[
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2007, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]
70.46.7.90
In Reply to: RE: lotsa words there, but... posted by mls-stl on June 04, 2007 at 15:02:23
TG1954: When first assembled the mechanical properties of speakers such as their cone and spider material, suspension material, cone material, voice coil, magnetic material flux density. ribbon weight, area, tension, panel dimensions, magnet distance, stator distance, electrostatic voltage differential etc., require a certain amount of time (typically 50-100hrs) to break or settle in to an optimal point.
mls-stl: That is quite a laundry list but I've never seen anything but anecdotal evidence that states it takes "50-100hrs" for this to happen. (And how convenient that they all get better on the same time schedule!)
TG1954: GOD mls-stl we're having an intelligent discussion about speaker break in, so why do you fell you must treat those who disagree with your POV with such sarcasm? The list I provided you wasn't a laundry list. It was to give you an idea of all the items that need to be broken in. You claim you've never seen anything but "anecdotal evidence" that it takes between 50-100hrs for speakers to break in. But your statement is simply untrue because the term anecdotal evidence is used in contrast to scientific evidence, as evidence that cannot be investigated using the scientific method. Yet a speakers break in IS verifiable and measureable via scientific methods!
As far as addressing your sarcastic remark of how convenient that speakers all get better on the same time schedule. No one said it couldn't or wouldn't take less or more than 50-100hrs. That was used as the time period most speakers seem to break in by. This is hardly surprising when you take into consideration that most dynamic speakers are basically made via the same materials and process. Ribbons, planars and electrostatics might take more or less time, I don't personally know what their typical individual break in time are.
=========================================================================
mls-stl: If I am paying thousands, and perhaps tens of thousands of dollars for a pair of speakers, why hasn't the manufacturer already done this? Shouldn't it be part of the quality control effort to make sure I get a proper product?
TG1954: You ask why hasn't the manufacturer already done this? I believe the reasons are;
1) The OEM designer/manufacturer of the drivers used in a speaker developed the drivers specifications based on the performance of an "optimally" broken in driver and the speaker manufacturer knows this. I'm sure initially the OEMs test a few pairs to be sure they sound the same when broken in. That's all part of their R&D. Once satisfied the drivers all break in as close to the same as they can possibly achieve, they manufacter the drivers.
2) The designer/manufacturer of the loudspeaker purchases OEM drivers either based on the specifications of an "optimally" broken in driver or as built to their specific specifications after "optimally" broken in. Now the speaker designer/manufacturer initially tests a few pairs of the speaker they've designed. That's all part of what their R&D is about. Once satisfied the speakers all break in as close to the same as they can possibly achieve, they manufacter the speakers with unbroken in drivers which they now know what they'll sound like once broken in. This is why they routinely mention their speakers will require X amount of time to break in and sound their best.
3) Many manufacturers don't have the room to have 100's if not 1000's of pairs of speakers breaking in. Plus if they were to pre "break in" every pair of speakers for the consumer they would have to charge for the time it took to do that no? That would only serve to raise the price of speakers you're already complaining about paying thousands, and perhaps tens of thousands of dollars for! No mls-stl it just makes good business sense to inform the potential client the speaker will require some time to break in and sound it's best. That's precisely why speaker manufacturers routinely mention in their manuels their speakers will require a break in period BEFORE sounding their best.
=========================================================================
TG1954: The speakers (like your car engine and all other mechanical components) will continue to break-in naturally throughout its lifespan...
mls-stl: Nice thought, but implicit in your statement is that things stay put at some magical (or "optimal" to use your phrase) point or improve. That is certainly not the case with cars, to use that example. My car currently has 30,000 miles on it. It was better when it had 20,000 on it and better still when it was at 10,000. Does it still work pretty good? Sure, but I don't have this pretense that the car has now stabilized at some optimal perfection or even continues to get better as I pile the miles on. Cars are far more an example of my point than yours. The fact that no part currently needs to be replaced doesn't mean the car is at it's 100% optimal status.
TG1954: Actually you're being a bit deceptive here. I NEVER said there was a point, be it "magical" as you sarcastically suggested or optimal like I stated where things stay put. You're selectively using parts of what I said. What I said was:
1) What seems to bother you and the other naysayers is that there's an optimal point of break in. But there's is no "magic" inherent in speaker break-in. The speakers (like your car engine and all other mechanical components) will continue to break-in naturally throughout its lifespan, it's simply a fact that the most noticeable amount will occur early on.
2) No one (besides YOU) said the components will never get worse. Eventually they will, but after they're initially broken in, that will be a long way down the road. In fact it will most likely be so slow and gradual that you won't even hear the deterioration until there's a serious problem which requires intervention to repair, that's why speakers eventually need to be reconed, surrounds need to be replaced or voice coils realigned.
So as you can see what I said was just like with a car's engine speakers will break in to an optimal point. With car engines I believe broken in is somewhere between 500-1000 miles with speakers it's typically 50-100 hrs. Then after that point both the car's engine and the speakers will continue to break-in naturally throughout their lifespan, it's simply a fact that the most noticeable amount will occur early on. Eventually they will both get worse, but after they're initially broken in, that will be a long way down the road. In fact it will most likely be so slow and gradual that you won't even hear the deterioration until there's a serious problem which requires intervention to repair, that's why speakers eventually need to be reconed, surrounds need to be replaced or voice coils realigned and cars engines need new valves, timing belts etc.
=========================================================================
TG1954: No one (besides YOU) said the components will never get worse.
mls-stl: I'd love for you to point out the great body of messages from the adherents of long break-ins who have treated break-in as anything other than an improving process.
TG1954: Once again you're being deceptive with your use of selective memory. Things will be an improving process for the speakers until an optimal point is reached, but as I stated before the speakers will continue to break-in naturally throughout its lifespan until the point of eventually needing a repair due to mechanic break down. It just that this break down point is not something that occurs quickly after the optimal plateau is reached. This is evidenced by the many speakers on eBay that are 10, 20 or more years old.
=========================================================================
TG1954: If you believe that we always have the "but audio is special" rule mls-stl so be it! But in this case you're the only claiming that's so...
mls-stl: Dream on. The "but audio is special" rule is invoked around here so often that it makes one's head spin. It may be phrased differently, but it is pulled out as the all-purpose answer nearly every time one of the beloved modern audio truisms bumps heads with science or engineering.
TG1954: I NEVER said the "but audio is special" rule is not used here. You need to stop twisting my words. What I said is in this case YOU'RE the person invoking the "but audio is special" rule. The way I see it mls-stl in physics it's a known phenomenon that materials with mechanical movement will have a physical change and eventual deterioration over a period of time and that's what speakers are doing when "breaking in". So I have to admit it really amazes me that you as what I'd call an objectivist and part of the specs/measurements crowd here on PHP who are always ridiculing subjectivists for having a "but audio is special" attitude, are now by claiming speakers do NOT "break in" the group who's saying "but audio is special."
Follow Ups:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2007, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]