Speaker break-in??

[MacManNM]

How does the speaker magically stop changing then once it's broken in? Yeah, a hose will wear out in eventually. Do you run 200 degree water under high pressure thru your speakers? That explains a few things.

Oh well. Everyone knows those idiots that actually design the speakers, like Toole, don't know what they're talking about. Internet yahoos are a much better source of information.

Rob,
Are you saying that the physical attributes of drivers don’t change as they are used? If they do, then the sound does change as they are played. It may be an infinitesimal amount, but it does change. Are you denying that? Or have these gods of drivers of which you speak (Dr. Toole) engineered materials that are totally unchanged by physical movement? If this is the case, then I believe it is your obligation to inform the government of these said materials, so they may further aid in the defense of this country.

 

[Rob Babcock]

Um, yeah- they move when electricity passes thru the voice coil. How long have you been into hifi again?

Yeah, I'll tell the Government my theories on hifi. I'm sure they give a crap what we think about speaker burn in. Seriously, man, get a life.

 

[Willow]

For the record, I don't really know if speakers need "break in." Shoes do, I can tell you that. I do get pretty skeptical by some manufacturers claim of hundreds or even thousands of hours being needed. By that measure they're broken in just about two weeks before they're worn out!

Shoes don't need break in, your feet need time to build extra skin to protect !

 

[markw]

Personally, I've never put too much stock in speaker break in.

Heck, if it's that much of a big deal, shouldn't your ears tell you when it's been accomplished?

hint... if your return priveliges are about to expire and they still don't sound right, then follow your instincts.

 

[MacManNM]

Um, yeah- they move when electricity passes thru the voice coil. How long have you been into hifi again?

Yeah, I'll tell the Government my theories on hifi. I'm sure they give a crap what we think about speaker burn in. Seriously, man, get a life.

Your sarcastic replies show how serious you really are. I never said anything about you selling your theories on Hi-Fi. I simply stated that if you or anyone else had knowledge of a material that doesn't deteriorate from physical stress, the Government would be interested. I see that hooked on phonics is really starting to pay off for you. Furthermore, I don’t believe I ever said that burn in was required, or made a huge audible difference. I’m simply stating that driver characteristics change as they are used. Basic physics. Maybe you should practice what you preach in your little motto.

 

[Rip Van Woofer]

Behave yourselves please, and try to state disagreements courteously. This especially apples to MacManNM, but others as well.

Back to the point: If I may use a lighthearted example, the elastic components of speaker drivers are like the elastic in your shorts: tight at first, followed after a brief (no pun intended) break-in (or stretch, for the shorts) by a long period of uniform performance within the tolerances for which they were designed, until at last a rapid deterioration takes place. Then your woofer stops woofing and your BVDs fall to your ankles. Hopefully the former occurs only once per several underwear life cycles!

Point being, the wear cycle of elastic materials does not follow a long, linear progression.

The need for prolonged speaker break-in (and for specific break-in practices like playing pink noise, etc.) is indeed a myth. A few hours of your favorite music at normal listening levels is more than sufficient, if needed at all.

(My apologies to any here who do not wear underwear and had difficulty relating to the example... )

 

[gene]

I do know that the ear and the human brain can be more sensitive than the best test equipment.

On that point, I will stongly have to disagree with you. Human hearing is inconsistant and often unpredictable since perception and biases will almost always play a big role. Test equipment doesn't suffer these biases. The trick is to know what measurements correspond to what we are hearing.

 

[MacManNM]

Behave yourselves please, and try to state disagreements courteously. This especially apples to MacManNM, but others as well.

Back to the point: If I may use a lighthearted example, the elastic components of speaker drivers are like the elastic in your shorts: tight at first, followed after a brief (no pun intended) break-in (or stretch, for the shorts) by a long period of uniform performance within the tolerances for which they were designed, until at last a rapid deterioration takes place. Then your woofer stops woofing and your BVDs fall to your ankles. Hopefully the former occurs only once per several underwear life cycles!

Point being, the wear cycle of elastic materials does not follow a long, linear progression.

The need for prolonged speaker break-in (and for specific break-in practices like playing pink noise, etc.) is indeed a myth. A few hours of your favorite music at normal listening levels is more than sufficient, if needed at all.

(My apologies to any here who do not wear underwear and had difficulty relating to the example... )

Excuse me? I don’t believe I am the one lacking courtesy here. All I have done is try and state the physics involved. As you just did.

 

[Buckeyefan 1]

Tweeters actually don't break in. This has been confirmed time and again by many leading loudspeaker designers, Acousticians such as Dr. Toole and even our own Resident Loudspeaker Engineer Mark Sanfilipo and former loudspeaker reviewer Patrick Hart whom both measured no differences in driver parameters before and after alleged "break in". When Mark gets back in town, I will have him comment on this thread. I will also ask Dr. Toole permission to publish some of his findings.

