Speaker Break In: Fact or Fiction?

[krabapple]

*ME* and a host of others who trust what they hear?

But as I've already pointed out, you and that host of others you cite aren't trusting what you hear. You're making the patently erroneous assumption that when you make a call from sighted listening, all you're basing it on is what you hear.

This isn't about experiments, it is about enjoying audio, and that is ALL. I don't need to do a study to tell me I know what I am hearing. You know where you can put your check.

You know what htey say, denial, it ain't just a river in Egypt.

Drivers will likely wear out given a long enough time period. What's your point? As Danny has stated, the driver reaches a state of equilibrium after some period of use, after which the changes are negligible.

Ah, so some changes are negligable, and some aren't. Well, that's a start. At what point does it reach the *audible* state of equilibrium?

Similar principles apply apparently, as has been shown by Danny's data, which is why I made the comparison; though not to the same degree as direct mechanical contact.

I wasn't likely to give Danny's data credence for representing an *audible* difference in the first place; after seeing more of his posts, I'm no longer inclined to give them credence as data.

blah blah blah. So give up.

That rapier wit will take you far.

Which is why I asked Danny earilier in this thread if those measured differences translated into any noticable differences in the sound produced.

That is a rather key point, is it not?

 

[krabapple]

And yet you remain? Thanks for gracing us lowly creatures with your omnipotence.

Enough wagging yet?

After you, Gaston.

 

[krabapple]

posted for educamational purposes:

Pierce in more detail, on speaker break-in (scroll a bit down the page, or search for 'dpierce' -- he's got several posts in that thread)

http://forumz.tomshardware.com/ce/engineers-speaker-break-ftopict40958.html

The estimable Chu Gai summarizes work by Nousaine , Pierce, and David Clark (who had an AES paper touchign on the subject)

http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-1555.html

Stereophile thread where engineer 'Mark' espouses speaker break-in (says his company has DBTs to prove it's audible, but I can't find further cite for that) but refreshingly admits that break in is so variable that it can also be inaudible , or has a good likelihood of being detrimental when audible.

http://forum.stereophile.com/forum/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=1963&page=0&fpart=3&vc=1

measurment of Audax drivers after various periods of break-in

http://www.vikash.info/audio/audax/index.asp

Paul Barton of PSB on break-in (near the bottom of the page

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

and oh, look, here's Danny Richie again, doing the twist:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=698280

My favorite observation of his from that thread:

Double blind would mean that neither the test subject nor the one administering the test could know which of the amps were being played.

That is not really possible as someone has to swap the amps in and out.

The mind reels. So let's take stock: Danny 3) knows that speakers break in because he measured changes in speakers 2) says people with good hearing can hear it in quick-switch sighted A/B tests ); 3) doesn't understand DBTs; 4) thinks Richard Pierce and John Dunlavy were misguided about break-in (although they both acknowledge measurable changes in speakers), and in need of assistance from him as speaker designers; 5) doesn't understand evolution, but believes it ain't true.

 

[Audioholics]

I had asked Mark to respond to the issues in this thead, but as he is a pretty classy guy, this has degenerated into something I don't think he'll touch with a 10' cable...

We'll just post the second part of his Speaker Break-in article when it's ready and deal with it at that time.