Do Audio Speakers Break-in?

[anmpr1]

One would give more credence to break-in being meaningful if there were common cases of components sounding worse after extended use. But every single one of the processes involved seems to only make things sound better..

I have read reports of old electrostatic panels losing film rigidity over the years. Woofer surrounds have been known to deteriorate. On the other hand, I have a set of JBL L123A woofers from the mid '70s that appear to be as new.

You'd think that pretty much any mechanical thing would/could deteriorate over time, with frequent use, but whether the deterioration is important or noticeable is another question. We audiofools tend to make a lot of stuff up. That's just our nature.

 

[sergeauckland]

I have never heard any difference between right out of the box and a few days later.

When I had the HiFi shop in the mid 1980s, we had a lot of 'speakers on demo, and at that time people mostly preferred to take away the ones they heard rather than a factory sealed box, encouraged by the magazine at the time. That meant that we rotated our stock regularly, which was good as it meant our demo equipment never got scruffy but it also meant we heard loudspeakers which had been used for a fair few hours, and those right out of the box. I can say we were never aware of there being any difference between them. I concluded at the time that burn-in wasn't anything to get exercised about, whether loudspeakers or indeed electronics.

S

 

[Jinjuku]

I've seen speaker designers show in-audible measured differences and they simply play a tone to loosen up the compliance on a transducer.

 

[RichB]

Just to reiterate the point, made many times before.
Why does break-in of audio components always make them sound better - never worse?

I have plugged amplifiers into power conditions and even via a Kill-A-Watt and found they sound worse so I now plug them directly into the wall, using their stock cables of course.

- Rich

 

[AudioTodd]

Well this seems to be a case of typical pseudo-logical audiophillia: Take some plausible science-based phenomenon and then extrapolate HUGE and DRAMATIC effects without any context, that when given, would indicate that the actual effects are negligible in most cases in real world use. We read and hear this stuff all the time. Somebody with no training and a popular science book and a set of self-proclaimed ”golden ears” suddenly discovers tremendous improvements necessitating thousands of dollars of expenditures.

Not me. I have two main systems, one with two sets of speakers and the other with three (mini monitors, towers and magnepans) with Benchmark AHB2s, a Pass XA25, Clayton Audio M100s, a Cary designed Single Ended Triode as well as two different push-pull tube amps. By constantly varying the setup, my brain now VERY quickly adjusts to whatever I’m listening to and I would be hard pressed to claim I can hear much differences other than those clearly caused by power limitations, amplifier output impedance, speaker dispersion patterns and fundamental frequency response, etc. Being able to do this has been eye opening and made me wonder why I spend so much money (but I keep chasing it anyway).

Of course, I could be wrong and my affordable Blue Jeans Cables could just be obscuring all of the incredible differences I should be hearing... lol

 

[kokishin]

I'd be obsessed with humidity and break in if I had old style paper rot style driver diaphragms and surrounds. They would probably sound more and more organic with extra humidity, as seen by the organic colonies forming on the diaphragm below. So lifelike, unstrained, and "relaxed" sounding!

(And I wonder if wooden drivers are completely sealed? I swear there are a few companies that use them because they sound organic. If so, they should sound like whatever decidedly toxic chemical they were sealed with, since speakers always sound like their cone materiel (another "given" that I think is a myth.) For example: My Genelecs have an aluminum tweeter, so you know they have massive treble spikes and their mids sound foamy and soft with tons of nulls, and the aluminum woofer is way to bright and metallic.)

If only I had some really old speakers that sounded organic and alive like these:

View attachment 53036

I forwarded your post to the CDC.

 

[Xulonn]

You guys ain't heard nothin' until you've heard my well broken-in Jensens...an amazing sonic experience...

Don't ever let anyone tell you that speaker materials don't change over time. /snark

 

[NTomokawa]

I've never seen professional studio monitors/control monitors require "burn-in" in any shape or form. To me that's clear enough. There is no speaker burn-in.

 

[A800]

From my experience:
Soft surround type speakers not so much.
Stiff surround type speakers like PA subs take some hours...
Some are already broken-in from the factory.

 

[Thomas savage]

Learning to trust the sound coming from new speakers and acclimatising to differences from the previous incumbent might lead one to believe the device is changing.

Who knows , it's one of those areas that could do with proper analysis... Of the human not the speaker .

 

[Tks]

I imagine break-in is real, for the split second upon first operation.

In all seriousness though. It's very interesting to see no driver was ever created where after break-in it sounds worse. It's always a benefit it seems to people...

 

[thewas]

I imagine break-in is real, for the split second upon first operation.

In all seriousness though. It's very interesting to see no driver was ever created where after break-in it sounds worse. It's always a benefit it seems to people...

