IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

3 Pages V   1 2 3 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Help with headphone break in
MagR
post Apr 17 2013, 18:56
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 14
Joined: 17-March 13
Member No.: 107264



Hi

Iím a fairly new member and have been getting some good advice on this forum. My first headphones I bought a few weeks ago were the Sennheiser HD650. At first I didnít like them too much. They sounded a bit out of tune Ė especially on piano. Good pianists seemed to be hitting a lot of wrong notes! I thought it might be jitter as I remember from my vinyl days many years ago that wow and flutter (called jitter with digital sources I think) were most noticeable on piano. However the jitter specs on the dac Iím using were fine.

Anyway after a few weeks this ďtunelessnessĒ seems to have disappeared and the HD650ís seem to have more bass and generally sound great. Iím now thinking this might be due to running in or breaking in whatever the correct term is. I thought this was an audiophile myth at first but perhaps there is some truth in it. Has anybody else experienced this with the HD650? Is it just the driver loosening up or might it have something to do with the earcups fitting my head better now?

Iíve now ordered a pair of AKG K701ís which should arrive in a few days and will probably buy the Beyerdynamic DT880ís as well to experience different sound signatures. Will I experience this breaking in with these headphones and for how long or does that vary unit to unit? I looked on another forum and the answers varied widely. Has anyone here got some actual experience with these phones? Again, looking at other forums there seems to be a general belief that the AKG K701ís sound takes a very long time to break in and will be considerably smoother as a result.

Thanks in advance

Mag
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
saratoga
post Apr 17 2013, 18:58
Post #2





Group: Members
Posts: 4718
Joined: 2-September 02
Member No.: 3264



QUOTE (MagR @ Apr 17 2013, 12:56) *
Iím a fairly new member and have been getting some good advice on this forum. My first headphones I bought a few weeks ago were the Sennheiser HD650. At first I didnít like them too much. They sounded a bit out of tune Ė especially on piano. Good pianists seemed to be hitting a lot of wrong notes!


A headphone is a transducer, it can't change the tuning of the actual notes played, so whatever you're hearing its probably not the headphones.

Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
pdq
post Apr 17 2013, 19:05
Post #3





Group: Members
Posts: 3311
Joined: 1-September 05
From: SE Pennsylvania
Member No.: 24233



If you have been told ahead of time that headphones require a break-in time, then that is quite possibly what you will experience yourself, regardless of whether or not it is actually true. smile.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
MagR
post Apr 18 2013, 12:02
Post #4





Group: Members
Posts: 14
Joined: 17-March 13
Member No.: 107264



QUOTE (saratoga @ Apr 17 2013, 17:58) *
QUOTE (MagR @ Apr 17 2013, 12:56) *
Iím a fairly new member and have been getting some good advice on this forum. My first headphones I bought a few weeks ago were the Sennheiser HD650. At first I didnít like them too much. They sounded a bit out of tune Ė especially on piano. Good pianists seemed to be hitting a lot of wrong notes!


A headphone is a transducer, it can't change the tuning of the actual notes played, so whatever you're hearing its probably not the headphones.

Thanks for that.

I wonder if I had some setting wrong somewhere which I've now inadvertently corrected as it was quite noticeable before.

Thanks again

Mag
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
MagR
post Apr 18 2013, 12:06
Post #5





Group: Members
Posts: 14
Joined: 17-March 13
Member No.: 107264



QUOTE (pdq @ Apr 17 2013, 18:05) *
If you have been told ahead of time that headphones require a break-in time, then that is quite possibly what you will experience yourself, regardless of whether or not it is actually true. smile.gif


Thanks for your reply.

In your opinion does break in not actually exist? Is this the McGurk effect or something similar where we hear what we expect to hear?

