilch, forget about it, etc.

In one experiment, Nousaine used a driver that was said to need 48 hours of break-in. Placing the driver in a 1.5 cubic foot box, he found the system resonance to be 53 Hz before break in. After 48 hours the resonance was 49 Hz. After a few minutes rest, the resonance had gone back to 51 Hz. The following morning it was back to 53 Hz. This indicates that whatever small changes that occur in a driver's characteristics during playback comeback to their original state after rest.

These experiments have been performed with other drivers such as from Dynaudio with similar results. Overall this indicated that whatever changes do occur, they do not change the sound quality.

Moreover, Richard Pierce, who some may know as having designed the crossovers for the Rockets, is a well known consultant and speaker designer who has examined the parameters and behavior of thousands, if not tens of thousands of drivers. His finding also concur with Clark's and Nousaine's with regards to how drivers behave in the real world.

So if the sound quality does not change in any significant way, what then does occur? Well listening adaptation would then have to be looked upon as a very strong reason for the perception of speaker break-in. Anyone who has spent time listening to audio systems or components knows their opinions with regards to the nature of the sound changes with time. In the case of speakers, when one buys them and brings them home, you become used to the sound of that particular speaker. That sound may grow upon you or you may find there's something that you don't like about it. Nonetheless, however they sound in your particular home, it'll be different from the way they sounded either in someone elses home or the stores where you heard them.

Now I've had a few emails that I've sent to various speaker manufacturers and these are some of the replies on this subject of break-in.


We've found (as have our dealers and customers) that the most significant changes occur within the first 75-150 hours, with smaller incremental changes occurring up to a few hundred hours. After that point, you shouldn't notice much change at all, as the speakers would be broken in thoroughly. This time is the same for each model and is best accomplished by just playing music through them.



Thank you for your interest in Revel.

Todd Sutherland
Madrigal

-----Original Message-----
From:****
Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 8:37 AM
To: admin@madrigal.com
Subject: speaker breakin




Dear Sir/Madam,

Thank you for your enquiry into Krix Loudspeakers. Most speakers will benefit from a 'run in' time and our speakers are no different. We suggest running speakers at moderate listening levels for between 20 - 50 hours. After this time you should hear some differences as the components of the speakers start to 'free up',

I hope this information has helped, should you have any further queries please feel free to reply to this email.

Kind Regards

Ben Ormsby
National Consumer Sales



With all mechanical parts they do require a running in period, this ideally should be about 36 hours, what I suggest you do is listen to your speakers at a moderate level when you can over this period. Following this procedure will help prolong the life of your speakers.
Best Regards,
Gabriel O'Donohue
Customer Specialist Support
Tannoy Ltd
Tel: +01236 420199
Fax:+01236 428230
E-mail: gale.o'donohue@tannoy.co.uk



Thanks for your recent email to Definitive Technology.

In order to break-in your BP10Bs, we recommend playing them at a moderately loud volume for about 40 hours. (After this period, the suspensions on the speaker cones loosen up a bit.) Generally, you'll hear a smoother high frequency response as well as a greater openness or transparency.)

If you need any other information, please email me at cpelkowski@definitivetech.com

Thanks Again,
Chet Pelkowski
Definitive Technology



Now if studies have indicated there is no significant change during pre and post breakin and that whatever changes in driver parameters that do occur, are restored to their original values over time, one must ask the question, if the speaker companies are aware of this, and larger companies, that have access to such data as I've presented here do, what is the purpose for specifying breakin that amounts to around 40 hours, give or take? To my mind, the reasons would have to do with ensuring that the customer keeps the speakers in their home for a couple of weeks to hopefully either get used to them or to convince themselves, rightly or wrongly, that they do like the speakers. During this process of listening, the customer, as can be seen on some of the posts on this forum, is actively seeking out other users opionion, corroborations, justifications, positive/negative opinions. So myself, I would recommend that anyone purchasing speakers listen to them in their homes and if during that time, which should be well before the RETURN PERIOD, they don't like them to take them back where they bought them and rethink the choice they made. Any salesman who says you need this CD or this procedure to break-in is doing so for either a couple of reasons...they're ignorant, or they're hoping you need a little more time for the speakers to grow on you so you don't return them and he/she doesn't blow the sale and commission.

You've already answered that one. It's like the posters in Ikea that say:

"'Why do I have to assemble this myself?'

So you don't have to pay for someone in a factory to assemble it for you."

The factory has limited space, specialized machinery, blah blah blah. Using their facilities on break in the consumer can do at home is a waste of their capital. Not to mention that having every driver need to spend 100 extra hours @ the factor is bad for turnover and introduces another limiting variable to the # of units that can be manufactured per run.

In a competitive environment there would be a manufacturer who would pounce on this as their major selling advantage. The fact that they dont suggests that there is no competitive advantage to be had for pre-breakingin of speakers. Moreover, engineers are very good at creating accelerated mechanisms for most things and I am pretty sure that the cost of breaking in would rapidly diminish if indeed there is much cost in the first place. As far as the Ikea example, dont forget that you are quoting a manf. advt. The real reason they dont assemble is that it would cost a fortune to ship pre-assembled furniture, not to mention the hassle of damage and the difficulty the customer would have carting the furniture home. Also, as you may realise that stuff is low-end furniture and not high quality furniture, which is almost never user assembled.

What is really more perplexing is the fact that a speaker manufacturer who knows that their speakers are going to changes performance so radically ( and maybe unpredictably) would allow their product to leave their premises. What does it say about their quality control?

It doesn't say anything about their quality control. And yes, I believe shipping and warehouse expenses associated with greater volume are the top issues for Ikea, not assembly, but assembly is far from insignificant. Just think of the extra factory space that would be needed to assemble each piece before it goes out. This would also slow down how quickly they can get product to market. The same goes for the drivers, except that we're not talking about larger shipping and storage volume... just needing more capital and lower turnover. Any manufacturer who is willing to jack their prices up and/or lower their margin just so they can "compete" on whether or not a speaker is pre-seasoned has their priorities wrong. Consumers respond to price, sound quality, aesthetics, and reliability. Pumping resources into something a large portion of the market doesn't place value upon is senseless. I don't think you can lump in the breaking in with reliability.

Nevermind what commercial box-stuffers think, it's more interesting that in Olson's book speaker break-in isn't discussed. I gotta find my Eargle and go through it again, I don't think he held much with break-in.

Modern speaker makers are known to pander to the delusions of modern audiophiles, note the trend towards double sets of inputs for "bi-wiring" and fool's bi-amping. It's called telling the customer what he expects to hear.

It's more than that. If you refuse to put in 2 sets of inputs per speaker, then you're immediately blocking out a segment of the market that has already invested in multiple amps for bi-amping. Those people suddenly have an extra amp if they decide to go with that manufacturer. It's pretty bold to just cut those people off... but some manufacturers don't cater to those people and STILL happen to recommend break in (Focal). So what one has to do with the other might not be so clear.

Consumers respond to price, sound quality, aesthetics, and reliability.

If consumers respond to sound quality, isnt it a shame that the first time they hear a speaker is when it is at its worst!

Perhaps the reason why I'm so persistent on this issue is because initially the argument was that one can't hear the difference, but when that was challenged it suddenly became about manufacturing policies, the intentions of reviewers, the neuroses of the audiophile/stereophile community, etc. A bunch of straw man arguments... all of which say nothing about what does or doesn't happen to the sound. More or less, you're trying to tell us it's a conspiracy and we shouldn't believe it. I don't know how that resolves anything.

Yes, Usp1, that is a good point.

If consumers respond to sound quality, isnt it a shame that the first time they hear a speaker is when it is at its worst!

However most people hear speakers that are already broken in (or at the very least well on the way to being broken in) on the sales floor or 'listening room' when going to a B&M store. You are absolutely correct when people buy from the internet not previously hearing them.

Perhaps the reason why I'm so persistent on this issue is because initially the argument was that one can't hear the difference, but when that was challenged it suddenly became about manufacturing policies, the intentions of reviewers, the neuroses of the audiophile/stereophile community, etc. A bunch of straw man arguments... all of which say nothing about what does or doesn't happen to the sound. More or less, you're trying to tell us it's a conspiracy and we shouldn't believe it. I don't know how that resolves anything.
How do you reconcile that driver-driver variations are larger than break-in effects?

The reason why I went into manufacturing practices is that it always makes sense to "follow the money". WHo benefits from a controversial issue? If the proponents of an idea are the ones benefiting from that idea then one must take it with a huge grain of salt. I did not accept the idea that there are indeed differences that are audible due to break-in. I said it was interesting that the Richie article found such significant differences after break-in. The methodology used in that article is not statistically valid and would never make it through a peer-reviewed scientific journal. It is at best anecdotal evidence. Rather like midwives and delivery nurses who insist that more babies are born on full moon days even though there is no statistical evidence that it is true.

The differences found in Richie's article are not signficant nor are they offered with explanations. He does have a penchant for displaying data with a lot of signficant figures though.

It's more than that. If you refuse to put in 2 sets of inputs per speaker, then you're immediately blocking out a segment of the market that has already invested in multiple amps for bi-amping. Those people suddenly have an extra amp if they decide to go with that manufacturer. It's pretty bold to just cut those people off... but some manufacturers don't cater to those people and STILL happen to recommend break in (Focal). So what one has to do with the other might not be so clear.



Considering that most modern audiophiles don't even seem to know what bi-amping is and wouldn't know a line level crossover, whether active or passive, if one kicked them in the ass......

Answer me this. How come the old-timers didn't go on about speaker break-in? The guys who started this hobby after WW II and were far more technical than modern audiophiles? How come designers like Olson, Hilliard and PWK didn't go on about it?

Why did this come about when a drug-addled self-indulgent generation that puts more into the sizzle than the steak came into the hobby?

Now people I respect have documented changes in drivers after initial use, I'm not disputing that. It's the claims of great improvement in sound that I don't hold with.

I recently changed out the aluminum high frequency diaphragms in some 45 year old Altec 605A speakers. No improvement in sound. I'd suspect that after 45 years the diaphragms were "broken in".

Considering that most modern audiophiles don't even seem to know what bi-amping is and wouldn't know a line level crossover, whether active or passive, if one kicked them in the ass......

Answer me this. How come the old-timers didn't go on about speaker break-in? The guys who started this hobby after WW II and were far more technical than modern audiophiles? How come designers like Olson, Hilliard and PWK didn't go on about it?

Why did this come about when a drug-addled self-indulgent generation that puts more into the sizzle than the steak came into the hobby?

Now people I respect have documented changes in drivers after initial use, I'm not disputing that. It's the claims of great improvement in sound that I don't hold with.

I recently changed out the aluminum high frequency diaphragms in some 45 year old Altec 605A speakers. No improvement in sound. I'd suspect that after 45 years the diaphragms were "broken in".

I'm guessing you don't believe in speaker break-in then? :D

As far a bi-amping heres (http://www.sonicfrontiers.com/HTML/TechnicalSupport/TechSupport.html#5) a little tid bit. Yes I know, its from a company that makes amps.

I don't think anyone has ever tried to say (in this thread) that speakers will go from bad to good through break in... more like from good to slightly better. Whether or not you perceive that difference is a subjective matter, that cannot be negated by anything anyone has to say about manufacturing practices, consumer beliefs, history, science, and anything else, because it's a matter of that person's ears. I personally don't have an opinion on the matter, but I am 100% sure that some people truly believe in break in, and others don't. The important thing is that the OP got his question answered, which is that there is no wrong/right way to break them in, whether or not it's even an issue. As a bonus there was a suggestion about how to do it in a more inconspicuous matter. I don't know where else we can go with this, since we've agreed to disagree.

I don't think anyone has ever tried to say (in this thread) that speakers will go from bad to good through break in... more like from good to slightly better. Whether or not you perceive that difference is a subjective matter, that cannot be negated by anything anyone has to say about manufacturing practices, consumer beliefs, history, science, and anything else, because it's a matter of that person's ears. I personally don't have an opinion on the matter, but I am 100% sure that some people truly believe in break in, and others don't. The important thing is that the OP got his question answered, which is that there is no wrong/right way to break them in, whether or not it's even an issue. As a bonus there was a suggestion about how to do it in a more inconspicuous matter. I don't know where else we can go with this, since we've agreed to disagree.

well it can be objective.

White noise + RTA + time = is there REALLY a change.

Of course as was stated before. It can not be done just once. Has to be done numerous times.

............but when that was challenged it suddenly became about manufacturing policies, the intentions of reviewers, the neuroses of the audiophile/stereophile community, etc. A bunch of straw man arguments... all of which say nothing about what does or doesn't happen to the sound. More or less, you're trying to tell us it's a conspiracy and we shouldn't believe it. I don't know how that resolves anything.
Did you read my Post#22?



How do you reconcile that driver-driver variations are larger than break-in effects?

The differences found in Richie's article are not signficant nor are they offered with explanations. He does have a penchant for displaying data with a lot of signficant figures though.
EXACTLY

How do you reconcile that driver-driver variations are larger than break-in effects?Yes, and how does anyone reconcile the proposition that break-in always leads to improvements?

It would be to the general detriment for manufacturer's to not push for a break-in period. While the net effect is the same - your ears break-in (get used to the speaker in its new surroundings) or the characteristics of the speaker change in an audible fashion, finally settling in - there is an important distinction. If you know it's the former, you are more likely to not spend enough time with them resulting in more returns. If it's the latter, you're more likely to spend time with them resulting in less returns. This might not be so for the savvy consumer, but for one who has been largely weaned on the tecno-babble of the internet, new-age malarky shown on TV, and review magazines this distinction is not lost upon the marketing wings of many companies.

It seems obvious to me that Kentucky produces not only fine Bourbon but the clear thinking of Tom Brennan in this regard.

Yes, and how does anyone reconcile the proposition that break-in always leads to improvements?

It's quite simple Kal and the answer is in that song, "The Sun Will Come Out Tomorrow". Or maybe it's a variant of the Stockholm Syndrome. I'm not sure.

Your speakers will "break-in" the first second you play them, Sniperslayer. And hopefully they won't "warm-up" too much. :)

The reason manufacturers probably suggest a "break-in" period is that they want your ears to become accustomed to the speakers' sound, making it less likely for you to return them if you are initially unhappy with their sound.

And this is the truth. It's all marketing.

sivadselim, yes, I read that post. It is a perfectly good argument against that particular study. However, proving that one study is not statistically significant is not sufficient to prove that there is no break in effect. All that your post says is that further research is needed before we can "scientifically" "prove" that break in is a reality. The study doesn't hold water, but that doesn't imply anything about whether or not the effect exists. In fact, it's not really a study, just one observation... a data point... that happens to support the idea. I am expecting this to be one of those areas where there has not been enough research done to have a definitive answer (because it doesn't really matter). Hell, science hasn't even agreed on whether or not ethanol from corn creates a net energy profit, and that's been studied a great deal over the last 10 years.

Monster Cable should design a "speaker break-in" box that you can hookup to your speakers to improve their performance.

I can see it now:

Monster's new 'Break-In 2000' improves your speakers' out of the box performance by as much as 100 percent!!!! *

* For best results use with Monster speaker wire



More people would buy such a thing than we care to admit.

Hell, science hasn't even agreed on whether or not ethanol from corn creates a net energy profit, and that's been studied a great deal over the last 10 years.It doesn't. It will though raise prices on a lot of things.

In addtition to sivadselim's Post #22, reread #30. This work was done with far more thoroughness by David Clark whose findings are also supported by the work of Tom Nousaine and Richard Pierce.

Microsoft has just announced that windows will run a lot a faster after it has been broken in for several months.

It doesn't. It will though raise prices on a lot of things.


Not the place to get into it, but I've looked through the studies and found that the main proponent of negative energy profit found an energy profit ratio of .7 or so, while others found ratios between 1.3 and 1.6. It was argued that the low number was reached by not basing the study on genetically modified corn, modernized production facilities, and reuse of certain byproducts. I don't think it's appropriate for you to say "it doesn't"... it certainly has an energy to profit ratio well below those of gasoline and biodiesel, but there is no definitive proof that it's less than one. I will say that it is overrated, considering that we can get it from sugarcane and beetroots, which don't take as many resources to grow. You are also right that it'll probably offset the decrease in fuel costs by increasing what we pay for groceries, given that corn is an element in the production of many things (soda, livestock, etc).

Microsoft has just announced that windows will run a lot a faster after it has been broken in for several months.

LoL.. If only microsoft could make a fast OS.. Vista is horribly slow..
As far as speaker break in.. well it might be true it might not, personally i don't care, i listen to speakers for a good deal of time before i make any assumption about them. When i first bought got the speakers i currently have (swans 4.1's) i wasnt all that impressed.. Within a day or two i was much more impressed. Probably just my ears adjusting though. Companies that say a speaker needs x hours to break in don't bother me nearly as much as the ones that tell me to buy speaker wire that costs thousands of dollars.. I was reading through some threads on audiogon the other day and i was getting so frustrated that people believe all the hogwash on there. This guy actually bought speaker wire that was made of gold all the way through, WTF???? are kidding me. Everything sounded much better after that. Do "audiophiles" have brains or do they just have golden ears. The people on audiogon can tell the difference between components that make up like 0.0001% of the sound quality in the system, as though it was a huge difference.

Car&Driver had an article about ethanol: http://www.caranddriver.com/features/11174/tech-stuff-ethanol-promises.html Takes energy to make energy. In some South American countries that can tap off hydroelectric to effect the generation of ethanol but also have low populations it's kind of irrelvent.

