I guess this would be a why?,Question: Burn in

megasat16

jcandy wrote: »

Seriously, what part of the tweeter gets "burned in" during burn in?

Depends on what kind of tweeter we are talking about? It usually would be the diaphragm and the voice coil.

Break-in simply is the term to describe the newly made components or fitted materials to loosen up a bit as the signal and heat is applied over time. Breakin applies not only to woofer spider, it applies to all things that require movement when an electrical signal is applied.

Not everything is made 100% within specification as it should be since it comes out of factory. Many part of the speakers requires a specific time or usage before it functions within the specifications.

Tony M

PolkClyde wrote: »

I have had the new tweeters for a couple of years now,just got the chance to burn them in,really.over a 100hrs of non stop music.but first,I was a little disappointed in the new RDO's,no highs. I said to myself, bring back my SL2000.I want my highs back.But baby,let me tell you, this burn in stuff,works. I'm a fan of the RDO's Now,WOW.I don't know any other words right now,but WOW. The RDO's Rock. Will you guys explain the burn in process to me.can't believe the highs I'm hearing.I know I can do a Google,but You guys are better then Google.Shall I say,Audiophile GODS. Thanks

I thought and feel the same about the four RDO-194's I put in my SDA-SRS2's. Dull at first and then sounded just fine after a week or two.

megasat16

silvertuner wrote: »

but does that go for modifications done to crossovers on older speakers, ie 1974 altec's lol. caps and resistors and inductors is what im mostly referring to. i have a hard time believing surrounds dont open up over time and get a bit more excursion in woofers after they get a little more use and flexibility, but that isnt what i am referring to

Electronics have different burn-in effects from the speaker drivers. In your case, the speaker drivers are already broken in many moons ago. The electronics you replaced will not considerably change the sound for a few more moons.

While some electronics such as electrolytic caps require burn in time, many electronics components don't require burn in. But in general, People says confusing things and mixing up everything.

silvertuner

megasat16 wrote: »

Electronics have different burn-in effects from the speaker drivers. In your case, the speaker drivers are already broken in many moons ago. The electronics you replaced will not considerably change the sound for a few more moons.

While some electronics such as electrolytic caps require burn in time, many electronics components don't require burn in. But in general, People says confusing things and mixing up everything.

and how come electrolytic capacitors have a burn in time? a capacitor, in short, is a device in which an electric charge is stored. im assuming "how much" or "how long" it is able to store it? i know this is electronics 101 but... lol. so in conclusion a broke in capacitor will have better ability to store and react in a crossover network vs. a new capacitor? or am i being absolutely difficult about this and should probably never touch another crossover again? lol

megasat16

silvertuner wrote: »

and how come electrolytic capacitors have a burn in time? a capacitor, in short, is a device in which an electric charge is stored. im assuming "how much" or "how long" it is able to store it? i know this is electronics 101 but... lol. so in conclusion a broke in capacitor will have better ability to store and react in a crossover network vs. a new capacitor? or am i being absolutely difficult about this and should probably never touch another crossover again? lol

Nope and Nope. Electrolytic caps require burn in time has to do with the chemical reactions of electrolytic solution when electrical charge is applied for the first time. Many people call it capacitor refreshing or forming and they think it's only applied to the old lytic caps. But even new Electrolytic caps shipped out from factory may have lower capacitance at first till you have used it for a while and the capacitance will reach a correct level after using a while.

In case you are thinking would it need 100 hrs to do so, I hope not. It would be a few seconds to a few hours based on what lytic cap it is.

mdaudioguy

I don't think that Mr. Shaw's comments on this are anything more than his particular marketing schtick. "Their" speakers are flawed, mine aren't, so buy mine...

Anyhow, burn-in is probably easier to detect with a rebuild, rather than with a new speaker, because with a new speaker, you also have to contend with changes attributable to the break-in of moving parts.

silvertuner

mdaudioguy wrote: »

I don't think that Mr. Shaw's comments on this are anything more than his particular marketing schtick. "Their" speakers are flawed, mine aren't, so buy mine...

