| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Loudspeaker break-in
I know that many audiophiles believe that speakers need a period of break-in
to sound their best, while others disagree. This post is a request for those who believe in speaker break-in to provide advice, and it is also request that those who disagree allow those of us they believe to be mistaken to continue in the error of our ways without comment. I am breaking in a pair of Gallo Reference III speakers in my garage on 24 hour/day FM music, which I plan to stop at 120 hours. I do this on the advice of Gallo, and am told by Gallo that more power the better, as they personally believe in break-in, and several reports they have received say that for these speakers there is a definite break-in point that must be reached for best quality. They further recommend using high power for best results. My problem is that once I bring these into my living room I will not be able to give them high power very often, as I have a wife who will be disturbed by the noise. I wish to find the best way to continue the break-in these speakers a few hours at a time. While I have hard the general statement that break-in if desirable, I haven't seen anything specific onwhat to play and how loud. It would be easy to put a CD on repeat on occasion when we go out. I wonder if anyone has experience with the best signals to play through speakers for break in. Music? What sort? Test CDs? Which CDs? Which tracks? Wylie Williams Saint Louis Missouri |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
Place the speakers face to face, especially the wofers, and switch one of
the feed wires so they are now out of phase. This should cancel greatly the total sound level while not changing the excursion of the cones. How will you know if it makes any difference when all is done? I know that many audiophiles believe that speakers need a period of break-in to sound their best, while others disagree. This post is a request for those who believe in speaker break-in to provide advice, and it is also request that those who disagree allow those of us they believe to be mistaken to continue in the error of our ways without comment. I am breaking in a pair of Gallo Reference III speakers in my garage on 24 hour/day FM music, which I plan to stop at 120 hours. I do this on the advice of Gallo, and am told by Gallo that more power the better, as they personally believe in break-in, and several reports they have received say that for these speakers there is a definite break-in point that must be reached for best quality. They further recommend using high power for best results. My problem is that once I bring these into my living room I will not be able to give them high power very often, as I have a wife who will be disturbed by the noise. I wish to find the best way to continue the break-in these speakers a few hours at a time. While I have hard the general statement that break-in if desirable, I haven't seen anything specific onwhat to play and how loud. It would be easy to put a CD on repeat on occasion when we go out. I wonder if anyone has experience with the best signals to play through speakers for break in. Music? What sort? Test CDs? Which CDs? Which tracks? Wylie Williams Saint Louis Missouri |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote My only concern is - how
will I know when they have stopped breaking in, and started wearing out? You can't reasonably have one without the other. I haven't ever had a speaker wear out, and I don't worry about them wearing out in home audio use. As I have done speaker repair for a few years I have repaired many with age-deteriorated foam and I have also replaced 20 year old capacitors on the general principle that they might be deteriorated and new ones usually sound better. And I have seen speakers virtually beat to death by musicians, DJs, and fans of very loud rock and/or rap, but I don't anticipate that anything I do will cause speaker failure. I just want to find out if anyone has made a serious study of the best signal source to break in speakers, and ask them to share their findings with me. Wylie Williams |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 25 Sep 2004 20:54:32 GMT, "Wylie Williams"
wrote: "Stewart Pinkerton" wrote My only concern is - how will I know when they have stopped breaking in, and started wearing out? You can't reasonably have one without the other. I haven't ever had a speaker wear out, and I don't worry about them wearing out in home audio use. As I have done speaker repair for a few years I have repaired many with age-deteriorated foam and I have also replaced 20 year old capacitors on the general principle that they might be deteriorated and new ones usually sound better. And I have seen speakers virtually beat to death by musicians, DJs, and fans of very loud rock and/or rap, but I don't anticipate that anything I do will cause speaker failure. I just want to find out if anyone has made a serious study of the best signal source to break in speakers, and ask them to share their findings with me. Tom Nousaine has made a considerable study of this phenomenon, and of course Dick Pierce is an extremely experienced drive unit *designer*. Their researches appear to indicate very clearly that there is no such thing as break-in past the first few seconds. Since you yourself acknowledge that you have not observed drivers wearing out, how could they possibly 'break in'? -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote
Since you yourself acknowledge that you have not observed drivers wearing out, how could they possibly 'break in'? Pardon me for lack of clarity. Let me begin by repeating myself then elaborating on what I meant to say but apparently failed to say clearly: And I have seen speakers virtually beat to death by musicians, DJs, and fans of very loud rock and/or rap, but I don't anticipate that anything I do will cause speaker failure By referring to seeing speakers "beat to death" I refer to the weakening, splitting, tearing, and eventual malfunction of cones, surrounds, and spiders that I have seen after extended hard use, as well as capacitors exploded and voice coil formers melted . I would consider this to be wearing out prematurely because of abuse, but based on my personal history I don't believe any use I would make of a speaker is likely to wear it out within my anticipated period of use. Wylie Williams |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message ...
