Do Audio Speakers Break-in?

[DualTriode]

No, it's not. That's real world break-in.

BTW, it still isn't in spec but it's reasonably close. I've never had a sub that met the specs exactly and usually, when you use two, they are measurably different.

I'm not arguing that small and measurable differences are noticeable to the ear. I'm just saying I can easily tell the difference between a broken in sub and a non broken in sub, particularly in a second order enclosure.

I guess that means that you have to break it in every time it sits overnight in the cold garage.

For speakers plus or minus 15% is the norm.

 

[TomB19]

I guess that means that you have to break it in every time it sits overnight in the cold garage.

Why would it mean that? Is this a joke?

Are you contending that sitting overnight in a garage resets a driver to pre-break-in specifications?

 

[DualTriode]

Why would it mean that? Is this a joke?

Are you contending that sitting overnight in a garage resets a driver to pre-break-in specifications?

No Joke,

I will take you by the hand and explain it.

It is not break in, it is warm up.

Thanks DT

 

[paddycrow]

I can speak to what happens in an auto engine, it's what I used to do for a living. We call it de-greening and it is a measurable change in friction internal to the engine. Primarily has to do with the rings running in on freshly honed cylinder walls.

I doubt anything like that occurs in a loudspeaker.

 

[CumSum]

No question. Break-in is real, measurable, and it makes a difference.

I recently pulled a brand new subwoofer out of the box and measured it with my DATS 2 at Qts of .72. At first, I thought something was wrong because it was way out of spec. I tested it a dozen times, re-weighed my offset mass, and had a look at the DATS module. After a couple of weeks in a test box, it's now at 0.53. Now it's reasonably close to spec. Yeah, Qms changed a bit and it is easily measurable in a theater environment or on the bench. lol!

Of course, that big Qts change won't affect an infinite baffle situation as much as a second order box but it would be easily measurable in either case.

Obviously, the effect isn't going to be as pronounced with a butyl surround, mid driver but they break in a wee bit also, as do tweeters.

Take a woofer out of the box and compare it to a woofer that has been in use for a long time. Push in the cone and feel the resistance. They will be nowhere near the same. Do you suppose they sound identical, when one takes jway more force to move the cone? My gawd.

This site has become one of the least objective audio sites on the internet.

I built my first Dayton Ultimax 18" sub and used it heavily for over a year. Then I built my second Dayton Ultimax 18" sub. Literally the first thing I did when I finished building the second sub was to measure the first sub, just a basic sine sweep in REW with a UMIK-1. I then moved the old sub out of the way and measured the brand new sub. Both measurements were within 0.1dB of one another. They measured identically and in terms of sound there was nothing noticeably different.

I don't think break-in is complete BS, it has merit for mechanical components. But in my little experiment with massive 18" drivers, there was no difference to speak of.

 

[watchnerd]

I don't think break-in is complete BS, it has merit for mechanical components.

Do cartridges count?

 

[ehabheikal]

Nope! Somebody is going to say to run it with pink noise at 85db for 100 hours or something. In fact Klipsch basically says that.
https://www.klipsch.com/blog/how-to-break-in-a-speaker
"After about 100 hours of use, your speakers should be broken in."

So to truly put this myth to rest, let it play loudly for 100 hours. Then try again. Don't give me any of this "should be" stuff. We're dealing with audioimbeciles here. They need the point crammed down their throats. Also maybe do it with the Klipsch speaker since, ya know, different brands.

And a full battery of tests including distortion.

 

[jhaider]

No question. Break-in is real, measurable, and it makes a difference.

I recently pulled a brand new subwoofer out of the box and measured it with my DATS 2 at Qts of .72. At first, I thought something was wrong because it was way out of spec. I tested it a dozen times, re-weighed my offset mass, and had a look at the DATS module. After a couple of weeks in a test box, it's now at 0.53.

Can you show us resultant differences in the measured response?

A lot of people seem to think that a change in T/S parameters is dispositive to prove this “break in” hypothesis. It is not. All that shows is some numbers in a model shifted around from one measurement to the next.

I’ve yet to see anyone claiming break in provide data that could actually make that case, such as changes in frequency response for a loudspeaker when new vs “broken in.” Often what’s not there. By contrast...

I built my first Dayton Ultimax 18" sub and used it heavily for over a year. Then I built my second Dayton Ultimax 18" sub. Literally the first thing I did when I finished building the second sub was to measure the first sub, just a basic sine sweep in REW with a UMIK-1. I then moved the old sub out of the way and measured the brand new sub. Both measurements were within 0.1dB of one another. They measured identically and in terms of sound there was nothing noticeably different.

That is how to test the break in hypothesis.

 

[trl]

Take a woofer out of the box and compare it to a woofer that has been in use for a long time. Push in the cone and feel the resistance. They will be nowhere near the same. Do you suppose they sound identical, when one takes jway more force to move the cone? My gawd.