Thanks again

Mag

P.s. I was definitely experiencing something as I've replied to the poster above. As I'm new I conclude I had something plugged in/set up wrong before.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Arnold B. Kruege...
post Apr 18 2013, 13:12
Post #6





Group: Members
Posts: 3537
Joined: 29-October 08
From: USA, 48236
Member No.: 61311



QUOTE (MagR @ Apr 17 2013, 13:56) *
Hi

Iím a fairly new member and have been getting some good advice on this forum. My first headphones I bought a few weeks ago were the Sennheiser HD650. At first I didnít like them too much. They sounded a bit out of tune Ė especially on piano. Good pianists seemed to be hitting a lot of wrong notes! I thought it might be jitter as I remember from my vinyl days many years ago that wow and flutter (called jitter with digital sources I think) were most noticeable on piano. However the jitter specs on the dac Iím using were fine.


Please read TOS 8. You agreed to it in order to sign up here. Please put it into practice!
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
dhromed
post Apr 18 2013, 13:15
Post #7





Group: Members
Posts: 1245
Joined: 16-February 08
From: NL
Member No.: 51347



There's no such thing as break-in as far as I know. There is such a thing as broken, though. wink.gif

QUOTE
I was definitely experiencing something


While it's probable that you may have accidentally set and unset a setting, placebo is one of the things that can make you experience things regardless of the properties of the hardware.

Most placebo, as I experience it, comes from knowing beforehand that some element of the audio chain "should" be better, therefore my brain automatically pays more attention, and behold, I suddenly hear more, and incorrectly attribute this to the element.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
extrabigmehdi
post Apr 18 2013, 13:21
Post #8





Group: Members
Posts: 402
Joined: 15-August 09
Member No.: 72330



The guy Tyll from innerfidelity measured the effect of "break in".
From what I've understood of his article, the changes are too small, and he didn't want to conclude anything .
What I see, there are less changes in the frequency response with time, than there are differences between left & right.
http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/measu...headphone-break

This post has been edited by extrabigmehdi: Apr 18 2013, 13:22
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
db1989
post Apr 18 2013, 13:25
Post #9





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 5174
Joined: 23-June 06
Member No.: 32180



I agree with the general sentiment, Arny. But to be fair, even if the effects were imagined Ė which would be my guess Ė apparently they have now disappeared, which would seem to preclude testing.

Of course, the rule still stands against confident claims about quality and its agents in the present tense. To that end, I agree with pdq that what you experienced was most probably a result of placebo/expectation bias. Certainly the oft-invoked Djinn of Djitter isnít likely to have been involved in any capacity. Itís strange that the phenomenon seems to have stopped at some time Ė I presume without you having read/heard anything that could push your expectation bias in the opposite direction wink.gif Ė but, as above, itís difficult to evaluate the claims without (A) a time machine or (B) a high risk of unproductive speculation that would violate TOS #8.

None of this means the thread has to stop: discussion of mechanisms that may plausibly have caused this is fine, although I suspect such things are scarce!
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Rollin
post Apr 18 2013, 14:21
Post #10





Group: Members
Posts: 184
Joined: 5-March 08
Member No.: 51815



Another experience of headphones' "breaking in" http://translate.google.ru/translate?hl=ru...kki05aging.html
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Nessuno
post Apr 18 2013, 15:08
Post #11





Group: Members
Posts: 422
Joined: 16-December 10
From: Palermo
Member No.: 86562



Here there is a blogger who claims to have measured and ABXed some subtle differences on an HD650 before and after a 100hrs break-in.
He also gives two recordings, pre and post break-in for others to test, anyway maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see any log of his own trials.

I'm in no way linked to this blog neither I endorse his conclusions, it's only something I just remembered to have read.


--------------------
... I live by long distance.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
pdq
post Apr 18 2013, 15:45
Post #12





Group: Members
Posts: 3311
Joined: 1-September 05
From: SE Pennsylvania
Member No.: 24233



I'm curious how you would ABX the same device 100 hours apart. Perhaps a time machine that sends you to either of two times, but you don't know which?

Edit: I am not opposed to the concept of a break-in period for headphones or speakers. How the characteristics of elastomers etc. change with vibration is certainly something to consider.

This post has been edited by pdq: Apr 18 2013, 15:47
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
DonP
post Apr 18 2013, 15:58
Post #13





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 1469
Joined: 11-February 03
From: Vermont
Member No.: 4955



QUOTE (pdq @ Apr 18 2013, 09:45) *
I'm curious how you would ABX the same device 100 hours apart. Perhaps a time machine that sends you to either of two times, but you don't know which?