snip My only concern is - how will I know when they have stopped breaking in, and started wearing out? You can't reasonably have one without the other..................... It's all the same. You're just trying to move into the long (we hope) linear part of the wearing-out curve. |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 26 Sep 2004 14:51:46 GMT, "L David Matheny"
wrote: "Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message ... snip My only concern is - how will I know when they have stopped breaking in, and started wearing out? You can't reasonably have one without the other..................... It's all the same. You're just trying to move into the long (we hope) linear part of the wearing-out curve. Perhaps so. But, given that people who've investigated this possibility, such as Tom Nousaine and the redoubtable Dick Pierce, seem to regard 'break-in' as a non-event after the first couple of *seconds*, and given others (such as the OP himself) who claim never to have observed 'wear out', do we have any real*evidence* that break-in really exists? If not, then surely a search for 'the best break-in CD' is as pointless as arguing which shade of green is best for painting the edges of CDs? -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
Stewart Pinkerton wrote in message ...
On 26 Sep 2004 14:51:46 GMT, "L David Matheny" wrote: "Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message ... snip My only concern is - how will I know when they have stopped breaking in, and started wearing out? You can't reasonably have one without the other..................... It's all the same. You're just trying to move into the long (we hope) linear part of the wearing-out curve. Perhaps so. But, given that people who've investigated this possibility, such as Tom Nousaine and the redoubtable Dick Pierce, seem to regard 'break-in' as a non-event after the first couple of *seconds*, and given others (such as the OP himself) who claim never to have observed 'wear out', do we have any real*evidence* that break-in really exists? If not, then surely a search for 'the best break-in CD' is as pointless as arguing which shade of green is best for painting the edges of CDs? Mike Scarpitti here. I have argued vociferously against such myths as 'burn-in' as it's called on Head-Fi. I was banned for a month simply because I refuse to believe in this fairy tale. http://www4.head-fi.org/forums/forum...p?s=&forumid=2 The ONLY thing that playing signals through a driver can do is to heat it up. If it is allowed to cool, it will return to the same state. |
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
Stewart Pinkerton wrote in message ...
My only concern is - how will I know when they have stopped breaking in, and started wearing out? You can't reasonably have one without the other..................... Does it necessarily follow that a period of "break-in" leads directly into an immediate period of decline? Can it be that the break-in period is followed by a lengthy "plateau" period in which performance stays within minimum specification or peak efficiency before noticeably or measurably beginning to wear out? I'm not talking about just speakers, but any product that has moving parts (but also electronics as well). If speaker materials do change their behavior maybe it's like breaking in a pair of shoes; the first minutes, or maybe even the first hours (hopefully not) the shoe will quickly feel better as it "loosens up" and conforms to your feet(hopefully not the other way around, but maybe your feet do a little conforming also.) After the "break in" process the shoe has a "constant" feel about it for months or years until they begin to noticeably wear and start to feel uncomfortable again. Baseball gloves are clearly that way. They can take a season to loosen up, and then they stay seemingly constant for years. Or the time when we had some doors hung. They did not swing right, they were a little stiff, even though they were hung properly. The craftsman assured us that in a few days, after breaking in (use) they would feel fine. He was right; after a little use the doors began to open and close (swing) as expected and have done so for years. There are other examples such as my motorcycle. The clutch/transmission system was stiff when first purchased. Shifting had to be done very deliberately and was audibly clunky. But in a few days or weeks, as cautioned by experienced riders, shifting reached an optimum tension level, became smoother, more quite and stayed that way for many years before finally beginning to wear out (became loose and unreliable). Many veteran BMW riders (not me) don't consider their engines (not transmissions) fully broken in until after 40,000 miles. I have never formed an opinion on speaker break in because whether it exists or not, the listener, it would appear, by taking the time to listen over a few days or weeks, can make a more accurate, sensible decision with respect to their tastes. Hopefully they can return the speakers for a complete refund if they don't work out. (This is the only way I buy speakers or linestages). If it takes a few days or weeks for the consumer to reach a more informed decision assisted by a lengthy in-home audition, which may be fueled by beliefs about speaker break-in, the more power to them. Resources for researching speaker break-in, if they do exist, should probably be redirected for more worth while pursuits. Robert C. Lang |
