Do Audio Speakers Break-in?

[mansr]

The only real proof is personal experience.

Are you a solipsist?

 

[BDWoody]

The only real proof is personal experience.

How'd that work out in math class?

 

[jharkness]

IMHO, I think that the break-in period for speakers is actually for your ears to break-in.
Your ears need to become accustomed to the speakers.

I have the same issue when changing headphones. I listen to headphone A for a few weeks and then switch over to B and B sounds horrible. Next day, putting on headphone B and they sound great on the same songs.

Personally, I think it is your brain not the instrument

 

[ta240]

It's actually more than just heating up. New competition tires need a few heat cycles in order to reach optimum grip. This is a break-in period where you need heat them up gently, then let them cool off, repeat a few times. All without stressing the tire - gentle driving, no hard accel, braking or cornering. If you don't do this the tire will not perform as well, nor last as long, as it should. Back when I used to race cars, companies like Tire Rack offered a service to heat cycle new tires before shipping them.

Regarding speaker break-in, the manual for my Magnepan 3.6/R says the bass response will gain a few Hz deeper after several hours of play. Seems reasonable, as it's a mechanical system. I don't recall hearing any difference, but I've had them 20 years so that memory has faded.

So, Tirerack is smart enough to offer heat cycling of their tires for their customers but professional race teams have to do it on the track. That makes no sense at all. The professional teams tires would be heat cycled prior to putting them on the car.

 

[Bear123]

The only real proof is personal experience.

Umm, that's not true at all.

Thank goodness for the objective data this site helps to provide.

 

[ROOSKIE]

IMHO, I think that the break-in period for speakers is actually for your ears to break-in.
Your ears need to become accustomed to the speakers.

I have the same issue when changing headphones. I listen to headphone A for a few weeks and then switch over to B and B sounds horrible. Next day, putting on headphone B and they sound great on the same songs.

Personally, I think it is your brain not the instrument

While I have had that experience and other similar experiences (such as some days my hearing is much, much more acute than other days & some days different qualities seem to stand out vs other days) There can be a ton of variation in my hearing and tastes.
I have also noticed some changes due to what I perceive as break in. Since I have many speakers and am often switching I am not getting used to one new pair.
The big thing is why not just break them in before critically judging them? What is the loss? Play them non stop at fairly high volumes for 30 hours and them use them as intended. Simply can't hurt even if break in is bs.

 

[ROOSKIE]

I guess I don't know that at all...

Ucontrolled listening impressions are some of the least reliable 'data points' I could think of.

I am not denying it...specifically...but I haven't seen anything like proof or actual meaningful data that would convince me it was true.

Yes, but "uncontrolled" listening impressions matter none the less. Not everything can be controlled. On some level we better allow our perceptions to be valuable.
There will be no joy otherwise. I love measuring things and I understand the value it can have, however for myself data is not the goal. The data is a tool used toward increasing the likelyhood that I perceive something that brings me joy(quality tunes in the case of audio).
Joy is the goal.
Now don't get me wrong as I stated I do value tests and I value measurements & there is a reason the more subjective aspect plays a role in each review.

 

[Mnyb]

Controlled and subjektive are not necessarily opposite. Controlled listening test are using your subjective abilities, it’s just that the bias is removed and the result can be valid and useful for others.

 

[richard12511]

IMHO, I think that the break-in period for speakers is actually for your ears to break-in.
Your ears need to become accustomed to the speakers.

I have the same issue when changing headphones. I listen to headphone A for a few weeks and then switch over to B and B sounds horrible. Next day, putting on headphone B and they sound great on the same songs.

Personally, I think it is your brain not the instrument

I agree. I envy people who are "blown away" by "night and day" differences when they get a new pair of speakers. Other then the very first time I upgraded from the speakers in my computer monitor to a Logitech 2.1 system($300 or so), I've never been blown away by the improvement in sound from upgrading. I'm always underwhelmed by the improvement I hear, but I think it's more my ears had gotten used to the previous sound. Whenever I go back and hook my old speakers up after listening for a few months on the new system is when I really start to appreciate the improvement.