Buy 2 pairs?

I can believe that the ear pads could compress a bit in the first hundred hours of use, maybe putting the phones closer to your ears.
Another oft mentioned effect is that it's your ears that break in and get used to the new <whatever>.

Neither of those would happen if you are just playing music through phones sitting on a table.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Nessuno
post Apr 18 2013, 15:59
Post #14





Group: Members
Posts: 422
Joined: 16-December 10
From: Palermo
Member No.: 86562



QUOTE (pdq @ Apr 18 2013, 16:45) *
I'm curious how you would ABX the same device 100 hours apart. Perhaps a time machine that sends you to either of two times, but you don't know which?

If I read correctly, he says he left the headphone untouched on a dummy head during the break-in, to make the measures pre and post and record the samples and then ABXed the recordings. Of course in this case we weren't there to assess those conditions, but the method seems sounding to me.

This post has been edited by Nessuno: Apr 18 2013, 16:04


--------------------
... I live by long distance.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
mzil
post Apr 18 2013, 16:13
Post #15





Group: Members
Posts: 422
Joined: 5-August 07
Member No.: 45913



^"inserted in EURI's ear canals , its physical placement must remain untouched for the next 100 hours in order to prevent any placement-related deviations. Each 10 times averaged pre break-in & post break-in measurement data are to be compared, and should any type of change occur, they are to be reproduced back utilizing a binaural recording technique to be ABX-compared."

I can't think of a reason why his method isn't sound either, however I assume the two audio samples he has provided are individual recordings and have nothing to do with any "10 times averaged" technique he, I presume, uses for his plots.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Mach-X
post Apr 18 2013, 16:35
Post #16





Group: Members
Posts: 242
Joined: 29-July 12
Member No.: 101859



@db1989 not to speak for Arny, bought I *think* he was implying not to speak of jitter until you can prove it exists :-D
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
saratoga
post Apr 18 2013, 17:04
Post #17





Group: Members
Posts: 4718
Joined: 2-September 02
Member No.: 3264



Thats a neat test, and I think probably quite valid.

However the effect is quite small. I suspect you'd see similar results just turning the room's thermostat up and down smile.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
greynol
post Apr 18 2013, 19:12
Post #18





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 10000
Joined: 1-April 04
From: San Francisco
Member No.: 13167



QUOTE (MagR @ Apr 18 2013, 04:06) *
In your opinion does break in not actually exist?

No more so than anything else being parroted to be true and seemingly solely based on the propagation of anecdotes.

QUOTE
Is this the McGurk effect or something similar where we hear what we expect to hear?

Most likely, yes.


--------------------
Your eyes cannot hear.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
DVDdoug
post Apr 18 2013, 19:33
Post #19





Group: Members
Posts: 2448
Joined: 24-August 07
From: Silicon Valley
Member No.: 46454



IMO burn-in/break-in is total nonsense! And if it's true (or to the extent it's true), it's a very bad thing!

1. Why isn't it done at the factory? Where I work (non-audio electronics) we burn-in everything at elevated temperature for one week. This is NOT to improve specs/performance. It's to weed-out early failures before the product gets out the door. We are making electronics, not wine or cheese! We test before burn-in, and if the board/unit fails, it does not go into burn-in. We test after burn-in, and if all goes well (which it does at least 95% of the time) the unit passes post burn-in test, and it gets shipped.

2. I've never heard of a reputable manufacturer recommending customer burn-in. Some "snake oil" audiophile manufacturer's do. But again, why don't they do it at the factory?

3. If the specs/performance change after burn-in (or several hours use) by the end user, the manufacturer's factory tests & specs mean nothing... It's a poorly designed & built product by an incompetent manufacturer! If the performance/specs are not stable, the manufacturer has no idea if the customer is getting a great product or a crappy product. There's always going to be some performance drift, aging, and some measurement variation. But the drift should be insignificant, and most importantly the product shouldn't drift out of spec (at least for a year or more).