Same like with all audiophoolery updates if you read such reviews, which each update/change everything only gets better, the wife comes running even faster out of the kitchen and Diana Krall virtually sings even closer on your lap.

 

[GD Fan]

New speakers I purchased last summer (before discovering this site) took months to properly fit in. This involved: Getting the toe in just right, finding proper distances from the wall and nearby furniture, moving the couch back several inches, and dialing the subwoofer in to integrate just right. No change in the speakers was discernible above all that.

 

[Mnyb]

Well another effect that migth get confused with burn in is starting very cold equipment ?

You get new in box stuff rigth of the truck a cold day and eagerly you plug it in with parts that are at -10 degrees ( Celsius)

 

[Speedskater]

25 years ago, industrial audio consultant Dick Pierce wrote in the audio high-end newsgroup:

Speaker break-in - real or not?

In article <55dj48$[email protected]>,

Giles <[email protected]> wrote:
>My question is two fold: why would speakers need breaking in ? Is
>anyone aware of any measurements and tests having being done of before
>and after performance that has shown a measurable difference?

I am aware of at least one person who has done extensive measurements
of this type: me. I have a database of several thousand drivers that I
have measured.

>I have been able to think of only one mechanism attributable to the
>speaker that to me could conceivably be at play if there is indeed an
>effect. It is that the elastomeric materials that form the suspension
>of the cone of a driver are somewhat stiff to start with and become
>more pliant through use, thereby allowing the cones of the drivers to
>move more freely with use.

>I don't believe this though, as an elastomeric material that exhibited
>such a change in properties would surely continue to 'loosen' over
>time so as to go beyond the point of aurally optimum elasticity so
>that there was an eventual degradation in sound quality such as when
>the voice coil made some unwanted high speed excursions into
>stationary bits.

Well, there are, indeed, several mechanism that are, indeed, at work
that cause the operating parameters of drivers to change through use.
However, the notion that once one gets a speaker home it requires
"breaking in" suffers from several problems.

First, as a driver comes off the line, it's actual performance if
fairly far from it's intended performance target. Reasons for this
include the fact that the centering spider, typically manufactured
from a varnish- impregnated linen, is far stiffer than needed. Working
the driver back and forth lossens the spider considerably.

Now, one might say: there's objective proof of the need to "break in"
a loudspeaker! Not so fast. The break-in period for the spider is on
the order of several seconds, and if it takes you several seconds or
minutes or whatever once you get the speakers home to loosen the
centering spdier, it's not proof of the need to break thme in, it's
proof that the speaker you just bought HAS NEVER BEEN TESTED!

But, on to other points.

When I measure a driver, I can see a significant change in a variety
of operating parameters as the speaker is driven. Usually, in woofer,
the resonant frequency drops as the speaker is used, often by as much
as 10-20%. This is due, as you suggest, to a relaxing of the
elastomers used in the suspension.

However. If I turn the stimulus off, within a few minutes most, if not
all, of the change has completely recovered, and we're back to go
again. The elstomer has recovered from it's stresses (this is
especially true of certain polybutadene-styrene surround
formulations).

There are plenty of other, real, physical changes. For example, one
can see a reduction of the electrical Q with time under heavy use,
simply because of the positive temperature coefficient of the
resistance of the voice coil. Allow the speaker to cool down, and it's
completely recoverable.

Get it hot enough, and you might permanently loose some flux density
in the magnet. But you have to get REAL hot to do that. Hotter than
most of the compounds used in making a speaker can endure without
catastrophic failure (damned few glues, varnishes, cones and
insulating materials can withstand the temperatures neede to reach the
Curie points of the typical magnetic materials found in loudspeakers).

>What I really think is at play in all this is the adaptive signal
>processing abilities of the brain. It is not the speakers which get
>broken in, rather it is ones 'ears'.

When this has been suggested, despite the fact there's about a century
of research backing it, it is more often than not greated with jears
and cires. See, you can't sell special "break-in" CD's if the speakers
aren't broken in.

>I would be interested to hear other opinions on this.

Well, there will be loads of opinions. However, actual data on several
thousand drivers don't seem to give two shits about opinions, the
usual claims of "mysterious unmeasurable quantities" notwithstanding.

--
| Dick Pierce |
| Loudspeaker and Software Consulting |
| 17 Sartelle Street Pepperell, MA 01463 |
| (508) 433-9183 (Voice and FAX) |
11/2/1996
https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!topic/rec.audio.high-end/IBFD0zAUXWw

 

[Speedskater]

and Dick Pierce also wrote:

In article <55l8o2$[email protected]>, Donald A. West <[email protected]> wrote:
>I don't know about all this technical mumbo jumbo. all I know is when
>I got my new pair of NHT 3.3's, they sound horrible out of the box. I
>could not believe how terrible they sounded. they was no bass at all
>and the midrange was sucked in. I almost cried after spending so much
>money. One day I left the amp on and left the house. When I came back
>the house was rocking. This was the 3.3 I heard in the store. My tears
>went to joy! Is this speaker break in?