I did compared a 0h SVS SB1000 with a 100h one, but didn't felt any diff. An easier to move membrane usually means the enclosure starts to lose air.

Did you happen to post here some measurements before/after? Interesting how harmonics profile get modified by this burn-in.

This site has become one of the least objective audio sites on the internet.

I would take this as a complete joke!

 

[omm0910]

What I feel beggars reason, is the implication that, speakers (or electronics...) somehow "break in" for 100 hours, then magically stop changing after that. I could accept that on a microscopic level some materials break down over time. But how exactly is it supposed to work that they then stop changing. And if so, is this part of the speaker manufacturers master plan. Shouldn't they be testing and designing speakers for this purported break in. Shouldn't they tout this as part of their research, or have patents on "material that changes for 100 hours then stops changing". Or maybe they do change forever, presenting a moving target of frequency response, and eventually degrading into dust. Which is it? In any event, show me the objective measurement graph. I'm waiting.

 

[MRC01]

What I feel beggars reason, is the implication that, speakers (or electronics...) somehow "break in" for 100 hours, then magically stop changing after that. I could accept that on a microscopic level some materials break down over time. But how exactly is it supposed to work that they then stop changing ... In any event, show me the objective measurement graph. I'm waiting.

If the changes that occur during break-in occur at a rate that roughly follows a log(x) curve, then one could say break in is complete at the knee of the curve.

 

[krabapple]

If the changes that occur during break-in occur at a rate that roughly follows a log(x) curve, then one could say break in is complete at the knee of the curve.

Suggesting that companies have actually measured where the knee of the curve reliably occurs. I've seen zero evidence of this being the case.

 

[paddycrow]

I've yet to see anything but anecdotal evidence that break-in occurs. I have not experienced it myself.

First thing I want to see with any measured data is a measurement system analysis.

 

[milosz]

I think I read someplace (but then again maybe my monkey's brain is fabulating that memory...) I think I read someplace that some woofer motors can be objectively shown to exhibit some level of break-in effect, related both to the surround and to the spider, resulting in a small shift in T/S characteristics. Was it in Voice Coil that I saw this?

I think the changes - if present - are rather small and not likely responsible for the comments I've read from reviewers about the speaker "opening up" after X-hundred hours. I think such observations are likely to be changes in the mind of the reviewer rather than some change in objective speaker performance. <= MY OPINION not supported by testing or data.

 

[Xyrium]

Perhaps speaker manufacturers need to place tolerance percentages on their products like component (caps...resistors...inductors) mfgs do. Each speaker is essentially an LCR circuit...

This would, of course, be an admission that specs are expected to fluctuate though.

I personally don't believe in 'break in', at least in such that it would be audible.

 

[omm0910]

This is AVR SCIENCE review. Show me the before and after graphs.

Anyone? Anyone? I didn't think so...

[Sorry if that's a little pointed. Back to being a happy member.]

 

[Sal1950]

I think the changes - if present - are rather small and not likely responsible for the comments I've read from reviewers about the speaker "opening up" after X-hundred hours. I think such observations are likely to be changes in the mind of the reviewer rather than some change in objective speaker performance. <= MY OPINION not supported by testing or data.

You know my wife called out from the kitchen yesterday,

"honey what have you changed in the system over the last few weeks? It sounds so much better today than after you first got the new JBL's?"

I thought about it for a bit and then remembered, I DON'T HAVE A WIFE !!!

 

[DonH56]

Can't believe this is still going... I don't have plots and don't care to go looking. I am pretty sure there are some earlier in this very thread and there's always the AES. Speaker break-in is well-known but generally takes seconds to minutes for the vast majority. Most of it probably happens in final test. Big (sub)woofers may take a little longer, and some panels take longer. T/S parameters change measurably but most speaker designers with whom I have spoken (a very small number and I am not one) say the change is essentially inaudible, which is what Amir found.

As to the "why", surrounds and spiders (esp.) are often coated material and the coating takes a little time to break in and "relax". Think of a starched cloth or waxed paper, or even normal paper. Sort of stiff at first, but flex/crumple it a few minutes and it becomes smooth and supple.

Given a decent amp it won't have any trouble overcoming the added resistance from the driver until it breaks in.

Much ado about (almost) nothing...

IMO - Don

 

[jtwrace]

 

[Putter]

Nope! Somebody is going to say to run it with pink noise at 85db for 100 hours or something. In fact Klipsch basically says that.
https://www.klipsch.com/blog/how-to-break-in-a-speaker
"After about 100 hours of use, your speakers should be broken in."

So to truly put this myth to rest, let it play loudly for 100 hours. Then try again. Don't give me any of this "should be" stuff. We're dealing with audioimbeciles here. They need the point crammed down their throats. Also maybe do it with the Klipsch speaker since, ya know, different brands.

It occurs to me that if the '100 hour break in' was a real phenomena, there would be speakers played with pink noise or music for that time period or longer available for sale like prewashed jeans or vintage wines or.......you get the idea.