I just did a google search and put in "Dr. Floyd Toole speaker break in." One of the first sites that came up was this:

5.Speaker "break-in" fact or myth:

This is a fact, since the spider holding the voice coil in place and the surround holding the cone in place undergo mechanical stretching. I have measured a 20% reduction in Qts and also large changes in Vas after 20 hours of sustained sine wave excitation. These changes are audible and important, since the tuning of the bass alignment must be done after the woofers have undergone breakin, not before. In addition, mids and tweeters sound smoother due to the suspension loosening as well.

copied from http://archive.avsforum.com/avs-vb/history/topic/39265-1.html

Here's another one:
June 16, 2001

When it comes to breaking in a pair of speakers, what exactly should be done? Is there risk of damaging the speaker if they are played too loudly too soon, or is this just myth? I've heard that I should play a pair of speakers at a medium volume for a few days before playing them loud, but I've also heard that I should play them loud for several days before they are broken in.

Bryan Donovan

My understanding is that speaker break-in is primarily a mechanical phenomenon of X amount of driver motions that loosen up the internal spider suspension and external rubber/foam surrounds. I've never heard warnings about reduced output levels during this period. In fact, rather the opposite -- play the speakers as loudly as is reasonable in your environment and for their type, and use bass-heavy material. A common trick is to put the speakers face to face (as closely as possible), wire one out of phase, and cover both with a thick blanket. This will cancel a lot of their output and be sonically less obtrusive. Still, the easiest thing is to simply play music 24/7 for a few days -- normally when you're sitting down to listen, at barely audible levels when you go to sleep, and cranked (not insanely, of course) when you leave the house. Don't worry about it too much. You'll note the speakers changing for a certain period, sometimes possibly seeming to make a step back before going forward again, and then one day, bingo -- they no longer change. That's it.

(Personally, I think that's a bit extreme)

www.goodsound.com
http://www.goodsound.com/askme/2001_06_21.htm


I'm not familiar with GoodSound! or it's relationship to Harman's Dr. Floyd, but I do think there is some merit to speaker break in, as least with the bass drivers, when new. Many manufacturers of subwoofers state in their manuals that the driver requires some form of break in. Many of those manufacturers claim 20 hours is sufficient. I've said this before, and I'll say it again - if the manufacturer is recommending break in of their product, do you think it may have to do with performance or warranty issues?

 

[MacManNM]

On that point, I will stongly have to disagree with you. Human hearing is inconsistant and often unpredictable since perception and biases will almost always play a big role. Test equipment doesn't suffer these biases. The trick is to know what measurements correspond to what we are hearing.

Even on today’s most sophisticated submarines where the lowest noise digitizers and most sensitive equipment are in use, the human ear is still the most reliable tool in sonar. The human ear has approx 120db of dynamic range, which equates to 20 effective bits. Take into account that the equivalent sample rate (of a 20 bit digitizer) would be a 40KHz, that, is impressive. Not to mention the ability of the brain to process this information. Meeting these numbers in a complete data collection/analysis system would not be trivial, to say the least.

 

[Rip Van Woofer]

Excuse me? I don’t believe I am the one lacking courtesy here. All I have done is try and state the physics involved. As you just did.

My apologies. I should have read further back before singling you out.

Everybody play nice, OK?

 

[MacManNM]

My apologies. I should have read further back before singling you out.

Everybody play nice, OK?

No prob man.

Mom....Jimmy took my interconnects again

 

[HookedOnSound]

Back to the point: If I may use a lighthearted example, the elastic components of speaker drivers are like the elastic in your shorts: tight at first, followed after a brief (no pun intended) break-in (or stretch, for the shorts) by a long period of uniform performance within the tolerances for which they were designed, until at last a rapid deterioration takes place. Then your woofer stops woofing and your BVDs fall to your ankles. Hopefully the former occurs only once per several underwear life cycles!

Point being, the wear cycle of elastic materials does not follow a long, linear progression.

The need for prolonged speaker break-in (and for specific break-in practices like playing pink noise, etc.) is indeed a myth. A few hours of your favorite music at normal listening levels is more than sufficient, if needed at all.

(My apologies to any here who do not wear underwear and had difficulty relating to the example... )

The answer seems plausible and out of all the replies I agree with this one the most. This thread sure has some funny comments in it! I love a good argument!

But on a serious note: I think the term 'wear-in' would probably seem more applicable than that old term 'break-in'. I always hated it.

I don't mean to hijack this thread, but this brings a relevant issue:

Considering that speakers do 'wear-out', typically, what is the lifespan of a speaker?

