# "Burning in" headphones - another audiophile myth debunked (allegedly)



## qubit (Nov 20, 2013)

I'd never heard of such a ridiculous thing as "burning in" headphones before reading this article.



> OK, audiophiles: real talk. Earphone makers seem to be either too polite or scared to say anything. And the people in the industry who should know better are only actively encouraging a ritual. So let me say it for them: Earphone burn-in is a bunch of hokum.
> 
> For those of you unfamiliar with the practice, it basically amounts to pumping different kinds of sound into a new pair of headphones or earphones for a given period of time. This is to be done _before_ any critical listening happens. Think of it as the sonic equivalent of breaking in a new pair of shoes — the idea being that the true character of your earphones will only surface after some robust exercise. The only problem? There’s zero evidence this does anything but prolong your enjoyment of music and add more confusion to an already complex topic.



Read the rest at Wired


----------



## Mussels (Nov 20, 2013)

its a placebo. they dont sound as good as you expected? give them time it gets better (or more accurately, gives your brain time to forget what the old ones sounded like)


----------



## Fourstaff (Nov 20, 2013)

As with a new pair of shoes, you need to get used to new headphones hence "burning in". You start to notice quirks and defects of the headphones (I know it took me sometime to appreciate my HK BT)


----------



## Sasqui (Nov 20, 2013)

Mussels said:


> its a placebo. they dont sound as good as you expected? give them time it gets better (or more accurately, gives your brain time to forget what the old ones sounded like)


 
Yea, that.  If there was controlled testing to measure any difference, I wouldn't dismiss as hogwash.  Does make one wonder though if there maybe at least some truth to doing it changing the pliability of moving components ...much like the first stretch a fresh rubber band.  Larger speakers (woofers) have what's known as "free air resonance frequency", I'm sure that changes over time as the flexible portions of the diaphragm change/stiffen due to age and use.


----------



## Mussels (Nov 20, 2013)

Sasqui said:


> Yea, that.  If there was controlled testing to measure any difference, I wouldn't dismiss as hogwash.  Does make one wonder though if there maybe at least some truth to doing it changing the pliability of moving components ...much like the first stretch a fresh rubber band.  Larger speakers (woofers) have what's known as "free air resonance frequency", I'm sure that changes over time as the flexible portions of the diaphragm change/stiffen due to age and use.




considering how fast they actually move, i'd guess the 'warm up' time for a pair that hasnt been used for a long time would be in mere seconds.

this kind of myth prevails simply because there IS no way to test it without really expensive equipment - and its a great excuse for people to justify audio equipment that sounds bad in their personal opinion because 'it will burn in and get better later, so i wont be harsh on this $500 pair of beats by dre headphones that nice man on the street corner sold me for just $100!'


----------



## qubit (Nov 20, 2013)

Mussels said:


> considering how fast they actually move, i'd guess the 'warm up' time for a pair that hasnt been used for a long time would be in mere seconds.
> 
> this kind of myth prevails simply because there IS no way to test it without really expensive equipment - and its a great excuse for people to justify audio equipment that sounds bad in their personal opinion because 'it will burn in and get better later, so i wont be harsh on this $500 pair of beats by dre headphones that nice man on the street corner sold me for just $100!'


These are the same gullible people who buy $100 HDMI cables because "it makes the picture better".


----------



## Sasqui (Nov 20, 2013)

qubit said:


> These are the same gullible people who buy $100 HDMI cables because "it makes the picture better".


 
You just burst my bubble, lol


----------



## itsakjt (Nov 20, 2013)

Be it headphones or earphones, burn in does occur and difference is noticeable to any good audiophile. I remember when I bought my first Creative EP 630 earphone. It was good on the first day but became better after using it for sometime. I accidentally broke it and bought the same unit again which is now 2 years old and I still use it. The 2nd one had very high treble and bass was slightly less than the old one which was and I had to tweak the EQ to get desired audio quality. I thought that there is some version difference. But after using it for a month or two, it became much better and sounded just like my old one did. So I felt it and I believe that burn in of earphones or headphones is not a myth.


----------



## erocker (Nov 20, 2013)

Put your headphones in a freezer for a while, then listen to them. Then, listen to your headphones at a warmer temperature. There will be a difference... Even though it's not necessarily what this is about. 