Anyhow, burn-in is probably easier to detect with a rebuild, rather than with a new speaker, because with a new speaker, you also have to contend with changes attributable to the break-in of moving parts.

agreed. i can honestly say that the harshness in the top-end of mine is completely gone. i was thinking "need a pre amp for tone controls" to control this, until Harry set me straight on 'those caps are 38 years old probably, replace them'. took his advice, and i can tell a substantial difference in overall sound quality and detail with the new caps, both 2 mins into listening and 20 hours later.

jcandy

Taken from rec.audio.high-end; some parts of the post have been snipped

Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
From: DPie...@world.std.com (Richard D Pierce)
Date: 1996/11/02
Subject: Re: Speaker break-in - real or not?


Well, there are, indeed, several mechanism that are, indeed, at work that cause the operating parameters of drivers to change through use. However, the notion that once one gets a speaker home it requires "breaking in" suffers from several problems.

First, as a driver comes off the line, it's actual performance if fairly far from it's intended performance target. Reasons for this include the fact that the centering spider, typically manufactured from a varnish- impregnated linen, is far stiffer than needed. Working the driver back and forth lossens the spider considerably.

Now, one might say: there's objective proof of the need to "break in" a loudspeaker! Not so fast. The break-in period for the spider is on the order of several seconds, and if it takes you several seconds or minutes or whatever once you get the speakers home to loosen the centering spdier, it's not proof of the need to break thme in, it's proof that the speaker you just bought HAS NEVER BEEN TESTED!

But, on to other points.

When I measure a driver, I can see a significant change in a variety of operating parameters as the speaker is driven. Usually, in woofer, the resonant frequency drops as the speaker is used, often by as much as 10-20%. This is due, as you suggest, to a relaxing of the elastomers used in the suspension.

However. If I turn the stimulus off, within a few minutes most, if not all, of the change has completely recovered, and we're back to go again. The elstomer has recovered from it's stresses (this is especially true of certain polybutadene-styrene surround formulations).

There are plenty of other, real, physical changes. For example, one can see a reduction of the electrical Q with time under heavy use, simply because of the positive temperature coefficient of the resistance of the voice coil. Allow the speaker to cool down, and it's completely recoverable.

Get it hot enough, and you might permanently loose some flux density in the magnet. But you have to get REAL hot to do that. Hotter than most of the compounds used in making a speaker can endure without catastrophic failure (damned few glues, varnishes, cones and insulating materials can withstand the temperatures neede to reach the Curie points of the typical magnetic materials found in loudspeakers).

When this has been suggested, despite the fact there's about a century of research backing it, it is more often than not greated with jears and cires. See, you can't sell special "break-in" CD's if the speakers aren't broken in.

fishbones

Silvertuner,

Megasat is answering your question more directly and more properly than I can, but I must ask - Have you experienced it? It sounds like you believe it does exist, but maybe believe it because others tell you to? If you haven't, I say experiment for yourself. If you do experience it for yourself, well then you must be delirious, because it's only in your head, so why did you bother even upgrading your crossovers, you should have just changed your mind about how they sound and saved yourself some dough.

silvertuner

megasat16 wrote: »

Nope and Nope. Electrolytic caps require burn in time has to do with the chemical reactions of electrolytic solution when electrical charge is applied for the first time. Many people call it capacitor refreshing or forming and they think it's only applied to the old lytic caps. But even new Electrolytic caps shipped out from factory may have lower capacitance at first till you have used it for a while and the capacitance will reach a correct level after using a while.

In case you are thinking would it need 100 hrs to do so, I hope not. It would be a few seconds to a few hours based on what lytic cap it is.

very well explained, thank you, that was what i was looking for! still doesnt describe the 2 min listening vs 400 hour listening difference, but that could be "psychological" until DarqueKnight desides to study that one too lol :biggrin:

jcandy

silvertuner wrote: »

agreed. i can honestly say that the harshness in the top-end of mine is completely gone. i was thinking "need a pre amp for tone controls" to control this, until Harry set me straight on 'those caps are 38 years old probably, replace them'. took his advice, and i can tell a substantial difference in overall sound quality and detail with the new caps, both 2 mins into listening and 20 hours later.

