Do Audio Speakers Break-in?

[gfx_1]

I've had the JBL HDI-1600's in my system for about 4 days now and they been running about 18 hours a day. I haven't detected any change in their sound?

I think the subwoofer is a more extreme example, it had a stiff surround and spider. He measures them before and after a break-in to
better calculate the cabinet size. Tweeters don't change that much or at all (that's measured also somewhere) and midtoners / woofers are easier.
I think (completely subjective) that I liked my new bookshelf speakers better after a while.

 

[tuga]

From the JBL 4319 manual:

As with most speakers, after you start playing the 4319 it will take the drivers’ suspensions several weeks to “break in” and achieve optimum performance. During this period, the balance among the woofer, midrange and tweeter may change, so we recommend that you adjust the midrange and tweeter controls accordingly.

 

[ferongr]

"Please allow for the return period window to expire."

 

[Voo]

dont speaker mfgr's break in their speakers before they leave the factory? I have seen some factory tours like focal stick their speakers in a shipping container and play them for days non stop. maybe thats just their QC

 

[snurf]

From my experience break-in is real, but...it depends on the driver. About 30 years ago I purchased a pair of Dali speakers which changed a lot during the first four hours. From sounding plain wrong to making music.

Then a few years back I purchased a pair of Yamaha HS 8 and noticed no change at all. This has been the case with some other models, as well. Anyways, I felt I needed sub-bass for my HS 8's, so I purchased an active subwoofer with a Peerless XXLS-835017 driver. It sounded awful, but I knew from experience that some drivers need break-in. It took about two weeks to break in. Again, the biggest improvement became evident within four hours. I decided I needed more bass and bought another unit. Same thing happened. I then bought another two units and the same thing happened again.

The explanation from an interview with a driver manufacturer in Scandinavia, was that the glue they use for the surround in some models hardens from the movement of the cone. The manufacturer also had the drivers sitting on a shelf for a few months before shipping them out.

So while the before/after measurement may look almost the same it's impossible to not hear any difference with some drivers.

Edit: I'm guessing the ever so slightly dynamic change when the glue is hardening is noticeable but doesn't really show up in a sweep.
Edit: Replaced 'suspension' with 'surround'.
Edit: Clarification: To my ear it sounds that some drivers sounds faulty or defective when new, just doing something wrong, and then becomes fully functioning. Not so much as going from good to great.

 

[Sir Sanders Zingmore]

This completely mirrors research performed at Harman where they tested a new woofer and a "broken-in" one in a real speaker. While physical changes are occurring in the driver, they are at such low level that there is no hope of attaching them to audibility.

@amirm is the Harman research available somewhere? It would be interesting to see (the subject of measured changes to drivers has come up in a discussion going on over at SNA about speaker break-in).

 

[amirm]

@amirm is the Harman research available somewhere? It would be interesting to see (the subject of measured changes to drivers has come up in a discussion going on over at SNA about speaker break-in).

A bit of it is in dr. Toole book which I have quoted before. The measurements I saw were in a private presentation at harman which I have not seen elsewhere.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

A bit of it is in dr. Toole book which I have quoted before. The measurements I saw were in a private presentation at harman which I have not seen elsewhere.

Many years ago, Paul Barton (PSB) made a similar test with similar results.

 

[Linus]

What about component break in ?!
My phono pre’s manual states “The performance of your MOON 110LP v2 will continue to improve during the first 300 hours of listening.“
Seriously?! 300 hours, for a phono pre. Considering 20 minutes per sides, 2 sides per vinyl, it comes to 450 albums to get optimal performance. That the stupidest thing I’ve heard.

 

[snurf]

Some materials like polypropylene in capacitors and such needs to form "routes" when new but stabilizes after 15-20 minutes. So amps etc are "broken in" after 20 minutes. It's hardly noticeable.

 

[Speedskater]

Some materials like polypropylene in capacitors and such needs to form "routes" when new but stabilizes after 15-20 minutes. So amps etc are "broken in" after 20 minutes. It's hardly noticeable.

