| ndahbar |
Is there such a thing/need for breaking speakers and/or subs?
From what I read online, and from what I couldn't find in ANY speaker manual I've ever owned, definitely not the case...but I thought I'd ask. |
|
|
| nwaring |
Lack of use? I have an old Kenwood system with a set of Polk bookshelf speakers in our living room that hasn't been turned on for about 3 years. Kind of like ndahbar on break in, I have wondered if lack of use of the speakers was a problem. I guess the same goes for the equipment. I recall the last time I turned it on it took awhile for the Kenwood 5 CD carousel to work.:)
Niles |
|
|
| one4gatr |
I am surprised Tim hasnt chimed in on this one yet. You might want to post this on Tims website www.audiokarma.org. Tim goes by the name " Kamakiri" on that site. You will probably get a great deal more answers/suggestions there. But for what it is worth here is my two cents:
I ALWAYS "burn in" my speakers before cranking them to their max. Not that I have any science to back this up this is my theory. Speakers are pretty basic in nature cone, magnet, coil. Some speaker systems employ some other electronics (crossovers etc..). I dont know that the factory puts a max load on the speakers prior to shipping them out so I tend to break in the electronics gradually so as to not overload the yet untested circuitry. Some would argue that if the speaker is going to blow it will do so regardless of when you put the power to it. And since the speaker is "designed" to accept a particular load in theory it shouldnt matter "when" you put the load to it. Again I kind of deal with it like the break in period on a car I wait until after the first 500 miles to max out the tach. My personal opinion is it cant hurt.
nwaring - probably the biggest issue you would have would be the cones on the speakers. I know I had a pair of Boston Acoustics that I hadnt used in years and when I put power to them I blew the cone off the frame. (the rubber had dry rotted). As far as the cd changer it could have been some dust on the optics. |
|
|
| phins2rt |
ndahbar,
I have no scientific evidence either but I swear my speakers "broke in" about 2 weeks after I installed them. I had never heard of this before but I did notice it after I was aware of it. Kind of like the 2K drone!:D |
|
|
| imraw |
| Yes, your speakers do need time to "burn in" just like any electronics do. Also, the foam or rubber surrounds on your drivers need some "burn in" time. By listening to the speakers it allows the speaker surrounds to reach their maximum excursion and release. After a period of time you will notice the base becomes deeper and tighter. Your midrange will become more focused. With regard to the crossovers in your speakers, the burn in allows the wires and the caps used in the crossovers to burn in. Generally you are looking anywhere from 50-100 hours for burn in of any of your components. After that they will continue to improve but not nearly as great as the initial burn in. In fact, you can purchase CDs that have burn in tones for your components. The best way to burn in your speakers is to face them at each other, hook one out of phase, throw a blanket over them, turn up the volume bit, a little pink noise (or burn in tones) and let them play for several hours. Tim, do you have any other input on this? I think I about covered it. |
|
|
| ndahbar |
Ok, more importantly, can you possibly HURT your speakers or your sub by listening to them at fairly high volume right out of the box? Could they at risk of "never being able to reach their 100% potential" if you do that?
I was testing out my new 10 inch sub with a DVD and I didn't have it cranked, but the darn DTS commercial they put before the movie starts on the DVD had a 2 second portion that had tons of low frequency, and it made my sub rumble A LOT and kinda almost distort slightly. I was pissed ! :3: |
|
|
| frostyra |
| I agree with imraw on the why's and how's of burn-in. Almost all audio components need several hours of burn-in before they sound as good as they're ever going to sound. It's not a question of loudness -- it's a question of sound quality. The higher the system quality, the more you'll notice the effect of burn-in -- and vice-versa. |
|
|
| hondacuraworld |
quote:
Originally posted by imraw
Yes, your speakers do need time to "burn in" just like any electronics do. Also, the foam or rubber surrounds on your drivers need some "burn in" time. By listening to the speakers it allows the speaker surrounds to reach their maximum excursion and release. After a period of time you will notice the base becomes deeper and tighter. Your midrange will become more focused. With regard to the crossovers in your speakers, the burn in allows the wires and the caps used in the crossovers to burn in. Generally you are looking anywhere from 50-100 hours for burn in of any of your components. After that they will continue to improve but not nearly as great as the initial burn in. In fact, you can purchase CDs that have burn in tones for your components. The best way to burn in your speakers is to face them at each other, hook one out of phase, throw a blanket over them, turn up the volume bit, a little pink noise (or burn in tones) and let them play for several hours. Tim, do you have any other input on this? I think I about covered it.
Nope, you've about covered it :29:
As far as wire burn in, we go through this on AudioKarma from time to time. IMO wire doesn't break in, contrary to what most audiophiles will tell you. Wire doesn't change its structure through use. In that case, it's more the listener that gets "broken in" to the sound of their new cable ;) |
|
|
| DaleB |
quote:
Originally posted by hondacuraworld
Nope, you've about covered it :29:
As far as wire burn in, we go through this on AudioKarma from time to time. IMO wire doesn't break in, contrary to what most audiophiles will tell you. Wire doesn't change its structure through use. In that case, it's more the listener that gets "broken in" to the sound of their new cable ;)
And a fine line it is, between listener and equipment being broken in.
