Do Audio Speakers Break-in?

[MarkWinston]

There is no proof that it works. You seem to have a vivid imagination about your method. Winding up the volume slowly and such. I've replaced the drivers in manyyyy speakers and I never wound them ups slowly when frequency sweeping them to check for issues. There simply was not the time to go slowly and do it in gradual steps. Break-in is a imaginative thing and is just that.

Great, and like you have proof it doesnt. Keep standing your soft ground with no definitive evidence to back your claim. Instead of all these yankee doodle poop talk, why dont you show definitive proof of your wild claim instead of merely telling others that it doesnt work? Oh I forgot, talk is cheap. And dont bother asking me to back my claim that it works, its even audible to people that arent interested in all this audio stuff. You dont want to run in your speakers? Up to you. You dont have the time to baby the speakers even for a few minutes? Thats all you. Vivid imagination or not, its my speakers and Ill do whatever I want to them even though I made it clear that this very step has nothing to do with running in speakers scientifically but my personal wish. Keep harping on a point that even isnt connected to the actual topic. Until you can show definitive proof, stop talking like its a fact. Some people. Pfffft.

 

[mansr]

Uh-huh

 

[krabapple]

Re. speaker break-in; I wonder why the doubters did not read Amir's results in the very first post that started this thread? It's got, like, measurements and stuff...

i dun no this too hard to unnerstan:

Objective analysis shows that there is no change to the frequency response and hence tonality of the speaker after a few hours of intensive running (full sweeps from 20 to 20 kHz). 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.

 

[krabapple]

and speaker break-in hasn't been proven to be a lie on speaker models that claims to require them. The test here is basically tested on an aluminum speaker driver whose manufacturer never claimed to require a break in . That's like testing an 8ohm for 4ohm rating and claiming emotiva must be lying because your speakers are tested to work with 8ohm, so that must apply to all speakers...then comes your conspiracy theory that 4ohm Emovita / Magnepan , etc...are trying to dupe you into upgrading your amp. That's how u ppl are wired..

Ah, so *some* woofers require break-in but others do not.

Audiophiles be funny.

 

[krabapple]

where have u ppl been....so many speaker manufacturers recommending break in ....it's not some new concept.
i just did a quick search...right on google's first page:
https://www.cambridgeaudio.com/usa/en/blog/how-run-speakers
https://www.klipsch.ca/blog/how-and-why-to-break-in-your-new-speakers
https://celestion.com/blog/how-to-break-in-a-guitar-speaker/
https://audioengineusa.com/explore/speaker-setup-break-new-speakers/

that's why i think you ppl ridiculous conspiracy theory that this is an industry wide grift and afraid to do the test to prove such outlandish assumption

And there's at least that many cable makers who say their cables 'sound different', and even recommend break in.

So?

It's not science. It's marketing. They know their audience.

 

[krabapple]

Break ins work, with enough voltage. You can 'break in' your speaker for 100000000 hours at 45db and it wont do a thing. Time dont mean a thing without force. With the right voltage and enough cone excursion, your speakers will be broken in in a matter minutes. I personally play 10hz to 22khz sine wave sweeps at 100 seconds per sweep @ 20% volume for the first 5 minutes and increase to 40% for the next 5 minutes and so on. When I get to 80% volume I stop. Break in done. I could go to 80% right away but I tend to gradually increase volume as I described above.

Amazing.

 

[amirm]

All I'm saying is if the manufacturer recommends it, then do it because it might make a difference, if not, don't do it because its design doesn't require it.

You have not shown why any design requires it. And we have explained why that statement is in the manual.

Regardless, as I mentioned, if this is really important to you, then pony up some money and work to create a test setup. If you are not willing, then you are wasting our time with empty arguments.

 

[amirm]

There is visible difference in bass.

No, that is just run to run variation.

 

[krabapple]

Hmm, who else these days in America thinks 'you can't prove they DON'T!' is a slam-dunk argument.....it's on the tip of my tongue but I can't seem to recall. Let me look at the news to remind myself....

 

[MarkWinston]

Who else these days in America thinks that everything is just a conspiracy to trap unknowing fellow humans? ROTFLMAO!

And yeah, those that are so eager to prove that running in doesnt work better put out some dough because the last time I heard, many have experienced break in first hand and it aint brain conditioning or the likes, and it is your duty to disprove what many believe and not the other way round. Im 100% on the break in side but Ill still chip in.

