-Snip-
That's an interesting claim. Do you have data to back it up.
For myself, I have measurement data that I have personally taken
on several thousand loudspeakers and drivers. This was measured
using a variety of Bruel & Kjaer, ACO and General Radio
laboratory condensor microphones through measurement systems
including a DRA MLSSA system, a Clio industrial system, B&K and
GR acoustical analysis systems, with support equipment from HP,
and many others. Would I, perchance, fit in your category of
those who "do not have the equipment to reveal this very obvious
phenomenon?"
--
| Dick Pierce |
| Professional Audio Development |
| 1-781/826-4953 Voice and FAX |
| |
Yes, I have been fiddling a lot with over clocking of CPUs, all the way from
486 up to Pentium 4. A fresh CPU will generally only go to a certain point
before it becomes unstable. If kept at the maximum stable clock freq.. for a
week or two, it is usually able to be pushed further and run stable at a
freq. previously unstable. So "something" is changing over time.
I agree that burn-in of audio equipment are also partly getting used to the
"new sound image" but it is also more than this. I am in the business as
well, and gets a lot of new stuff in, so it is relatively easy to compare
burned-in demo equipment with fresh equipment, and I assure you that there
is a difference from a listening point of view. I am not saying that it is
measurable in a conventional manner, but it sure is audible, at least to my
ears. Furthermore I would say that it is not slightly audible, but clearly
and obviously audible.
I can see that you have access to a lot of serious measuring equipment,
which of course are useful in many situations. It is however my personal
opinion that we must trust what we are hearing, and not blindly trust that
best technical specifications equals the most realistic and satisfying sound
or that we can fully explain or understand what happens as the brain decodes
a sound impression.
KE