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Resources for researching speaker break-in, if they do exist, should
probably be redirected for more worth while pursuits." This is reasonable, except we don't want such a laid back view to obscure the use such claims are put to in marketing/publishing for commercial intrest. The current benchmark is that breakin is at best a matter of a very short time and of little consequence for most of the audio gear purchased,ie. excludes wire, amps, signal sources, etc. as such. We don't want this claim to be added to the stew of other unsupported claims so as to suggest the whole should ever be a concern in making purchases and enjoying the music. We want to demystify the whole scene that has grown up to the detriment of audio. and to the support of paranormal belief systems. |
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
|
I find the speaker "break in" vaguely reminiscent of the old wear-out
"bathtub" curves - where there is a period of early failure, followed by a period of constant failure rate (hopefully low) and then an accelerating failure rate as the components themselves wear out. DO tubes "break in" - I kinow they need to warm up some to perform to their peak - but is there a period of breakin? |
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 28 Sep 2004 00:46:02 GMT, B&D wrote:
I find the speaker "break in" vaguely reminiscent of the old wear-out "bathtub" curves - where there is a period of early failure, followed by a period of constant failure rate (hopefully low) and then an accelerating failure rate as the components themselves wear out. Except that this isn't what actually happens, except perhaps for foam surrounds, and that's just chemical degradation, not actual wear. All the available evidence suggests that driver 'break-in' occurs in the first few seconds, if at all. DO tubes "break in" - I kinow they need to warm up some to perform to their peak - but is there a period of breakin? Actually no, tubes begin to wear out from the first time they're switched on. The only question is - how much do you allow them to degrade before changing them? Doesn't seem like a great recipe for top-class sound to me.................. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
|
We gotta watch out that this generalization comparability logic
doesn't get out of hand. Loudspeaker tranducers are just that; cars are cars and baseball gloves are destinct from both. The concept behind mechanical break-in is legitimate and explanable from basic physics behind it. But everything has it's own set of rules. Drivers used to commonly have break-in in old days, lots of it I believe but not so today for the average modern driver that you see in let's say 95% of the speakers on the market. (I'm making a very generalized assumption that "unusual" drivers are in +/-5% of the products out there but I think it's less) But if you get down to basic materials: Metals and natural fibers tend to exhibit some mechanical changes when first subject to stress forces until they reach an equilibrium and then usually remain stable for a long time if the forces are such that the structural integrity is not compromised, ie not too much stress. Polymers, from what I hear (not my first hand knowledge) have the tendancy to be "what you see is what you get" right out of the mold. This is one reason why (besides price) loudspeaker manufacturers use them extensively, consistancy is gold! If unit to unit consistancy is a mandate, then initial mechanical consistancy comes along for the ride. You really can't have one without the other because it reduces one more factor that can vary. If a loudspeaker driver would have a lot of break-in, then this break in factor would be just one more process that could vary from unit to unit. So it's inheirantly avoided, and not by accident. |
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thanks for your reply. In answer to your question - This is a faith based
initiative. I broke in many speakers when I had a stereo storefront. On a few speakers, especially smaller bookshelf speakers with rubber-surround woofers the change was dramatic. From this I make the assumption that all speakers probably benefit to some degree. And since the only cost is a little time, I always break in my speakers. his particular speaker is the best I've ever had and I want to get the best from it. Having the Gallo national sales manager tell me that they believe in break-in and that the initial field reports are that break-in is important for these speakers confirms me in my desire to do a good job. I appreciate your suggestion, but I am still wanting to go a bit further that just playing some unspecified music for an unspecified time. Given the number of energetic audiophiles I thought maybe someone had done some experimentation and would share the results.. Wylie Williams wrote in message ... Place the speakers face to face, especially the wofers, and