Is it changes in temparature?

Is it changes in relativce humidity?

Is it changes in your mood?

Unless you have a means of answering no to all these postulates, you'll
never know what it IS.

The only thing you can be sure of is that it's not alien abduction.

Unless you live in Hew Hampshire, of course.
**************************************************
**************************************************
NNTP-Posting-Date: 2 May 2000 15:35:36 GMT

Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end



In article <8ekik4$fub$[email protected]>,
arthur bye <[email protected]> wrote:
>John: I would beg to differ with you in this regard. I have purchased
>no less than 4 new sets of mid to high end speakers and it is very
>easy to tell the differences of a speaker after burn in.

Well, there are those of us that will differ with you in this
regard, and none of us need to beg.

I have been responsible for the purchase, design, building, what
have you of several thousand times as many drivers as you, and
the data I have before me suggests something different.

There are effects from use, for example, reduction in efficiency
due to temperature rise, increase in compliance due to elastic
deformation of the surround, changes in the mechanical
properties of adhesives and cone material, etc., that are the
result of extended playing at moderate to high power levels, for
sure.

However, every one of these effects can be shown to be
reversible simply by removing the signal from the loudspeaker
for the time needed for it to reach thermal equilibrium with the
surroundings (minutes to hours), or for elastic deformation to
recover (seconds, at most). There exiwst no objective data to
suggest that there is anything to long-term performance change,
OTHER THAN WEAR AND DETERIORATION, to the break-in legends.

What break-in does occur in drivers occurs withing the first few
SECONDS of operation, and this is normally done during driver
qualification and system testing.

Further, the sound and, indeed, objective measurements of
loudspeakers show significant changes due to simply evironmental
differences, such as changes in temperature and humidity.

No one doubts that you perceived there is a difference, but you
fail to account for a variety of factors that have nothing to do
with the loudspeaker.

The only data that would substantiate any claims of real changes
would involve direct comparisons between identical drivers that
differ only in their age. This, in and of itself, is a difficult
experiment to conduct if, for no other reason than the fact that
it's nearly impossible to find two identical drivers to begin
with.

On the other hand, it IS possible that the 4 sets of drivers you
have DID change markedly over a period of several hours of use.
After all, it IS possible that some drivers are defective in
this fashion.

--
| Dick Pierce |
| Professional Audio Development |
| 1-781/826-4953 Voice and FAX |
| [email protected] |

 

[Thomas savage]

What break-in tells me is , audiophiles are more often than not coping with disappointment wrt new purchases . They literally have to convince themselves things are getting better after the initial truth. I think also there might be a altered state that is bought on when you purchase something new, you start focusing on all sorts of things previously unnoticed. This can be a very uncertain period that's quite destabilising ime. You come up with all sorts of ideas as to why you hear what you think you hear.

After time you get back to normal but alas it was all worth it.. well it has to be , your invested in so many ways it's rather hard to think or allow yourself to think otherwise.

Not to worry the internet is there to reassure you , just don't goto ASR .. they are not music lovers over there


I can't believe more people don't consider it's them who are the variable in the audio chain. It seems if not obvious at least worth considering before you delve into things being beyond science.

We need to probe audiophiles, deeply. Any volunteers?

 

[CumSum]

I have had two experiences with break-in. One was when measuring the difference between my one year old DIY 18" sub with a new one I just built. If anything, my building of said sub should have caused some variation. Well the brand new sub I built measured identically (less than 0.1dB difference) to my year old sub. This is an 18" driver mind you that moves tons of air. This seems like the best case scenario for a woofer to break in being so massive.

Another experience was with headphones. I had a pair of broken in Phillips Fidelio X2 headphones. Headphones were fine but Amazon sent me a brand new replacement pair. So I had identical headphones one new and one broken in. Having A/B'd them I could hear a bit more harshness and energy in the treble region on the brand new pair. After breaking them in I "believe" they were indistinguishable when A/B'd again.

 

[Darkweb]

I’ve had some Martin Logan’s that had no treble fresh out of the box; perhaps the panel needed to be fully charged? I confirmed it with in room measurement.

 

[Thomas savage]

I’ve had some Martin Logan’s that had no treble fresh out of the box; perhaps the panel needed to be fully charged? I confirmed it with in room measurement.

Well they are not ' Harman ' approved so they are outside of science.

Thusly this experience you had is not valid.