Guys, I'm not looking to start a debate on break in periods, if it's real, a myth, etc.
I have purchased a new Esoteric X-03 SE SACD player on 12/26/07 along with new Tara Labs The One (w/ISM) balanced interconnects. I let the player warm to room temperature as it was stone cold when I opened the box, evidence that it was either in an unheated warehouse or truck for a while-confirmed by my dealer. After a half a day, I hooked it up and the sound was incredibly poor. Very hard sounding, harsh mids and highs, narrow soundstage, no impact to bass, no definition. I am now on hour 674 and it's almost there. Soundstage opened up, detail is awesome, everything is, as I said almost there, but I still have a bit of a sting on female vocals. I have done an extensive amount of research and although Esoteric's website says break in should be 250 hours, I have found some information stating it would take 800 to 1,000 hours to sound excellent, with it still improving there after.
Again, I am not looking for responses disputing break in, that this is a fantasy and it must be some other culprit in my system (my dealer prchased the same player on the same day (same shippment) and he is experiencing the same).
I would love to hear about other members experience with equipment requiring a rather extensive break in period.
I wouldn't judge the Esoteric critically until you have anywhere near 500-750 hours on it. You will be pleased but you need patience.Enjoy the process.
They do take a long time to break in but once they do... Thanks to Guido, who figured out that the power supply on the large esoteric were good enough that they didn't need power cables with digital filtering, I chucked a python vx cable for a regular python. Loved the difference and upgraded to the anaconda. I am very happy with my shunyata power cord on my esoteric.
Last week I sold my A prestige and bought one esoteric X01 D2, I was very disapointed with the result, the esoteric sound was forward, the sounstage disapered, the high and mids harsh, some time the bass very strong but out of balance with the rest of music, so I began to try one answer how one machine of $19k result in this kind of sound, now I see some light --> burning. yesterday I turn on esoteric with a burning sacd from AAD, and luckly I have one new Joule mariane La300 preamplifier that needs to burn, so I turn on the preamplifer too, I am going left they burning for 7 days and listen the diference, I am using BMI hammerhead mk3 in the player, it was very good with prestige, but I saw here shunyata power cords are very good to use with esoteric, I would like to know the experience of others power cords from esoterics woners. Thanks
Hi John- Not listened to vinyl personally since about 5 years ago, when I gave away my Linn LP12 (purchased new @1977) to my grateful brother, and still going strong! I was Impressed (very) with the turntable TW Acoustics? at the Denver show last year and the year before that also In the Aspara Acoustics room. When he played cd's It was easy to hear the superiority sound of the Turntable.
I used to love vinyl, but prefer the convenience of cd's these days. Is It still a more mellow sound that cd?, It used to be to my ears, If my memory serves me.
Gawdbless
Not even close, IMHO. I've tried many different digital players, single box and seperate, up to $20K....vinyl beats them all easily. I do agree that I do still listen to digital for convenience sake, but when listening for music's sake, vinyl wins hands down. YMMV.
John- Exactly, the music Is the most Important thing, I listen to (virtually) every genre, a lot Is not deemed to be true 'audiophile' quality recordings, does It matter to me they are not? Nope. I just wanna listen to music however It was mixed onto cd. I do not buy SACD's because It Is only the most popular (or seems to me) titles and groups etc that are available In that format, anyway I am more than happy with the standard and only versions, coz thats all I am able to get, with 99.9% of the cd's I buy. I am still of the opinion that Its not the fault of the cd but the fault of the system that can't make everything sound as musical and as pleasing as possible to hear. I used to love vinyl, but prefer the convenience of cd's these days. Is It still a more mellow sound that cd?, It used to be to my ears, If my memory serves me.
Gawdbless, first of all, I am not a fan of the digital medium. Vinyl is my heaven. However, as far as digital goes, I'd rather have a player of omission than commission. Therefore, the Esoteric's are not for me, as no player is for everyone. I'd rather be able to listen to that poor recording without grinding my teeth, than worry about hearing footsteps or breathing or some other stuff on a cd that I've never heard before. Music is more important to me than quality of recordings. That being said, if hearing deep into a recording means that much, look for the SACD version. That's my $0.02
Not a contradiction at all. I do no want any component of my system to add any coloration, or subtract any recorded info, from the music I listen to. Pretty simple. It means I want a neutral system. Add nothing - subtract nothing. Just a clear window to the music. I know it is impossible but that is my ambition, and that is what I strive for.