Also, speakers are mechanical with a magnet that physically moves the speaker cone. Using them will slightly weaken the structural integrity of the cone over time. Hence, burn in.


----------



## qubit (Nov 20, 2013)

erocker said:


> Put your headphones in a freezer for a while, then listen to them. Then, listen to your headphones at a warmer temperature. There will be a difference... Even though it's not necessarily what this is about.
> 
> Also, speakers are mechanical with a magnet that physically moves the speaker cone. Using them will slightly weaken the structural integrity of the cone over time. Hence, burn in.


+1 on the cold headphones. When I first got my car, the factory fitted audio system sounded a certain way and is reasonably capable of reproducing bass. However, on my first time driving it on a really cold morning, the sound tinny with almost no bass. The effect was so marked, that I initially thought there was a fault with it. Once the card warmed up with the heater, the normal sound quality returned, more or less. It still does this to this day.

The properties of the cone will change over a long period of time* (months and years) as it absorbs moisture/dries out, aging and generally gets bashed about from all that vibrating. However, I don't think the kind of "burn in" they're talking about applies here.

*A better quality speaker would be expected to be more resistant to these usage and time effects and so deliver more consistent performance.


----------



## Crap Daddy (Nov 20, 2013)

Maybe it's placebo but my Senns sounded better after a few days. Burn in or getting used to how they sound? Dunno.


----------



## qubit (Nov 20, 2013)

I tell you what was odd.

Back in the early 1980s, I used to listen to music recorded off the radio onto cassette and often used headphones to avoid disturbing those around me.

The recordings were relatively "high quality" for the time, recorded on a decent cassette deck and on chrome tapes.

I bought a pair of JVC headphones which sounded quite nice, having decent bass and treble and a clear overall sound. Eventually the molded headphone plug developed an intermittent connection, so I cut it off and soldered my own one on. They sounded better. I couldn't believe it, but yes, the treble was that little bit more precise and focused, compared to the slightly "feathery" sound before. And this wasn't a one-off placebo effect either, because...

The headphones eventually broke, so I replaced them with the same model. That feathery sound returned and when I eventually changed that headphone plug, those ones sounded better too.

To this day I have no idea why this should be, especially on equipment that wasn't super high fidelity to begin with, but there it was, plain as day.

Any ideas why?


----------



## remixedcat (Nov 21, 2013)

Crap Daddy said:


> Maybe it's placebo but my Senns sounded better after a few days. Burn in or getting used to how they sound? Dunno.



My Beyers are the same now. The bass is even more complex and nicer.


----------



## entropy13 (Nov 21, 2013)

I didn't even know there's such myth to begin with. lol


----------



## mauriek (Nov 21, 2013)

Myth? i don't think so..i think people have different sonic perception level, some people have more sensitive sonic perception from the birth or by years of training, it is the same with some people said that they can see the difference from 30fps to 60fps but others said they can't, or some people said they can taste better wine but other said the wine taste not much different. well..it's still open for discussion or deeper research.


----------



## johnspack (Nov 21, 2013)

Actually something I was considering when I was buying my new headphones,  then I thought,  what?


----------



## OnePostWonder (Nov 21, 2013)

I'm actually pretty surprised by the article.  It seemed to be like most of the community at Head-Fi took burn-in for gospel.  I guess I'll see if they've latched on this at all.


----------



## johnspack (Nov 21, 2013)

I'll work in my Q701s and see if it does anything...  I use headphones for hours a day,  so I should see a difference soon.....


----------



## Frederik S (Nov 21, 2013)

Definitely true for balanced armatures. With big drivers there could be some truth to it, the membranes are made of materials which both have creep and are water permeable.

I think the largest contribution to the audible burn-in is the fact that the pads begin to conform better to your head and that is critical at least for close back headphones, perhaps not so much on open back designs.

Tyll's excellent test of AKG k701s with regards to burn-in: http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/evidence-headphone-break

I also think Tyll touches on the subject of positioning, this can also have a huge effect on how your headphones sound.


----------



## johnspack (Nov 21, 2013)

Yeah,  the 701s have a dual diaphragm cone,  so it might need working in,  also the flat wire magnet coils....  who knows....


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Nov 21, 2013)

On a similar topic, $1/metre wire should sound as good as $50/metre wire shouldn't it?

I believe this burn in is true myself, I used to be a hi-fi nut, and I know people who had really expensive setups, and always used to burn in their speakers.


