KEW

KEW

Audioholic Overlord
Speaker break-in is a frequent topic. I have generally subscribed to the view point that speaker break-in was largely psychological and had little to do with actual physical changes to the speaker. However, being practical, I considered it a moot point, because I have no problem leaving music playing for hours on end and it is easy enough to not do any critical listening until they have had a few days.

I have a lot of respect for Danny of GR Research, and he seems to have compiled a good argument (with measurements) for speaker break-in.

http://www.gr-research.com/burnin.htm
 
D

Dennis Murphy

Audioholic General
It's interesting that Danny claims a lot of the break-in effects are electrical--capacitors mainly--but that the measurements really only go to the mechanical properties of a woofer (other than the temporary effects of the heated voice coil). No one doubts that play-time will affect the suspension and surround, and that Fs will drop and, to a lesser degree, Qts. I can't say as I've measured anything like the magnitudes Danny is showing for extended play, but there's no question that there is a directional effect. None of this goes to claims that speakers smooth out or become less edgy outside of the deep bass region affected by woofer break in. I demonstrated that the BMR radiator used in the Cambridge Aero measured identically and sounded the same after 50 hours of play, despite vociferous claims that there was a dramatic change in sound quality.
 
Last edited:
slipperybidness

slipperybidness

Audioholic Warlord
I personally believe in mechanical break-in. I can absolutely confirm that polymers will stretch and outgas residual solvent, and become a bit more compliant over time (that is one of the artifacts from polymer manufacturing).

Gene also did a similar investigation for AH.

What Gene determined was that the change from new to broken in were insignificant when compared to the driver-to-driver variation measurments. I think that is a blind spot from this linked article-- How do his pre-breakin and post-breakin measurements compare to the unit-to-unit variation?

The next big question--Is this data set large enough to be statistically significant? You need a minimum of 30 data points to start getting statistically significant results. You need to be certain that the data derived from the sample set has a minimum of 95% confidence interval that it is truly representative of the population under evaluation.

And, the real million $ question-- Were the changes that he measured actually AUDIBLE changes? Or were they inaudible but measurable? He didn't even approach that question.
 
j_garcia

j_garcia

Audioholic Jedi
We had a really, REALLY long thread about this that Danny even got involved in. It went nowhere.
 
elwaylite

elwaylite

Audioholic
This one is easy. If you believe in it and the speaker/sub builder recommends break in, play to your hearts content for a month and then re-run auto eq. If you don't, play to your hearts content and be happy forever. Both are easy and keep everyone from worrying about something so insignificant.
 
gene

gene

Audioholics Master Chief
Administrator
I personally believe in mechanical break-in. I can absolutely confirm that polymers will stretch and outgas residual solvent, and become a bit more compliant over time (that is one of the artifacts from polymer manufacturing).

Gene also did a similar investigation for AH.

What Gene determined was that the change from new to broken in were insignificant when compared to the driver-to-driver variation measurments. I think that is a blind spot from this linked article-- How do his pre-breakin and post-breakin measurements compare to the unit-to-unit variation?

The next big question--Is this data set large enough to be statistically significant? You need a minimum of 30 data points to start getting statistically significant results. You need to be certain that the data derived from the sample set has a minimum of 95% confidence interval that it is truly representative of the population under evaluation.

And, the real million $ question-- Were the changes that he measured actually AUDIBLE changes? Or were they inaudible but measurable? He didn't even approach that question.
Not only that but the small differences of a driver "broken in" vs "unbroken in" are mostly swamped out once loaded into an enclosed system.

See: http://www.audioholics.com/loudspeaker-design/speaker-break-in-fact-or-fiction

Danny Richie is a talented loudspeaker engineer, but some of his claims are "interesting", especially regarding exotic cables.
 