Perhaps its greatest promise as a fuel supplement for cars, seeing as it's a high-octane type of additive, would be to inject it separately into the combustion chambers of smaller, high compression engines. Those would then still be able to generate the horsepower and torque needed/wanted and take advantage of higher mpg's. 'Course, you need to overcome technical problems but it looks interesting to me. Makes for great political fodder though, doesn't it?

Like I said, Car & Driver is just one voice among the masses. Believe me, there hasn't been a final word on the matter.

Not so long as politicians live there won't!

This is ridiculous, and it's not the place to talk about it. If you take a good look at the sector, you'll see that it goes beyond politics. Do the reading yourself... I'm not going to try to summarize everything for you.

Dude, do you at least want to NSFW tag your sig?

Someone says my ears should be burning.

You subjective and objective guys still debating this? I guess some lessons are not easily learned.

You can debate and gab all you want. It really brings nothing to the table and nobody is going to win over anybody else with opinions.

The facts are speakers and drivers do break in (or burn in) and that period is typically 40 to 100 hours to reach a settled range.

What you hear has just as much to do with the electrically burn in (just like with caps, wire, and anything else) as it does the mechanically break in.

Yea, yea I know, if the mechanical break in of moving objects is too tough to grasp then electrical burn in will be nothing more than voo doo to you right?

The electrical burn in is not easy to document, but the mechanical break in (compliance change) is very easy to document.

Need more proof?

Take a woofer, any woofer, fresh out of the box and run it through the same break in procedure that I have and document the results.

Oh yea, most of you can't. You don't have that measuring equipment.

Well I do and I'll be glad to do it for you. I already spend a ton of time educating what's a few more hours...

Send me any new woofer, any brand, any size, so long as it has not been played.

I'll measure the T/S parameters right out of the box and at any time increments you want.

And for those of you that think it happens with just a few stretches of the suspension or just a few seconds, you'll be in for a surprise. That is not even a drop in the bucket.

So debate all you want, but if you want to learn something start testing and see what you get.

How do you reconcile that driver-driver variations are larger than break-in effects?

source for that claim?

Someone says my ears should be burning.

You subjective and objective guys still debating this? I guess some lessons are not easily learned.

You can debate and gab all you want. It really brings nothing to the table and nobody is going to win over anybody else with opinions.

The facts are speakers and drivers do break in (or burn in) and that period is typically 40 to 100 hours to reach a settled range.

What you hear has just as much to do with the electrically burn in (just like with caps, wire, and anything else) as it does the mechanically break in.

Yea, yea I know, if the mechanical break in of moving objects is too tough to grasp then electrical burn in will be nothing more than voo doo to you right?

The electrical burn in is not easy to document, but the mechanical break in (compliance change) is very easy to document.

Need more proof?

Take a woofer, any woofer, fresh out of the box and run it through the same break in procedure that I have and document the results.

Oh yea, most of you can't. You don't have that measuring equipment.

Well I do and I'll be glad to do it for you. I already spend a ton of time educating what's a few more hours...

Send me any new woofer, any brand, any size, so long as it has not been played.

I'll measure the T/S parameters right out of the box and at any time increments you want.

And for those of you that think it happens with just a few stretches of the suspension or just a few seconds, you'll be in for a surprise. That is not even a drop in the bucket.

So debate all you want, but if you want to learn something start testing and see what you get.


thanks danny for weighing in. this sure seems like the kind of topic that would have had (at least) a couple of academic/white papers published on it. does anyone have any cites?

LTD02 asked...

source for that claim?

David Clark, an AES Fellow presented "Precision Measurement of Loudspeaker Parameters", which was published in the March, 1997. I may have a copy somewhere and if so, I'll PM you.

Dick Pierce
Loudspeaker and Software Consulting
336 Broadway Hanover, MA 02339

Tom Nousaine can be contacted at nousaine@nousaine.com

All have done work, with Pierce perhaps the greatest, on driver measurements spanning thousands if not tens of thousands. I may be wrong but Richie doesn't have the overwhelming statistical data the above have and presents measurements implying a greater accuracy and precision than is possible. They're also devoid of context. For example, consider that in something like sealed box systems, the compliance of the enclosure dominates which in turn is largely responsible for the system resonance.
Suspension stiffness is difficult to control considering that most companies that make drivers source it externally. This in itself introduces inherent variations which can be compounded if you've got more than one source. Further it's also temperature dependant and if you measure the gamut of T/S parameters you'll find they invariably differ from what the manufacturer publishes. Afer all, they're only targets same as a toilet bowl is when you piss in it. The electrical break-in comments, well, that's a bit new-ageish for me. There are warm up periods which result in an equilibirium but you might just find that those vary too depending how your system is used.

Didn't Craigsub do a test on break-in sometime back and found no discernible differences? As I recall, the one thing he did not do is listen to the set breaking in while they were breaking in. I may be wrong about this, but that is my recollection.

David Clark, an AES Fellow presented "Precision Measurement of Loudspeaker Parameters", which was published in the March, 1997. I may have a copy somewhere and if so, I'll PM you.

Let's see his measured data.

Tom Nousaine can be contacted at nousaine@nousaine.com

Does he have any measured data?

I may be wrong but Richie doesn't have the overwhelming statistical data the above have

How much measured data do you need? My data was also consistent with the finding of other leading industry professionals in driver design and two of them commented so regarding my data. Their comments were also posted.

Regarding the other fellows mentioned, where is ANY of their measured data of the T/S parameters of a fresh woofer verses the T/S parameters after various amounts of burn in time?

and presents measurements implying a greater accuracy and precision than is possible.

My level of accuracy (my measurements) are no greater that what can be obtained with any good measuring system.

They're also devoid of context. For example, consider that in something like sealed box systems, the compliance of the enclosure dominates which in turn is largely responsible for the system resonance.

That in no way changes the fact that the compliance of the woofer changes or that the subjective sound changes.

Suspension stiffness is difficult to control considering that most companies that make drivers source it externally.

QC issues are not a problem and even when there is a variance from driver to driver both will go through the same loosening up during a burn in period and both will change comparatively in the same way.

Further it's also temperature dependant...

My measured data shows the difference with the voice coil still hot from testing and after cool down.

...if you measure the gamut of T/S parameters you'll find they invariably differ from what the manufacturer publishes.

Sure but they are not the same after 100 hours of play as they were fresh out of the box. The compliance still changes.

The electrical break-in comments, well, that's a bit new-ageish for me.

Still living in the dark ages?

I'd be glad to have a group of you over to listen to capacitors before and after burn in.

Didn't Craigsub do a test on break-in sometime back and found no discernible differences?

The bummer is that just because burn in changes are easily measured and easily heard is no guarantee that everyone will notice or can hear it.

Some systems don't resolve it very well and some people just don't notice.

I'd be glad to build out two pairs of identical speakers, burn in one set and not the other, then have a whole group of the nay sayers come by for and evening of enlightenment.

What you hear has just as much to do with the electrically burn in (just like with caps, wire, and anything else) as it does the mechanically break in.

Yea, yea I know, if the mechanical break in of moving objects is too tough to grasp then electrical burn in will be nothing more than voo doo to you right?

The electrical burn in is not easy to document, but the mechanical break in (compliance change) is very easy to document.

Electrical burn-in is a myth. Period.

Do you even have any feint idea on the design process of electrical components such as DAC, processors, capacitors, etc? They were tested and characterized using different conditions and the 'burn-in' process includes nothing besides warming up. I guess this is a concept that's too hard to grasp.

But I agree mechanical burn-in is required, even though some companies test their drivers before assembling.

Electrical burn-in is a myth. Period.

You are greatly mistaken.

Do you even have any feint idea on the design process of electrical components such as DAC, processors, capacitors, etc?

Sure, do you? I work with many companies that develop these products I even do subjective beta testing for them. Some even bring their products here to listen to them on my system.

Maybe you should talk to some of the major capacitor manufacturers and designs about capacitor burn in periods. I'll be glad to give you some numbers that you can call.

But I agree mechanical burn-in is required, even though some companies test their drivers before assembling.

Mechanical burn in (compliance change) and the testing of drivers prior to assembly is not the same thing.

Here is a link to interview with a well known speaker designer. His take on break-in is somewhat down in the article.

http://www.soundstagelive.com/factorytours/psbnrc/

Here is an article with lots of math and some measurements.

http://www.audioholics.com/education/loudspeaker-basics/speaker-break-in-fact-or-fiction

If speaker break-in is real, then somebody needs to develop that service for speakers for the high rollers among us. Perhaps they could have a company do that in the major cities for AV vendors. You buy your speakers and they are immediately taken over to a break-in house Here is one that will break-in your cables.

http://www.cableburner.com/

I'd be glad to build out two pairs of identical speakers, burn in one set and not the other, then have a whole group of the nay sayers come by for and evening of enlightenment.


Just out of curiousity, how would you set that up so as to pass scientific muster? It would have to be repeatable I would assume without anyone (including you) knowing the identity of the pair that is broken in and the unbroken in ones. Wouldn't measurements have to be taken before break-in to make sure that they are the same (within industry standards) before break-in? I guess the hard question is having the speakers in the same positions quickly so that judgements could be made-sounds daunting to me.

Let's see his measured data.
The paper is available for $20 if you're not a member of the AES. $5 if you are. You can always write it off your taxes as an expense. He can also be contacted in other ways. You do subscribe, don't you Danny? Staying current with what's out there, right? Maybe thinking of making a contribution to the advancement of the art?

Does he have any measured data?
I gave you an email address, write him.

You are striking a nerve with me now. He has ZERO credibility with me. I have seen his loudspeaker design work first hand and have corrected his errors, redesigning many designs. To put it nicely I thought his work was a mess. Opinion stated as fact. Some might say your work is more showmanship than anything else. He has both academic and professional credentials. Pierce doesn't publically discuss work he does for companies as that would divulge confidentialities such as designing to specific price points and matters that were never intended to become public. Again, you've got his snail mail address. OTOH, you can email him or you can find him on the newsgroups. That latter would be fun. Show him your results and what you conclude from it. Call him out.

How much measured data do you need? My data was also consistent with the finding of other leading industry professionals in driver design and two of them commented so regarding my data. Their comments were also posted.For statistical treatment? More than you've got there Danny. It's rather clear that your intent is to ascribe the small changes that occur to people's perceptions which somehow you look upon as the one constant that's invariable.

Regarding the other fellows mentioned, where is ANY of their measured data of the T/S parameters of a fresh woofer verses the T/S parameters after various amounts of burn in time? Contact them or get the papers Danny. As to why you don't have the paper already, well...?

My level of accuracy (my measurements) are no greater that what can be obtained with any good measuring system.All those significant figures? Come on now!

That in no way changes the fact that the compliance of the woofer changes or that the subjective sound changes. The latter under controlled unbiased conditions? Really?

Sure but they are not the same after 100 hours of play as they were fresh out of the box. The compliance still changes. Neither I nor anyone else referenced above has said otherwise. Effects tend to be off-setting and return to 'normal' after an appropriate rest period. Besides, you've got the whole issue of driver-driver variations both within a given lot number and different lot numbers. The T/S parameters aren't hard numbers with no +/- and confidence levels.

Still living in the dark ages?Oh, you mean without tests that incorporate bias controls like you? No.

I'd be glad to have a group of you over to listen to capacitors before and after burn in. All exactly the same originally? Would you still be able to identify which is which if someone else put them in the circuits and you didn't know which was which? Chriss Angel does better magic.

I'd be glad to build out two pairs of identical speakers, burn in one set and not the other, then have a whole group of the nay sayers come by for and evening of enlightenment.
I'm not sure you'd know how to. Why not take 2 pairs of commercially available speakers, break one in for say 5 minutes and the other for 40 hours. Then the next day have that person, not you, set them up in a given location, one pair at a time, for 10 listening sessions. Make the switches random, without the participants knowing including you. Then if the group can pick out the burned-in set of speakers correctly 9 times, that'd meet the criteria for a 95% confidence level.

i'll burn your cables! They come back melted but hey, they'll sound great as long as you put them on cable lifters. ps. I dont do cable lifter break in though as it is not cost effective.

Maybe you should talk to some of the major capacitor manufacturers and designs about capacitor burn in periods. I'll be glad to give you some numbers that you can call.
Major right? Post them here.

i'll burn your cables! They come back melted but hey, they'll sound great as long as you put them on cable lifters. ps. I dont do cable lifter break in though as it is not cost effective.
I don't care what they say, that is funny:D

Yes, it's been a contentious debate hasn't it? People swearing it doesn't or does happen with receivers and speakers. Then there are those that say cables break in and they pay to have their cables cooked so that they'll be broken in right away. But how do you really know? How do you know that guy actually cooked your cables? How long do you really have to play that amp or speaker till it's broken in? Lot's of people have different views on this. Lots of different times. Days. Weeks. Hours. It's all different. But you want to know, don't you? You want something unambiguous. You're the kind of fellow or babe that knows breakin depends on a lot of things. Like whether you live in Denver or Death Valley. Humidity, pollen count, whether those drivers came from Malaysia or Finland. All these things matter. And all these things have a different break-in period. You know this because you're reading this and you're an audiophile.
Well now, there's a product. Brought to you by the infamous Chu research laboratories. A facility where no expense is spared. A place where modern instrumentation and a dedication to hand made isn't just a saying. It's enforced by natural means.

http://www.tabberone.com/Trademarks/SweatShops/LittleSweatShop/sweatshop.gif

Here is a recent picture of our research and manufacturning staff hard at work making our revolutionary product. We select only people with tiny hands and fingers because they have superior dexterity when assembling our revolutionary product. In a world where unemployment exits and runs ramant, Chu Industries is proud to state that its employees work 160 hour weeks. Idle hands are the work of the devil you know.

http://us.history.wisc.edu/hist102/photos/assets/photos/1058.jpg

Now the product. It's simple looking but it's made with revolutionary materials. A proprietary spring alloy, of just the right hardness and possessing the correct Hook's constant is used. The outer shell is constructed of a carefully manufactured polymeric substance of a controlled molecular weight distribution and is available in a variety of colors. So how do you use it you ask? Well nothing could be simpler. For speakers, drill a hole in the top and insert the timer. When it pops up, your speakers are broken in. For your receiver or other electronic componet do the same thing. For cables, wires, and those specialty power cords, you can simply used the speaker approach if you already know they're broken in.
The price? Much much less than those stupid Bedini Clarifiers! If you order within the next 30 days and are one of the first 1000 people, you can get a bag of 10 for $1000. And get this! You can buy it on easy-pay! 10 equal $100 payments billed to your credit card. And Chu will make the last payment for you. S/H is only 14.95 and that's Fed-Ex next day! Order red if you want a warm sound. Blue for something a tad on the cooler sound. Or mix and match. We don't give a flying ****.

http://img.alibaba.com/photo/10987764/Pop_up_Thermometer_for_Food_Industry.jpg

I got to get me some of those-a true breakthough.

Here is a link to interview with a well known speaker designer. His take on break-in is somewhat down in the article.

http://www.soundstagelive.com/factorytours/psbnrc/

And he says... "Barton doesn’t doubt that people are hearing these changes, but thinks that what they’re hearing is actually brain break-in."

That's it? He THINKS!!! No test run, no measured data. Nothing but an opinion based on NOTHING?

This one from Audioholics is hilarious!!!!

Here is an article with lots of math and some measurements.

http://www.audioholics.com/education...act-or-fiction

They have absolutely ZERO! Zip, notta, nothing. Have a good look.

They took some published T/S parameters for a couple of woofers. Now look closely here's the key from their own text.

"break in specs are derived from a 5% increase in suspension mechanical compliance."

They DERIVED the new compliance numbers by guessing that the change would be 5% and never measured anything. They never measured ANYTHING!

You can see that the took the Vas of the 4" woofer 1.5627. They theorized a 5% change. Multiplied 1.5627 by 1.05 and got 1.6408 as a new number.

They also theorized that it would take place in a few seconds.

They never measured ANYTHING !!!

To Chu...

Some might say your work is more showmanship than anything else.

Some who have being listening to my work might suggest to you otherwise. Prediction! Many industry awards for my design work by years end.

He has both academic and professional credentials.

That doesn't mean anything if you can't properly design a crossover.

OTOH, you can email him or you can find him on the newsgroups. That latter would be fun. Show him your results and what you conclude from it. Call him out.

I think sparing him any further embarrassment would be a more prudent choice.

For statistical treatment? More than you've got there Danny.

Okay, how much do you want? How many drivers would you like to see measured before and after various amounts of burn in time? Would you like to be present for the tests? How many more industry professions (people that design and build drivers) are need to confirm that my measurements match their own?

Effects tend to be off-setting and return to 'normal' after an appropriate rest period.

When parameters are used for calculating an optimal box volume then yes they do offset. Vas increases as Qts decreases. However after a period of rest they do not return back to figures prior to burn in. The compliance change is forever. It does not go back.

Quote:
I'd be glad to have a group of you over to listen to capacitors before and after burn in.

All exactly the same originally? Would you still be able to identify which is which if someone else put them in the circuits and you didn't know which was which? Chriss Angel does better magic.

Yep, been there, done that, and with a group of people.

Quote:
I'd be glad to build out two pairs of identical speakers, burn in one set and not the other, then have a whole group of the nay sayers come by for and evening of enlightenment.

I'm not sure you'd know how to.

What? Give me a break!

Just out of curiousity, how would you set that up so as to pass scientific muster? It would have to be repeatable I would assume without anyone (including you) knowing the identity of the pair that is broken in and the unbroken in ones.

It's pretty easy. I have done that before.

Wouldn't measurements have to be taken before break-in to make sure that they are the same (within industry standards) before break-in?

Dude, I can test all the drivers, all the components, and match them perfectly. I'll then let you watch me measure all four speakers so that you can see that they are all exactly the same.

