He should have talked about elastic limits at the beginning instead of using confusing terms like creep, but at least he did at the end. What I don't understand is how come the compliance of the spider change if they don't go past it's elastic limit, as he claims? And if they do go past it's limit a little bit, then why not using a material with a better elastic limit that won't change its compliance under normal usage?
Other than that confusing bit, it's nice to see him pretty much debunk the whole burn-in myth. There are some other points I wish he would address more directly. First of all, when he says the response change around the resonant frequency, by how much it changes? Is it even by a noticeable amount? And what does he think that people are hearing when they claim they hear a speaker break in over hours or sometimes weeks of playing it? And while the break-in happens primarily in the woofer, does a tweeter break-in also in the same fashion?
Part 2 should be interesting, at any case.
As I've posted elsewhere, not in a large set of measurements that I did. The suspension changes did not affect the frequency response much. I'd suppose Andrew thinks people aren't hearing anything physical but have psychologically adapted to the new sound. That's what I believe 98.647% of "break-in" is.when he says the response change around the resonant frequency, by how much it changes? Is it even by a noticeable amount? And what does he think that people are hearing when they claim they hear a speaker break in over hours or sometimes weeks of playing it?
Nature of "tweeks" generallyWhat I don't understand is why people always claim that speakers break in for the better. Don't even a few get worse?
Sure. If a tree falls in the forest and no one hears it, it makes no sound.If a break-in believer was given a set of speakers advertised as brand new but which had secretly been broken in at the factory with 1,000 hours of music would the break-in believer perceive an improvement in sound after performing his own 100 hours of break-in?
Nothing and, eventually, they do. Note, also, that no one ever says that "breaking in" results in poorer sound.If speakers break in over time, what would stop them from eventually wearing out.
The main thing was the resonance frequency just kept dropping little by little by little through the whole 280 hours at full power. Yes it was permanent; the suspensions were just getting the hell battered out of them.Do they change much after a few minutes? Is it permanent if you go longer/hotter?
Wait, what did you say? I can't hear you, I'm in the middle of this forest...If a tree falls in the forest and no one hears it, it makes no sound.
...and it's too loud in the forest because all these cable companies are doing "burn-in"Reminds me of reading cable reviews where the companies involved offer to burn them in for you, yeah right........of course they do.
What I don't understand is why people always claim that speakers break in for the better. Don't even a few get worse?
You forgot significant others. Or is that in yet another universe?mirrors, furniture and decorations look more attractive the more they are looked at.