3db

3db

Audioholic Slumlord
j_garcia

j_garcia

Audioholic Jedi
For me, I just go by what I hear. If I can't hear a difference, then I don't worry about it. I'm open to trying things to see if they make a difference. Often they don't or are minimal. I HAVE heard differences with various interconnects, likely just in little games the manufacturers play with specs and materials to achieve a different sound for marketing purposes. However I've never found it to be meaningful enough that I'm willing to spend money on it, nor did I feel it was of any real benefit to me. Same with speaker wire. IF there was a difference that I THOUGHT I was hearing, it was so small that if I have to consider that I might not hear a difference that it wasn't worth my time anymore.
 
Last edited:
highfigh

highfigh

Seriously, I have no life.
I would swear the I have heard speakers change in the first hours of listening but because it isn't in one session, I have to doubt whether I really do hear what I think I do as someone who tries to listen critically. It wouldn't be reasonable to believe that I can remember exactly what I heard in minute detail after experiencing other sounds & noises that may affect my hearing. However, I also know that our brain is really good at fudging some details. I have heard speakers that I hated at first and then noticed that I didn't hate them as much after a few hours. Some, I still hated, but others weren't as bad as the initial listen.

I have the Dayton WT3 which, I assume, isn't the most accurate measuring setup but I have done repeated measurements on several drivers before their actual use and the data was consistent. After use, the parameters changed- Fs, Qm (and therefore, Qts) and Vas. I don't beat my speakers to death and I'm not planning to do any destructive testing, but the music I listen to has a wide frequency range.

FWIW, most of the cables that sounded worse than others were real POS type, usually selling for about $8 for a 6' AV with red, white and yellow molded covers on the plugs or something that was damaged. I don't listen to cables, but if I hear something bad, I'll swap to find out if anything changes. If I set up a system and I like it, I leave it alone.
 
agarwalro

agarwalro

Audioholic Ninja
The driver parameters that change measurably after break-in, to the point that it is audible. The manufacturers typically rate (higher end) electronic components used in crossovers, at 5% tolerance. The latter also drift with burn-in. The latter is also claimed by some to be audible.

It begs the question: When there is such a measurable variance and corresponding audible change in sound, why do speaker manufacturers not sell premium or ultra premium products advertised as "Already broken in, the sound quality you hear today is what you will hear for life"? You don't see Monoprice or BJC, nor Dave (Ascend) or Dennis (Philharmonic) or Brian (Rythmik) or Tom (PSA) doing it. Fry's doesn't stamping burn-in times on their electronic components.

Surely, there must be a market for speakers in which every driver is broken-in and every electronic component hand picked to offset tolerances and give a that much more predictable speaker characteristic. Paradoxically, the higher end one's purchase, more likely one is to be advised a burn-in/break-in period! How is it that not a single manufacturer at any price point finds value in this?

I conjecture, the extra effort does not yield that much improvement over "eyeballing" everything to ensure the complete package meets an intended specification within the total package tolerance.

Further, if there is no price point at which a speaker designer/manufacturer can prove audible improvement from using burnt in drivers, electronic components, etc. there must not be that big an impact when put in context with other things intrinsic to the speaker/package (good design philosophy, using drivers within specific bandwidth, phase alignment, electronic components within manufacturer guidelines, etc.) or extrinsic to the speaker/amplifier (room acoustics, recording quality, etc.).

So, in closing, if the all reputable designers/manufacturers would rather devote their skill and resources on other things, why should I get hot over burn-in?
 
Last edited:
zieglj01

zieglj01

Audioholic Spartan
Sometimes mood swings and emotions, may play a big part in what one might hear.:)
 
walter duque

walter duque

Audioholic Samurai
When I get new speakers I just turn them up to max. power for hours. If nothing blows I am good to go and they are broken in for me.
 
fuzz092888

fuzz092888

Audioholic Warlord
When I get new speakers I just turn them up to max. power for hours. If nothing blows I am good to go and they are broken in for me.
Oh what do you know, you can't even tell if the speakers are on half the time :p
 
walter duque

walter duque

Audioholic Samurai
Oh what do you know, you can't even tell if the speakers are on half the time :p
Good point, my top modules where off (maybe for months) and I didn't even notice it. My wife turned the amp off that runs the top modules of the towers instead of using the power sequencer.
 
highfigh

highfigh

Seriously, I have no life.
The driver parameters that change measurably after break-in, to the point that it is audible. The manufacturers typically rate (higher end) electronic components used in crossovers, at 5% tolerance. The latter also drift with burn-in. The latter is also claimed by some to be audible.