4. Why is it that the product always seems to improve with burn-in? Why doesn't it sometimes get worse? (Most things deteriorate with time, use, and abuse.) If it really does improve after a few hours, what happens to this unstable product after twice the burn-in time, or longer? Does it continue to improve, or does it begin to deteriorate. Do my $50 headphones sound like $500 headphones after several years, or do the drivers disintegrate and distort badly?

This post has been edited by DVDdoug: Apr 18 2013, 19:35
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
dhromed
post Apr 18 2013, 19:48
Post #20





Group: Members
Posts: 1245
Joined: 16-February 08
From: NL
Member No.: 51347



QUOTE (DVDdoug @ Apr 18 2013, 20:33) *
We test after burn-in, and if all goes well the unit passes post burn-in test, and it gets shipped.

Wait.. doesn't that mean you essentially ship pre-damaged equipment?

You light a match and say "this one works!" and put it back in the box.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
greynol
post Apr 18 2013, 19:59
Post #21





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 10000
Joined: 1-April 04
From: San Francisco
Member No.: 13167



I've never heard someone suggest burn-in was a bad thing before.

Doug nailed it. Well done!


--------------------
Your eyes cannot hear.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
antz
post Apr 18 2013, 20:41
Post #22





Group: Members
Posts: 221
Joined: 26-March 05
From: Wolverhampton UK
Member No.: 20961



QUOTE (DVDdoug @ Apr 18 2013, 18:33) *
4. Why is it that the product always seems to improve with burn-in? Why doesn't it sometimes get worse? (Most things deteriorate with time, use, and abuse.)
Amazing coincidence isn't it? No-one's really going to admit their product gets worse are they, or that burn-in reduced the sound quality of their shiny new gear!
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
antz
post Apr 18 2013, 20:51
Post #23





Group: Members
Posts: 221
Joined: 26-March 05
From: Wolverhampton UK
Member No.: 20961



QUOTE (dhromed @ Apr 18 2013, 18:48) *
QUOTE (DVDdoug @ Apr 18 2013, 20:33) *
We test after burn-in, and if all goes well the unit passes post burn-in test, and it gets shipped.

Wait.. doesn't that mean you essentially ship pre-damaged equipment?

You light a match and say "this one works!" and put it back in the box.

No, what he's referring to is standard practice for equipment that must not fail (e.g. military). All components and the resulting assembly suffer from what's called infant-mortality, whereby new equipment can suffer early failure. Once past a certain threshhold, equipment that didn't fail is likely to be highly reliable for a long (and usually predictable) time. Critical equipment will be taken out of service before it's time-expired. This doesn't only apply to electronic gear, things like jet-engines are treated similarly.

It's a different idea from burn-in or break-in, which is usually claimed to improve equipment in some way. It makes sense for mechanical equipment, where components bedding-in to each other is a real and demonstrable effect. For electronic gear and especially transducers, it's dubious.

This post has been edited by antz: Apr 18 2013, 20:55
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
pdq
post Apr 18 2013, 21:25
Post #24





Group: Members
Posts: 3311
Joined: 1-September 05
From: SE Pennsylvania
Member No.: 24233



Bathtub curve
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Arnold B. Kruege...
post Apr 18 2013, 21:29
Post #25





Group: Members
Posts: 3537
Joined: 29-October 08
From: USA, 48236
Member No.: 61311



QUOTE (Nessuno @ Apr 18 2013, 10:08) *
Here there is a blogger who claims to have measured and ABXed some subtle differences on an HD650 before and after a 100hrs break-in.
He also gives two recordings, pre and post break-in for others to test, anyway maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see any log of his own trials.

I'm in no way linked to this blog neither I endorse his conclusions, it's only something I just remembered to have read.



The google translation of the conclusion of the first of his references (in Japanese), which he claims supports his thesis is:

"A result of the aging 200h the GS1000, Frequency characteristic for the (amplitude), I think to be no difference between the measurement error or more."

My interpretation of that there was no significant difference once typical variations were considered.

The cited paper and some other of its references don't seem to be as careful or thorough.

This post has been edited by Arnold B. Krueger: Apr 18 2013, 21:29
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

3 Pages V   1 2 3 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 24th April 2014 - 12:20