Gawdbless, I truly wish the World were what we wish it to be. . . unfortunately 'tis only just waht it is. Or in the immortal words of Prof. Francesco Isola, my highschool teacher of Latin and Italian Literature: "The impact with factual reality is ALWAYS painful!"
(If I had an expensive CD player, I'd have the P03/D03!)
I don't think my player makes poorly recorded CD's sound poor because of a flaw in my system, but rather because it is an incredibly revealing player, and is doing what it should. I don't want a player that masks things, but, rather, reveals all to me. It is like a very good hi-def TV - the good looks good but the bad is, well, bad. (Hi def looks awesome on my Pioneer Elite but standard TV looks pretty bad-).
There's a Miles Davis CD where, in the midle of a track, you can hear foot steps across the soundstage. Some believe you should not hear that, as it disrupts the experience. To me, I want a player which extracts everything from the recording, albeit, good - or bad.
Unfortunately, having a high end, revealing system can be a trade off. I don't listen to them much (anymore) but some of my older rock recordings from the 1970's sound pretty bad on my system, because they were recorded poorly. On my buddies inferior system, or one of my car systems, it is no where near as evident. (If I must play them, they go in the alesis masterlink which is not as revealing).
Funny thing, I had started digital photography a while back with an entry level camera (Nikon D70) and lens. All my pictures looked great from the start. When I upgraded to their top of the line (camera & lens), boy, did my pictures look bad. The new rig showed all my poor photo taking techniques. The learning curve took a while, and now I take pretty good pictures. The trade off is I need top shelf technique to get incredible shots but with the lesser quality rig, technique barely mattered. I feel this is similar to music reproduction. The Phillips DVD player I have in the garage doesn't show any flaw in any recording---nor does it exploite the incredible sound of a very well recorded piece of music. See where I am coming from? I prefer the extra time, work, expense, etc. to get as close as I can to whatever I am trying to get close to. That's what rocks my boat. I understand it may not be everyone's cup of tea.
Cerrot- If I'd paid $7800 or however many dollars it cost for an expensive cd player then It had better play EVERY cd that I put in it and play It darn well to boot! None of this 'great cd's sound great but lesser recordings sound poor' malarky. Totally unacceptable.
Guido- Why should It not be reality? I mean high end hi-fi Is nothing If not very expensive.
Is it the (alledgely) poor sound quality the cd or does the fault lie with the hi-fi equipments Inability to play the cd musically? I personally think the latter.IMO. My test cd Is of Albert Ammons/Pete johnson duets recorded 1940's? or sometime before then,obviously not up there with Telarc, Decca etc but still very musical and dare I say it playable and Enjoyable?
Gawdbless, excellent theory. . . I wish it matched reality more than it does. I bought the complete String Quartets by Antonin Dvorak recorded by the Panocha Quartet on Supraphon. Read the various online reviews. . . they range from glowing to shamelessly salivating. Played it on my system (X-01 Limited, ARC Ref 3, JRDG 7M monos, Maggie IIIAs) . . . Truly fab performance, but. . . what an ear bleeder! Did a high bit rate OGG encoding for my PDA. . . it's wonderful! Made a copy of a key track on a test CD that I took to RMAF last fall. The track remained unlistenable in most systems--price no object. Only in a couple of cases it was bearable for more than 30 seconds. Tube CDps were no help--they screetched happily along with everyone else. I suffered the least on what turned out to be my favorite system--consisting of Primare CDp, JRDG Concerto linestage, JRDG 312 amp, Vienna Mahler speakers in the Soundings HiFi room--the rest of the test CD was magnificent. In the 'littler' Soundings room I played the same torture track on Primre CDp, Primare integrated, Vienna Beethoven Baby Grands. .. scary, but the rest of the test CD was wonderful. My own Mahlers arrived shortly after the show--I had ordered them during the summer. . . out with the Maggies and in with the Mahlers. With 310 hrs of breakin on the Mahlers, new tubes on the Ref 3 and a couple thousand HRS on the X-01 the Panocha Quartet gives a great performance, I can take a few tracks at moderate listening levels. . . but the recording still sounds etched.
No, I don't think so. Poor recordings sound, well, poor. Great ones will sound great. You can't have it both ways. If a CD player makes a poorly recorded CD sound decent, it is adding - or taking away something. I do not want either
"It is now extremely musical, but still merciless with harsh recordings optimized for boomboxes, which sound hidious".