Capacitors can certainly "degrade" over time; some older units can fail completely.

FTGV

Interesting read,I have heard Paul Barton of PSB make comments that are essentially in line with those of Alan Shaw,in that the changes heard over time are due to acclimation not burn in.However on the other side of the coin Dannny Richie has shown that indeed there is mechanical changes occuring in a drivers suspension over time.
http://www.gr-research.com/burnin.htm
http://www.gr-research.com/myths.htm

nooshinjohn

jcandy wrote: »

This excerpt is from a thread titled The big 'burn-in' fantasy, from the Harbeth forum. The author is the owner of Harbeth Audio, Alan Shaw:

I have explained the reality of the so-called burn-in issue. As far as loudspeakers that I know of are concerned, the issue is 100% in the mind. It is entirely about acclimatisation. I am so sure of this that I am willing to eat any Harbeth speaker that you or anyone else can demonstrate changes its character after a so-called burn in........................

I smell troll.


Speakers are as much a mechanical device as they are an electrical one. Any mechanical device, whether it be a new car, a refrigerator, or riding lawnmower all have a "break-in" period, during which the moving components are "seated" and achieve their optimal operating parameters. In cars, things in a new engine are tight, and each has unique characteristics due to even the slightest variances in tolerances, weights, heat dissipation, and many other variables. Breakin allows the engine to reach it's full potential and bring all those variables into a balance that is good for that particular engine.

A speaker is no different. To my ear, a new speaker sounds to tight, to lifeless, but within a very short time, the drivers loosen up and begin operating more freely. The sound changes as a result, becoming more natural and not constrained. Break in is no myth.

silvertuner

nooshinjohn wrote: »

I smell troll.

que?

FTGV

nooshinjohn wrote: »

I smell troll.

As do I.

FTGV

silvertuner wrote: »

que?

Don't mind him,he thinks anyone with an opinion even slightly opposed to his is a troll.

heiney9

fishbones wrote: »

Silvertuner,

Megasat is answering your question more directly and more properly than I can, but I must ask - Have you experienced it? It sounds like you believe it does exist, but maybe believe it because others tell you to? If you haven't, I say experiment for yourself. If you do experience it for yourself, well then you must be delirious, because it's only in your head, so why did you bother even upgrading your crossovers, you should have just changed your mind about how they sound and saved yourself some dough.

Who is Silvertuner? He didn't even post in this thread?

H9

silvertuner

FTGV wrote: »

Don't mind him,he thinks anyone with an opinion even slightly opposed to his is a troll.

gotcha. i suppose too much solder fumes and tube-radiation does that

F1nut

When did juju morph into jcandy?

heiney9

F1nut wrote: »

When did juju morph into jcandy?

I'm guessing right after the sex change, but it's just a guess.

H9

RuSsMaN

Now TWO threads are going? I'm about to get my merge on and really confuse it.

fishbones

I'd love to run an experiment with a non-believer sometime...

Catch him at the right moment when he's going to buy a new set of awesome speakers he's researched and picked out. He'll get 'em, bring 'em home, hook 'em up and turn 'em on for a couple minutes to make sure they sound equal...then I will make him unplug one of the speakers. He will then allow the 1 hooked-up speaker to run continuously for 100 hours (the other speaker left unhooked). After the 100 hours, I would come back to his house, he would fire them both back up to see how they compare...and I would watch him stutter his way through trying to explain how and why they sound sooo different. I would walk out smiling (without saying a word) and he would spend the entire sleepless night playing with his system to try and figure out what happened and how it cannot be. :biggrin:

nooshinjohn

fishbones wrote: »

I'd love to run an experiment with a non-believer sometime...

