Do Audio Speakers Break-in?

[krabapple]

I mean, come on guys... is this thread really still going round and round?

I know, right? The 'known' parameters of speaker break-in -- that it happens pretty fast, with woofers, on first use , if at all -- were mentioned early on. And yet people are re-reporting that now. While others are offerings us the same old anecdotes fatally contaminated with sighted bias.

And do I have to mention again, that without new unit-to-new unit variance data --i.e., knowing the normal 'spread' of measurements of brand new units off the same assembly line -- even interpreting actual 'break in' measurements is kind of a joke?

I hope I don't.

My vote: the horse is dead, Jim. More kicking won't help.

 

[waofner]

it is necessary as long as people neglect facts.

every-and i mean every- oscillating mechanical system will change it`s parameters over time and under load. even the silicon hairspring in your wristwatch or the suspension of your car.

speaker chassis are not excluded by magic from this. (far from it, plastics are prone to change parameters over time and under load)

frequency response is not the way to disprove this. thiele-small parameters should be measured.

 

[Waveform Fidelity]

Can you show those measurements which are very contradicting to the existing ones which show some of the lowest tolerances in the market and much lower than 1dB including crossovers where in my experience the typical tolerance of the components barely changes the response.

See black and red curves of below pairs:

KEF Q11 Meta floorstanding loudspeaker Lab Report

Measured on its Uni-Q axis, the Q11’s three 165mm ‘hybrid alloy’ bass units make their presence felt in what is a generally down-tilted, bass-rich response [see Graph 1], albeit with a peak at 14kHz and strong main dome resonance at 45.7kHz (+7dB re. 1kHz). The latter is also seen on the CSD...

hifinews.com

KEF LS50 Meta Loudspeaker Lab Report

Lab Report To ensure the validity of our comparisons, new samples of both the LS50 and LS50 Meta were tested 'back-to-back' under identical lab conditions. So, while the LS50's pair matching is within 1.3dB and response uniformity good to ±2.9dB and ±4.0dB [grey/orange traces, Graph 1] the new...

www.hifinews.com

KEF LS60 Wireless Loudspeaker Lab Report

Lab Report With its line/digital inputs and fully integrated Class AB and Class D amplifiers, KEF's LS60 Wireless has no meaningful 'sensitivity' that might be compared with a standard passive loudspeaker. Neither does it have any meaningful 'impedance' – the internal amplifiers are certainly...

www.hifinews.com

KEF R3 Meta Loudspeaker Lab Report

Lab Report No 'fantasy specifications' here as the most compact of KEF's R Meta series delivers exactly what it says on the tin (ok, website). The 3.2ohm minimum/4ohm nominal impedance rating is met in practice with 3.17ohm at 142Hz although the load is

www.hifinews.com

KEF R11 Meta Loudspeaker Lab Report

Lab Report Just as we saw with the R3 Meta [HFN Sep '23], this latest 'Meta' version of the original R11 [HFN May '19] has also witnessed a top-to-toe refinement. Sensitivity is essentially unchanged at 89.6dB/2.83V/1m while the forward response is slightly downtilted [see Graph 1] with errors...

www.hifinews.com

KEF Reference 5 Meta Loudspeaker Lab Report

Lab Report In practice this 'Meta' version of the original Reference 5 [HFN Oct '14] has evolved from tip-to-toe. KEF's specs reflect this too – bass extension is unchanged, but sensitivity is down from 89.5dB to 88dB and the Uni-Q crossover adjusted from 2.8kHz to 2.1kHz, etc, in this latest...

www.hifinews.com

KEF Blade One Meta Loudspeaker Lab Report

Lab Report While attention is inevitably focused on the efficacy of KEF's Meta disc in dissipating the Uni-Q driver's rear-radiation [see LS50 Meta, HFN Jun '21], the Blade One Meta's driver ensemble delivers a remarkably flat axial response [see Graph 1]. With response errors of just ±1.2dB and...

www.hifinews.com

Looked through the results and this appears to be new pair left/right matching vs old batch vs new batch matching, but in any case the matching looks good within 1dB or so. My SP1632 drivers are from the R900 so the manufacturing tolerances may not be as good. Also, I do wonder how aging may affect performance. The UniQ doesnt use ferro-fluid for cooling, which often degraded over time affecting performance.

But returning to the original posters issue of breakin vs manufacturing tolerances of the ATC speakers - it still seems more likely, to me, that manufacturing tolerances are the cause, and I would not automatically discount the OP claim, in the absence of measurements, that he could hear differences.

 

[a4eaudio]

The 'known' parameters of speaker break-in -- that it happens pretty fast, with woofers, on first use , if at all

Well, no... Which is probably why the thread goes round and round.