And making the distinction as to which is the reason things sound different could be quite a challenge.
I like your tact on cables though. But one could say there structural changes in the cable with use, at a molecular level. Any amount of energy has to result in heat, and that will make things move around. Different wires sound differently, but never change their spots, I hear you say.
Of course, with electronics you can have mechanical changes in capacitors, etc. taking place too, even solder joints as they age. But whether you can hear them is another story. |
|
|
| hondacuraworld |
Also regarding speaker cables, who considers that once the audio power hits the end of the leads on the driver terminals it changes to about 100 feet of thin as a hair copper wire, sometimes aluminum wire, sometimes copper plated aluminum wire. To add insult to injury this thin wire is wound into an inductive coil which bucks the ability of the audio signal to go through it. The speaker circuit is all in series with the cable to the amplifier. A series circuit is only as good as the worst link in it.
Changing/improving speaker cables in some cases is like laying asphalt on the first 10 feet of a mile long tortuous logging road trying to make the entire road more efficient. Just doesn't happen. Cables will only make a difference in a very high efficiency system. If you're running 100 watts plus, keep your money in your pocket and buy a set of Monster Cables because you'll never hear any difference.
There is a lot of marketing hype in the audio marketplace designed specifically to target the unwary consumer and convince them to open their wallets, a big one I've recently noted is for power interconnects. Unless you change the entire line from your amp back to the hydroelectric dam, and re-wind the power station's transformers and alternators with pure silver wire, how is changing the last 6 feet of the path gonna make a bit of difference? Fact is, even if you did, it wouldn't. |
|
|
| DaleB |
quote:
Originally posted by hondacuraworld
Also regarding speaker cables, who considers that once the audio power hits the end of the leads on the driver terminals it changes to about 100 feet of thin as a hair copper wire, sometimes aluminum wire, sometimes copper plated aluminum wire. To add insult to injury this thin wire is wound into an inductive coil which bucks the ability of the audio signal to go through it. The speaker circuit is all in series with the cable to the amplifier. A series circuit is only as good as the worst link in it.
Changing/improving speaker cables in some cases is like laying asphalt on the first 10 feet of a mile long tortuous logging road trying to make the entire road more efficient. Just doesn't happen. Cables will only make a difference in a very high efficiency system. If you're running 100 watts plus, keep your money in your pocket and buy a set of Monster Cables because you'll never hear any difference.
There is a lot of marketing hype in the audio marketplace designed specifically to target the unwary consumer and convince them to open their wallets, a big one I've recently noted is for power interconnects. Unless you change the entire line from your amp back to the hydroelectric dam, and re-wind the power station's transformers and alternators with pure silver wire, how is changing the last 6 feet of the path gonna make a bit of difference? Fact is, even if you did, it wouldn't.
Using your premise there is an arbitrary cutoff point of 100 watts?
There are so many other factors to consider such as the impedance of the speakers you are driivng, as well as the ability of a particular amplifier to work linearly with a specific load. Those are just two.
Granted, using intercom wire on a 'good' system is like putting street tires on a racing car. Everything is commensurate within the system you are trying to integrate. Matching where possible, and using enough reserve, so compromises are left to a minimum. |
|
|
| hondacuraworld |
No, I'm talking in vague generalities and using 100 watts as an example to reference what I'm talking about....my fault, I should have explained better :)
Naturally, if you're running speakers that are say 86 dB efficient, you're not going to use a 7 watt SET amp to drive them, so I get your point about system matching. I will say it has been my experience that if you take a high power receiver (a real one with real power), and A/B a pair of high end cables vs. standard Monster fare, you're not going to hear a tremendous difference, more than likely none at all. Now, take a SET amp and a pair of speakers that are 108 dB efficient, now you've got a situation where tiny differences in conductance and resistance come into play. With a low powered amp, you're relying far more heavily on that first watt of amplification than a high powered HT system (for example), therefore the less the power of amplification, the greater the impact of small changes like wire. Here again, most low power gear is hand wired, with silver strand wire, hospital-grade capacitors, etc. |
|
|
| DaleB |
quote:
Originally posted by hondacuraworld
No, I'm talking in vague generalities and using 100 watts as an example to reference what I'm talking about....my fault, I should have explained better :)
Naturally, if you're running speakers that are say 86 dB efficient, you're not going to use a 7 watt SET amp to drive them, so I get your point about system matching. I will say it has been my experience that if you take a high power receiver (a real one with real power), and A/B a pair of high end cables vs. standard Monster fare, you're not going to hear a tremendous difference, more than likely none at all. Now, take a SET amp and a pair of speakers that are 108 dB efficient, now you've got a situation where tiny differences in conductance and resistance come into play. With a low powered amp, you're relying far more heavily on that first watt of amplification than a high powered HT system (for example), therefore the less the power of amplification, the greater the impact of small changes like wire. Here again, most low power gear is hand wired, with silver strand wire, hospital-grade capacitors, etc.