I guess the hard question is having the speakers in the same positions quickly so that judgements could be made-sounds daunting to me.

No dude that is really easy too. I just hosted a small speaker shoot out just this month. Maybe you read about it already. If not go here: http://www.stereomojo.com/Small%20Speaker%20Shootout%202007/SmallSpeakerShootout2007Part1.htm

Measurements are included.

I have done this many times before. The tough part is getting anyone to participate long enough to document any real statistical data. On my system most people can pick the burned in speakers over the non-burned in speakers in a few seconds, repeatable, and easily. It is about like asking people to take a taste test between Dr Pepper and Coke and identify which is which 100 times. As soon as one person can establish it 100% of the time they aren't going to want to keep drinking all that Coke and Dr Pepper.

No dude that is really easy too.
I am old (60) and remember when "dude" was in-is it in again?, cause it really sounds dated to me and actually sounds offensive. I respond better to just Randy.

Ah man, ;)

Sorry Randy, I am a little younger than that, and I am from Texas. :D

Ah man, ;)

Sorry Randy, I am a little younger than that, and I am from Texas. :D
Apology accepted (for being from Texas as well:D)

800 watt amps break in speakers really well! :D

Apology accepted (for being from Texas as well)

Alright now don't make me come up there. ;)

I'll settle this once and for all. Chu, send me two pairs of your favorite speaker. Danny, you send me two pairs of the LS9's that are due out soon. I'll eventually get around to measuring them (before I die), and then I'll get back to you. :D

Okay, okay, I just want free speakers, especially those wicked LS9's. :p

Chu and Danny, I just want you to know that even though you both disagree with each other on this subject severely, you both are a great asset to this forum and A/V community. Thanks for all your hard work guys. With that said (yes I was serious), whoever sends me the free speakers first wins! LOL! :)

Okay, okay, I just want free speakers, especially those wicked LS9's.

We have to ship out all of those pre-orders first, then the pair that was requested by Stereophile for review... See blurb:

http://blog.stereophile.com/rmaf2007//index1.html

I don't even have the prototypes here anymore. We sold them at RMAF. I sure miss those speakers.

That's it? He THINKS!!! No test run, no measured data. Nothing but an opinion based on NOTHING? Well, it's probably based on their own internal results as well as referenced to existing research. He's being 'polite'. Combine that with how much these changes actually affect the final parameters, it's quite reasonable. Hell, if I walked into or about a room, I'd probably change the characteristics of the speaker more at the listening position.

Some who have being listening to my work might suggest to you otherwise. Prediction! Many industry awards for my design work by years end. Yes, and people who hang out at Oprah's site buy into everything she says. You've got a little fan base. Didn't Bedini get an award too at the CES?

That doesn't mean anything if you can't properly design a crossover.Again, opinion stated as fact. Why don't you get Mark to divulge all the correspondece that occured between him and Pierce? All of it. And again, you can take it up with him publically on the newsgroups. Mano a mano. Texans aren't chicken are they?

I think sparing him any further embarrassment would be a more prudent choice.
Cluck...cluck...cluck...the sound of a Texan free range yardbird.

Okay, how much do you want? How many drivers would you like to see measured before and after various amounts of burn in time? Would you like to be present for the tests? How many more industry professions (people that design and build drivers) are need to confirm that my measurements match their own? Have you taken any statistical courses. Know anything about statistical quality control? Read any of Deming's work? Do you know how to sample incoming batches?

When parameters are used for calculating an optimal box volume then yes they do offset. Vas increases as Qts decreases. However after a period of rest they do not return back to figures prior to burn in. The compliance change is forever. It does not go back.
Read the paper Danny.

Yep, been there, done that, and with a group of people.
Sure. Should've YouTube'd that one!

No dude that is really easy too. I just hosted a small speaker shoot out just this month. Maybe you read about it already. If not go here: http://www.stereomojo.com/Small%20Sp...t2007Part1.htmMight've been nice to use some version of the crib-sheet Harmon uses. Sighted comparisons? People allowed to talk during the whole thing? Identities of the participants revealed? Danny, do better than that. So, you took a sub $200 speaker and turned it into a $1000 speaker. I'm fuggin' impressed! I wonder how the sub $200 one would've fared. Maybe next time there won't be so many lightweights. What did the companies who sent speakers say about the various measurements?


800 watt amps break in speakers really well! So does playing a sine wave at the resonant frequency.

We have to ship out all of those pre-orders first, then the pair that was requested by Stereophile for review... See blurb:

http://blog.stereophile.com/rmaf2007//index1.html

I don't even have the prototypes here anymore. We sold them at RMAF. I sure miss those speakers.

Oh cool...Stereophile. They are a well regarded magazine; I am sure they will love them.

You sold the prototypes? Wow, that's pretty cool. So seriously, when do I get mine? LOL! J/K

Seriously though, I am going to try to get an audition of the LS6's (the 9's will never fly with the wife) one of these days. They very well may be the ("perfect") speakers that I have been and continue to search for (see below for an explanation):
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=919069

A pair of speakers on the house, huh Nuance? Will the Barbi Twins meet your criteria? They come with extended bottom and top ranges but I hear the view is razor sharp.

http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/MMPH/246335~Barbi-Twins-Posters.jpg

could the amount by which a speaker changes during "burn in" be determined, in part, by the material/design of the spider?

put another way, could "burn-in" be speaker dependant, with some speakers changing significantly while others change insignificantly?

BTW, I have no negative comments on the speaker line from AVS123 as competent transducers.

Here (http://bruce.coppola.name/audio/BurnInLegend.pdf)is Nousaine, who says...Myth!

Head R&D engineer from Scan-Speak indicates the following (http://matrixhifi.com/ENG_rodajealtavoces.htm):

“I checked with the head R&D engineer for Scan-Speak, and here is how he responded to your question:

The drive units are not "burned in" when they leave our factory. However, the Thiele/Small parameters for Scan-Speak drivers are always given for units that are burned in - for the simple reason that it makes the designer's job easier, as all speakers will end up being burned in. Speaker units will automatically burn in when they are being used. If you buy a brand new speaker system (which normally is not burned in), complete burn-in will take about a month - depending on how often (and how loud) you listen to music. During burn-in the sound quality should improve.

There is a fast way to do it and the speaker designer should burn in the units (especially the woofers) before tuning the cabinet volume, damping material and port length (vented speaker) and trimming the cross-over network.

All you need is a sine wave generator and a power amplifier. Keep the drive unit in free air. Set the frequency to about 75% of the expected free air resonance frequency of the drive unit and turn up the voltage until the cone reaches full excursion without making mechanical noise. Let it run for 5 minutes and the job is done.

Notice that only Scan-Speak parameters are given for burned in drivers. You can expect the free air resonance frequency to drop about 10% (in some cases even up to 15% - the stiffer the spider, the bigger the change) during break-in. Naturally this affects the Q-values (they go down) and the equivalent volume (Vas goes up), as it is the suspension compliance that increases.”

i'm going to market a new speaker break-in disc

it will be a universal disc that will play in sacd dvd-audio dts and dd and will even downmix a PCM 2 channel stereo signal

it will have one large continuous track on the disc which will mix 20hz -20Khz sine wave sweeps together with Yanni Live at the Acropolis playing backwards

you play this at -20db for 48 hours and you're speakers will be professionally broken in

put another way, could "burn-in" be speaker dependant, with some speakers changing significantly while others change insignificantly?
Let's assume it does and that signficantly really means signficantly. As a manufacturer, how would you QC it in a timely fashion so that if there was a problem, you could've halted the production run, returned the drivers, and all that?

So, I've got a month before I can return the speakers?

Chu,

Your insults and name calling aren't going to prove anything. Show me some real data.

Have you taken any statistical courses. Know anything about statistical quality control?

I sure have. I had statistics classes in college, when I got my business degree. You didn't answer my question. How much do you want? How many drivers would you like to see tested before and after various amounts of burn in to prove to YOU what all of us industry professionals already know.

Quote:
No dude that is really easy too. I just hosted a small speaker shoot out just this month. Maybe you read about it already. If not go here: http://www.stereomojo.com/Small%20Sp...t2007Part1.htm

Might've been nice to use some version of the crib-sheet Harmon uses. Sighted comparisons?

Comparisons were not sighted. They were blind.

People allowed to talk during the whole thing?

Notes, information, or talking among panelist did not occur.

Identities of the participants revealed?

Not until it was all over.

So, you took a sub $200 speaker and turned it into a $1000 speaker. I'm fuggin' impressed! I wonder how the sub $200 one would've fared. Maybe next time there won't be so many lightweights.

First, the speakers that won are NOT available for $200. AV123 will be offering this model at $299. a pair. Upgrades to that speaker were made by the Skiing Ninja.

Maybe you'd like to send some speakers next time. You could have submitted a recommendation for what you would have liked to see in the shoot out.

What did the companies who sent speakers say about the various measurements?

I have heard zero feedback from them.

Let's assume it does and that signficantly really means signficantly. As a manufacturer, how would you QC it in a timely fashion so that if there was a problem, you could've halted the production run, returned the drivers, and all that?

why don't you ask the head engineer of scan-speak? :rolleyes:

A pair of speakers on the house, huh Nuance? Will the Barbi Twins meet your criteria? They come with extended bottom and top ranges but I hear the view is razor sharp.

http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/MMPH/246335~Barbi-Twins-Posters.jpg

LMAO! :p

Chu,

Your insults and name calling aren't going to prove anything. Show me some real data.
Cuts both ways doesn't it? You want nice, then stop being a condescending *****.

I sure have. I had statistics classes in college, when I got my business degree. You didn't answer my question. How much do you want? How many drivers would you like to see tested before and after various amounts of burn in to prove to YOU what all of us industry professionals already know.
The data should already be in your files Danny. Maybe not done by you, but surely the factory does incoming QC on drivers. They do, don't they after all, they're professionals? Then you can subject the data to analysis. We can look at variations within a lot on the basis of say 95% confidence levels or whatever it is that you currently use. We can compare driver to driver variations with break-in variations. If you haven't done it or it's not being done or never been done, well...
Do you not read any work by the AES?

Notes, information, or talking among panelist did not occur.
That's certainly unclear from this statement...

There was much discussion about this comparison and some uncertainty as to which speaker to favor. Everyone thought the Kayak’s virtues, other than the lack of bass and weight, were better than the HT-2’s. Some asked for guidance, but I told them to vote the way they thought best. Though the HT-2 won in a close vote, the feeling was unanimous that the Kayak with a well suited subwoofer would be a better choice. It is worth pointing out that the Kayak retails for $695 while the RAW is $999. - Publisher

BTW, how'd the Ninja XLS get in considering your involvement with the company?

why don't you ask the head engineer of scan-speak? :rolleyes:
He already said it takes 5 minutes. I assumed you mean a little longer than that.

A pair of speakers on the house, huh Nuance? Will the Barbi Twins meet your criteria? They come with extended bottom and top ranges but I hear the view is razor sharp.

http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/MMPH/246335~Barbi-Twins-Posters.jpg

Nice Pic Chu....glut implants maybe?....hahahahah

I was wondering what equipment u run? In particular, what speakers?

Ah the old "break-in" question, another one of the hilarious lines of BS propagated in the high-end audio field. Invented to stop refunds. "Don't like that speaker sir?" "But how can you possibly know if you haven't allowed them to break in for at least 80 hours."

So the poor schmuck turns around and goes back home and keeps playing the speakers/CD player (why of course CD players also require break-in ;))/cables...you name it. And in two weeks he's now either gotten used to the sound or just doesn't want to be bullied again when he tries to get a refund or his refund period has expired.

p.s. and OF COURSE they sound even better after 3 months. When I used to work in high end audio the sales people would claim that the break-in process is just like the energizer bunny, it keeps going and going....

p.p.s until of course you are ready to trade in your equipment at which point all the fabulous sound you've achieved due to your many hours of break-in has evaporated and suddenly the equipment is now worthless as the salesman opens his Orion Blue Book to fine out the used value ;)

Chu,

I don't have much interest in this thread but if you keep posting pics like that I may have to keep dropping by.

He already said it takes 5 minutes. I assumed you mean a little longer than that.

your question was how would you QC it if the changes from break-in are significant. i don't have the answer to that. if you need the answer to that in order to be comfortable that driver break-in is real, you can ask the head r&d engineer at scan-speak. :D

The data should already be in your files Danny. Maybe not done by you, but surely the factory does incoming QC on drivers. They do, don't they after all, they're professionals? Then you can subject the data to analysis. We can look at variations within a lot on the basis of say 95% confidence levels or whatever it is that you currently use. We can compare driver to driver variations with break-in variations. If you haven't done it or it's not being done or never been done, well...

Ha, ha, ha. When I work with driver manufacturers developing drivers for my company or one of the many companies that I do design work for I have to wait for them to finish burning them in for 40 hours before they even send me the data.

That's certainly unclear from this statement...

Quote:
There was much discussion about this comparison and some uncertainty as to which speaker to favor. Everyone thought the Kayak’s virtues, other than the lack of bass and weight, were better than the HT-2’s. Some asked for guidance, but I told them to vote the way they thought best. Though the HT-2 won in a close vote, the feeling was unanimous that the Kayak with a well suited subwoofer would be a better choice. It is worth pointing out that the Kayak retails for $695 while the RAW is $999. - Publisher

Yea they were pretty torn on that one. Most of the discussion however took place after notes had already been made and decissions decided.

BTW, how'd the Ninja XLS get in considering your involvement with the company?

Orginialy the event was going to be hosted at Art's, He had a great system and room for it. The digital amp comparison was held there.

http://www.stereomojo.com/SHOOTOUT2007INTEGRATEDS.htm

Then business obligations forced Art to have to back out on hosting. My facility was the fall back. I hosted but had nothing to do with judging anything. The publisher was also present as an observer to make sure all was fair.

It was up to the companies that I did design work for as to whether they wanted to withdraw from sending product to the event due to my hosting it. Two of those companies decided not to send product for that reason. Two others did not.

He already said it takes 5 minutes. I assumed you mean a little longer than that.

5 minites? Ha, ha, ha. There is still quite a bit of change between 20 hours and 40 hours. Let's see his measured data. How about we measure some Scan Speak drivers fresh, after 5 miniutes, after an hour, after 20 hours and after 40 hours and see if what he says holds true?

You can't stop playing it either QQQ, or move the wires, or have a power interruption, or change the outlet, because then you've got to start all over again. Glad you like the pics and yeah, I think those buns have had all sorts of injections. BTW, my son was at one of Hef's promotional gatherings in Chicago a few years back. The babes were cute, Hef was protected up the wazoo, and he spent a half hour talking with Ditka.

your question was how would you QC it if the changes from break-in are significant. i don't have the answer to that. if you need the answer to that in order to be comfortable that driver break-in is real, you can ask the head r&d engineer at scan-speak.I've previously stated that the process can take but a minute. If not here, elsewhere. The changes I'm aware of are neither signficant nor anything to agonize over.

Ha, ha, ha. When I work with driver manufacturers developing drivers for my company or one of the many companies that I do design work for I have to wait for them to finish burning them in for 40 hours before they even send me the data.
Ho, ho, ho. You're not where the factories are Danny. 40 hours? While you're here and they're there. OK. They should be taking statistical sampling of incoming lots so the data exists. That means doing more than one driver. That is unless they don't. Which is it?

Orginialy the event was going to be hosted at Art's, He had a great system and room for it. The digital amp comparison was held there.

http://www.stereomojo.com/SHOOTOUT2007INTEGRATEDS.htm

Then business obligations forced Art to have to back out on hosting. My facility was the fall back. I hosted but had nothing to do with judging anything. The publisher was also present as an observer to make sure all was fair.

It was up to the companies that I did design work for as to whether they wanted to withdraw from sending product to the event due to my hosting it. Two of those companies decided not to send product for that reason. Two others did not. The proper thing would've been to recuse them. On a side note, maybe one day there'll be another shootout with speakers as is and with Frying Ninja modifications. That'd be fun, don't you think?

5 minites? Ha, ha, ha. There is still quite a bit of change between 20 hours and 40 hours. Let's see his measured data. How about we measure some Scan Speak drivers fresh, after 5 miniutes, after an hour, after 20 hours and after 40 hours and see if what he says holds true?Hee, hee, hee. Seems a little long to me, but they may have a history of predictability models based on long term testing to see if a driver's parameters falls into a 'bin'. Again, you really ought to get the paper.

Ho, ho, ho. You're not where the factories are Danny. 40 hours? While you're here and they're there. OK. They should be taking statistical sampling of incoming lots so the data exists. That means doing more than one driver. That is unless they don't. Which is it?

The proper thing would've been to recuse them. On a side note, maybe one day there'll be another shootout with speakers as is and with Frying Ninja modifications. That'd be fun, don't you think?

Hee, hee, hee. Seems a little long to me, but they may have a history of predictability models based on long term testing to see if a driver's parameters falls into a 'bin'. Again, you really ought to get the paper.

Hey Chu, i must be invisible here........what gear are u running?

I am in a speaker debacle and would like to know what speakers u have and why.....ty in advance

I did do a rather long test of a pair of Onix Ref 2's which I had purchased in summer, 2004. One speaker was broken in using pink noise for several days.

The other was not.

I could not tell a difference.

However.

A problem.

I had been sold "B" stock speakers. In other words, neither was "new". It was not much of a test. AV123 did "make it right", so all I did was waste a few hours.

A simple solution ... place the speakers face to face. Wire them in out of phase. Let them simmer for about 3-4 days with pink noise.

It cannot hurt, and for the purpose of the in home demo, it will speed up the process.