 

[Milt]

I know this has been posted at least once in this thread, but imo it's the user that get "broken in" rather than the speaker.

 

[amirm]

I think a lot of people don't know how to evaluate speakers properly and buy bad sounding speakers. It gets to their house and it doesn't produce good sound and they are disappointed. Then they listen for a while and get used to it and fall back in love with their content.

Get a great speaker and the moment you play anything into it, it sounds wonderful. If it does not, you have bought the wrong speaker....

 

[Tks]

Are you a solipsist?

I rarely give that benefit of the doubt anymore. I just chalk it up to people being sophists instead. Let them demonstrate to me otherwise if that isn't the case.

 

[ROOSKIE]

I think a lot of people forgot what a "fact" is. Even some people talking up "facts". A fact is something that can be reasonably proven.
If I eat lunch at 12:00 and I tell someone I ate lunch at 12:00 that is not a fact even though it is true.
It is a fact if there is a video synchronized with an accurate clock showing me eat lunch at 12:00, or if there was a witness there that saw me eat lunch at 12:00 and can corroborate my true statement thus making it a reasonably proven event = fact.
Now you can see how complex things can get fast, because if I eat breakfast at 12:00 and someone sees me eating, what meal are they going to guess I am eating?? Likely lunch and that may be taken by others as a fact and even though it is not true, it may be essentially a fact due to the reasonable proof available.
Facts are based on reasonable proof, NOT the truth.
Fact, is term that represents a high (hopefully very high) probability of something being true, but is not a substitute for the truth.

 

[DonH56]

fact /fakt/ noun
a thing that is known or proved to be true.

 

[maltux]

Living in a society that gives more credibility to belief than fact, I truly wonder humanities existence.

 

[Juhazi]

[QUOTE="ROOSKIE, post: 345509, member: 13686"---
The big thing is why not just break them in before critically judging them? What is the loss? Play them non stop at fairly high volumes for 30 hours and them use them as intended. Simply can't hurt even if break in is bs.[/QUOTE]

Why not 33 1/3h or any other number?

 

[Putter]

I find it amazing that this thread has gone on 9 pages (so far). There seem to be some fairly simple conclusions to be had.

First is that manufacturers of speakers recommend a break in period, first allow the consumer to become accustomed to a different speaker sound and second, to put it past the return period if that doesn't happen. I would consider this to be a business decision. Finally it's unlikely speakers are not at least tested to ensure they actually work and I suspect given a quick frequency response check. We do have several people in the speaker business in this forum who could verify if this is true.

All measurement of speakers used within reasonable volumes show minimal changes in frequency response and if that weren't true, there would be a lot of returned speakers. Again a reasonable business practice to use materials that don't change over time, foam surrounds excepted and their deterioration occurs well beyond the return period and as I understand it the composition of the foam has changed so the longevity is greater. The same applies to the use of electrolytic capacitors vs. poly caps.

As for playing at high volumes for a sustained period of time, you may actually be risking failure of the drivers which likely could be replaced within warranty period or exchanged, but still seems like a silly idea without proof.

 

[MRC01]

So, Tirerack is smart enough to offer heat cycling of their tires for their customers but professional race teams have to do it on the track. That makes no sense at all. The professional teams tires would be heat cycled prior to putting them on the car.

I believe the tires for professional teams are shipped to them already heat cycled and ready to race. Or, they heat cycle them by driving an easy lap, then going into the pits, lifting the car and letting the tires cool off. Either way, heat cycling is not a scam, and Tire Rack is not the only company that does it.

 

[SmackDaddies]

For what it is worth....
I am fami,ar with a company that manufactures drivers for speakers. More tha 1m a year, including a lot of large subwoofer drivers. The owner ers belief is that the larger the driver, and then burn I really does matter.

 

[amirm]

Klippel sells a measurement system to detect aging in speakers. Here is a slide from their presentation on that:

Notice that the "break-in" is not that many hours at all. And the 100 hour recommendation is in the fatigue area!