----------



## Mussels (Nov 21, 2013)

after reading the article frederik linked to above, i have to change my stance somewhat.


on high end hardware, yes, some burn in seems to occur. 

he had some variation in the data that seemed cyclical which imo could have been related to time of day and weather conditions which (again, in my opinion) means the burn in variation he saw could be just because of temperature and humidity. it must really suck to test these kinds of things professionally.


----------



## memmaker (Nov 21, 2013)

I don't think that this is a myth. At least in big drivers/woofers, the suspension mechanism needs loosen a bit in order to reduce the mechanical resistance. Not only frequencies are important there, also the speed with the cone/diaphragm moves to one "level" to another. If resistance is higher, the cone tends to deform when pressure is applied by the coil and of course it takes a little more time to reach the "higher level of amplitude" of the sine. It is a subtlety, but the human hearing have enough sensitivity to these subtleties.


----------



## Agility (Nov 21, 2013)

Surely its a myth. Bought my Westone 4R and it sound the same since the beginning of its days with me..




memmaker said:


> I don't think that this is a myth. At least in big drivers/woofers, the suspension mechanism needs loosen a bit in order to reduce the mechanical resistance. Not only frequencies are important there, also the speed with the cone/diaphragm moves to one "level" to another. If resistance is higher, the cone tends to deform when pressure is applied by the coil and of course it takes a little more time to reach the "higher level of amplitude" of the sine. It is a subtlety, but the human hearing have enough sensitivity to these subtleties.



Were talking about headphones.


----------



## vega22 (Nov 21, 2013)

used to make a big impact but the way speakers are made has changed, they do not use the same materials now so a "burn in" aint needed no more.

idea was the heat cycles would make the glue on the cone go harder (or softer idk) and it would then give a crisper sound.

just to point this out, in case someone was not sure, you know. headphones are speakers agility, just small ones.


----------



## qubit (Nov 21, 2013)

marsey99 said:


> just to point this out, in case someone was not sure, you know. headphones are speakers agility, just small ones.


And just to be pedantic, they're also microphones, albeit very bad ones! 

I see there's almost a 50:50 split on the votes now. Interesting.


----------



## m0nt3 (Nov 21, 2013)

For speakers, I have never heard of it referred to as burn in. But break in sure. The idea is the the speaker moves more freely after the voice coil and surround breaks in. Whether you hear the difference or not is subjective. Personally, I never could hear the difference, but my ears aren't the best.


----------



## THE_EGG (Nov 21, 2013)

TBH I've only noticed a slight difference after break in with my Bowers and Wilkins P5s. I tried them when I got them home and thought they were good but lacking a little base. Left them playing different genres of music at normal volume for a couple of days and tried them again to find the base quite a bit stronger than I remembered. Maybe a placebo, not sure but I noticed a difference with those headphones. Otherwise with game headsets and buds I haven't noticed anything really, I think my ears just get used to the sounds they produce and think it is better after broken in - even though it might not be.


----------



## Kaynar (Nov 21, 2013)

If you answered "Yes" you simply never had the chance to compare and you are only expressing a theoretical opinion. The truth is that burning in headphones is a common thing on some headphones but with some models its VERY obvious. I clearly experienced this when I bought the Denon AH-D5000 headphones. I first heard the sound "out of the box" for the first two days but then I left them to play my music library (shuffled non stop) 1 week in a row at medium volume. When I listened to them again the high frequencies were obviously better and the bass was not "muddy" anymore.


----------



## qubit (Nov 21, 2013)

Kaynar said:


> If you answered "Yes" you simply never had the chance to compare and you are only expressing a theoretical opinion. The truth is that burning in headphones is a common thing on some headphones but with some models its VERY obvious. I clearly experienced this when I bought the Denon AH-D5000 headphones. I first heard the sound "out of the box" for the first two days but then I left them to play my music library (shuffled non stop) 1 week in a row at medium volume. When I listened to them again the high frequencies were obviously better and the bass was not "muddy" anymore.


More likely you just got used to the sound.


----------



## sneekypeet (Nov 21, 2013)

qubit said:


> More likely you just got used to the sound.



Why even bother starting a thread asking for opinions if you are just going to discount tales and tell them what they heard?


----------



## Athlon2K15 (Nov 21, 2013)

+1 . Ive done this for years on every new set of headphones and my home audio equipment.


----------