For HT, I've got an older set of Time Windows. For 2 channel, Whispers. I may give those to my oldest if'n he finally stays in one house for more than 2 years. What I'd replace them with, I don't know. He's been a great son. I recommmend that people make their own decisions so I neither recommend them nor denigrate them.

Even faster is to hit them with a sine wave at their resonant frequency.

BTW, from this point, Danny will find no more 'sarcastic' barbs from me. If the discussion goes further, I'll try and be as dispassionate and cuddly as can be.

For HT, I've got an older set of Time Windows. For 2 channel, Whispers. I may give those to my oldest if'n he finally stays in one house for more than 2 years. What I'd replace them with, I don't know. He's been a great son. I recommmend that people make their own decisions so I neither recommend them nor denigrate them.

Interesting name for a line of speakers (Whisper) .....Any way, i guess it begs the question....did u notice a difference over time during "break in"?

Chu ... Whisper as in from Legacy Audio ?

Yes. I spent time getting them in happy positions. Then I enjoyed them.

Great speakers ... there is irony in that Bill Duddleston is a firm believer in break in - he cautioned me to allow sufficient time to break my Classics in when I bought them a LONG time ago.

Great guy to talk to .... passionate, knows his stuff, yet talks in plain language.

Who knows though what people would say when they're drunk and talking to someone who could give 2 ****'s? Thiel also buys into it. I think though, that depending upon a person's familiarity with research into speakers and the human auditory system and maybe just a touch of psychological stories regarding bias they tend to come to certain positions. Those positions aren't always very comfortable especially if one has been used to thinking a different way. The thing is though, those positions also suggest that one can be alienating segments of the marketplace. So vendors have to walk a fine line at least for me.

So vendors have to walk a fine line...
Absolutely they do. 95% of the *real* engineers out there know that high-end cables are a joke. But most of them dare not say it publicly if they want to sell a high-end product and stay in business. John Dunlavy was one of the very few who spoke up. It's the same on issues like this.

You are greatly mistaken.

Sure, do you? I work with many companies that develop these products I even do subjective beta testing for them. Some even bring their products here to listen to them on my system.

Maybe you should talk to some of the major capacitor manufacturers and designs about capacitor burn in periods. I'll be glad to give you some numbers that you can call.

Yes, I worked for a while as characterization engineer and design engineer in the semiconductor field.

No, the products can't be 'listen' to because they are still at the chip (component) level. And please delight me with those 'major' capacitor manufacturers, as I am fairly eager to find out what they are going to say.

And please delight me with those 'major' capacitor manufacturers, as I am fairly eager to find out what they are going to say.

Sure. No one stocks and tests more capacitors than this guy. He also designs some of the best caps on the market.

http://www.soniccraft.com/products/capacitors.htm

If you really are eager their number can be found there on the web site.

Nice Pic Chu....glut implants maybe?....hahahahah

I was wondering what equipment u run? In particular, what speakers?

Its's not a question of Equipment that your running its how long it last with each excursion :D And how may surrounds you'll need for each twin! :D

Ah the old "break-in" question, another one of the hilarious lines of BS propagated in the high-end audio field.
Agreed, never support scan-speak, as they propogate lies....they are worse than Monster!!!

Its's not a question of Equipment that your running its how long it last with each excursion :D And how may surrounds you'll need for each twin! :D

I think i could manage to bi-wire the twins.......fake glutes and all.....

Absolutely they do. 95% of the *real* engineers out there know that high-end cables are a joke. But most of them dare not say it publicly if they want to sell a high-end product and stay in business. John Dunlavy was one of the very few who spoke up. It's the same on issues like this.

I'm curious as to how many speaker manufacturers (and which ones) actually tell you that burn-in is important.
Does anyone dare ask the designer of their favorite speaker what they think about the need (or lack thereof) to burn-in their speakers? What would you do if they told you that you needed to?

An excerpt from PSB's FAQ:

Do your speakers require a "burn in" time?
No, our PSB speakers will sound great straight out of the box.

i admire that kind of no nonsense attitude although i'm sure it doesnt sit well with the audiophile elite.

i admire that kind of no nonsense attitude although i'm sure it doesnt sit well with the audiophile elite.

I know, I have always believed that it's your ears that need to become aclimated to a new speaker or component. I have spent one month with my latest speakers and I'll be the first to admit that they sound better after spending some time with them, but only because my ears have grown accustomed to them not because their properties have changed. I wasn't even in the market for new speakers, in fact I really liked my B&W CDM 1NTs. They were a great speaker, with a good sub they were more musically satisfying than speakers I had owned in the past that were more expensive like KEF Ref 2s and Paradigm Studio 100s. I got a killer deal on a pair of PSB M2 monitors that I couldn't pass up. I auditioned the M2s a year ago in the same showroom as the B&Ws years earlier and knew they were a better speaker but when I first set them up at home it was as if the B&Ws sound was still etched in my mind in such a way that it affected my initial impressions of the M2. It left me questioning each speaker's strengths and weaknesses. After several late nights rediscovering my favorite CDs and vinyl it became clear how good they really were, you could almost say that my ears "forgot" the B&W's signature and allowed me to listen to the music and not the hardware. I think comparisons are tough because people often hear what they expect or want to hear, your ears can play tricks on you in this hobby.

I agree completely steve. I'd bet that your brain adjusting to the different sound characteristics of a new speaker is much more of a factor than any kind of miniscule change caused by speaker break in. My opinion on the issue has always been that it really doesnt matter much either way. As long as when you buy a speaker you give it a good trial period to get aquainted with the sound, then if there is any kind of break in (which i doubt) then that will happen during the process anyways. The only time i can see it mattering much is when a company says "oh it doesnt sound good until 60 hours of break in" which is just complete b.s...

I agree completely steve. I'd bet that your brain adjusting to the different sound characteristics of a new speaker is much more of a factor than any kind of miniscule change caused by speaker break in. My opinion on the issue has always been that it really doesnt matter much either way. As long as when you buy a speaker you give it a good trial period to get aquainted with the sound, then if there is any kind of break in (which i doubt) then that will happen during the process anyways. The only time i can see it mattering much is when a company says "oh it doesnt sound good until 60 hours of break in" which is just complete b.s...

do you have any data supporting your opinion?

do you have any data supporting your opinion?
Data to support what? He stated a few different opinions there. I'd like to know what data you are asking for.

do you have any data supporting your opinion?

None, zip zilch nada. Armchair speaker analyst hear, i have no real expertise just opinion.

The funny thing is that you can find two experts that will tell you something completely different. What i have yet to see though is definitive analysis to warrant the claims by the manufacturers that speaker break in is a real phenomenon (meanign, where do they come up with the 30, 45 or 60 hour figure). I don't doubt speakers do break in, but as its been mentioned before, the amount of time it takes to break them in is about as long as it takes to get the voice coil warm... One person mentioned 5 minutes, another said a few seconds, and scan speak said there was a very fast way of doing it as well.. And PSB mentioned that it doesnt make any difference with their speakers.. I hope psb isn't using scanspeak produced drivers (i have no idea really but i'm guessing they make their own). Anyways, it seems most likely speaker break in is just an easy way of telling a person that its not them but the speaker that will change the more they listen. Telling a person they need to adjust to the speaker may not be taken well by everyone, whereas telling them the speaker will change for the better as they play it will help with buyers remourse when the speaker doesnt sound quite as good as the user thought it would.

None, zip zilch nada. Armchair speaker analyst hear, i have no real expertise just opinion.
Opinion or not I'd still like to know exactly what data he is asking for because if it is data to support your opinion that a person gets used to the sound of a speaker, their are mountains of data showing how quickly our brains adapt/change in reaction to our environments. Hell, asking for data on that is like asking for data to prove the earth is round. One could choose from thousands of textbooks but hopefully ones common sense and everyday experience in life would suffice.

There's also plenty of data showing how short our auditory memory is, i.e. anyone who listens to a speaker every day and tells you a month later how different it sounds is kidding themselves if they think they are capable of such a feat.

MWolfe

I know there are those who will jump into this thread and bash me but many of these same people also believe that wires and solid state gear need breaking in also. Electrons do not care whether a wire is hot off the extruder or ten years old . These are also the same folks who use a magic brick, ming poo disc, or some other BS tweek that is based in magic or wizardry. One of my favorites is the PS Audio Hum Buster, what a crock... it turns "noise into light". Yeah... it's a glorified nite-lite. I used to respect PS having owned a PS 6.2 pre until I saw that wallet vacuum. The list of useless snake oil, voodoo, and magical tweeks that are perpetuated by manufacturers and "audiophile experts" is scary. In my 25 years in this hobby the only tweeks that worked were room treatments, speaker positioning, and of course upgrading to better equipment. We should start a thread called "Useless Tweeks" however I'm afraid that it would be a flame war due to the brainwashed masses that embrace this crap.

I'm in field service and have been in several wire manufacturing plants and they all use the same equipment and for the most part the same techniques and raw materials. The wire that 90% of us use is made by large O.E.M.s like Carol, Belden, or American Insulated Wire (Leviton). Wire is made like yarn, large coils of 1/2" copper is extruded and annealed via heat and pressure into finer strands depending on aggregate gauge and strand count. These finer wires are wound onto bobbins where they are fed through a hole and pulled as the bobbins spin to twist the strands into a certain gauge. The finished product is pulled through a liquid PVC or rubber trough to coat the wire with it's insulator. Being an audiophile I've asked several people in these plants about Monster Cable and generic and the ones that didn't look at me as if I were a freak said "wire is wire". Now I know that there are companies that use silver or six nines copper with time aligned networks and that's fine but most companies do not have the resources to manufacture wire, they sub it out. Often times it's only the dielectric and jacket material that differentiates one speaker wire from another.

The same can be said for "break in" with solid state electronics, once the caps have been charged and the component achieves normal temperature it's characteristics should not change, in fact I'd be worried if it did. Many high end components use 1% and 2% parts throughout so the tolerance is tightly controlled, I'm often puzzled when I read that a $5000 amp was "harsh intitially but really opened up" after 50 or 100 hours. That annoys me.

I don't deny that tools like FFT analysis MAY show SLIGHT changes in a speaker cone's compliance from new throughout the first few minutes or hours of operation, but I firmly believe that they are so minute that they are not even at the threshold of audibility.

There are many posts here that suggest "break in" is encouraged to avoid returns and I'd have to agree with them. If after listening to a speaker for 40 hours you still don't think it sounds good, guess what... maybe it doesn't and you need to look at another. They just don't want you coming in the next day disappointed, especially if it's truly an upgrade over your last speaker. If you liked it in the store chances are you will like it after getting used to it's own unique sonic signature.

You break in engines, Levis, sneakers, and baseball gloves ... not products whose tolerances are exact and should never waver.

I looked at the SonicCraft website. Doesn't look to like much of a manufacturer. In fact, kind of really small pototoes type of reseller outfit with neglible volumes and a clearing house for discontinued products and out of business Blackgate. The thing is, the outfit and probably the person running it, don't seem to be much of experts on anything. It reminds me of nurses in the military who justify their practice of Reiki by telling people who have doubts about the practice to ask other nurses who practice Reiki.

The thing is, you can make a good speaker using their products. You can also make an equally good speaker not doing so. By way of example, in the latter case you've got the stock X-LS available for under $200 at AVS123 or you can get a frying ninja version for $1000. Is the latter a better sounding speaker? If you bought one and never owned the first, how do you know? If you bought the parts and did the 'upgrade' yourself, given that you can't compare the unmodded version head to head, how do you know? Maybe one day someone will actually buy both and there'll be a nice blind test. Myself, I'm a suspicious kind of guy. When small outfits send stuff out for evaluations, you have to wonder about a lot of things. Maybe they're unfounded worries. I just never liked paying for a cab ride by asking the cabbie to reach into my pocket and take the fare out of my wallet.

You break in engines, Levis, sneakers, and baseball gloves ... not products whose tolerances are exact and should never waver.

You are correct when it comes to electronics...If a transistor 'breaks in', that means its broken...:rolleyes: Wire also follows this same principle no matter the construction of the wire during the manufacturing process...

However when it comes to mechanical items, such as spreakers, there IS a break-in period regardless of what you "believe" is too minute to be noticeable...:rolleyes: On some models the change is noticeable, on others not quite as dramatic, but change all the same...

You and I are certainly entitled to our opinions, but when it comes down to it, neither of our opinions will mean squat to J6P who will hear what they hear and believe what they believe...;)

Telling a person they need to adjust to the speaker may not be taken well by everyone, whereas telling them the speaker will change for the better as they play it will help with buyers remourse when the speaker doesnt sound quite as good as the user thought it would.
Conversley, one might argue that what really is more likely to happen is that people will not want to admit that the speaker they ordered doesn't sound so great at first, but they come to convince themselves that it is improving and while a few may be comfortable with the notion that they have gotten "used to" the sound, others would rather believe it was the speaker rather than their mind that has changed.
I think it's funny that we will say that a speaker started to sound better after we adjusted to it's "qualities", I don't know that I've see anyone who does a head to head comparison claim that they should live with both for a couple of weeks and see if their preferance changes.....I have done that on many occaisions as a byproduct of having a few differant systems in my house at any given time and taking to long to sell a particular set. I don't ever recall changing my preferance over time so I would have to assume that the speakers don't change, and that having a referance keeps my mind from imaging an adjustment.

On another note, I am not a scientist but it isn't a "stretch" to believe that rubber stretches and becomes more pliable over time, of course it's better than the old foam that deteriorated over time and changed with humidity!

I would have to assume that the speakers don't change

The speaker changes undeniably...Now the question is, does it change for the better??? As an example, I have a couple of sets of small satellite speakers...One set I have had for over 2 years and to this day, they sound just as crappy as they did the day they were purchased (they are ex-floor model speakers)...Now I have another set of satellites that I purchased brand new...They sounded (new) just as crappy as the first set I mentioned...But after about 2-3 weeks of being used, the sound, while still being crappy, does not sound AS crappy as when new...They have mellowed out and broken in...

I looked at the SonicCraft website. Doesn't look to like much of a manufacturer. In fact, kind of really small pototoes type of reseller outfit with neglible volumes and a clearing house for discontinued products and out of business Blackgate. The thing is, the outfit and probably the person running it, don't seem to be much of experts on anything. It reminds me of nurses in the military who justify their practice of Reiki by telling people who have doubts about the practice to ask other nurses who practice Reiki.

What? You decide whether or not a person is an expert based on their web site? And you think you know somethig about the volume of business that they have just based on their web site as well?

You have no idea what this guy does or what he knows. If you really want to learn something about the guy why don't you call him up and ask him.

You can also make an equally good speaker not doing so. By way of example, in the latter case you've got the stock X-LS available for under $200 at AVS123 or you can get a frying ninja version for $1000.

That new model is $299. The upgrade from the Skiing Ninja is $352, and you install the upgrade. Speakers ordered with the upgrade including labor is $999.

Is the latter a better sounding speaker? If you bought one and never owned the first, how do you know? If you bought the parts and did the 'upgrade' yourself, given that you can't compare the unmodded version head to head, how do you know?

Yes the later is a better sounding speaker. You can easily know without doing a side by side comparison just by listening to the speakers. It's pretty easy to tell them apart. Lots of people do and have done side by side comparisons as well.

I looked at the SonicCraft website. Doesn't look to like much of a manufacturer. In fact, kind of really small pototoes type of reseller outfit with neglible volumes and a clearing house for discontinued products and out of business Blackgate. The thing is, the outfit and probably the person running it, don't seem to be much of experts on anything. It reminds me of nurses in the military who justify their practice of Reiki by telling people who have doubts about the practice to ask other nurses who practice Reiki.

The thing is, you can make a good speaker using their products. You can also make an equally good speaker not doing so. By way of example, in the latter case you've got the stock X-LS available for under $200 at AVS123 or you can get a frying ninja version for $1000. Is the latter a better sounding speaker? If you bought one and never owned the first, how do you know? If you bought the parts and did the 'upgrade' yourself, given that you can't compare the unmodded version head to head, how do you know? Maybe one day someone will actually buy both and there'll be a nice blind test. Myself, I'm a suspicious kind of guy. When small outfits send stuff out for evaluations, you have to wonder about a lot of things. Maybe they're unfounded worries. I just never liked paying for a cab ride by asking the cabbie to reach into my pocket and take the fare out of my wallet.

... notwithstanding the issues of whether or not you agree with some of the assertions that Danny has made - I take umbrage to the condescending attitudes in full view here...

I don't like the "frying ninja" reference and i REALLY don't like the name calling... that kills me... I'm upset...

I shared several e-mails with my old pal Dick Pierce this weekend - and I promised to clear up a few things here for everyone's benefit (including my own)... There are several issues that need to be surfaced and I plan on doing that...

Dick Pierce is a WORLD RECOGNIZED EXPERT in driver measurement and characterization... he is a scientist... I will have more to say about all of this after my "Monday Morning" here in Colombia has run it's course... :)

In the meantime - play nice you guys... Chu Gai you can be a bit better "investigator" by not just viewing web sites and issuing proclamations... and Danny, you know better than to engage someone like this that has no vested interest in anything but being a "debunking expert"...

I like you a lot CG... but this is sort of foolhardy... These guys make great products - and not just because I am using some of them - but because there has been a lot invested by people like Bas Lim that Founded REL Cap in this area... Just because you may not agree with this stuff doesn't mean that there is not an awful lot of science behind it...

Try hard guys...

Best...

mls

... notwithstanding the issues of whether or not you agree with some of the assertions that Danny has made - I take umbrage to the condescending attitudes in full view here...
But you don't take umbrage at the other condescending attitudes, Mark?

I don't like the "frying ninja" reference and i REALLY don't like the name calling... that kills me... I'm upset...
But calling me an idiot is OK.