switch one of the feed wires so they are now out of phase. This should cancel greatly the total sound level while not changing the excursion of the cones. How will you know if it makes any difference when all is done? I know that many audiophiles believe that speakers need a period of break-in to sound their best, while others disagree. This post is a request for those who believe in speaker break-in to provide advice, and it is also request that those who disagree allow those of us they believe to be mistaken to continue in the error of our ways without comment. I am breaking in a pair of Gallo Reference III speakers in my garage on 24 hour/day FM music, which I plan to stop at 120 hours. I do this on the advice of Gallo, and am told by Gallo that more power the better, as they personally believe in break-in, and several reports they have received say that for these speakers there is a definite break-in point that must be reached for best quality. They further recommend using high power for best results. My problem is that once I bring these into my living room I will not be able to give them high power very often, as I have a wife who will be disturbed by the noise. I wish to find the best way to continue the break-in these speakers a few hours at a time. While I have hard the general statement that break-in if desirable, I haven't seen anything specific onwhat to play and how loud. It would be easy to put a CD on repeat on occasion when we go out. I wonder if anyone has experience with the best signals to play through speakers for break in. Music? What sort? Test CDs? Which CDs? Which tracks? Wylie Williams Saint Louis Missouri |
|
#20
|
|||
|
|||
|
Wylie Williams wrote:
I know that many audiophiles believe that speakers need a period of break-in to sound their best, while others disagree. This post is a request for those who believe in speaker break-in to provide advice, and it is also request that those who disagree allow those of us they believe to be mistaken to continue in the error of our ways without comment. Many manufacturers of 'pro-audio' speakers specify parameters after a 'break-in' period. Before 'break-in' the resonant frequency will typically be higher than datasheet values. E.g. "Notes 3. Thiele - Small Parameters follow a 400 Watt preconditioning period." http://www.precisiondevices.co.uk/as...ds/super/9.pdf Graham |
|
#21
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Wylie Williams" wrote in
: While I have hard the general statement that break-in if desirable, I haven't seen anything specific onwhat to play and how loud. It would be easy to put a CD on repeat on occasion when we go out. I wonder if anyone has experience with the best signals to play through speakers for break in. Music? What sort? Test CDs? Which CDs? Which tracks? Wylie Williams Saint Louis Missouri I have a CD that play different frequencies, I put it on repeat mode. The CD cost a lot of money but it claim that by playing this CD through your new speakers, it is reduce the break-in time by 5 folds! I think it make sense since normal music (either from a FM station or CD) can only play a certain range of frequencies. Don't ask me how much the CD cost, because I got it from my local Hi-Fi store, the owner has that. But if you want to play with that, I can mail you one of this! Lawrence |
|
#22
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Wylie Williams" wrote in message
... I know that many audiophiles believe that speakers need a period of break-in to sound their best, while others disagree. This post is a request for those who believe in speaker break-in to provide advice, and it is also request that those who disagree allow those of us they believe to be mistaken to continue in the error of our ways without comment. I am breaking in a pair of Gallo Reference III speakers in my garage on 24 hour/day FM music, which I plan to stop at 120 hours. I do this on the advice of Gallo, and am told by Gallo that more power the better, as they personally believe in break-in, and several reports they have received say that for these speakers there is a definite break-in point that must be reached for best quality. They further recommend using high power for best results. My problem is that once I bring these into my living room I will not be able to give them high power very often, as I have a wife who will be disturbed by the noise. I wish to find the best way to continue the break-in these speakers a few hours at a time. While I have hard the general statement that break-in if desirable, I haven't seen anything specific onwhat to play and how loud. It would be easy to put a CD on repeat on occasion when we go out. I wonder if anyone has experience with the best signals to play through speakers for break in. Music? What sort? Test CDs? Which CDs? Which tracks? Wylie Williams Saint Louis Missouri Stereophile's Test CD 3, track 20. You may want to keep your amplifier's output below clipping levels... |
|
#23
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Wylie Williams" wrote in message