Does a cd player that makes cd's sound that bad be considered a 'high end' product coupled with a high price tag?
Surely a hi-fi system should play everything chucked at It and be musical, obviously some recordings are of lesser quality than others, but It should still sound musical regardless. IMHO.
Cerrot--I agree totally. I'm now well over 300 hours and the player is really coming into its own. All of the hardness and lack of dimensionality are gone--GONE. The thing has just laid right back and now sounds liquid, three dimensional, dynamic and REAL. I have to say that if it gets any better than this I'll.....I don't know what I'll do. Right now the Esoteric bests my Scout/JMW/Dyanvector 20XM across the board--the thing is just phenomenal. I will continue to do the solo burn and see where it takes me. I'd have never thought break in could be so dramatic or so long a process. I wonder why Esoteric doesn't provide more information about break in (how long, how to, etc) in their owners manual. Or perhaps they could burn them in at the factory. Either might ease the minds of those who feel robbed when they hear the player right out of the box. John, to answer your question--no, I would not say the player sounded "unbearable" at the start. But I can certainly see how some might characterize it that way. When you lay out $7K on a CD player it really ought to sound dam good from the jump. And I will admit I too was disappointed initially. So, I guess I would say it sounded somewhat "unbearable" compared to where it is now. BTW, I'm using a Empirical Design power cable and interconnects going to an ARC SP16 and then an ARC 150.2. Speakers are the new Daedalus DA-1.1's, which are unbearably AWESOME.
Cerrot, I am delighted you persisted. . . my X-01 was absolutely awful in the beginning as well. If you ever have the opportunity, try the Alpha version of your Python chord and the Hydra 4 or 6 on your X-03. The VX chords and the Hydra 8 contain the FeSi pellets that tend to filter out some low level info on the TEAC X series.
I hit the 920 hour mark last night and have been enjoying the player tremendously. It has opened up dramatically. The highs are smooth (s m o o th), and well extended, very clear, detailed and distinct; the midrange is liquid, airy and has the texture I was looking for, and the bass is very well defined and well integrated. The detail has been amazing since 300 or so hours. It has played every CD I have inserted with not a problem. CD's sound incredible but the SACD's are truly amazing. The sound is vey musical and three dimensional with a true sense of presence. Hard to belive it can improve more but other Esoteric owners I have spoken with have said that they have experienced improvements up to 1200 hours. I am now very happy with the player and glad I got it. I am using the balanced connections (Tara Labs The One with ISM on board and Shunyata Python Helix Vx power cable into a Hydra 8). I have already heard things that were not audiable on my Music Fidelity kW SACD player (except for the incredibly loud transport on the kw-this one is silent).
I thought I'd get back to everyone with an update on the break in of my X-03SE. While waiting for my speakers to arrive and break in I managed to put about one hundred hours on the unit in a "passive" break in mode--i.e. with the player spinning a disc solo on repeat mode. Once my speakers arrived I listened mostly to LP's so I could break them in while the cd player spun away. At the 100 hour mark I began using the Esoteric. I listened to several discs and then put the machine on repeat mode so it could break in some more. I would listen again at the next 50 hour interval to the same discs and note any perceived change in the sound. I'm now up to around 300 hours and so have listened at 100, 150, 200, 250 and 300 hours. I have to admit that there has been noticeable improvement in the sound--the player at 100 hours is not the same machine at 300 hours. What I heard at 100 hours was much more forward, etched and fatiguing than what I hear now. At three hundred hours the player has begun to relax, lay back and become more three dimensional. Inner detail has improved and the machine sounds much more musical and engaging. I have to say that at 100 hours I really did not like the Esoteric. In fact, I was thinking I had made an error in selling my Naim CDX2, which sounded much more musically satisfying by comparison. At 300 hours the player is in another league altogether. Gone is the glare and lack of tonal subtlety. The player now surpasses the Naim in musicality and adds more detail and authority in the bass. I am going to continue to burn the player in solo and listen at 50 hour intervals to see whether there are additional improvements beyond the 300 hour mark. I expect there will be, however slight. Cerrot--it seems you may have had it right on this one!