TS parameters have been shown to change for at least 72 hours when burning in a new, raw woofer with a sine wave at Fs near xmax. This does not PROVE that the is an audible difference after break in. But it provides a scientific reason why it could. See the KEF paper.

 

[krabapple]

Well, no... Which is probably why the thread goes round and round.

TS parameters have been shown to change for at least 72 hours when burning in a new, raw woofer with a sine wave at Fs near xmax. This does not PROVE that the is an audible difference after break in. But it provides a scientific reason why it could. See the KEF paper.

Well, no, not sufficient.
How much is it changing from hour to hour across 72 hours (i.e., the rate) ? And how does the delta compare to the delta of out-of-box units?
I know you're aware that measuring a change alone doesn't make it perceptually meaningful.

Anyway, I still say shut this thing down. It's a pointless circle, um, exercise, by now, and the wild claims of 'broken in' sound are still just that. Even after decades of advocates knowing what was required to make a convincing case for them.

 

[Mart68]

Well, no... Which is probably why the thread goes round and round.

TS parameters have been shown to change for at least 72 hours when burning in a new, raw woofer with a sine wave at Fs near xmax. This does not PROVE that the is an audible difference after break in. But it provides a scientific reason why it could. See the KEF paper.

Don't forget the drive units are not 'virgin' when you unbox the speaker. Drivers tested before and after installation, at least by any speaker manufacturer that's doing things properly.

 

[krabapple]

Don't forget the drive units are not 'virgin' when you unbox the speaker. Drivers tested before and after installation, at least by any speaker manufacturer that's doing things properly.

And who is doing that, exactly?

 

[MAB]

I wrote it before, the smallest summary possible: I bought new ATC SCM19’s, it took some time before I liked them, discovered that the painting was not flawless, it took months before the replacements came, then suddenly the months-old were replaced by new ones, the decrease in sound quality was shocking and I had to wait again before the sound recovered.

Note: ATC states that their speakers do not need breaking in. My conclusion: rely on your own ears and surely don’t listen to people that draw conclusions based purely on measurements.

Your anecdote based on sighted listening and your perceptual bias, is totally uncompelling given the dozens hundreds of measurements showing that driver break in effect is tiny, occurs in the first few moments of operation, the actual changes in parameters are below inaudibility, the tiny changes that do actually occur and cancel each other, and the nature of the changes does not systematically make it sound better even if the changes were audible.

It's particularly absurd given ATC QC's every driver. Does the end-user really think they have some magical tones they play that ATC doesn't have access to that somehow break the driver in in a way ATC is incapable of doing? And apparently every person who has ever tested driver break-in?

 

[MAB]

frequency response is not the way to disprove this. thiele-small parameters should be measured.

The T-S parameter changes through break-in have been reported dozens of times in this thread.

 

[Keith_W]

I mean, come on guys... is this thread really still going round and round?

The thread hasn't broken in yet.

 

[RexrothPigeon]

Anyway, I still say shut this thing down.

then flag it and move on

 

[boomboom]

I noticed that many ascilab speakers recommend "break-in for optimal performance", since Amir is a distributor for them I got curious, is there any truth to it?

 

[a4eaudio]

..., is there any truth to it?

Well, there are 1,831 posts before yours discussing the topic.

 

[MAB]

I noticed that many ascilab speakers recommend "break-in for optimal performance", since Amir is a distributor for them I got curious, is there any truth to it?

Ask them to share the measurements that show they change over the first 24-hours, and that the changes result in optimized performance.

Amir started this thread, did you read his OP and understand his data?

I asked KEF when they made similar unsupported claims in their marketing material, with no evidence and despite much evidence to the contrary.

 

[boomboom]

Ask them to share the measurements that show they change over the first 24-hours, and that the changes result in optimized performance.

Amir started this thread, did you read his OP and understand his data?

I asked KEF when they made similar unsupported claims in their marketing material, with no evidence and despite much evidence to the contrary.

Yeah i got the gist of it but since he distributes these I got curious, maybe they meant something else? Thought it's worth asking

 

[Sal1950]

But I think it entirely possible that woofer surrounds and spiders might change characteristics over time with use.

They do, but it is only an extremely minimal change as things loosen up. Loads of measurements have shown it.
Audible, I'd highly doubt it, but even then only possible if done under bias controlled A-B between a virgin and well used.
And never would it be a OMG, "its a completely different speaker after a week of breakin".
That's a brain perception issue.

 

[RickS]

Yeah i got the gist of it but since he distributes these I got curious, maybe they meant something else? Thought it's worth asking

Maybe, but the better target to ask would be @AsciLab.