Speaker Breakin Article

Status
Not open for further replies.
Well, you have to understand that the burned in cables kind of did it for us. I have so many hours per week to allocate staff to writing articles, testing and reviewing. When this stuff comes up it's more of a distraction than anything that will positively or negatively affect anyone.

We aren't exactly in a hurry to prove that the world is round or that we aren't being 'insulting and disrespectful' to the "entire" AV community ("entire" being defined by the people who hang out in a particular circle and presumably believe that cables need to break in for 60 hours).
 
emorphien

emorphien

Audioholic General
Burned in cables is ridiculous, and I agree with your articles but it's hard to really pull much out from that particular article as it stands.
 
gene

gene

Audioholics Master Chief
Administrator
That's always been my question, and why I'm so puzzled over this exists/doesn't exist debate. If it occurs, can you hear it? Does it produce a detectable change in sound? Is there an audible change? If not, isn't the whole debate moot?
I spoke in great length with Dr. Toole and some of Harman's top driver design engineers about this topic. They all have stated driver break in is measurable but from all of their controlled DBT testing it was inaudible. Woofer suspensions do loosen up, as we stated in our article on this matter. In a real room with real music and not test tones, the acoustical change if any is very minor. Of course smart loudspeaker designers take into account when designing woofer/enclosure systems so it does once again become a moot point.

They are only questionable to some people. I can't guarantee that everyone or that anyone will notice the audible effects. The systems that you guys use to review products with is not exactly the kind of system that will allow one to notice these changes. For some of us the audibility effects of burn in are quiet clear.
Oh geez an audio elitist :) You're on the wrong forum for this. Sorry we don't review more triode tube amps, cable risers and vinyl devices, we prefer equipment that measure better on the bench, have better reliability and usability, and overall superior accuracy.

Burned in cables is ridiculous, and I agree with your articles but it's hard to really pull much out from that particular article as it stands.
Well if you can't get the basic E&M theory of a simple device such as wire correctly, imagine what other areas one can mess up and be mislead into false conclusions. Ignorance is the dark path to esoteric audio land. Few have been saved once they have been lured into the power of the dark side :)
 
mtrycrafts

mtrycrafts

Seriously, I have no life.
Danny Richie said:
You are correct. The information that I posted contains real measured data that is consistent with the measurements made by every other driver designer or manufacturer.

However the data posted here at this site is based on nothing more than an assumption. No real data to support the theory is given.
Clint, That is total nonsense, disrespectful, and insulting to the professionals of this industry.
You guys really need to yield a little more respect to those of us that take the time to educate you on this subject by documenting real measured data. If you can't take the word of those of us that design and build drivers for a living, then please at least conduct these test for yourselves. The information you have posted on your site here is false, misleading, and a disservice to the audio community.
You need to make contact with Richard Pierce on this subject of driver measurements. You have heard of him?

I seriously doubt his measurements will support your claims.
Oh, yes, respect has to be earned first.
 
mtrycrafts

mtrycrafts

Seriously, I have no life.
Biscokid said:
Are you saying the article I posted does not have data?

the link was removed. There is data, then there is real data.
 
mtrycrafts

mtrycrafts

Seriously, I have no life.
Danny Richie said:
So you discriminate against my measured data because I can also hear?

I would love to have you guys come over for a visit some time. We can listen to burned in verses non-burned in speakers together. :) When would be good for you guys?

Well, that is yet to be demonstrated in a proper, bias controlled DBT, right?
Anyone can speculate and imagine. The brain is very good at that aspect, confuse reality, fill in where there is emptiness. Well known human trait.
 
D

Danny Richie

Audioholic Intern
Well, you have to understand that the burned in cables kind of did it for us.
Bare with me and I'll share with you young man.

Look, when I was not much younger than you were I thought the same thing.

I can also still remember my disbelief when I buddy of mine told me what a difference his power cords would make too. I thought he was crazy (not really crazy, but I had to hear it myself). Then he let me hear one. We tried it just on my power amp. Man was he right. That power cord made a significant difference.

You can believe what you want about that. I don't care. It doesn't bother me one way or another what you think about subjective matters. It is just that. It's subjective. You can have your own opinion but you can't have mine.

I have heard differences in wire from speaker cables to interconnects, burned in and not burned in even cryo treating. It does make a difference and if you had the privilege of my experiences you'd think too.

I can't scientifically explain everything that is going on there and barely have a grasp on some of the fundamentals that take place regarding wire burn in.