... I know that many audiophiles believe that speakers need a period of break-in to sound their best, while others disagree. I am surprised that anyone who reads an audio.hign-end newsgroup doesn't know that all quality speakers MUST be carefully broken in by playing the Solti recording of Mahler's "Resurrection" Symphony (Decca 410 202-2) at maximum volume late at night whilst consuming a half bottle (or so) of a good vintage port or a slightly lesser quantity of a fine single malt scotch. For ultimate speaker performance and longevity real purists will likely wish to continue the break in with the Von Karajan, Verdi Requiem (DG 415091-2), Giulini, Bruckner 8th (DG 415 124-2) and Mravinski, Tchaikovsky Symphony 4 (DG 419 745-2) on successive nights. At the end of this period your speakers will be properly broken in and able to handle anything you care to play through them to your complete satisfaction. If not, you bought the wrong speakers and had better go shopping again! D. |
|
#24
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#25
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Nousaine" wrote in message
... snip.................. But how can I complete the 150 hours of burn-in playback during the 7 day return period to assure that I haven't unfairly disadvantaged the speaker with this procedure? Business minded ones invented some sort of burn in CDs to shorten the time. |
|
#26
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 30 Sep 2004 00:20:46 GMT, "Chelvam" wrote:
"Nousaine" wrote in message ... snip.................. But how can I complete the 150 hours of burn-in playback during the 7 day return period to assure that I haven't unfairly disadvantaged the speaker with this procedure? Business minded ones invented some sort of burn in CDs to shorten the time. Ah, but were they approved by the speaker manufacturer? :-) -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
|
#27
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
... ....... Business minded ones invented some sort of burn in CDs to shorten the time. Ah, but were they approved by the speaker manufacturer? :-) Smart businessman will only approach esteemed magz like TAS, Stereophile. BTW, I believe I have read one speaker manufacturer did suggest burn in CD to shorten the initial break in time. Let's see if I can find the speaker. |
|
#28
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Wylie Williams" wrote in message ...
I know that many audiophiles believe that speakers need a period of break-in to sound their best, while others disagree. This post is a request for those who believe in speaker break-in to provide advice, and it is also request that those who disagree allow those of us they believe to be mistaken to continue in the error of our ways without comment. I am breaking in a pair of Gallo Reference III speakers in my garage on 24 hour/day FM music, which I plan to stop at 120 hours. I do this on the advice of Gallo, and am told by Gallo that more power the better, as they personally believe in break-in, and several reports they have received say that for these speakers there is a definite break-in point that must be reached for best quality. They further recommend using high power for best results. My problem is that once I bring these into my living room I will not be able to give them high power very often, as I have a wife who will be disturbed by the noise. I wish to find the best way to continue the break-in these speakers a few hours at a time. While I have hard the general statement that break-in if desirable, I haven't seen anything specific onwhat to play and how loud. It would be easy to put a CD on repeat on occasion when we go out. I wonder if anyone has experience with the best signals to play through speakers for break in. Music? What sort? Test CDs? Which CDs? Which tracks? This was recently addressed elsewhere. From my experience with very many drivers through the years, and from talking to transducer engineers at some of the main manufacturers, there seems to be little mechanical break in these days with the typical modern cone drivers with polymer suspensions. Specifically, Cms and Rms, and thus indirectly Fs and Qt don't significantly change from 1st hit to after rumbling around for many hours. Possibly, the hysteresis profile loosens up with some, but if you allow the cone to move enough this is also of no importance, Fs won't change. Some have previously referred to Small's recommendation in his 1973 paper to have the cone barely moving when measuring T/S but this doesn't apply today and I don't feel it ever did. Drivers back then had pleated surrounds and were stiff with small Xmax's so maybe this was precautionary advice. This small part of the article was not science. Some dome tweeters do change timbre after some running in, especially coated fabric, but you can plainly hear them loosen up within a few minutes. I assume we're discussing high end here, so there will always be QA testing and very often 2x; before and after assembly. Assembly line QA testing is also done after some run in and therefore drivers themselves will not be virgins when you get 'em. So what's with all those stories about how speakers change after setup? How about atmospheric conditions changing with setup? Just got your new speakers in February and you live in Minnesota, well yeah they're