I've now heard back from two people who I contacted regarding this question. My dealer instructed me to turn the preamp "on" while breaking in the Esoteric, and so I have for the last 30 hours. Tonight I heard from Esoteric Tech Support. According to these folks no other equipment needs to be connected to the player during break in. Since this is the easier answer for me to accept, I've turned off my pre and will break in the rest of the way solo. I'm not sure what accounts for the discrepancy here--probably nobody really knows for sure whether having the player connected to a live preamp makes a difference. I'm inclined to think that the bulk of the internal components get broken in without a live preamp but perhaps there are some parts related to the output stage that would benefit from a live playmate. Despite this, I'm going to leave the preamp "off" and hope for the best--I'm really not keen on burning up tube life to get the last little bit of break in that might come with a live preamp.
I played mine through the whole system with music for the 1st 24 hours and than went to the Purist Audio II break in cd for the 6 hour session and than played music again for another 200 hours. I would than alternate between the Ayers CD and the Purist Audio for approx 50 hours on and 50 hours off (music). The first 250 or so hours were at moderate volume (solid state, electrostatics and dedicated room, so no problem-besides, I felt the system could go for a good burn/run in as I did perform some upgrades within the prior 6 months). The balance of my break in is at very low volume, unless I am playing another source, at which time it is still running.
I guess there may be something to the 'active load' philosophy. There is no way to know unless identical units have been burned in for the same amount of hours, one by itself, one connected to a 'live' preamp. Dodgealum, burning up 800-1000 tube hours is exactly why I would not do this. If you feel it necessary to have a preamp turned on, I would suggest grabbing a receiver (I know I have a couple laying around the house), plug the Esoteric into the receiver and turn both on. No need to hook a speaker load to the receiver. I would assume this would accomplish the 'live load' for the player, but not wear out your tubes.
As Germanboxers suggests, and I tend to agree, the 'live load' is a theory with no certain results. Good tubes are too expensive for me to try this with my Ref 3. If I had a SS preamp, I would try this as a "why not?" tweak.
However, I do recommend you investigate the Ayre/Cardas burn in cd. I and many others have found this to be a valuable tool. I would think a few hundred hours with the Ayre/Cardas cd on repeat with no preamp would accomplish more than a few hundred hours with a regular cd with a preamp. Just my $0.02
On burning in...Steve Huntley also suggested just plugging it in and running it on repeat...no need for preamp...in fact, he said you don't even need it hooked up to a preamp...just place it on the table and let run. I suspect the reason for this is that the major burnin devices (caps) are located in the power supply and digital boards, not necessarily the output section?
I did not use my tube preamp to burn it in either, though I did power up the system from time to time to listen and probably left it on longer than normal...just in case. ;-)
Jmcgrogan2, you may be correct, but the idea is to ensure that the output phases of the CDp have something to do by letting them communicate with a live destination. This of course may all be nonsense, and a CDP with the rest of the system turned off may just break in the same. By the way, I used only my old LS2B for the break in; I did not want to put oodles of empty hrs on my Ref 3. G.
I'm interested in a response to your question as well since I am using up tube life to burn in my cd player. If I can get away with the preamp off and still get the job done that would be my preference.
I still don't understand the value of turning the preamp on when buring in a cd player, can someone explain this? I'm under the impression that just having the cd player on repeat would burn it in. Since you cannot hear it anyway, I would recommend using the Ayre/Cardas burn in cd as the disc on repeat.
Dodgealum, I guess it's safe to assume that you are not using a tube preamp. I have a tube preamp, and I would not advise this break in method to other tube preamp owners.
It looks like I may have sold my Esoteric's too soon. :) I know mine had no where near 1000 hours on them when I sold them.
Power cords may be a good way to take the edge off the Esoteric's too, as Guido suggests. I've gone the other way it would seem, using a very revealing power cord on a warmer cd player. I've also heard a couple of modded Esoteric's that seemed to take the edge off too. Whatever it takes......
Not sure if it matters but I've got the preamp on "mute" with no output. My amp is "off" since the speaker leads are lying on the floor waiting for my new speakers and I wouldn't want power to get to the wires risking a short. Do you think I am getting the break in benefits with the preamp muted?
Excellent method Dodgealum. That is exactly what I did with X-01 break in. CDp on repeat and an old linestage turned on with moderate gain. I kept amps on standby. This resulted in a barely perceivable reedy sound from the speakers. Every 150 hrs or so I turned on the system fully for some listening. At 800 hrs or so progress seems to slow down, but the real magic comes in a little after 1100 hrs. Seems Esoteric players equipped with Burr Brown 1704 chips take a long time to break in. I have heard that Esoteric players equipped with Analog Devices chips like P03/d03 combo are much faster. I have no info on break in time for TEAC players using AKM or Crystal Semiconductor DAC chips.