I shared several e-mails with my old pal Dick Pierce this weekend - and I promised to clear up a few things here for everyone's benefit (including my own)... There are several issues that need to be surfaced and I plan on doing that...

Dick Pierce is a WORLD RECOGNIZED EXPERT in driver measurement and characterization... he is a scientist... I will have more to say about all of this after my "Monday Morning" here in Colombia has run it's course...
I'll be looking for an explanation.

In the meantime - play nice you guys... Chu Gai you can be a bit better "investigator" by not just viewing web sites and issuing proclamations... and Danny, you know better than to engage someone like this that has no vested interest in anything but being a "debunking expert"...
I visited the website that Danny directed everyone to as an example of a major manufacturer. THAT proclamation was issued by him. I consider a place like Solen a major manufacturer and maybe someone of the stature of a Bob Pease as a more credible person on the topic of break-in.

I like you a lot CG... but this is sort of foolhardy... These guys make great products - and not just because I am using some of them - but because there has been a lot invested by people like Bas Lim that Founded REL Cap in this area... Just because you may not agree with this stuff doesn't mean that there is not an awful lot of science behind it...
I have nothing against you MS. I didn't say they didn't make good products nor did I say there wasn't any science. I see nothing on the website that addresses the matter of electronic component break-in. The matter comes down to does the use of 'audiophile approved' components result in a better sounding speaker in an already good speaker. And, if so, does the approximate $800 difference represent good value or could one have used that $800 to better advantage?

You'll also note, that I did not disparage the XL-S speaker in any way. I called them good.

I raised a couple of questions, in that post and elsewhere, that speak to the issue of recusing products in situations where one has a vested interest. I'm a big fan of avoiding the appearance of impropriety.

I made note that one cannot make a fair comparison in situations where they've bought the modded speaker outright to the unmodded one. I also further noted that one cannot then do so once they've modded their own speaker. The ability to compare head-to-head is forever lost.

Now, while you're bringing up the topic of playing nice, Mark, please consider the following. Danny's remarks concerning Pierce, a "WORLD RECOGNIZED EXPERT" as you've noted, represent an attack with unsubstantiated claims and devoid of any context whatsoever. Pierce, as you know, would never divulge any information regarding his business relationship with you. When the mention was made to Pierce in the newsgroups regarding his involvement with Rockets, he went so far as to publically indicate that he would resign from involvement in the newsgroups if it seemed his impartiality would be called into question. You hired him for his technical expertise in a number of areas. You also hired him because you knew, and still know, that whatever was discussed between the two of you would go to his grave. You wouldn't be back-stabbed. That remains as true then as it does now. When Danny calls into question matters which suggest incompetence on Pierce's part, the man will not defend himself for the aforementioned reasons. He also calls into question your competence and judgement Mark. As you reflect on matters, reflect on that. If you want to rise above a Pierce, then rise on your own merits and not by kicking a man who takes his professional pride in honoring his business relationship with you Mark.

But you don't take umbrage at the other condescending attitudes, Mark?


But calling me an idiot is OK.


I'll be looking for an explanation.


I visited the website that Danny directed everyone to as an example of a major manufacturer. THAT proclamation was issued by him. I consider a place like Solen a major manufacturer and maybe someone of the stature of a Bob Pease as a more credible person on the topic of break-in.


I have nothing against you MS. I didn't say they didn't make good products nor did I say there wasn't any science. I see nothing on the website that addresses the matter of electronic component break-in. The matter comes down to does the use of 'audiophile approved' components result in a better sounding speaker in an already good speaker. And, if so, does the approximate $800 difference represent good value or could one have used that $800 to better advantage?

You'll also note, that I did not disparage the XL-S speaker in any way. I called them good.

I raised a couple of questions, in that post and elsewhere, that speak to the issue of recusing products in situations where one has a vested interest. I'm a big fan of avoiding the appearance of impropriety.

I made note that one cannot make a fair comparison in situations where they've bought the modded speaker outright to the unmodded one. I also further noted that one cannot then do so once they've modded their own speaker. The ability to compare head-to-head is forever lost.

Now, while you're bringing up the topic of playing nice, Mark, please consider the following. Danny's remarks concerning Pierce, a "WORLD RECOGNIZED EXPERT" as you've noted, represent an attack with unsubstantiated claims and devoid of any context whatsoever. Pierce, as you know, would never divulge any information regarding his business relationship with you. When the mention was made to Pierce in the newsgroups regarding his involvement with Rockets, he went so far as to publically indicate that he would resign from involvement in the newsgroups if it seemed his impartiality would be called into question. You hired him for his technical expertise in a number of areas. You also hired him because you knew, and still know, that whatever was discussed between the two of you would go to his grave. You wouldn't be back-stabbed. That remains as true then as it does now. When Danny calls into question matters which suggest incompetence on Pierce's part, the man will not defend himself for the aforementioned reasons. He also calls into question your competence and judgement Mark. As you reflect on matters, reflect on that. If you want to rise above a Pierce, then rise on your own merits and not by kicking a man who takes his professional pride in honoring his business relationship with you Mark.

CG...

You saw my reply - but you didn't READ my reply...

I am very upset about the name calling and I said so...

You BOTH owe each other apologies...

I said I was upset - not JUST with you...

I am very upset with Danny's remarks about DP and I told him so this weekend... I answered several e-mails and calls about it...

I DID say I planned a more full and complete reply...

I respectfully say again... you saw my reply - but you did not READ my reply... you took it all in with a "CG Slant"... and anyone reading this can see that... I am not happy... with either of you...

You don't work with me - but Danny does - and he knows I am not happy about it... What part of "World RECOGNIZED EXPERT" (as I've so stated) didn't YOU understand... Dick is someone that I know and trust implicitly... Your statements call many things into question just by "the way" you are framing your replies... You know this and so do I...

Dick is my friend... and we know and trust each other...

I am upset at Danny and he knows this... OK... no more need be said about it as I'm replying for myself and my company...

If you press hard enough CG you will see that nothing comes from stones... You and I are fine - but I also stand by what I know and have witnessed here and in other places... I'm implicitly stating that I have trusted you before and do so now - but at the risk of being more blunt... I often wonder what your goals are... To what end my friend...

I have a commercial and vested interest... I don't run from that either... I have to walk a very fine line here... always have...

I will have my say about this - and I plan a further call to Danny later about his choice of language on a public forum... I also call into question some of your motives - but I will do that in private... again, notwithstanding that Danny is wrong wrong wrong about Dick...

Try to have a good day... I'm going to try to do the same...

Best...

mls

I do like the idea that my speakers will be worth more as they age, just like steak and fine wine:-)

Then please accept my apologies for reading it through my own sunglasses Mark. I think you saw my motives Mark with respect to Pierce. In general, I'm all for giving the consumer a fighting chance. I pick on everybody.

I know you're in Cali. I don't know if you're married, but all I can say, there's some spectacularly hot babes there. The DR isn't too bad either. Most sincerely, I want your speaker endeavors to succeed. I want the consumer to be able to leverage your manufacturing expertise with sound research to their benefit. To that end, I look forward to seeing more comprehensive reviews.

Then please accept my apologies for reading it through my own sunglasses Mark. I think you saw my motives Mark with respect to Pierce. In general, I'm all for giving the consumer a fighting chance. I pick on everybody.

I know you're in Cali. I don't know if you're married, but all I can say, there's some spectacularly hot babes there. The DR isn't too bad either. Most sincerely, I want your speaker endeavors to succeed. I want the consumer to be able to leverage your manufacturing expertise with sound research to their benefit. To that end, I look forward to seeing more comprehensive reviews.

We are really ALL COOL between each other... I know your style and I understand and RESPECT YOU... :cool:

OK... babes... a favourite subject... :)

Cali has some of the most amazing women in the world... I understand why Cali is generally picked as having some of the most beautiful women ANYWHERE...

However, that said... I personally take sincere umbrage to that --- as Khabarovsk in Far East Russia (my 2nd home) has women that cannot be imagined by ANY measure... Simply magnificent...

Cali women have easily the most beautiful SHAPES I have ever seen - while Russian women have "the package"...

I would love to a/b these (blind if you please) but Lynn might have something to say about that... ;)

I am willing to post pictures... but I don't want to get myself in any trouble...

All the best my friend...

mls

A pair of speakers on the house, huh Nuance? Will the Barbi Twins meet your criteria? They come with extended bottom and top ranges but I hear the view is razor sharp.

http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/MMPH/246335~Barbi-Twins-Posters.jpg


That's one pair of speakers I'd like to..uh.."break-in" for 50-100 hrs. :D Unfortunately, they have a low WAF.

I visited the website that Danny directed everyone to as an example of a major manufacturer. THAT proclamation was issued by him. I consider a place like Solen a major manufacturer and maybe someone of the stature of a Bob Pease as a more credible person on the topic of break-in.

What makes you think Solen sells more caps each year the Sonic Craft. Do you have any idea how much product either of them sells? And how much product does a company need to sell or manufacture to be a major manufacturer to you?

I regard to what I said earlier. I did voice some opinions that I shouldn't have. Mark did not ask me to, but I did remove those comments because it was the right thing to do. I shouldn't have said some things that I did. My apologies for that.

Okay guys,

Let's do some research shall we. Let's see how long it takes for a woofer to break in or reach a settle range in the T/S parameters. I know it's been done before and I have already documented it on one woofer. But let's do it some more with different woofers.

One phone call to a major driver dealer here in the US and I now have sample woofers coming from some known big name driver manufacturers. They will be of the 6" to 7" size range.

Each woofers will be measured right out of the box.

Then they will be ran for 5 minutes with a sine wave signal near it's Fs. Allowed to cool down an measured again. If some of you here are correct then the T/S parameters will have now reached a settle range and playing them further should not change the parameters further. :rolleyes:

Then I'll run them for an hour, let them cool, then measure them again.

How about we repeat the process again at 10 hours, 20 hours, 40 hours and 80 hours.

This should tell us something shouldn't it? How does that sound?

Anybody want to drop by while measurements are taken? Witnesses welcome.

How about we get a second company or person with measurement capability to do the same thing?

Next is a challenge to any or all of the Nay sayers out there.

I'll build two pairs of identical speakers. I'll match drivers and components. I'll allow anyone and everyone to view the crossovers to see that all is the same. Then drivers will be dropped in and measurements taken to show that all four speakers measure exactly the same.

One pair will have been allowed to burn in for about 100 hours and the other pair will not.

We then A/B compare the two pairs of speakers. I have a A/B selector switch that is very high quality and I have a listening system that is top notch. So comparing will be easy. You guys can agree to set up the listening test anyway that you want. All you have to do is show up.

I am in North central Texas. Iowa Park, Texas to be exact.

Who wants to come?

Dannie, what size room do you recommend for the LS6's?

Sounds like a great idea. If i were in the area i'd come for sure. It will be interesting to see how it pans out one way or another.. And if I was wrong oh well.. Wouldn't be the first time.

Danny, i really don't see why it is a challenge to the nay sayers anymore than it is to the speaker break in believers. I hope you can take an objective, opinion free attitude going into it.

Okay guys,

Let's do some research shall we. Let's see how long it takes for a woofer to break in or reach a settle range in the T/S parameters. I know it's been done before and I have already documented it on one woofer. But let's do it some more with different woofers.

One phone call to a major driver dealer here in the US and I now have sample woofers coming from some known big name driver manufacturers. They will be of the 6" to 7" size range.

Each woofers will be measured right out of the box.

Then they will be ran for 5 minutes with a sine wave signal near it's Fs. Allowed to cool down an measured again. If some of you here are correct then the T/S parameters will have now reached a settle range and playing them further should not change the parameters further. :rolleyes:

Then I'll run them for an hour, let them cool, then measure them again.

How about we repeat the process again at 10 hours, 20 hours, 40 hours and 80 hours.

This should tell us something shouldn't it? How does that sound?

Anybody want to drop by while measurements are taken? Witnesses welcome.

How about we get a second company or person with measurement capability to do the same thing?

Next is a challenge to any or all of the Nay sayers out there.

I'll build two pairs of identical speakers. I'll match drivers and components. I'll allow anyone and everyone to view the crossovers to see that all is the same. Then drivers will be dropped in and measurements taken to show that all four speakers measure exactly the same.

One pair will have been allowed to burn in for about 100 hours and the other pair will not.

We then A/B compare the two pairs of speakers. I have a A/B selector switch that is very high quality and I have a listening system that is top notch. So comparing will be easy. You guys can agree to set up the listening test anyway that you want. All you have to do is show up.

I am in North central Texas. Iowa Park, Texas to be exact.

Who wants to come?


I would probably sponsor Dennis Murphy, if he wants to go. My ears aren't that developed. Tom Nousaine would be fun to have there as well.

Question: Could you arrange it so it was ABX? That way, you could describe what one should hear as a difference, but the ABX would account for actual differences.

I think one problem with blind testing is the problem of context--I think too many of us don't know what we should listen for. I think this is one of the flaws of blind testing in general.

For the record I'm an agnostic on the issue.

An excerpt from PSB's FAQ:

Do your speakers require a "burn in" time?
No, our PSB speakers will sound great straight out of the box.

If you set the speakers on Fire they Burn nicely! :D

Question: Could you arrange it so it was ABX? That way, you could describe what one should hear as a difference, but the ABX would account for actual differences.

I think one problem with blind testing is the problem of context--I think too many of us don't know what we should listen for. I think this is one of the flaws of blind testing in general.

For the record I'm an agnostic on the issue.what I don't understand is how you can have the speakers in the same place more or less at the same time. If I have two sets of speakers or even one set A/B then my room has to have exactly the same effect on both of them? I don't have that in my room and my right speaker sounds different than my left speaker when playing mono material-pink noise is really easy to tell, just because the room has a different effect on each of them. Am I making any sense to anyone other than myself?

what I don't understand is how you can have the speakers in the same place more or less at the same time. If I have two sets of speakers or even one set A/B then my room has to have exactly the same effect on both of them? I don't have that in my room and my right speaker sounds different than my left speaker when playing mono material-pink noise is really easy to tell, just because the room has a different effect on each of them. Am I making any sense to anyone other than myself?

Of course it sounds differently...they are located in seperate areas of the room.:rolleyes:

Just place the speakers side by side (while still maintaining proper distance for L/R for stereo imaging).

Of course it sounds differently...they are located in seperate areas of the room.:rolleyes:

Just place the speakers side by side (while still maintaining proper distance for L/R for stereo imaging).
I am not following you-are you talking about one set of speakers-A being on the left and B being on the right side by side and maintaing proper imaging? (Lets call A being the unbroken in speaker and B being the broken in speaker) or are you saying having two different sets of speakers side by side (one set A and one set B) one being the broken in one and one not? And you roll your eyes at me?:rolleyes: How is that going to make them sound correct-hell you could have exactly the same speakers (two sets) setting side by side and I would bet pink noise would not sound exactly the same from either set because of their respective positions in the room. To be honest, I think pink noise would be a better determinant of differences than music anyway, but that is just me.

To sum it up, I don't get what you are proposing and how you are going to prevent room effects because of the different position(s) of either one set (playing mono) or two sets (playing mono or stereo)? I think that is why Harmon International spent the really big bucks to DBT speakers by making rapid changes of speakers to EXACTLY the same position as a previous pair for testing. Everyone talks about the enormous effect the room has on speakers but now we are trying to determine the effects of break-in on the same speakers and we don't account for the room. What am I missing here?

someone like this that has no vested interest in anything but being a "debunking expert"...

How are we to be sure?
Does anyone truely know anothers motives?

- but at the risk of being more blunt... I often wonder what your goals are... To what end my friend...

I raised a couple of questions, in that post and elsewhere, that speak to the issue of recusing products in situations where one has a vested interest. I'm a big fan of avoiding the appearance of impropriety.

I always feel more comfortable listening to someone who does have a vested interest (and states so at the outset) so you know that they have certain motives....I am suspicious about those who claim to have none.

I am not following you-are you talking about one set of speakers A being on the left and B being on the right side by side and maintaing proper imaging? (Lets call A being the unbroken in speaker and B being the broken in speaker) or are you saying having two different sets of speakers side by side (one set A and one set B) one being the broken in one and one not? And you roll your eyes at me?:rolleyes: How is that going to make them sound correct-hell you could have exactly the same speakers (two sets) setting side by side and I would bet pink noise would not be exactly the same from either set because of their respective position in the room. To be honest, I think pink noise would be a better determinant of differences than music anyway, but that is just me.

To sum it up, I don't get what you are proposing.

You said:
my right speaker sounds different than my left speaker when playing mono material-pink noise

And I replied:
Of course it sounds differently...they are located in seperate areas of the room.

Then you correctly perceived what I meant when I said:
Just place the speakers side by side (while still maintaining proper distance for L/R for stereo imaging).

And you replied with:
are you saying having two different sets of speakers side by side (one set A and one set B) one being the broken in one and one not?

If I can clarify anything else I wrote that:
To sum it up, I don't get what you are proposing

just ask...;)

BTW you are not going to be able to prevent room effects unless you have an empty room.

You said:


And I replied:


Then you correctly perceived what I meant when I said:


And you replied with:


If I can clarify anything else I wrote that:


just ask...;)

BTW you are not going to be able to prevent room effects unless you have an empty room.

Please propose how you would remove room effects so that it is a fair test. That is ALL that I am asking and I am just asking that. (And by the way, I did not like the rolled eyes as if you have solved the problem and my problem of room effects was stupid).

I am not sure an empty room works either unless all sides are the same (i.e. same windows or no windows, etc etc)-my room certainly is not.

To me, the side by side comparision does not work, but I am willing to listen as to why it does.

Kal, do you think the side by side method would work in a test like this?