going to "break in" or better said, warm up. Heck even humidity can change a driver slightly if they were packaged in plastic and then opened up in a damp environment. Many tweeters absorb some ambiant humidity and get a bit heavier this way. Damping materials can shift and slowly settle if oriented differently in the stock room. All of this is potentially (but not likely) audible but doesn't come from the drivers themselves, it comes environmental influences on the drivers. I'll leave break in of crossover components to those who know better but that idea intuitively seems quite rediculous to me. As far as break in program material goes, I'm with Dersu on this one, listen and enjoy. Music in the emotional lines of celebration would probably work best. If your new loudspeakers should require break-in, who cares, they'll do it all by themselves so let them perform for you while doing so. If you should want to break an individual driver's cherry prior to the design process to be sure, high pass filtered pink noise for tweeters and for woofers / cone drivers +/- 1.5x Fs sinewave rumbling at 2/3 Xmax work well. |
|
#29
|
|||
|
|||
|
Wessel Dirksen wrote:
I'll leave break in of crossover components to those who know better but that idea intuitively seems quite rediculous to me. As far as break in program material goes, I'm with Dersu on this one, listen and enjoy. Music in the emotional lines of celebration would probably work best. If your new loudspeakers should require break-in, who cares, they'll do it all by themselves so let them perform for you while doing so. If you should want to break an individual driver's cherry prior to the design process to be sure, high pass filtered pink noise for tweeters and for woofers / cone drivers +/- 1.5x Fs sinewave rumbling at 2/3 Xmax work well. I did use very low frequency(10Hz) sine waves at almost max. excursion of the woofer to test if my cabinets are really airtight. The reason for the low frequency is that the excursion is really strong without pumping too much power into the driver. Any faults, like a scratching voicecoil, a weak surround that flips over inside or debris in the airgap can be spotted immediately, so this test is really useful. I do not call this burn-in. The whole term is misleading, as it comes from semiconductor testing for space/aviation applications. Those parts are stressed at max. temperature/power ratings to insure the functionality and detect early failures. Certain kind of failures appear in the first hours of use and you really do not want them to show up after the mission has just started, so JANTX-specs have procedures to detect these and every single part has to undergo this burn-in. This wouldn't apply to loudspeakers at all, since we are not on a critical mission. Usually it is also not of disadvantage to do this, unless you damage the speaker, either by exceeding the max. excursion or power, which is likely to occurr if you are not absolutely sure about what you are doing. So my advise would be: forget about this, if you already have to ask. -- ciao Ban Bordighera, Italy |
|
#30
|
|||
|
|||
|
I know that many audiophiles believe that speakers need a period of
break- in to sound their best, while others disagree. This post is a request for those who believe in speaker break-in to provide advice, and it is also request that those who disagree allow those of us they believe to be mistaken to continue in the error of our ways without comment. Dear Wylie, I have worked at 3 loudspeaker companies and/or divisions and been one of the loudspeaker system development engineers for WED Enterprises for EPCOT, Tokyo Disneyland and Euro Disneyland. In many cases loudspeaker break-in is useful. In a few cases loudspeaker performance is all downhill from the first moment it is used. Some of the more esoteric designs like electrostatic, thin-film, Heil AMT loudspeakers or metal diaphragm tweeters or compression drivers, benefit only marginally from a very moderate break-in period and then it's into equilibrium and finally downhill performance for them. While the surround on a loudspeaker can benefit from a break-in period if it is cloth or paper coated with aeroflex, rubber surrounds, polypropelene and foam surrounds don't change much so a very short break-in is all that is needed. But the fabric spiders on most loudspeakers definitely benefit from a longer break-in period. Phenolic resin cone/surround/spider systems also benefit from a substantial break-in period. Bextrene cones can also benefit from a short break-in period. What most designers I know define as "benefit" equates to the loudspeaker having a certain characteristic performance that is then repeatable for a long period of time (usually measured in years). That's why most designers I know don't want to show-off their latest designs until they have beaten on that design for quite a while and they are sure it will sound "the same" for a long period of time so others can audition it. Untreated paper cones and cloth or fiber spiders are the two most variable parts of a loudspeaker design. Those two parts can change quite dramatically over a period of 3 days to about 1 month with heavy use. Most speaker designers I know also