There is no sense in arguing that stuff. So you might as well drop it. Until you hear it for yourself you won't believe. If you ever plan a trip out this way (Texas) I'll be glad to enlighten you (any of you).

Now speaker burn in is a different story. The same goes for woofer burn in. There is not only an electrically burn in but a mechanical one as well. The mechanical changes in compliance are fairly easy to document.

All you have to do is measure the T/S parameters of a woofer before and after various intervals to see what type of time is needed for this change to take place and to reach a settling range.

The problem is, and the problem that I have with you guys is that you haven't done that. But what you have done is post some false and misleading information.

Do yourselves and everyone else a favor and remove it.

Then post real measured data taken before and after various amounts of time. If you take the time to do it right then you'll see the results for yourself. At least you can then from an opinion based on something and not an opinion based on nothing. What you have now is worse than nothing because it is just something that you made up. I theory based on nothing is worth less than nothing.

They all have stated driver break in is measurable but from all of their controlled DBT testing it was inaudible.
For some people is will not be audible, but for a whole lot of people it is. If you ever come visit with me I'll put something together to show just how audible it really is. That's the part not worth arguing over.

Woofer suspensions do loosen up, as we stated in our article on this matter.
Yes, but you stated that it takes place in just tens of seconds and that's it. Just a few seconds later and it's all burned in huh? That is just false and misleading. That is the part that you need to address. How long does it really take?

In a real room with real music and not test tones, the acoustical change if any is very minor.
Ah, now this sounds very inconsistent. Now it is "the acoustic change if any..." and sure it will be "minor". But you haven't heard it yet and have no idea.

Of course smart loudspeaker designers take into account when designing woofer/enclosure systems so it does once again become a moot point.
Yes we can take it into account but the change in optimal box volume and tuning is pretty small. I can change the box tuning more by adding or taking away damping material. You see as one set of variables go one way (making the optimal box size larger) the other parameters go the other way (making optimal box size smaller).

Of geez an audio elitist You're on the wrong forum for this. Sorry we don't review more triode tube amps, cable risers and vinyl devices, we prefer equipment that measures better on the bench, has better reliability and usability, and overall superior accuracy.
I wouldn't call myself and elitist and if you knew me very well you wouldn't either. While I do design products in entry level price ranges I don't do so with entry level gear. I am always looking for the best bang for the buck to offer my customers, but I don't do critical listening and evaluating of a product that I am designing on bank for the buck gear in an entry level class. Granted I do look for the best bang for the buck gear for my own system but it is in more of a cost no object class. No offense but it is critical for my job. When I evaluate a speaker that I have been working on I need to hear exactly what IT is doing. I can't be listening through bottlenecked electronics or piece of crap gear. If I have issue with any audible problem, I must know that it is not something else in the chain.

I put a ton of time and effort into any product that I design, and some of them have won some of the industry's highest awards and been in nearly all of the major publications. Even the cheapest speakers that I design gets evaluated on thousands of dollars worth of electronics for hours on end, and in multiple systems.

Now how do you think I feel when one of those products gets reviewed somewhere by a guy using a Denon receiver and a Koss DVD player as a CD player. Man, that's insulting. It is absolutely insulting. I can't help but thing to myself that I am glad he liked it but he really hasn't even heard it. Understandably the customer is going to hook it up to whatever else is in the same price range, but it should NEVER be reviewed with entry level gear. What you'll hear is exactly what you feed it.

Guess what else. If your system is nothing more than an inexpensive home theater receiver and a DVD play, you're probably not going to hear the differences in speaker burn in. You won't likely hear the difference from one kind of wire to the next either, let alone how the sound of wire changes from burn in time. If this is your view of audio and you like it that's fine, but there is a whole other world out there that you haven't seen yet.

You need to make contact with Richard Pierce on this subject of driver measurements. You have heard of him?
Yea I think I have. :rolleyes: 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.
 
Danny Richie said:
Now how do you think I feel when one of those products gets reviewed somewhere by a guy using a Denon receiver and a Koss DVD player as a CD player.
If it's an AVR-5805 MK2 you should feel pretty good for the receiver. It measures much cleaner and better than most esoteric gear we've put on the bench.

And, let's not start the cable debate over again. We've already completely debunked it once and for all - except for the few remaining black knights who refuse to double blind their own listening tests; or only listen to esoteric "EQ" cables that roll off the high end and then claim cables sound different - of course they do if they are made poorly.
 