It begs the question: When there is such a measurable variance and corresponding audible change in sound, why do speaker manufacturers not sell premium or ultra premium products advertised as "Already broken in, the sound quality you hear today is what you will hear for life"? You don't see Monoprice or BJC, nor Dave (Ascend) or Dennis (Philharmonic) or Brian (Rythmik) or Tom (PSA) doing it. Fry's doesn't stamping burn-in times on their electronic components.

Surely, there must be a market for speakers in which every driver is broken-in and every electronic component hand picked to offset tolerances and give a that much more predictable speaker characteristic. Paradoxically, the higher end one's purchase, more likely one is to be advised a burn-in/break-in period! How is it that not a single manufacturer at any price point finds value in this?

I conjecture, the extra effort does not yield that much improvement over "eyeballing" everything to ensure the complete package meets an intended specification within the total package tolerance.

Further, if there is no price point at which a speaker designer/manufacturer can prove audible improvement from using burnt in drivers, electronic components, etc. there must not be that big an impact when put in context with other things intrinsic to the speaker/package (good design philosophy, using drivers within specific bandwidth, phase alignment, electronic components within manufacturer guidelines, etc.) or extrinsic to the speaker/amplifier (room acoustics, recording quality, etc.).

So, in closing, if the all reputable designers/manufacturers would rather devote their skill and resources on other things, why should I get hot over burn-in?
Some manufacturers do say their speakers have a break in time. You only mentioned a half-dozen and there are many hundreds.

Also, I never knew Monoprice offered premium or ultra-premium products.
 
highfigh

highfigh

Seriously, I have no life.
When I get new speakers I just turn them up to max. power for hours. If nothing blows I am good to go and they are broken in for me.
I had a set of Phillips car speakers with ferrofluid in the tweeters and was talking with a friend who is also involved in audio. He asked how they sound when the temperature is extremely low- I just told him that I crank the stereo to clipping and it makes them more responsive.

I could sense that his skin was crawling over the phone.
 
KEW

KEW

Audioholic Overlord
When I get new speakers I just turn them up to max. power for hours. If nothing blows I am good to go and they are broken in for me.
Some day, you need to make a list of "Approved by Walter" audio gear!
That way, the rest of us could buy with confidence, knowing that the gear will never, ever flinch (under sane usage)!
 
walter duque

walter duque

Audioholic Samurai
Some day, you need to make a list of "Approved by Walter" audio gear!
That way, the rest of us could buy with confidence, knowing that the gear will never, ever flinch (under sane usage)!
At times I do drive my speakers to the limit, and then some. Not as much as I used to though. In the last 25 years I blew 1 tweeter on New Years Eve. Not a big deal had 2 free replacements 2 days later at no charge.
 
Swerd

Swerd

Audioholic Warlord
I had a set of Phillips car speakers with ferrofluid in the tweeters and was talking with a friend who is also involved in audio. He asked how they sound when the temperature is extremely low…
There was only one time I ever heard a difference between fresh-out-of-the box new speakers, and the same speakers after they had been played several hours. It was a cold winter day in January, and the speakers spent most of that day in the back of a delivery truck. They were cold enough for the rubber surrounds and the tweeter ferrofluid to be below their solid-fluid transition point. They were stiff with cold. I think, warming up to room temperature was the main factor, not break-in.

In that sense, the speakers had been "cryo-treated" :D.
 
newsletter

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