This discussion prompted me to contact the dealer I bought my X-03SE from and get his take. He said that while there is considerable difference of opinion on break in of components his own views tend to square with what Cerrot and a few others have said here--namely, that the Esoteric's require quite a bit of run in time. Cerrot, I looked at the website after reading your post and did see the reference to 250 hours. I have sent Esoteric an email requesting clarification on whether double or triple that amount of time is necessary or not. According to my dealer, the Esoteric's will reach 90-95% of their potential after around 750 hours. Again, Cerrot, very much in line with your experience. He did not state, however, that the machine sounds as bad as you report during the break in phase. Additionally, I have decided to pass up a learning opportunity and have now begun breaking in my machine while waiting for my speakers to arrive. I had considered leaving the machine unused until I could listen and then reporting back to the thread with any changes in the sound at various break in points (100, 250, 500, etc). But, listening to everyone's experience here and then having it confirmed by my dealer, I decided to forgo the learning opportunity and just get on with burning in the player. I've been without music for five freaking months--the last thing I want to do is have to wait another two weeks while my player reaches it's peak potential. So, I concede the argument that Cerrot never wanted to have by giving up the opportunity to inject evidence from my own experience breaking in this machine. Finally, on the question of how to break the player in, my dealer suggest I put the Esoteric on "repeat" mode and run it into my preamp while it is turned on. Just a slight twist on what was reported here--that the preamp should be on while the player is doing its thing.
Thank you Cerrot, my experience with the Shunyata Python and Anaconda Helix VX on X-01 is they tend to create a slight candy-coating of reality, paradoxically accompanied by harshening in some situations. I found the Alpha chords ultimately more satisfying on the X-01. Have you tried the Alpha variant of the Python on X-03? My findings on the subjects are discussed in "A tale of Two. . . Anaconda Helix" at: http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?fcabl&1146623467&openmine&zzGuidocorona&4&5#Guidocorona
Cerrot, I purchased my UX-3 used, but I'm reasonably certain the unit had not been played very many hours (mfg date was just 3 months from the date I received it). My starting point with the UX-3 is therefore somewhat unknown, but this is what I found: upon first listen I was a little worried that it would be too "digital" sounding. It didn't sound as "smooth" as my previous APL3910, but it was more dynamic and detailed.
After a week of non stop play, it became significantly "smoother", but still the strengths of the player were evident...dynamics, detail, and impact. Over the next few weeks, the player became "balanced". By this I mean, the strengths of the player were clearly the same BUT, the player "opened up" in a way that helped transport me to the event. High frequencies were no longer spot-lit, but contributed to putting in context the venue of the recording and filling out the overtones of the instruments in a more natural way. I was very happy with the player at this point, but wondered what was possible, given the obvious strengths of the player.
I then sent my UX-3 to Steve Huntley of GNSC and he spent a great deal of time performing a Statement mod to the player. This mod involved the addition of a great many Black Gate caps in the power supply section as well as many other passive part upgrades and power supply filtering. When I got it back, it was clearly a half step back from when I sent it out. Over the next few weeks of constant play, it opened up in such a natural way...much better than before. The strengths no longer stand out, it's extremely well balanced and serves to bring me to the event. This is not to say that it is not dynamic and detailed...it is...it's just always in support of the music, not something of its own.
Bad sounding CD's still sound bad, but the difference is that they are listenable AND I can tell why. Different spaces, mic placement, mixing and mastering decisions are much more easily discerned. To me, particularly with the UX-3, the burn in process is a balancing process.
The dynamic and low-level detail capabilities of the UX-3 allow for a more involving listening session. In particular, the micro dynamic capabilities, combined with the detail retrieval allow me to get alot closer to what a musician is doing. They are not, however, something by themselves...dynamics and detail are present in such a way as the sound is more believable, not "impressive" if you understand what I mean?
To me, these qualities are an essential platform to get closer to the music. It must be balanced though...the highs have to open up and they do with time. If your system tends to emphasize some of the stronger qualities of the Esoteric though, you could lose the balance.
Cerrot: "made the flaw in the recording evident"...
This is a bit of a tangent, but if you spent just five minutes in a professional recording studio, you might realise there's no such thing as a perfect recording. In my former life as a muso and having done several recordings in various small and large studios (in Australia), I think you'd be horrified to see the way some things are done and with what equipment, as I was.
