I've always wondered about the 'break-in' period for speakers

[zoiks]

A lot of reviews for speakers online indicate that the speakers that people purchase end up sounding better after an initial "break-in" period.

Is it really that the speakers develop a more harmonious balance between highs/lows and adjust to the enclosure that they are fitted within or is it that people just get more attuned and used to the speakers? I know that I got used to the 'tinny' sound of the speakers in my old car after a while and they sounded perfectly fine to me thereon.

 

[vi edit]

I think it's a little of both, but there's definitely some merit to the break in of the speakers themselves. Subwoofers in particular seem to really open up in volume and depth after 50-100 hours of use.

 

[dfn]

I've heard about headphone burn in and generally speaking, it opens a can of worms. Check head-fi for some threads.

As for speakers, I would read this. I'd put more stock in his opinion (than audiophiles online who've never done unsubjective/unbiased tests/experiments) since he's done actual repeatable experiments, and also, he's the had hancho/designer behind PSB. When someone "sees" a difference or "hears" a difference, it is one thing. When a properly calibrated and tested instrument measures a difference, that is another thing entirely.

Finally, and perhaps most controversially, Barton talks about the supposed break-in effect of components that has become so popular in audio today. Break-in refers to running components for a long time (sometimes hundreds of hours) to the point where their components "settle" into their proper operating mode. Barton doesn’t doubt that some components do change subtly, but he thinks that the major improvements people think they’re hearing aren’t in the components at all. Barton doesn’t doubt that people are hearing these changes, but thinks that what they’re hearing is actually brain break-in.

Barton has examined his own speakers to test this. He has taken a Stratus Gold loudspeaker, built and measured some ten years ago, and re-measured it today. The deviation is slight, perhaps 1/4dB at most. Although that deviation can possibly be heard, it is certainly not a huge difference that one may attest to hearing. Instead, Barton surmises that the difference in sound that people are hearing over time is conditioning of the brain. He cites experiments done with sight that indicate the brain can accommodate for enormous changes fairly quickly and certainly within the hundreds of hours that audiophiles claim changes occur in. Could this apply to hearing, too? Barton thinks that more often than not, what happens is that the changes in perceived sound that are attributed to component break-in are simply the brain becoming accustomed to the sound. He warns listeners not to fool themselves.

 

[ICXRa]

I've been listening to and buy good quality components and speakers for 30 years now. I have to say that what dfn posted from that Paul Barton article is exactly how I feel about it even though I have no equipment to test it with.

To me it ranks up there with cable break in, cross over break in etc etc but these topics are so controversial in some circles you can quickly find yourself in a flame war if you're not careful.

 

[vi edit]

I'd like to see a scientific measurment in subwoofers where there are high levels excursion. You'd think that some break in of the physical moving parts of the speaker would have some affect in output.