like a speaker to be "broken-in" with the kind of program material that will most likely be played through it. But short of a narrow niche market product, most prefer pink noise or swept sine waves or mixed random clock frequencies (best case) as the program material to be used for the break-in. While some loudspeaker designers suggest loud volume break-ins, so they can avoid worst case scenarios most designers think medium levels (90-94 db @1m) do the best job of breaking in loudspeaker spiders and untreated paper cones. Too much "break-in" using very loud levels can put a loudspeaker on the road to extinction pretty quickly. Moderate levels are less likely to ever do that. But it is the lowest frequencies that a driver will produce that break it in the fastest. All the test signal sources I mentioned about cover those ranges very well. Using musical program for break-in can take a period in excess of a month if the program is not wideband or loud enough. On the Cerwin Vega assembly line woofers were routinely run for 20 minutes at 20 hertz with 20 watts of continuous energy in order to "help" them reach equilibrium. At ESS and Marantz there was no break in done at the factory. At Desktop and Disney systems were often run after complete assembly with 20 watts of pink noise for 20 minutes before the public ever heard them because they set-up protocols dictated that. So this means that sometimes people who make decisions about a new speaker may not have heard that item at its best yet. Sometimes it's better to audition a 2 year old pair of somethings from the dealers' showroom rather than a new pair of somethings out of the box when doing an in-home test. Do-it-yourselfers should always precondition component speakers before trying to build a system of their own. And that's also why some of the results from the "ESS Wins on Campus" tests varied slightly as the speakers became more broken-in and consistent in their performance at each new college. And finally, when a speaker is repaired under warranty by the replacement of one single speaker component (out of perhaps 6 or 8), the "new" speaker may sound very strange indeed until it too has been able to break-in. A few speaker companies may "burn-in" their finished speaker systems the way amplifier companies routinely do, but not too many just due to the space constraints. Cerwin Vega and Disney had airplane hangar sized facilities to use and so a little burn-in space could always be found. Desktop had a tiny speaker and so a burn-in room didn't take much space, but companies like B&W or JBL would need a very significant amount of space to use for just burning in speakers if they chose to do that. It might be a good idea because when a dealer takes a new speaker out of the box to demo to a customer, they may or may not make a sale based on sound that might change in the next month. Broken-in speakers would be better to sell assuming they sounded good. Failures in the field would go down too because early speaker failures would be caught during break-in. But it would make broken-in speakers much more expensive and that might reduce their competitiveness so it's a trade off. UNLESS, all buyers have long auditions periods they use to determine which speaker to buy, and then all speaker buyers are willing to break a speaker system "in" for the required time. Life's a series of trade-offs and this is just an good example of how it works. TTG we don't get enough sand in our glass |
|
#31
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#32
|
|||
|
|||
|
"watch king" wrote in message ...
Dear Wylie, I have worked at 3 loudspeaker companies and/or divisions and been one of the loudspeaker system development engineers for WED Enterprises for EPCOT, Tokyo Disneyland and Euro Disneyland. In many cases loudspeaker break-in is useful. In a few cases loudspeaker performance is all downhill from the first moment it is used. Some of the more esoteric designs like electrostatic, thin-film, Heil AMT loudspeakers or metal diaphragm tweeters or compression drivers, benefit only marginally from a very moderate break-in period and then it's into equilibrium and finally downhill performance for them. While the surround on a loudspeaker can benefit from a break-in period if it is cloth or paper coated with aeroflex, rubber surrounds, polypropelene and foam surrounds don't change much so a very short break-in is all that is needed. But the fabric spiders on most loudspeakers definitely benefit from a longer break-in period. Phenolic resin cone/surround/spider systems also benefit from a substantial break-in period. Bextrene cones can also benefit from a short break-in period. What most designers I know define as "benefit" equates to the loudspeaker having a certain characteristic performance that is then repeatable for a long period of time (usually measured in years). That's why most designers I know don't want to show-off their latest designs until they have beaten on that design for quite a while and they are sure it will sound "the same" for a long period of time so others can audition it. Untreated paper cones and cloth or fiber spiders are the two most variable parts of a loudspeaker design. Those two parts