Actually, I consider both places kind of small, geared more to the hobbyist and very low volume user. Solen looks to me to be a larger outfit. Google Maps actually shows a building for Solen. For SC, if one uses 5140 Park Ave Hot Springs, AR 71901 instead of their PO Box, it's hard to see much. I would think for larger volumes, there are other sources. Again, I see nothing in SC to suggest they are a manufacturer of any size.

what I don't understand is how you can have the speakers in the same place more or less at the same time. If I have two sets of speakers or even one set A/B then my room has to have exactly the same effect on both of them? I don't have that in my room and my right speaker sounds different than my left speaker when playing mono material-pink noise is really easy to tell, just because the room has a different effect on each of them. Am I making any sense to anyone other than myself?
Yes, it's clear. That's why the research center in Canada rotates the speakers. Now, what'd be fun would be to break-in the two pair anyway you want and let them 'rest' overnight. Rotating of course.

Kal, do you think the side by side method would work in a test like this?I am skeptical but one might try to randomize the position of each pair with respect to the other.

Please propose how you would remove room effects so that it is a fair test. That is ALL that I am asking and I am just asking that. (And by the way, I did not like the rolled eyes as if you have solved the problem and my problem of room effects was stupid).

I am not sure an empty room works either unless all sides are the same (i.e. same windows or no windows, etc etc)-my room certainly is not.

To me, the side by side comparision does not work, but I am willing to listen as to why it does.

Kal, do you think the side by side method would work in a test like this?

Don't get your panties in a bunch because I used the roll eyes icon...:rolleyes:

You asked why the left speaker sounded different than the right and sorry, but that IS a silly question.

The side by side is the ONLY possible and closest way to A-B speakers, there really is no alternative.

And as for the empty room needing to have the same dimensions you are absolutely correct and what was what I was aiming for you to figure out.

This isn't rocket science.

You have a left side A-B speaker and then a right side A-B speaker...that is how it is done.

... notwithstanding the issues of whether or not you agree with some of the assertions that Danny has made - I take umbrage to the condescending attitudes in full view here...

I don't like the "frying ninja" reference and i REALLY don't like the name calling... that kills me... I'm upset...

I shared several e-mails with my old pal Dick Pierce this weekend - and I promised to clear up a few things here for everyone's benefit (including my own)... There are several issues that need to be surfaced and I plan on doing that...

Dick Pierce is a WORLD RECOGNIZED EXPERT in driver measurement and characterization... he is a scientist... I will have more to say about all of this after my "Monday Morning" here in Colombia has run it's course... :)


and Danny, you know better than to engage someone like this that has no vested interest in anything but being a "debunking expert"...


I've always found Mr. Pierce's posts on forums to be highly educational and extremely well-informed. I wonder, does Mr. Pierce know what Mr. Richie has been saying about him to people on other forums too?

http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=225525&postcount=27




You need to make contact with Richard Pierce on this subject of driver measurements. You have heard of him?
Yea I think I have. He's the wrong guy for you to throw in my face. I have had to re-engineer his work plenty.


I seriously doubt his measurements will support your claims. Oh, yes, respect has to be earned first.
Trust me, I have seen his work and I am not impressed. He has earned no respect from me.



http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=193933&postcount=129

I'd give John Dunlavy and Richard Pierce as much or more.
Funny that you mentioned those two guys. I have upgraded or fixed designs from both of them.

I thought John Dunlavy was one of the nicest guys in all of audio.

This Richie guy...he seem a bit full of himself...or of something. :rolleyes:

Okay guys,

Let's do some research shall we. Let's see how long it takes for a woofer to break in or reach a settle range in the T/S parameters. I know it's been done before and I have already documented it on one woofer. But let's do it some more with different woofers.

One phone call to a major driver dealer here in the US and I now have sample woofers coming from some known big name driver manufacturers. They will be of the 6" to 7" size range.

Each woofers will be measured right out of the box.

Then they will be ran for 5 minutes with a sine wave signal near it's Fs. Allowed to cool down an measured again. If some of you here are correct then the T/S parameters will have now reached a settle range and playing them further should not change the parameters further. :rolleyes:

Then I'll run them for an hour, let them cool, then measure them again.

How about we repeat the process again at 10 hours, 20 hours, 40 hours and 80 hours.

This should tell us something shouldn't it? How does that sound?

Anybody want to drop by while measurements are taken? Witnesses welcome.

How about we get a second company or person with measurement capability to do the same thing?

Next is a challenge to any or all of the Nay sayers out there.

I'll build two pairs of identical speakers. I'll match drivers and components. I'll allow anyone and everyone to view the crossovers to see that all is the same. Then drivers will be dropped in and measurements taken to show that all four speakers measure exactly the same.

One pair will have been allowed to burn in for about 100 hours and the other pair will not.

We then A/B compare the two pairs of speakers. I have a A/B selector switch that is very high quality and I have a listening system that is top notch. So comparing will be easy. You guys can agree to set up the listening test anyway that you want. All you have to do is show up.

I am in North central Texas. Iowa Park, Texas to be exact.

Who wants to come?

That is a great idea. I can't come. But that is OK. I trust you as much as I trust anybody else I don't know, maybe a little more since I've at least heard your name before.
When I was younger and had more time than money, I used to occasionally build and design speakers in my basement. I always ran in a speaker for awhile before taking measurements. Funny, I never thought to measure it before and after the run in. Usually the measured response was pretty close to what the manufacturer specified. I'm still not convinced a simple sine wave measurement tells all there is to know about a driver, but it sure is a useful place to start! I would be surprised if a fresh out of the box driver measured the same as one that had been run in, but I could be wrong.
Please let us know what you find. Thanks.

p.s. Since I started buying speakers, there is no doubt in my mind that speakers change as they "break in". But I can't separate out how much of that is due to me getting used to a different speaker, how much is due to tweaking position of the speaker, or tweaking of the room, or how much is due to actual speaker break in - since they all happen over the same time. My guess is probably a bit of each.

Dannie, what size room do you recommend for the LS6's?

We had them working really well in a room at RMAF that was 13' by 19'. I think they would have still work well in an even smaller room but I wouldn't want them in too much smaller of a room.

Danny, i really don't see why it is a challenge to the nay sayers anymore than it is to the speaker break in believers. I hope you can take an objective, opinion free attitude going into it.

For all of those that have already heard the differences in speaker burn in it really isn't much of a challenge.

And guys this well treated room will not have any effect on the speakers set up as AB and AB. The differences (in my experience) are way more than the room effects of being a foot to the left or a foot to the right.

For most people as soon as they realize what the audible differences are between the burned in pair verses the non-burned in pair then they can typically identify which speakers are playing in just a few seconds.

Actually, I consider both places kind of small, geared more to the hobbyist and very low volume user. Solen looks to me to be a larger outfit. Google Maps actually shows a building for Solen. For SC, if one uses 5140 Park Ave Hot Springs, AR 71901 instead of their PO Box, it's hard to see much. I would think for larger volumes, there are other sources. Again, I see nothing in SC to suggest they are a manufacturer of any size.

Man, you have no idea what you are talking about. You can't tell anything about the amount of business a company is doing by looking at their web site or address on a map.

You would not believe how much business some of these companies do to other manufacturers. Sonic Craft sells a ton of caps to a lot of other companies using them in products that you don't even know exists.

I am skeptical but one might try to randomize the position of each pair with respect to the other.

I can move the position of the speakers from A to B then B to A and it won't matter. As soon as the listeners realize the audible cues to listen for then the jig is up pretty quick. They often don't even need to listen to the both. They can just listen to one of the other and tell you which one it is.

Don't get your panties in a bunch because I used the roll eyes icon...:rolleyes:

You asked why the left speaker sounded different than the right and sorry, but that IS a silly question.

The side by side is the ONLY possible and closest way to A-B speakers, there really is no alternative.

And as for the empty room needing to have the same dimensions you are absolutely correct and what was what I was aiming for you to figure out.

This isn't rocket science.

You have a left side A-B speaker and then a right side A-B speaker...that is how it is done.You really are condescending aren't you? Seems to be easy for you. I submit that if you have two sets of speakers side by side, I am skeptical in line with Kal.

It isn't about rocket science, it about a test that has some scientific validity. Dennis Murphy is busy so he won't be attending (and it is not especially interesting to him). By the way, I just sent him a very well known speaker to test and he tested and gave me a very straight forward evaluation. He never asked me if they had been broken-in (they had not been). Hmmmm.

Does it not bother you at all that Tom Nousaine who has evaluated and tested literally hundreds of speakers thinks speaker break-in other than a very few minutes is bogus?

Oh yea, I don't wear panties, but I am really not very interested if you do:D (me being condescending)

I actually have been thinking of a test that is not quick switching. If it is so easy, then it should be a breeze. How about three sets of identical speakers. Two are not broken in and one is. After the speakers are certified equal in measurements, then one of them is broken in for how many hours you want by a third univolved party who is not present at the test. Only that party knows the identity of the broken in speaker. Then, the test is administered with 10 people. The tester gets three (make that four) attemps and can listen to all three plus another one twice, only one set four times or one set two times and another set two times, etc. Whatever they want. Each set of speakers is positioned exactly the same and the test taker (I would suggest Danny and 9 others) listen (in the same sweet seat) and identifies which set of speaker is broken in and which sets are not. They can use whatever they want-test tracks, pink noise, whatever. Results are tallied and the speakers are revealed by a call to the third party. If the identity is easy, I would think that it would be a breeze to pick out the broken-in speaker and the speakers that arent. Frankly, it gives you a 1 in 3 chance of just guessing-not bad odds really, but it is the overall score of the 10 that is the important stat I would think. Based on Danny's confidence level, I see 100% being the expected score. Maybe it would be, it's fine with me.

The test above may not be perfect so if you see flaws, please suggest alternatives.

Well Britney doesn't get her panties in a bunch either. Myself, I can see some merits in it.

http://tonyskansascity.com/tonyskansascity/lacepanties.jpg

Man, you have no idea what you are talking about. You can't tell anything about the amount of business a company is doing by looking at their web site or address on a map. Well, I can recognize a cheezy website that's not even set up for e-commerce. Besides, you're the one that gave me the website. I can also look at a satellite view of the address and see if there's a building there. So can you. Try it. Can you find the building for SC? Try it for Solen.

You would not believe how much business some of these companies do to other manufacturers. Sonic Craft sells a ton of caps to a lot of other companies using them in products that you don't even know exists.
You mean little tiny outfits that might be here tomorrow and might not? We must have a different measure of what tons are.

Throughout all of this Danny, why do you not have the AES article mentioned earlier? How can one stay abreast of the art in any field by not taking advantage of both the history that's occurred and the developments that are occuring? Doctors read journals and observe the work of others in their field. Lawyers always have law journals. Chemists subscribe to any number of peer-reviewed journals that are relevant.

We had them working really well in a room at RMAF that was 13' by 19'. I think they would have still work well in an even smaller room but I wouldn't want them in too much smaller of a room.


Thank you sir!

Are there rough square footage numbers - or cubic, actually - that we can use for small, medium , and large room size designations?

Good Morning from Colombia…

I’m going to add just a bit today – as frankly my time is very limited. I wish to state a few things that need to be better understood – and offer my own apology to my friend Dick Pierce…

Dick and Peter Madnick had helped me with getting the original Rocket line launched. Dick is very well known to me as a scientist, and truly dedicated person in the art of loudspeaker and driver design. Dick was chosen because in my mind he was THE BEST…

Like all things, our work in China did not go as smoothly as one would like. My partner there would often “modify or bend” Dick’s requirements on his crossover designs… I can remember Dick specifically requesting very specific “low DCR” inductors and instead we would get higher results… Dick did not like this at all (of course) as he felt it had compromised his designs… I was constantly fighting to get EVERY drop out of these speakers… Sometimes even with my own partners…:)

I also know in the case of one x/o – the original design was thrown out the window in favour of a more inexpensive design… I was pretty unhappy when I found this out – and Dick was MORE than unhappy (words that I won’t use here)…

In a world where speakers are often a blended set of compromises – Dick always held that he could do MORE and BETTER… He is very much like that IRL as well… I love the guy (he is a bit of a curmudgeon for sure though - but that's all part and parcel of this really wonderful guy) and I can tell everyone here that Rocket would not have happened were it not for him…

I personally let Dick down in many areas… I apologize to him for this here and now. It’s not easy being the boss – and the guy in the middle (sometimes)… Rockets have been well reviewed and loved by many – and we have Dick to thank for this…

I decided later to change directions with this product group and later this lead to us hiring Danny Richie. Danny is also a SUPERB product engineer and I have been thrilled with his efforts… Danny has helped us push the company into new areas – and I love this fellow as well…

I do think that Danny has mis-characterized some of DP’s work… I have discussed this with him. Each engineer has different “approaches” in the way he tackles a problem – and Danny has certainly been outspoken with me about how he wanted to approach his efforts with Rocket et all at av123. I laud his work publicly as well… Danny is highly energized and opinionated – and this has led to trouble for him at times – both here and on other forums…

I don’t care to be anyone’s conscience (I have enough trouble with my own)… and I’m not at all happy with some of the “stuff” that has been slung here… I wish to apologize to those hurt on behalf of av123 and it’s staff…

Thanks for taking the time to read this… I’m not going to be answering any further question with respect to this x/o or that x/o – I’m always here to try to help with decision-making – for our products – or others…

To my long time friend Dick Pierce – I wish to formally apologize to you for anything that got out of hand here… You are WORLD CLASS in my book – and in my 38 years (almost 39 now) – You Rank Sir…

Most sincerely yours…

Mark L. Schifter (mls)

President and Founder

av123 / Perpetual Technologies

Does it not bother you at all that Tom Nousaine who has evaluated and tested literally hundreds of speakers thinks speaker break-in other than a very few minutes is bogus?

The person that you quoted above this question wasn't me but I'd like to respond to this question.

Why not ask Tom Nousaine or anyone else with measurement taking capability to do the same thing that I am doing.

The first step is to document the mechanical compliance changes. Have him measure the T/S parameters of a set of drivers, fresh out of the box, after five minutes, after an hour, after 10 hours, 20, hours, 40 hours, and 80 hours and let's see how long it takes for the T/S parameters to settle in.

The person that you quoted above this question wasn't me but I'd like to respond to this question.

Why not ask Tom Nousaine or anyone else with measurement taking capability to do the same thing that I am doing.

The first step is to document the mechanical compliance changes. Have him measure the T/S parameters of a set of drivers, fresh out of the box, after five minutes, after an hour, after 10 hours, 20, hours, 40 hours, and 80 hours and let's see how long it takes for the T/S parameters to settle in.
I am not an engineer or a professional reviewer (but I did stay at one of those hotels that makes you feel like you are). Since Tom has a stated position and you have a different one, and Tom seems very open as far as receiving emails, I would suggest you can make your case to him direct. I will be the first to admit that I (emphasis) don't have the knowledge to properly frame your tests-Tom's email address can be found on his web site here-

http://nousaine.com/

To be honest, this thing has been beaten to death. If people want to break-in speakers so be it. It seems a pretty small thing in the world of big things. My complaint is when people who have credentials and are published are challenged, it is insulting to them to just dismiss them out of hand. If you have information to challenge their position, challenge them directly-don't play it out here as if they are a bunch of nobodies. I am speaking of Pierce, Clark, and Nousaine, among others.

I wanted to add one other edit and that is a congratulations for your work on the Usher Tiny Dancer. The NSC measurements on the Soundstage review is some of the nicest I have seen posted and from all reports the speaker is a great sounding speaker.

Randy

This forum should be an ENTHUSIEST'S forum, not a vehicle for direct manufacturer's shameless plugs for their mediocre third world manufactured products. USE YOUR OWN WEBSITES !!!!! I'd like to add that Danny Richie should post in the DIY forum, after all that's basically what he's pushing. If I wanted to listen to his condescending "better than thou" attitude I would order a pair of his $29 tweeters and $45 woofers and let him tell me in person how his DIY ninjas outperform a brand name speaker. When I hear the term speaker engineer I think of Dr. Floyd Toole, Paul Barton, Jim Theil, Franco Serbin, Dave Wilson, not Danny Richie. Enough said.

The only thing anybody is pushing around here is an education, and obviously you'll be first in line. :D

If people want to break-in speakers so be it.

There isn't a choice in the matter and that is what you are overlooking here with this statement...ALL speakers, each and every one, get broken in whether you want to break them in or not...:rolleyes:

The whole point in this thread is if the sound quality changes between a broken-in speaker and a new out of the box speaker...

True. Anyone demonstrated that yet in a DBT? Didn't think so.

WHO CARES?????????????:eek:

Ya know... opinions are like arm-pits... everyone has a couple of them and they both usually stink! :(
Besides, arguing on the internet is like competing in the special olympics... even if you win you're still retarded! ;)

... is like competing in the special olympics... even if you win you're still retarded!

That is really not a nice analogy in a public forum. :rolleyes:

Pierce has made note in the newsgroups of the difficulty that companies have when manufacturing takes place in other countries that don't have an understanding or a history in the field of speaker design. While all companies look to find ways to drive manufacturing costs down, be it through simplifying the manufacturing process or material substitution, those have to be done with an understanding of the ramifications. Pierce never mentioned the companies he was talking about and I get the impression that when he related some of the stories, he was talking about more than one company with the common thread being China. The type of parts substitution for crossovers that Mark mentioned are not unknown. To someone over there, a capacitor is just a capacitor, a resistor just a resistor, and as a result, final products differ signficantly from what was intended.