I understand totally! :cool: |
|
|
| imraw |
Tim,
Lets not forget the differences between "watts" and "current". There are plenty of companies out there that tout 250 watt receivers and only push about 20 amps of current. OTOH, my coda is a 100 watt amp that pushes over 80 amps of current. And when you do send the current "downstream" the properties of the speaker cables and internal wireing of the speakers will change properties from the heat (however small). I think that while an untrained ear may not hear differences and those nay-sayers will never hear it, cables do change properties after burn in and become audibly (sp) different after burn in, to include focus, deeper base, and a more defined soundstage. This can be easily tested by using a brand new pair of speaker cables (as well as interconnects) and swapping them out with a set that has been very well burned in over time. Remember, watts do not = current. |
|
|
| Neicho |
Funney subject here,
I just got our 04 MDX Tourning and can NOT notice a difference in the sound system from our 02 MDX that did not have the upgraded Bose System. I have a good ear for sounds and Audio and I am not impressed with the new Bose system, And that was one of the main reasons I ordered the touring.
Please correct me if I am wrong and anyone sees the difference.
thanks |
|
|
| phins2rt |
quote:
Originally posted by Neicho
Funney subject here,
I just got our 04 MDX Tourning and can NOT notice a difference in the sound system from our 02 MDX that did not have the upgraded Bose System. I have a good ear for sounds and Audio and I am not impressed with the new Bose system, And that was one of the main reasons I ordered the touring.
Please correct me if I am wrong and anyone sees the difference.
thanks
No neicho. You're right. The Bose sucks!!:D |
|
|
| hondacuraworld |
Boy can this conversation go in a few different directions :)
I'm willing to bet that your Coda amp was measured 100 watts true quality RMS, not the peak RMS garbage that's offered to the general public. To use your example and equate it to Ohm's Law, you have to compare apples to apples.
Electrons do not 'pick up' flavor or contaminants from their conductive highways. Electrons can not be modified. Some of them however can be prevented from reaching the end of their journey by resistance, being converted into heat along the way as you had mentioned.
I will readily agree that some pre-manufactured cables, be they for power, or interconnecting low level audio, or loudspeakers are good quality products that work well. They work well because they are made from quality basic materials like copper or silver wire.
Regardless of everything else, I have yet to hear a set of wires "break in". I simply refuse to believe that 100 hours of exposure to an line level audio signal or power from an amplifier can change the conductive properties of any metal. |
|
|
| DaleB |
quote:
Originally posted by hondacuraworld
I simply refuse to believe that 100 hours of exposure to an line level audio signal or power from an amplifier can change the conductive properties of any metal.
To a difference it could be 'heard'? I agree totally. At a molecluar level there are changes, even aging causes changes. But hearing those changes is another thing totally. You may 'hear' differences due to corrosion at terminations points, but I don't want to get into that. Let's just say it is wise to clean all connections periodically. |
|
|
| frostyra |
| The guys at Stereophile Magazine are really gonna hate this thread! I subscribe to, and enjoy, their mag, but hear very few of the differences they describe. I bought a highly-recommended Marantz "Special Edition" CD player to replace my old 2nd-generation Magnavox. The only differences I could definitely hear were that the Marantz had less jitter and a quieter (less hiss) analog section. |
|
|
| DaleB |
quote:
Originally posted by frostyra
The guys at Stereophile Magazine are really gonna hate this thread! I subscribe to, and enjoy, their mag, but hear very few of the differences they describe. I bought a highly-recommended Marantz "Special Edition" CD player to replace my old 2nd-generation Magnavox. The only differences I could definitely hear were that the Marantz had less jitter and a quieter (less hiss) analog section.
I used to have a 2nd gen Magnavox myself. With the Philips chip. It was considered excellent in it's day. Nice build on the player too.
Not as much cheap plastic like more newer plalyers. And gold RCA's with individual level controls.
OH yes, more modern players do sound better. I had an Adcom CD-600 once too. Another Philips based player. It had a sweet sound. |
|
|
| hondacuraworld |
| The older Magnavox players must have been good.....McIntosh used Magnavox guts for the MCD7000, which I own. |
|
|
| imraw |
| OK OK, I am not going to flame anyone. I have auditioned many a cable from excellent to the piss poor. I, for one, can hear the difference, and have definately heard the difference after many hours of pushing signal/current through them. Once again, the main difference is focus and soundstage definition. Hey, I just had my over 40 physical from the Army and they said I have almost bionic hearing. Even after all the rounds I have thrown down range and my Harley. The important part is to have fun with audio, and if it sounds good to you then two thumbs up. |
|
|
|