D

Danny Richie

Audioholic Intern
If it's an AVR-5805 MK2 you should feel pretty good for the receiver. It measures much cleaner and better than most esoteric gear we've put on the bench.
If it measures better it has to sound better right? You must be measuring the wrong thing.

My speakers measure great. Does that mean they sound great? It's a good indication that there are not any problems but it won't tell you how they sound. Sometimes they measure great and don't sound all that great and I go back to the drawing board.

I have three different caps here. They all measure the same if I measure them for capacitance. Does that mean they sound the same?



They don't sound the same at all.

And, let's not start the cable debate over again. We've already completely debunked it once and for all
You haven't debunked anything just because you and your pals can't hear the difference on entry level gear.
 
Biscokid

Biscokid

Audioholic
Do you guys measure your wine and food to see how good it is?

its also real funny that you remove the article that was posted but you leave your article. Seems fishy.
 
tomd51

tomd51

Audioholic General
Well, looking at it from their perspective Bisco, if you were runnning a forum and a member posted a link to an article that you felt to be biased, misleading and inaccurate (I'm not saying it is or it isn't), would you be inclined to remove the link to the article or keep it?

Just curious.... -TD
 
S

sploo

Full Audioholic
Danny Richie said:
I have three different caps here. They all measure the same if I measure them for capacitance. Does that mean they sound the same?



They don't sound the same at all.
I guess the important question is - if they measure the same, but sound different, why?

What function of the ear exists that modern test equipment cannot capture?

You can measure differences you can't hear, but I'm not aware of situations where you can hear something you can't measure. Anyone got any citations?
 
I actually like this thread - here, have some more rope... lol.

Anyone ever bother to measure the variances between batches and individual drivers? Harman has. Think those tolerances are less than anything speaker break-in has to offer? No.
 
gene

gene

Audioholics Master Chief
Administrator
Danny;

You seem to have a problem with staying on topic and using red herrings to confuse the issues at hand.

Patrick Hart, a former loudspeaker engineer of Harman saw this thread and offered me this PM to share in the forum:

A speaker’s “amount of work” or “performance envelope” is well illustrated by looking at the area under the frequency curve. That area will always stay the same as long as the magnet/voice coil motor structure are not changed and the moving mass components are not driven beyond their mechanical failure limits.

Oh, some of the Thiele-Smalls will change such as the FAR or compliance but unless some part of the driver is actually modified the actual “work” that the speaker is able to perform always remains the same. In the case of break-in the FAR might go down 5Hz or so for say a 6.5” mid-woofer. So we’ll usually see a very slight lowering of sensitivity across the driver’s working bandwidth. The area under the curve remains the same.

If one looks at the equations which form the Thiele-Small parameter derivations it will be seen that factors to the left of the = sign always balance with factors on the right. They have to.
 
gene

gene

Audioholics Master Chief
Administrator
If it measures better it has to sound better right? You must be measuring the wrong thing.
Here we go again. Audio is a GREAT mystery. We CANNOT quantify what we hear so we simply design on blind faith and hope we reach audio nirvana by tweaking caps and circuits NOT thru empirical analysis but through subjective listening tests only. Then if consumers don't like the end results, the manufacturer blames their other system equipment, synergy, gravitational pull of the moon, etc. I smell an audio elitist and it stinks rather awful.
 
D

Danny Richie

Audioholic Intern
You seem to have a problem with staying on topic and using red herrings to confuse the issues at hand.
All to illustrate a point young man. All to illustrate a point.

And here is a good one:

guess the important question is - if they measure the same, but sound different, why?

What function of the ear exists that modern test equipment cannot capture?

You can measure differences you can't hear, but I'm not aware of situations where you can hear something you can't measure. Anyone got any citations?
If you look at what I wrote, I said they measure the same in regards to capacitance. There are a lot of other things going on that have a great effect on the sound. Most of these are measurable and quantifiable. Other differences are dielectric constant, dielectric absorption, equivalent series resistance, self inductance, dissipation factor, insolation resistance, voltage rating, dielectric thickness, type if film used, type of conductive material used, thickness of the conductive material, thickness of the film, type of termination, type of material used for termination, composition of the solder, type of leads used, etc.

The same things can be said for electronics. If you just look at some of the variables one might conclude that a Denon receiver might sound better than my tube amps. But if you look at everything else involved (all the other variables) its not hard to understand why my tube amps and tube pre-amp kick the crap out of the best Denon receiver in sound quality, coming and going.

Gene, thanks for offering Patricks comments.