But it goes beyond capacitors, resistors, and inductors. In many cases, Pierce has designed the actual drivers. Among other things, it means specifying the shape, taper, the material that the cone is made from. Don't forget the parameters needed to characterize the cone. Or the dustcap. Or the type of wire, gauge, and length that makes up the magnet assembly. Don't forget the tolerances, the magnetic strength and everything else. Or the basket and what type of metal it's made from and the properties of that metal. He noted that he'd reject lots of drivers before they got it right. Now, where those lots wind up...well you can guess. Buy any drivers lately? Far more than T/S parameters hitting certain marks are needed to ensure that a design is not compromised. He's made mention of how supremely difficult it was to communicate that substitutions aren't an acceptable way of life. Not to Mark. Mark knew and knows. The suppliers though, well that's another matter. A little here. A little there. After a while, when you think things are rolling along just fine, little changes occur with cumulative effects. The speaker that was once so good, where everyone toed the line, is now different. But it can happen slowly. Maybe you can't tell the first lot of speakers from the 4th. Maybe the 4th from the 9th. But the first from the 9th? Well...suddenly something isn't quite right.

Why it's done? I don't think it's malicious. But it's sloppy and speaks to not having a good appreciation for quality control or having an understanding of how things interact. While this isn't limited to China, considering that much manufacturing and products originate from China, it's only proper to question the capabilities of products originating from China. Pet foods that containg melamine. Toys that have excessive lead levels (how friggin hard was it to get that right?!). Food products that contain glycols. Medicines and toothpaste too. What good are low labor and raw material costs when you've got to QC every damned thing and you can't trust your suppliers to do it right?

I appreciate the comments that Mark has made. The story he recounts is not only consistent with what Pierce has long stated, but it is consistent with things we've all read in the news. It's consistent with stories that people who work for the FDA doing inspections have told me. I ask you though Mark, do you now have a good handle on the parts that make up the crossovers? What efforts, besides rudimentary measurements of speaker parameters, are being taken to ensure that drivers are being made consistently and according to what should be mutually agreed upon materials and methods of construction? I believe this requires techniques outside the realm of many people. Lastly, is there a move towards ISO certification for suppliers and up the chain?

Besides, arguing on the internet is like competing in the special olympics... even if you win you're still retarded! ;)

Which is the reason you decided to chime in...Well don't worry...YOU are still special...:rolleyes:

The only thing anybody is pushing around here is an education, and obviously you'll be first in line. :DIn case you missed it in the above edit...


I wanted to add one other edit and that is a congratulations for your work on the Usher Tiny Dancer. The NRC measurements on the Soundstage review are some of the nicest I have seen posted and from all reports the speaker is a great sounding speaker.:)

Besides, arguing on the internet is like competing in the special olympics... even if you win you're still retarded!
This is definitely one of the most f**ked up posts I've ever read here. What a jerk. Nice "cinema" by the way.

J.

This is definitely one of the most f**ked up posts I've ever read here. What a jerk. Nice "cinema" by the way.

J.

Yours is worse than his.

Anyway I am with Danny here.

Thanks Randy,

Usher is an industry leading company and I am honored that they selected me to take their flagship series speakers to the next level.

Yours is worse than his..

Not by a longshot...

The only thing anybody is pushing around here is an education, and obviously you'll be first in line. :D

Really ? What are your credentials?

do you have any data supporting your opinion?

Try some light reading here:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.audio.high-end/msg/7d26f5cc57ffd849?q=author:DPierce%40world.std.com+and+speake r+break+in&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&rnum=1

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.audio.high-end/msg/e52c59086811bd30?dmode=source&hl=en

Nousaine, Tom, 'Breaking Wind,' Car Stereo Review, Jan/Feb 1997, pg 90-94. (Break in myth)

Nousaine, Tom 'Test Report: Dynaudio MW 190, 12" Subwoofer,' Car Stereo Review, Oct 1997, pg 83-88. (More break in myth)

i admire that kind of no nonsense attitude although i'm sure it doesnt sit well with the audiophile elite.

They probably don't buy those speakers:D Doesn't support their beloved beliefs.:D

nice post charles. Both links were good reads.

Yours is worse than his.
If you think that poking fun at a guy's "Super Cinema (http://jseman1.googlepages.com/)" that he has featured in his signature (that he has since removed) is worse than making fun of "retarded" people (his language, not mine), then it's no wonder you have the reputation around here that you do.

J.

nice post charles. Both links were good reads.

Unfortunately it was nothing more than one more opinion with no data to support it, no facts, no measurements, nothing.

One of those running threads that go nowhere, just fun to watch. (kind of like Nascar races at Bristal - around and around):p

hyghwayman

WHO CARES?????????????:eek:

Ya know... opinions are like arm-pits... everyone has a couple of them and they both usually stink! :(
Besides, arguing on the internet is like competing in the special olympics... even if you win you're still retarded! ;)

:eek::eek::eek::eek:

The only thing anybody is pushing around here is an education, and obviously you'll be first in line. :D

You didn't answer my question. What formal training do you have in the field of pyschoacoustics ? My guess is none and that you are simply a garage hack who just got lucky with Usher. Usher's not bad, they're just another Sonus rip off in my opinion.

What formal training do you have in the field of pyschoacoustics ?

We are not talking about psycho acoustic effects. We are talking about easily measured and documented mechanical burn in effects on a driver and acoustical changes from it.

My guess is none and that you are simply a garage hack who just got lucky with Usher.

Fellow, I have been doing this professionally for a while now. My design work has extended to many companies besides my own. My design work has been reviewed or featured in just about every major magazine in the industry and has received a ton of awards from Editors Choice awards, a Golden Ear award, several budget speaker of the year awards, one product of the year award, A best of 2007 award, Maximum Mojo awards, etc.

You can be disrespectful if you like, but I am no garage hack.

Usher's not bad, they're just another Sonus rip off in my opinion.

That's your opinion and you are free to have it, but I totally disagree with that statement.

Let's look at the data and compare this to what Dick Pierce has stated in the two links that CharlesJ provided. Indeed, let us look at what's stated more carefully.

On GR Research's website, there is a technical section which can be found at, http://www.gr-research.com/burnin.shtm

1) Intially, DR states that he made 3 measurements for "consistency and accuracy", yet the public does not have the measurements obtained so that an assessment can be made for his quoted comments. Had he done so, then one could assign a +/- to the averages using appropriate statistical weighting for the small number of trials. The numbers given are devoid of an understanding of what the "consistency and accuracy" are. Further, to report data to the ten thousandth's decimal place implies an accuracy that is completely unsupportable. As an example, an NBS certified 25.0000 gram weight is not cheap and DR's reporting that he added such mass is a stretch.

2) DR performed measurements on a fresh woofer. Straight out of the box. Never been played. DR considers that a baseline from which meaningful comparisons can be made. Of course this ignores the fact that drivers can be stored in different positions resulting in differing extents of being out of center. It also ignores that the manufacturing process itself can result in differing amounts of stiffness due to the way the epoxy, varnish or whatever is used. So, what does Pierce say about this?

First, as a driver comes off the line, it's actual performance if fairly far from it's intended performance target. Reasons for this include the fact that the centering spider, typically manufactured from a varnish- impregnated linen, is far stiffer than needed. Working the driver back and forth lossens the spider considerably.


Now, one might say: there's objective proof of the need to "break in" a loudspeaker! Not so fast. The break-in period for the spider is on the order of several seconds, and if it takes you several seconds or minutes or whatever once you get the speakers home to loosen the centering spdier, it's not proof of the need to break thme in, it's proof that the speaker you just bought HAS NEVER BEEN TESTED!

Some manufacturers run their drivers through a process that excercises the driver. Some don't.

3) The second measurements involve physically pushing the driver back and forth. No electricity was applied. Presumably this was done once in each direction by hand. IOW, it's just ONE CYCLE. It is entirely reasonable to assume that if this is the case, the changes in temperature were irrelevent. The measurements now show a change. As Pierce noted above, this is due to some initial cracking of the epoxy or varnish used. Not a lot of cracks, but enough to indicate that just one cycle causes an effect. The change in F(s) is approximately 2.7. Again, note that it is impossible to assign any standard deviations (66%, 95%, 99% confidence levels) to the numbers. We'll have to use them as are.

4) The third test ran the woofer "hard for 10 seconds". What hard is, is undefined. 50% full excursion? 75%? Something else? No idea. We could assume it meant very near full excursion but the assumption is unwarranted as it could also mean it was run slightly past full excursion in which case one may've damaged the woofer. By way of example, take a spring and let it oscillate with a light weight. Now use a heavy weight and watch the spring deform permanently.

In any event, the F(s) dropped 3.7 from the original, never used, never tested woofer. After a period of time which we don't know, temperatures cooled. From what value to what value we don't know. Nor do we know how the temperatures were measured. In any event, the F(s) is now 2.7 from the original value.

5) The next measurements occured with 20 hours!! of hard run in. Again note, that no one knows what hard is. Well maybe your spouse knows a Mr. Softie :D F(s) has changed by 5.0 from the original measurement of the never used woofer returning to a net 3.7 change after things have cooled down. The same comments about the temperature apply.

Danny Richie states, "Now I wonder if the woofer burned in or if it was my test equipment?"

Well let's look at it shall we? In the AES paper I mentioned earlier, Clark found that it takes about a minute worth of work using a signal at the resonant frequency to effect break-in. Another manufacturer stated about 5 minutes. This 5 fold variation is still less than the time it takes to smoke a cigarette. As Danny Richie notes in his Technical section, there were no tests done at 1 or 5 or even 10 minutes. Instead, he took a T=0 seconds and T=10 seconds and then took a leap to 20 hours!!! Not even Marion Jones vitamin water can do that!

So, Danny presented data without...

a) The requisite number of data points at different times which could be curve fitted and equation developed. 10 seconds to 20 hours is just ridiculous.
b) No individual data points so that the averages reported could have appropriate error bars associated with them.
c) No specification for what driving hard means.
d) No temperature measurements.
e) No additional measurements after say 24 hours which would've been interesting as elastomeric creep takes more time than temperatures coming to some set value.

So, yes Danny Richie has presented data. What now follows is my personal opinion regarding this data. The data is incomplete and the experimental design is sloppy. Whatever statistics learned while pursuing a business program were not applied unless one considers adding three numbers and dividing by 3 to be statistics. Danny ignored or didn't think to investigate what happens to the T/S parameters after the driver has sat for a day which would have allowed him to investigate the elastomeric aspects in addition to temperature. He has not addressed the issue of driver to driver variablity within a lot of drivers and among different lots. Hence, he is unable to put into perspective for the reader the realities of manufacturing variabilities. Various unsupported claims were made elsewhere in the GR-Research link that appeal more to folk-lore rather than any verifiable scientific claims for audibility. In a very real sense, this is like the Nobel Laureate in Physics, Brian Josephson, attempting to use quantum mechanical explanations to justify things like mind reading and other paranormal events.

It is further my opinion that one benefits enormously by considering prior art and endeavoring to see what's been done in the field. Hence, that he does not have the AES paper nor apparently anything else pertaining to this field, has not boned up on matters of auditory science, is largely ignorant and dismissive of bias controls as it pertains to human psychology, other measurement techniques, etc. is indicative of why this paper and conclusions reached exist. Further work is obviously needed and since the ability to contact some of the people who don't see things quite the same way exists (Pierce, Clark, Nousaine), I might just start there.

We are not talking about psycho acoustic effects. We are talking about easily measured and documented mechanical burn in effects on a driver and acoustical changes from it.
.

I am sorry you didn't like the opinions of an expert like Dick Pierce and his info since he measures drivers for a living, brand new, after use, and after resting.

What will you accept, which Journal?

... In a very real sense, this is like the Nobel Laureate in Physics, Brian Josephson, attempting to use quantum mechanical explanations to justify things like mind reading and other paranormal events.

It is further my opinion that one benefits enormously by considering prior art and endeavoring to see what's been done in the field. Hence, that he does not have the AES paper nor apparently anything else pertaining to this field, has not boned up on matters of auditory science, is largely ignorant and dismissive of bias controls as it pertains to human psychology, other measurement techniques, etc. is indicative of why this paper and conclusions reached exist. Further work is obviously needed and since the ability to contact some of the people who don't see things quite the same way exists (Pierce, Clark, Nousaine), I might just start there.


This might also help with further testing and perhaps better data collection:D


http://www.audioholics.com/education/loudspeaker-basics/speaker-break-in-fact-or-fiction

It also looks like DR tried his silliness over at AH as well some time back;)

Let's look at the data and compare this to what Dick Pierce has stated in the two links that CharlesJ provided. Indeed, let us look at what's stated more carefully.

On GR Research's website, there is a technical section which can be found at, http://www.gr-research.com/burnin.shtm

1) Intially, DR states that he made 3 measurements for "consistency and accuracy", yet the public does not have the measurements obtained so that an assessment can be made for his quoted comments. Had he done so, then one could assign a +/- to the averages using appropriate statistical weighting for the small number of trials. The numbers given are devoid of an understanding of what the "consistency and accuracy" are. Further, to report data to the ten thousandth's decimal place implies an accuracy that is completely unsupportable. As an example, an NBS certified 25.0000 gram weight is not cheap and DR's reporting that he added such mass is a stretch.

2) DR performed measurements on a fresh woofer. Straight out of the box. Never been played. DR considers that a baseline from which meaningful comparisons can be made. Of course this ignores the fact that drivers can be stored in different positions resulting in differing extents of being out of center. It also ignores that the manufacturing process itself can result in differing amounts of stiffness due to the way the epoxy, varnish or whatever is used. So, what does Pierce say about this?



Some manufacturers run their drivers through a process that excercises the driver. Some don't.

3) The second measurements involve physically pushing the driver back and forth. No electricity was applied. Presumably this was done once in each direction by hand. IOW, it's just ONE CYCLE. It is entirely reasonable to assume that if this is the case, the changes in temperature were irrelevent. The measurements now show a change. As Pierce noted above, this is due to some initial cracking of the epoxy or varnish used. Not a lot of cracks, but enough to indicate that just one cycle causes an effect. The change in F(s) is approximately 2.7. Again, note that it is impossible to assign any standard deviations (66%, 95%, 99% confidence levels) to the numbers. We'll have to use them as are.

4) The third test ran the woofer "hard for 10 seconds". What hard is, is undefined. 50% full excursion? 75%? Something else? No idea. We could assume it meant very near full excursion but the assumption is unwarranted as it could also mean it was run slightly past full excursion in which case one may've damaged the woofer. By way of example, take a spring and let it oscillate with a light weight. Now use a heavy weight and watch the spring deform permanently.

In any event, the F(s) dropped 3.7 from the original, never used, never tested woofer. After a period of time which we don't know, temperatures cooled. From what value to what value we don't know. Nor do we know how the temperatures were measured. In any event, the F(s) is now 2.7 from the original value.

5) The next measurements occured with 20 hours!! of hard run in. Again note, that no one knows what hard is. Well maybe your spouse knows a Mr. Softie :D F(s) has changed by 5.0 from the original measurement of the never used woofer returning to a net 3.7 change after things have cooled down. The same comments about the temperature apply.

Danny Richie states, "Now I wonder if the woofer burned in or if it was my test equipment?"

Well let's look at it shall we? In the AES paper I mentioned earlier, Clark found that it takes about a minute worth of work using a signal at the resonant frequency to effect break-in. Another manufacturer stated about 5 minutes. This 5 fold variation is still less than the time it takes to smoke a cigarette. As Danny Richie notes in his Technical section, there were no tests done at 1 or 5 or even 10 minutes. Instead, he took a T=0 seconds and T=10 seconds and then took a leap to 20 hours!!! Not even Marion Jones vitamin water can do that!

So, Danny presented data without...

a) The requisite number of data points at different times which could be curve fitted and equation developed. 10 seconds to 20 hours is just ridiculous.
b) No individual data points so that the averages reported could have appropriate error bars associated with them.
c) No specification for what driving hard means.
d) No temperature measurements.
e) No additional measurements after say 24 hours which would've been interesting as elastomeric creep takes more time than temperatures coming to some set value.

So, yes Danny Richie has presented data. What now follows is my personal opinion regarding this data. The data is incomplete and the experimental design is sloppy. Whatever statistics learned while pursuing a business program were not applied unless one considers adding three numbers and dividing by 3 to be statistics. Danny ignored or didn't think to investigate what happens to the T/S parameters after the driver has sat for a day which would have allowed him to investigate the elastomeric aspects in addition to temperature. He has not addressed the issue of driver to driver variablity within a lot of drivers and among different lots. Hence, he is unable to put into perspective for the reader the realities of manufacturing variabilities. Various unsupported claims were made elsewhere in the GR-Research link that appeal more to folk-lore rather than any verifiable scientific claims for audibility. In a very real sense, this is like the Nobel Laureate in Physics, Brian Josephson, attempting to use quantum mechanical explanations to justify things like mind reading and other paranormal events.

It is further my opinion that one benefits enormously by considering prior art and endeavoring to see what's been done in the field. Hence, that he does not have the AES paper nor apparently anything else pertaining to this field, has not boned up on matters of auditory science, is largely ignorant and dismissive of bias controls as it pertains to human psychology, other measurement techniques, etc. is indicative of why this paper and conclusions reached exist. Further work is obviously needed and since the ability to contact some of the people who don't see things quite the same way exists (Pierce, Clark, Nousaine), I might just start there.

The respected engineers in the audio field have already documented this so it's a waste of your time to debate Danny. He has a history of contradicting things that the true experts in the field have already proven with good science and controlled listening tests.