 

[Doodski]

Who else these days in America thinks that everything is just a conspiracy to trap unknowing fellow humans? ROTFLMAO!

And yeah, those that are so eager to prove that running in doesnt work better put out some dough because the last time I heard, many have experienced break in first hand and it aint brain conditioning or the likes, and it is your duty to disprove what many believe and not the other way round. Im 100% on the break in side but Ill still chip in.

Rolling eyes.....

 

[Inner Space]

And yeah, those that are so eager to prove that running in doesnt work better put out some dough because the last time I heard, many have experienced break in first hand and it aint brain conditioning or the likes, and it is your duty to disprove what many believe and not the other way round. Im 100% on the break in side but Ill still chip in.

Eager to prove? It has been proved over and over and over and over again - including in the first post in this thread, ffs. Meanwhile you're just saying the same thing over and over and over and over again. That won't make it true, you know. I get that you desperately want to be one of the special few who know the secrets others don't - but here's the thing: there really aren't any secrets in audio. You need to find a different way to make yourself feel good.

 

[mhardy6647]

What does gradually increasing the volume do?

Well... he (or she, or they) could increase the volume really quickly (and really substantially), skipping breaking in entirely, and go straight to breaking.

 

[MarkWinston]

Eager to prove? It has been proved over and over and over and over again - including in the first post in this thread, ffs. Meanwhile you're just saying the same thing over and over and over and over again. That won't make it true, you know. I get that you desperately want to be one of the special few who know the secrets others don't - but here's the thing: there really aren't any secrets in audio. You need to find a different way to make yourself feel good.

Lmao! The first post is far from definitive proof, in fact that test made it more subjective than ever. Testing just one speaker (type) isnt exactly what you call proof, and experience confirms that. Had many speakers that didnt improve with break in, had many that did. So that doesnt cover 'making myself feel good'. Good try though.

 

[ahofer]

the industry make many claims, some truth, some lies...that's why it should be tested.
We can't just say every claim is an industry wide grift because it fits your narrative

Hitchens Razor: What can be asserted without evidence may also be dismissed without evidence.

They either 1)Know what the measured result is, and don't want to share it or 2) don't know, and should be avoided and ridiculed for not knowing. This is not a false binary. The burden of proof is on the manufacturers.

 

[Doodski]

Well... he (or she, or they) could increase the volume really quickly (and really substantially), skipping breaking in entirely, and go straight to breaking.

The commenter quote> "

I personally play 10hz to 22khz sine wave sweeps at 100 seconds per sweep @ 20% volume for the first 5 minutes and increase to 40% for the next 5 minutes and so on. When I get to 80% volume I stop. Break in done. I could go to 80% right away but I tend to gradually increase volume as I described above.

There is no point in starting at whatever 20% is (what is 20%?) and then 40% and 80%. It's like saying the breaking requires starting slow and low like cooking a brisket.

 

[amper42]

The break in period is for the listener's ears. If he doesn't like them initially, he may grow into liking them and the reason will be, "It sounds better now that the speaker has broken in."

 

[MarkWinston]

The commenter quote> "

There is no point in starting at whatever 20% is (what is 20%?) and then 40% and 80%. It's like saying the breaking requires starting slow and low like cooking a brisket.

Here we go again, harping on a point where I have mentioned has nothing to do with breaking in procedure but rather my personal choice and preference. And clearly someone doesnt know how to calculate simple volume percentage. Maybe a trip back to high school to catch up on all the calsses you missed. But if you insist on going on being a clown, go right ahead, because thats the best you could do. Blowing smoke is easy, backing up a ridiculous claim isnt. But go on. Speakers that have mechanical parts wont sound different after a break in... lmao! Thats a good one.

 

[Beave]

Here we go again, harping on a point where I have mentioned has nothing to do with breaking in procedure but rather my personal choice and preference. And clearly someone doesnt know how to calculate simple volume percentage. Maybe a trip back to high school to catch up on all the calsses you missed. But if you insist on going on being a clown, go right ahead, because thats the best you could do. Blowing smoke is easy, backing up a ridiculous claim isnt. But go on. Speakers that have mechanical parts wont sound different after a break in... lmao! Thats a good one.

I missed a lot of calsses in high school.

 

[NTK]

From who else?
https://www.routledge.com/Sound-Rep...f-Loudspeakers-and/Toole/p/book/9781138921368