'hardy noticeable' heck make that 'hardy measurable' especially in the ways that they are used in modern audio exuipment.

 

[snurf]

'hardy noticeable' heck make that 'hardy measurable' especially in the ways that they are used in modern audio exuipment.

Yes, I've only noticed it once.

Edit: Once I noticed something weird with a brand new amp after being turned on for 2 minutes that lasted a second or two...of course I can only speculate what the reason was and not tie it to any specific component in the amp or any other part of the chain

 

[krabapple]

Do the measured 'break-in' differences exceed variability from new unit to new unit in the same production run?

 

[PRL]

With moving parts you would expect there to be some fettling or fatigue particularly with the surround but I have heard that while measurable it’s not enough to make a noticeable difference. What I do wonder about is the ferrofluid in tweeters. I have had issues with tweeters 7 or more years old needing the old fluid cleaned out and replaced with new. It wouldn’t surprise me if many older speakers sound a little ragged for this reason.

 

[Rincewind]

"Do the measured 'break-in' differences exceed variability from new unit to new unit in the same production run?"

No, not in my experience working for two different high quality loudspeaker manufacturers.

 

[MattHooper]

Many years ago, Paul Barton (PSB) made a similar test with similar results.

I still know some audio reviewers, and I hear whatever they have in for review. A number of times I've heard a new speaker playing, first or second day of arrival. Then the reviewer a week later or so tells me they've broken in and sound different now. I drop over and...they sound the same to me.
If they were bright they were still bright, if the bass wasn't very deep it's still not very deep, all the characteristics I remember are there.
So I tend to infer it's the listener's brain doing the "breaking in" rather than the speakers, getting used to the new sound.

 

[A.West]

That probably has more to do with re-stringing before each game being too much effort for most amateurs. I don't doubt that there is a change, and it makes sense that players would prefer consistency whether it's the fresh or settled state.

I started stringing my own racquets this year and can confirm a significant drop in tension from stringing through first two hours of play. Then nat gut ages very differently vs polyester. I discovered there is a whole world of stringophiles, with their own boards. Differences between strings are much bigger than audio signals, but harder to test in action because player variability is so high. Among amateurs like me, the player error component dominates, but nevertheless, a 5% difference in tension or spin vs normal can lead to a significant difference in ball placement, in vs out. By constantly using fresh strings, high level pros can reduce variability of performance, plus reduce the odds of a broken string costing them even a single point. They could also beat me playing with a raquet with a broken string. Compared to tennis players, audiophiles have it easy. Quality measurements of fairly small or nearly nonexistent differences.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

So I tend to infer it's the listener's brain doing the "breaking in" rather than the speakers, getting used to the new sound.

Of course, even if the listener is a reviewer.

 

[Lsc]

This is one of those arguments that doesn’t matter either way.

However, it’s the reviewers who are as much to blame for this break-in “myth”. I often read, “I let the speakers break in for a week before I started doing my critical listening.”

If there is no such thing as break-in, what’s the point of the above? The reviewers ears aren’t getting used to the sound letting it play in the background for a week. Either way, breaking in won’t make my F228Be sound like Salons so it’s a moot point.

 

[TabCam]

This guy is a loudspeaker design legend and begs to differ.

http://www.gr-research.com/burnin.htm

He makes no acoustic measurements, only electro-mechanical ones.

Are electro-mechanical parameters not a predictor for acoustical performance?

There is a strong counter argument against listeners brain "breaking in"; how come you do not need it after being with other speakers for a longer time? I believe your (ad my) brain is "getting used to" the listening room / speaker combination. However, that would mean that a after say a month or longer you need to re-"break in" your brain.

Instead of just hypothesizing, arguing and/or making fun of "believers", we should be furthering science by posing a hypothesis, devising a test and execute it and analyze the results. The scientific method requires multiple samples of the same speaker and probably different speaker types as well. Maybe especially ones which are notorious for their break in period? At the same time a simple FR is not enough. Distortion graphs, waterfall plots, let's check this till the bottom.

For now I see no proof in either confirming nor disproving the hypothesis.