 

[mtrycrafts]

WRONG!

Why do foam surrounds deteriorate? The molecular structure changes. It’s the same with all materials, as they move the molecules are re-aligned to change the physical attributes of the material. It’s much the same as a piece of metal that is bent; you can never get it perfectly straight again. They do break in. Is it audible? I believe so.

Some surrounds deteriorate more than others whether it is used or not. That is an issue of materials, not break in of speakers. It doesn't break in, it starts its life to failure from day one. With your example of metal flexing, it doesn't break in after a few flexes but contines its path to failure with more flexing.

It is best to know audible differences not just believeing in it. It is not audible.

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

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

 

[mtrycrafts]

You're pretty much dead on for the most part. Woofers do tend to loosen up a bit after a few hours of play but don't forget that anything that can "break in" must also "break out". So it is a bit of a misnomer. Tweeters do NOT break in despite what many audiophiles claim.

I had many entertaining discussions with Dr. Floyd Toole on speaker break in and he also concurred it was pretty much a baseless myth which dealt more with listener breakin than speaker break in.

A good read from another audio pro:

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

 

[mtrycrafts]

I played with a tone generator the day I got my new speakers, and several weeks after. Clearly it had very little bass response below 50 Hz when I got it, now I can hear below it. The speakers also had a big warning on the bag to let the speakers break in before critical judgement.

How can you remember what level that tone was several week later? IMPOSSIBLE.

You should have made precise measurements with an known input voltage to the speakers and measuring SPL levels new and 2 weeks later. Anything less, especially your memory is just unreliable at best and won't say at worst

This is why there are so many audio myths, urban legends that never die.

 

[Votrax]

Even on today’s most sophisticated submarines where the lowest noise digitizers and most sensitive equipment are in use, the human ear is still the most reliable tool in sonar. The human ear has approx 120db of dynamic range, which equates to 20 effective bits. Take into account that the equivalent sample rate (of a 20 bit digitizer) would be a 40KHz, that, is impressive. Not to mention the ability of the brain to process this information. Meeting these numbers in a complete data collection/analysis system would not be trivial, to say the least.

Then why even use sonar when a sub has so many pairs of ears?

 

[MacManNM]

Some surrounds deteriorate more than others whether it is used or not. That is an issue of materials, not break in of speakers. It doesn't break in, it starts its life to failure from day one. With your example of metal flexing, it doesn't break in after a few flexes but contines its path to failure with more flexing.

It is best to know audible differences not just believeing in it. It is not audible.

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

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

I don't put any credibility in publications that center on the fidelity of car stereos. As far as how audible it is, there are too many parameters to make a blanket statement. TS parameters, box design and size, all play a major factor in the sound of a unit. I believe that it can be audible in certain circumstances. Someday when I have time, I will make some detailed measurements that will either prove or disprove this theory.

 

[Rob Babcock]

At the risk of sounding cynical, why wouldn't a manufacturer encourage you to "break in" your speakers for, oh, a few months before returning them? Especially the ones with a 30/60 day return policy. Naturally they don't want you to make any hasty judgements- they want the speakers to grow on you and they want you to keep them.

And it's a last refuge for the mfg'r when they get a bad review. I've lost count of the number of mfg'r replies that state something like "Normally we break in our speakers before they're sent out for review as a courtesy. This time deadlines didn't permit this. The awful noises and generally crappy sound Mr Goldenears experienced was almost certainly due to the fact that they only had 2000 hours on them: 10,000 hrs is required for proper breakin."

 

[mtrycrafts]

Even on today’s most sophisticated submarines where the lowest noise digitizers and most sensitive equipment are in use, the human ear is still the most reliable tool in sonar. The human ear has approx 120db of dynamic range, which equates to 20 effective bits. Take into account that the equivalent sample rate (of a 20 bit digitizer) would be a 40KHz, that, is impressive. Not to mention the ability of the brain to process this information. Meeting these numbers in a complete data collection/analysis system would not be trivial, to say the least.

I think a little reading about the human hearing capability is in order. No, I don't have a good reference but everything I read, it is not that stellar. after all, instruments are the tools measuring hearing responses and so far, they didn't run out of measuring room.
You just cannot hear well in a noisy environment as instruments can.

Instruments don't suffer from masking where as your hearing mechanism does badly. That is why perceptual coding works.

You have difficulty hearing simultaneousl a lod signal with very soft ones. No such problem with instruments.

Hearing JND is very poor, .2dB spl under laboratory conditions, in mid frequency band, 3dB at 16kHz and just as bad at the low end. Not so with instruments.

Phase shift is not so hot with human ears. No such deficits with instruments.

I am tired.