It would be better to discuss things that do make an audible difference such as dynamic behavior of the speaker in real-world use. A good example is the NRC tests used in the speaker reviews at SoundStage. One of the tests shows the non-linearity / compression of the frequency response when the input level is increased. There are a few designs that Danny was involved in that they did reviews for, the Usher Be-718 and the AV123 Mini-Strata. The Usher speaker did pretty good but the AV123 exhibited some problems that would be very audible. If I were Danny I would study this instead of wasting my time on something that really doesn't matter.

What's the matter Chewy? If you don't like the message try shooting the messenger? It's just as easy to shoot holes in your attempts to discredit my measured data. Let's see...

Further, to report data to the ten thousandth's decimal place implies an accuracy that is completely unsupportable.

Regardless of how many decimal places over the Clio system will read to it really doesn't matter much when the magnitude of changes are such that they are to the left side of the decimal place. Who cares if it states a measured Fs four decimal places over when the total change from 40 hours of burn in is 6Hz. :rolleyes:

As an example, an NBS certified 25.0000 gram weight is not cheap and DR's reporting that he added such mass is a stretch.

Who cares what NBS charges for weight? My local pharmacy scales are pretty damn good. Use your head man. Fs figures are made without adding mass. Yet the burn in time clearly effected that measurement as it should.

2) DR performed measurements on a fresh woofer. Straight out of the box. Never been played. DR considers that a baseline from which meaningful comparisons can be made. Of course this ignores the fact that drivers can be stored in different positions resulting in differing extents of being out of center. It also ignores that the manufacturing process itself can result in differing amounts of stiffness due to the way the epoxy, varnish or whatever is used.

It is stupid to suggest all of that. For one the woofer was not stored in some odd ball way as to effect the suspension. You are now grasping for straws.

And furthermore it doesn't matter if the T/S parameters are off from a manufacturers reference or not. The change from burn in time is the same. I can take a group of woofers all made from the same production run and might find a 1/2% variance some where or even a Fs that differs by 2Hz. It doesn't matter. The burn in effects are the same.

3) The second measurements involve physically pushing the driver back and forth. and blah, blah, blah...

This was done because some say that it is all that is needed. The myth was that the driver is burned in the first time the suspension is fully stretched each way. Obviously there was no validity to that myth as the compliance continued to change with burn in.

4) The third test ran the woofer "hard for 10 seconds". What hard is, is undefined. blah, blah, blah...

"Hard" is trying to teach something to YOU.

10 seconds was used because there is the myth that it only takes a few seconds. It doesn't make any difference just how hard, hard really is. Who cares? If the myths told here hold true then the driver will be fully burned in within just a few minutes and the parameters will return once allowed to settle.

Obviously this myth did not hold true according to the measurements.

And driven "hard" was pushing the woofer to about 75% of its X-max.

5) The next measurements occured with 20 hours!!

And what difference does it make how long it is played? One of the myths was it only took a few seconds.

Besides there was still compliance changes taking place from 20 hours to 40 hours.

Plus the driver was measured right after running it hard (hot) and after letting it cool for about 2 hours. How long do you think it takes to cool down? Did you need for the exact temperature of the voice coil to be measured as well?

Furthermore my measured data was supported by other well known and accredited woofer designers. One has a motor structure design patent to his name and the other is a head engineer at well known, long standing, US driver manufacturer. In case you haven't noticed that is a pier review. Do I need to get more than two next time?

I am sorry you didn't like the opinions of an expert like Dick Pierce and his info since he measures drivers for a living, brand new, after use, and after resting.

What will you accept, which Journal?

Opinions are opinions. Let's see some measured data.

I have a whole group of well known woofers coming. At what increments of burn in time would you like to see them measured?

What's the matter Chewy? Here we go again........:o

This might also help with further testing and perhaps better data collection

http://www.audioholics.com/education...act-or-fiction

I have already responded to that. There is NOTHING there but fiction.

They have absolutely ZERO! Zip, notta, nothing. Have a good look.

They took some published T/S parameters for a couple of woofers. Now look closely here's the key from their own text.

"break in specs are derived from a 5% increase in suspension mechanical compliance."

They DERIVED the new compliance numbers by guessing that the change would be 5% and never measured anything. They never measured ANYTHING!

You can see that the took the Vas of the 4" woofer 1.5627. They theorized a 5% change. Multiplied 1.5627 by 1.05 and got 1.6408 as a new number.

They also theorized that it would take place in a few seconds.

They never measured ANYTHING !!!

Rick are you sure you want to get involved in this?

He has a history of ...

I could share plenty of your history if you like.

It would be better to discuss things that do make an audible difference

A few years ago you were swearing that high end caps and resistors made no difference.

Here we go again........:o
Yeah, I get that a lot. It's a selling point when advertising oneself.

Rick Craig said...
If I were Danny I would study this instead of wasting my time on something that really doesn't matter.
There's a lot of things to study. Problems to solve. Problems to identify. But IMO, you've got to go past studying business to the disciplines that impact on what you're trying to accomplish. That's not going to come from hitting up the DIY forums where the doors are open to everyone. I tell you it's a Gumbaya world. Doctors and faith healers all eating at the same table and slapping each other on the backs.

What's the matter Chewy? If you don't like the message try shooting the messenger? It's just as easy to shoot holes in your attempts to discredit my measured data. Let's see...Let's see how good your aim is. Not using Cheney's shotgun I hope!

Regardless of how many decimal places over the Clio system will read to it really doesn't matter much when the magnitude of changes are such that they are to the left side of the decimal place. Who cares if it states a measured Fs four decimal places over when the total change from 40 hours of burn in is 6Hz.
It implies a precision that does not exist and hence should've been rounded down appropriately. It suggests to the uninformed reader that your discriminatory ability is a few order of magnitude better than it really is.

Who cares what NBS charges for weight? My local pharmacy scales are pretty damn good. Use your head man. Fs figures are made without adding mass. Yet the burn in time clearly effected that measurement as it should. See above comments.

It is stupid to suggest all of that. For one the woofer was not stored in some odd ball way as to effect the suspension. You are now grasping for straws. You're aware of how it was stored and for what length of time before it got to you? You're not a very thorough individual.

10 seconds was used because there is the myth that it only takes a few seconds. It doesn't make any difference just how hard, hard really is. Who cares? If the myths told here hold true then the driver will be fully burned in within just a few minutes and the parameters will return once allowed to settle.
1) Yes, it might only take a few seconds if the woofer was run in at the factory. It probably takes a while till you find good places for your speaker. As you're doing that. Moving things around. Maybe relocating a coffee table, doing some measurements, how do you isolate that from any audible break-in effects?
2) It certainly does matter how hard, hard really is. It's called consistency. Repeatability. It's called good science. After all, you want to initially make sure you've given the epoxy/varnish matrix a proper 'crack'. Not an irreproducible one.
3) As noted in my earlier comment about the information you provided on your web page, your initial strokes on the driver served to breakup the epoxy/varnish. That, as Pierce notes, is not breaking in. For you to claim it, is gratuitous.
4) You never tested the woofer after a couple of minutes, be it 1, 5, or 10. Nor did you measure it after say a 24 hour period to allow for recovery of elastomeric stretching. You went from 10 seconds to 20 hours. Talk about a 19 hour, 59 minutes, and 50 second lapse! Shoot away.

Obviously this myth did not hold true according to the measurements. I guess so long as we get to pick bizarre starting points and myths, I guess not.

Furthermore my measured data was supported by other well known and accredited woofer designers. One has a motor structure design patent to his name and the other is a head engineer at well known, long standing, US driver manufacturer. In case you haven't noticed that is a pier review. Do I need to get more than two next time? I read what Wiggins and the other fellow said. Again, you need to do more careful work Danny. You didn't. For example, in the 40 hour test, you never measured the woofer, which I presume was the same one used all along, initially. Before it got hot. I and many others don't consider the first few minutes of playing a speaker anything more than making sure it works. And again and again Danny, since you're taking replicate measurements, one can assign a +/- to the values weighted appropriately to derive an estimate of the uncertainty of the measurement to a given confidence level. Wiggins might be able to help you out on that. Or call a math professor. Note, that none of the references made any remarks as to the audibility of this when the driver is used in a finished product.

I have a whole group of well known woofers coming. At what increments of burn in time would you like to see them measured?
Get the GD paper already Danny and read it. Do a better job at documenting. Examine the effects after elastomeric relaxation. Borrow or rent a temperature measuring device. Learn how to do averages with associated errors. Jeez. Some shooting!

Gratuitous babe pic follows illustrating how precisely she's holding her hands and how accurately she has made sure that her bottoms don't show the precision of her skill with a razor.

http://www.petra-nemcova.info/gallery/petra_nemcova_006.jpg

There's a lot of things to study. Problems to solve. Problems to identify. But IMO, you've got to go past studying business to the disciplines that impact on what you're trying to accomplish. That's not going to come from hitting up the DIY forums where the doors are open to everyone. I tell you it's a Gumbaya world. Doctors and faith healers all eating at the same table and slapping each other on the backs.

Well you lost me on that last part :)

I do agree that it takes discipline to carry out an experiment and have reliable results.

I'm saying you need to find places that are more devoid of opinions that are unsubstantiated other than by people who share the same opinions. At DIY places, that's no so easy to do. Hence doctors and faith healers all having dinner together. It's my little rant against the politically correct world. Fuzzy math. Stuff like that.

I'm saying you need to find places that are more devoid of opinions that are unsubstantiated other than by people who share the same opinions. At DIY places, that's no so easy to do. Hence doctors and faith healers all having dinner together. It's my little rant against the politically correct world. Fuzzy math. Stuff like that.I am pretty sure that DIY world of speaker builders (Old Madisound, Parts Express, etc.) don't all share the same view of the type of speaker break in that Danny suggests. Some may be ambivalent (a bad design won't get any better by breaking in the speaker) but I believe Rick and Danny have "history" in this among other areas.

Chu Gai,
Maybe it is time to step up to the plate and participate. If you are willing
to devote the time, perhaps we can cover your travel costs. I'll throw in $20.
How far away do you live? What do you estimate your travel costs would be?
If I was filthy rich I'd offer to cover your expenses, plus $1000 a day, but alas
that is not an option for me.
How about this. How about you do your own controlled measurements? All
it takes is two speakers - one new, one "broken" in. You are obviously interested
in this subject. Why not do your own investigation instead of spouting what
you read elsewhere? Better yet, buy three. Measure them fresh out of the box.
See how they differ. Run one in - see if it changes. Just do it!

Travel is not an option at this time, but I'd be happy to slip the $20 between the cheeks of a dancer. Or, you can do it for me. To further her education you understand. The work's already been done. Danny won't get it. He won't contact the individuals directly. I've commented on his experimental design. I don't think the comments were unreasonable as they address several issues.

associated errors of measurement
the effects after a temperature cool-down
the effects after recovery of elastomeric properties
variations inherent within a single lot of drivers
variations inherent in different lots

Do you consider the data and experimental design robust? Are you comfortable with making claims about what happens after say 5 minutes based upon a measurements after 10 seconds and 20 hours?

Travel is not an option at this time, but I'd be happy to slip the $20 between the cheeks of a dancer. Or, you can do it for me. To further her education you understand.Now we are making some progress-education is a wonderful thing and to contribute directly like that-well priceless:D

Chu Gai,
How about this. How about you do your own controlled measurements? All
it takes is two speakers - one new, one "broken" in. You are obviously interested
in this subject. Why not do your own investigation instead of spouting what
you read elsewhere? Better yet, buy three. Measure them fresh out of the box.
See how they differ. Run one in - see if it changes. Just do it!How about this, you buy three sets of speakers, measure them, and send them to Chu. He will break one in and not the others and send them back. You have someone monitor the tests and you listen to all three and you identify the one that is broken in. After your test, you can return the two and keep the one that is broken in which will, of course, sound better.:)

If we're all listening to speakers and someone enters the room, leaving the door slightly ajar, how much of an effect does that have with say, the FR at the listening position? Is it more or less than the difference between a speaker run in for say 1/2 hour vs one run in for 40 hours after both have rested for 24 hours?

If we're all listening to speakers and someone enters the room, leaving the door slightly ajar, how much of an effect does that have with say, the FR at the listening position? Is it more or less than the difference between a speaker run in for say 1/2 hour vs one run in for 40 hours after both have rested for 24 hours?

I don't know. Do you?
fwiw I always leave the doors near the corner of my room open whenever I can. Open doors near corners make great bass "traps".

Happy Hollow Een

How about this, you buy three sets of speakers, measure them, and send them to Chu. He will break one in and not the others and send them back. You have someone monitor the tests and you listen to all three and you identify the one that is broken in. After your test, you can return the two and keep the one that is broken in which will, of course, sound better.:)
Good idea, but how about YOU do the buying and sending and measuring.
I'm done.

Yes, more. Open windows are nice too.

I have already responded to that. There is NOTHING there but fiction.
.

Yes, of course. What was I thinking of? You seem to be the only one who knows anything, we should just quietly disappear, right? Sorry to have bothered you.

Yes, of course. What was I thinking of? You seem to be the only one who knows anything, we should just quietly disappear, right? Sorry to have bothered you.

Gotta wonder why the page that was linked is no longer on the server??? If it is the article I think it was that I read earlier today, the article did in fact concede that speakers DO break-in...;)

Gotta wonder why the page that was linked is no longer on the server??? If it is the article I think it was that I read earlier today, the article did in fact concede that speakers DO break-in...;)

If you are referring to the AH article, it is up and running, I just checked.
The graphs 7 & 8 tells the FR story. You can barely see the difference, let alone be it audible. Similar to wire measured differences. Some have a .5 dB difference at 20kHz. Can you hear 20kHz? Not me. Even if I could, the JND up there is rather large.
The JND in the bass band is rather large too.

http://www.audioholics.com/education...act-or-fiction

Not up now...

http://www.audioholics.com/education...act-or-fiction

Not up now...

Interesting gremlins at work.:eek:
Your link is not working. I went back to my post and it works like a charm, both times today:

http://www.audioholics.com/education/loudspeaker-basics/speaker-break-in-fact-or-fiction

something got cut off? Who knows?

You copied it wrong Splicer.

The graphs 7 & 8 tells the FR story. You can barely see the difference, let alone be it audible. Similar to wire measured differences. Some have a .5 dB difference at 20kHz. Can you hear 20kHz? Not me. Even if I could, the JND up there is rather large.
The JND in the bass band is rather large too.

Differences that you hear from burn in are not related nor do they cause changes in amplitude.

They are caused by what then?

Differences that you hear from burn in are not related nor do they cause changes in amplitude.

Interesting. Perhaps you have submitted a paper to AES on this new find? That is one way to advance the audio science, not by posting to a web site.

What do you guys expect? Do you think that it will get louder or what?

I can measure a speaker prior to burn in and after burn in and the frequency response will stay the same.

I can measure one set of speakers that has not been burned in and a set of speakers that have been burned in and they still measure the same.

However, they can sound very different. I would describe the difference after break in as smoother, more transparent, less boxy, more relaxed, resolution is better, and the space between notes is greater.

There is a ton of things going on that causes this but it will be useless at this point to even point them out, especially if you have trouble accepting the easy to measure mechanical changes.

Let's further document the mechanical parameter changes and then I'll host an A/B listening session that will get into audible changes.

I can measure a speaker prior to burn in and after burn in and the frequency response will stay the same.

...the space between notes is greater.


seems like this would show up as a widening of the frequency resonse?

also, isn't a speakers sensitivity, in part, related to spider stiffness? and, as run-in occurs and the spider loosens up, shouldn't sensitivity increase (if only margninally)?

Quote:
Originally Posted by LTD02
do you have any data supporting your opinion?

Try some light reading here:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.audio.high-end/msg/7d26f5cc57ffd849?q=author:DPierce%40world.std.com+and+speake r+break+in&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&rnum=1

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.audio.high-end/msg/e52c59086811bd30?dmode=source&hl=en

Nousaine, Tom, 'Breaking Wind,' Car Stereo Review, Jan/Feb 1997, pg 90-94. (Break in myth)

Nousaine, Tom 'Test Report: Dynaudio MW 190, 12" Subwoofer,' Car Stereo Review, Oct 1997, pg 83-88. (More break in myth)

i haven't looked up the second two, but your first two links contain no data. :eek: the accounts in the first two links are anecdotes.

You'll rarely find comprehensive data posted on newsgroups regardless of the topic. In fact, in research papers that are published, often you'll find data reduction but data is often provided from researchers when asked for especially in situations which might be unexpected. Nousaine can be contacted via his public email and he may be able to shed more light. Understand that Pierce, and others too, do not consider the fracturing of the epoxies/varnishes/phenolics to be part of break-in. The data that's intersting to examine is the value at say 5 minutes after a temperature cool-down then after 24 hours. Then run more data points at longer periods of driver excitation, measuring in the same fashion. Does this make sense?

Chu-

I think you should emphasize your point by posting another pic of a really hot chic...seriously, you're going to get me in trouble at work. I was catching up on the threads while my CAD students were working on a project and a student happened to be working next to me when I perused this interesting, yet seemingly useless thread and he was like, "Holy Sh** Coleman...what're you looking at...porn?" Of course the whole class went overboard and I had to try to explain your motives for posting the "panties in a bunch" pic, which was really difficult to do without making you sound like a perv. At any rate, they all agreed that it was a worthwhile pic, though your credibility is a bit sketchy at this point. :)

J.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LTD02
do you have any data supporting your opinion?



i haven't looked up the second two, but your first two links contain no data. :eek: the accounts in the first two links are anecdotes.

I think Dick Pierce speaks from years if not decades of real data gathering rather than anecdotally

If anyone is looking for a test subject can I suggest these: http://www.stereophile.com/standloudspeakers/506dynaudio/index.html

My own subjective experience with a lot of the Dynaudio range is very similar to that particular reviewer's.

I am a perv Jason. Tell your students.