A speaker’s “amount of work” or “performance envelope” is well illustrated by looking at the area under the frequency curve. That area will always stay the same as long as the magnet/voice coil motor structure are not changed and the moving mass components are not driven beyond their mechanical failure limits.
The frequency response will only show one aspect. It shows output level. Okay...

Oh, some of the Thiele-Smalls will change such as the FAR or compliance but unless some part of the driver is actually modified the actual “work” that the speaker is able to perform always remains the same. In the case of break-in the FAR might go down 5Hz or so for say a 6.5” mid-woofer. So we’ll usually see a very slight lowering of sensitivity across the driver’s working bandwidth. The area under the curve remains the same.
By FAR is he referring to Fs? The area under the curve? :) If he is trying to say that the compliance change has a minimal effect on the measured response then I agree with him.

If one looks at the equations which form the Thiele-Small parameter derivations it will be seen that factors to the left of the = sign always balance with factors on the right. They have to.
I agree. So what. He didn't address anything regarding burn in time. Address the issue. My published data shows that a compliance change takes place. Professional loudspeaker engineers confirm it. Patrick says a compliance change takes place, and even your theory posted here on this web site is that a compliance change takes place.

The problem is that you have falsely stated information on your site as to the time frame that this takes place and you have done NO research or testing to substantiate your claims. You "derived" figures from a GUESS that there would be a 5% change and and a GUESS as to how long it would take. You need to get that information corrected and understood then we can move onto how it effects the sound.

I realize that some of this education process is going to take some time and that there is little I can share with you in words and print that is going to illustrate audible changes of burn in, so there is no sense in it. Maybe one day we can sit down together and share some listening time to explore these issues further. I would love it.

Here we go again. Audio is a GREAT mystery. We CANNOT quantify what we hear so we simply design on blind faith and hope we reach audio nirvana by tweaking caps and circuits NOT thru empirical analysis but through subjective listening tests only.
Don't insult me. I don't design products by faith and hope.

Then if consumers don't like the end results, the manufacturer blames their other system equipment, synergy, gravitational pull of the moon, etc. I smell an audio elitist and it stinks rather awful.
Come on man, that's pure crap.
 
D

Danny Richie

Audioholic Intern
Ooops, sorry about forgetting you Clint.

Anyone ever bother to measure the variances between batches and individual drivers? Harman has. Think those tolerances are less than anything speaker break-in has to offer? No.
I measure and test every single tweeter that we offer under the GR Research name. Just as with any other driver there are variances. Each of our tweeters comes with a printed response curve and they are sold in matched pairs at no additional cost. All of our kits leave with matched pairs too.

However the variances are in amplitude only. These are different than the variances of prior and post burn in. Which is greater is a subjective call. Is amplitude the most important aspect or is it phase coherency? Maybe it spectral decay? A ringing woofer resonance, that has to be up there too. No?

Even if one aspect is given more weight you can't deny the others.
 
Tomorrow

Tomorrow

Audioholic Ninja
gene said:
I smell an audio elitist and it stinks rather awful.
This thread has degraded once again into willy-waving, just exactly like the original thread. It's getting boring guys, and turns off those of us trying to learn. Please, discuss the issues or else we're gonna have to send the Mother Superior and her 'stick' after you. The proof comes from the debate and the data (or lack thereof), not the name-calling.
 
gene

gene

Audioholics Master Chief
Administrator
If you look at what I wrote, I said they measure the same in regards to capacitance. There are a lot of other things going on that have a great effect on the sound. Most of these are measurable and quantifiable. Other differences are dielectric constant, dielectric absorption, equivalent series resistance, self inductance, dissipation factor, insolation resistance, voltage rating, dielectric thickness, type if film used, type of conductive material used, thickness of the conductive material, thickness of the film, type of termination, type of material used for termination, composition of the solder, type of leads used, etc.
Yes and all of this is measurable and quantifiable. Any decent engineer understands the differences between capacitors beyond their RLC measurement on an impedance analyzer.

The same things can be said for electronics. If you just look at some of the variables one might conclude that a Denon receiver might sound better than my tube amps. But if you look at everything else involved (all the other variables) its not hard to understand why my tube amps and tube pre-amp kick the crap out of the best Denon receiver in sound quality, coming and going.
Ah so now the agenda is clear. Self promotion of your own products. No proof other than your alleged listening tests that your antiquated tube amps offer superior sonic attributes. Of course I am sure you have heard every Denon receiver on the market to make such a claim and you've done so in a controlled DTB testing style.

Normally I would ban a member who shamelessly promotes their products or adgenda's but this thread has become too entertaining to do that :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top