can change quite dramatically over a period of 3 days to about 1 month with heavy use. I presume you're making assertions about changes in measured characteristics of speakers over time. What measurements do change during break-in, and how much? Most speaker designers I know also like a speaker to be "broken-in" with the kind of program material that will most likely be played through it. But short of a narrow niche market product, most prefer pink noise or swept sine waves or mixed random clock frequencies (best case) as the program material to be used for the break-in. While some loudspeaker designers suggest loud volume break-ins, so they can avoid worst case scenarios most designers think medium levels (90-94 db @1m) do the best job of breaking in loudspeaker spiders and untreated paper cones. Too much "break-in" using very loud levels can put a loudspeaker on the road to extinction pretty quickly. Moderate levels are less likely to ever do that. But it is the lowest frequencies that a driver will produce that break it in the fastest. All the test signal sources I mentioned about cover those ranges very well. Are there really clear differences in measurements of speakers, depending on the signal played through them during their initial use? Using musical program for break-in can take a period in excess of a month if the program is not wideband or loud enough. On the Cerwin Vega assembly line woofers were routinely run for 20 minutes at 20 hertz with 20 watts of continuous energy in order to "help" them reach equilibrium. At ESS and Marantz there was no break in done at the factory. At Desktop and Disney systems were often run after complete assembly with 20 watts of pink noise for 20 minutes before the public ever heard them because they set-up protocols dictated that. So this means that sometimes people who make decisions about a new speaker may not have heard that item at its best yet. Sometimes it's better to audition a 2 year old pair of somethings from the dealers' showroom rather than a new pair of somethings out of the box when doing an in-home test. Do-it-yourselfers should always precondition component speakers before trying to build a system of their own. And that's also why some of the results from the "ESS Wins on Campus" tests varied slightly as the speakers became more broken-in and consistent in their performance at each new college. And finally, when a speaker is repaired under warranty by the replacement of one single speaker component (out of perhaps 6 or 8), the "new" speaker may sound very strange indeed until it too has been able to break-in. A few speaker companies may "burn-in" their finished speaker systems the way amplifier companies routinely do, They do? Then why do they tell consumers that we have to burn in their products? but not too many just due to the space constraints. Cerwin Vega and Disney had airplane hangar sized facilities to use and so a little burn-in space could always be found. Desktop had a tiny speaker and so a burn-in room didn't take much space, but companies like B&W or JBL would need a very significant amount of space to use for just burning in speakers if they chose to do that. It might be a good idea because when a dealer takes a new speaker out of the box to demo to a customer, they may or may not make a sale based on sound that might change in the next month. Broken-in speakers would be better to sell assuming they sounded good. Failures in the field would go down too because early speaker failures would be caught during break-in. But it would make broken-in speakers much more expensive and that might reduce their competitiveness so it's a trade off. UNLESS, all buyers have long auditions periods they use to determine which speaker to buy, and then all speaker buyers are willing to break a speaker system "in" for the required time. Life's a series of trade-offs and this is just an good example of how it works. TTG Speakers are mechanical, so break-in is at least plausible. But I've yet to see any real evidence that any physical changes that occur with initial use (as opposed to long-term decay) are sufficient to cause audible differences. Given your assertions above, I'd expect you to have such evidence. Do you? bob |
|
#33
|
|||
|
|||
|
Wylie Williams wrote:
I know that many audiophiles believe that speakers need a period of break-in to sound their best, while others disagree. This post is a request for those who believe in speaker break-in to provide advice, and it is also request that those who disagree allow those of us they believe to be mistaken to continue in the error of our ways without comment. Many pro-audio loudspeaker maufacturers *state* that the Thiele Small parameters they quote are measured after a pre-conditioning period. E.g. http://www.precisiondevices.co.uk/as...s/super/10.pdf read note 3 at the bottom of the data sheet. Graham |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Do speakers "break in" ? | Car Audio | |||
| cheap refoam loudspeaker kit? | Tech | |||
| Stereoplie Recommended Components help | High End Audio | |||
| Comments about Blind Testing | High End Audio | |||
| Bush threatens to break his father's record | Audio Opinions | |||
Hybrid Mode