Catch him at the right moment when he's going to buy a new set of awesome speakers he's researched and picked out. He'll get 'em, bring 'em home, hook 'em up and turn 'em on for a couple minutes to make sure they sound equal...then I will make him unplug one of the speakers. He will then allow the 1 hooked-up speaker to run continuously for 100 hours (the other speaker left unhooked). After the 100 hours, I would come back to his house, he would fire them both back up to see how they compare...and I would watch him stutter his way through trying to explain how and why they sound sooo different. I would walk out smiling (without saying a word) and he would spend the entire sleepless night playing with his system to try and figure out what happened and how it cannot be. :biggrin:

I love that demo. I did it to myself with my PS Audio AC-5's... I ran one for a month, then plugged in the other. My wife even commented that something was different.

F1nut

Do it Russ.

newrival

TOOLFORLIFEFAN wrote: »

but to be pushing your veiwpoint in many threads the last couple days is trolling IMO! knowing full well that it will do nothing but stir the pot.

don't we ALL do that? anyone here with an opinion does that. does that make you, me, or anyone else a troll? or are we only allowed to state our opinion in one place and then keep to ourselves.

I get that the majority of people here believe in esoteric audiophile theories, but do we have to call people trolls and gang up on em because we disagree with one another? Those who accuse others of pushing their"agendas" on others are often just as guilty, only they feel their agenda is righteous.

just wanted to throw that out there

F1nut

No newrival, there is a major difference between the naysayers and those in the know. Those in the know don't run around the forum pushing an agenda. However, we do become vocal once the naysayer springs into action to dispel their misinformation.

jcandy

FTGV wrote: »

Interesting read,I have heard Paul Barton of PSB make comments that are essentially in line with those of Alan Shaw,in that the changes heard over time are due to acclimation not burn in.However on the other side of the coin Dannny Richie has shown that indeed there is mechanical changes occuring in a drivers suspension over time.
http://www.gr-research.com/burnin.htm
http://www.gr-research.com/myths.htm

I don't think anyone is disputing that Fs (as measured in the Thiele-Small free-air sense) drops by as much as 10 percent within the first 5-10 hours of play. This is not controversial. Anyone who has ever measured T/S parameters of a driver has seen this. In some of my first builds I found it frustrating (and my wife annoying) to have a driver playing a 40Hz test tone for hours and watching Fs creep down slightly. However, it is important to realize that other parameters change, too, so that the in-box response tends to stay the same. Your link notes this effect:

Granted that the effect on the in-box measured curve, due to break-in burn-in, may or may not be significant, depending on the box.

The reason for this is that Qts also drops, so that Fs/Qts stays roughly constant even as Fs drops. This is also well-known. Its stated right up-front and discussed in detail in Vance Dickason's famous "Loudspeaker Design Cookbook". So, the implications for both design and in-box performance are ""trivial" in Dickason's words. In fact, its shocking how little the in-box response changes (F3, etc) in either sealed or ported alignments. Dickason goes on to say that the real value in such a break-in exercise is to ensure that the driver is not mechanically flawed. This is related to what Richard Pierce is suggesting. Learning all this made me back off with the extensive driver break-in before the crossover design. Its also why Shaw is telling you that he can't hear the effects of break-in.

The tweeter, on the other hand, is a separate beast entirely.

newrival

F1nut wrote: »

No newrival, there is a major difference between the naysayers and those in the know. Those in the know don't run around the forum pushing an agenda. However, we do become vocal once the naysayer springs into action to dispel their misinformation.

respectfully, i dont see the difference. they believe what they believe and you believe as you do. If theres no way to prove one over the other why cant it just be discussed civilly. I can understand people's frustration but seriously, the other side of the argument believes the same as the opposition: that the other side is pushing their "agenda." I believe in many of the theories like synergy, etc. but i realize there are others that arent going to believe that, but neither of us is going to convince the other, and we certainly aret going to prove our points by name calling.

You say we're in the know, but they believe they are. can you prove either is correct or incorrect? I say let's just keep discussions open-minded, much as is demanded in the forum by many in this discussion. it needs to work both ways

jcandy

nooshinjohn wrote: »

I love that demo. I did it to myself with my PS Audio AC-5's... I ran one for a month, then plugged in the other. My wife even commented that something was different.

Stereo?

nooshinjohn

FTGV wrote: »

Don't mind him,he thinks anyone with an opinion even slightly opposed to his is a troll.

There is a big difference between thinking and knowing.