That's not to say there aren't plenty of brilliant recordings out there, but at some point, your system is likely to exceed the limits of many recordings. You have to decide how much of that you're prepared to live with.
I appreciate your input greatly, not because you agree, but because of the detiled info you provided which has actually assisted me in my task. I was going to post last night but, instead, just had to run in the sound room and listen to some Yo yO Ma ( I also wemt back and read some of your other posts, and, I did upgrade to a Python Helix Vx last week). His Cello sounded amazing.
Cerrot, I'll take the minority view. While I have not used an Esoteric X-03SE, I am a delighted user of Esoteric X-01 Limited. When brand new the device was closed in and sternly harsh. Not at all listenable up to 250 hrs or so. Good -- with a lot of caveats -- at about 500. Very good at about 800 hrs. X-01 kept improving up to about 1200 hrs. It is now extremely musical, but still merciless with harsh recordings optimized for boomboxes, which sound hidious. Paradoxically, it drags every little ounce of music out of old recordings, making these exquisitely enjoyable. If X03 is anything like X-01, it will benefit from a good power chord. I use the Shunyata Anaconda Alpha Helix with good success. Some X-01 users have preferred the slightly richer sounding Purist anniversary. Avoid PCs with some sizzle at the top or trimness in the mids. Regardless, trust your own ears. If your ears tell you that the sound is still changing. . . that is because it is!
When I used the term "test CD" I was referring to good old standards that I knew like the back of my hand. For my "final test" of the esoteric, I had used a certain femlale vocal, which, after playing the CD on other systems, made the flaw in the recording evident. While my prior kW sounded awesome, and I had thought revealing, it did not exploit this flaw. I no longer use that CD as my final benchmark. This CD (Rebecca Pigeon) was just toted in one of the stereo rags as a great system "test" CD.
Finaly....your CDP is burn-in.....I am burn-out. I hope the rest of your system is up to the Esoteric's speed and transparency.......if not, you gone have to go through the number of sleepless nights(it can be fine tune but not by much). I kind of understand Jmcgrogan2's reasones to move in different direction with his source choice. And if you are stock to listening to a "Test reference" CDs only........well, what can I say....? - Good luck. (some cable expermentation and/or acoustic tretments comes to mind) I just hope you will enjoy some more of "real music" in the future. All the best. Mariusz
So let's re-cap shall we? At 674 hours you were "almost there" except for the bit of a sting in female vocals. Now at 760 hours, you are "there", especially when listening to test cd's.
I agree that the Esoteric is ruthlessly revealing. I have moved on because of that. I found that 90% of my cd collection was not up to the task w/ the Esoteric units. The choice was to find a player that made my collection sound good, or limit the cd's that I could listen to without grinding my teeth. I chose the former.
I'm glad to read that you are "there" Cerrot, enjoy the music.
Guys, The Estoteric site itself says 250 hours. In my system, that was just a consertive estimate. The system is now "there" at 760 hours. One issue that I have found is that the Esoteric is so revealing, that it has uncovered flaws in sone cd's that my previous kW did not reveal, so I did switch to other "test" cd's and all does sound wonderful.
01-26-08: Knownothing 1000/24 = 41.67 days. Less than 1.5 months. That is not really that long of a time. I could see continued improvements occurring over that period.
I also agree that continued improvements are possible. The question here is: Can 1000 hours take something from "unbearable" to "wonderful"?
1000/24 = 41.67 days. Less than 1.5 months. That is not really that long of a time. I could see continued improvements occurring over that period. My question would be how beneficial is it to just have a device turned on versus actually playing it with the disk spinning and signal coursing through electronics?
"I have found some information stating it would take 800 to 1,000 hours to sound excellent"
No offence, but it just doesn't sound logical. I hope you do not believe this statement which is very hard to swallow to say the least. Is there something in writing about this from the manufacture, and if there is - what does it say exactly .....and the explanation why??? I personally did experience a few components that benefited from the extra burn-in time....but never to that extreme.
My emm labs cdsa is in 200 hours and keeps imporving. I think break in period only gives you an additional 10 to 20%. It won't make a bad sounding unit, sound good. IMHO
"After a half a day, I hooked it up and the sound was incredibly poor. Very hard sounding, harsh mids and highs, narrow soundstage, no impact to bass, no definition."
That's a pretty damning review of a piece of high-end gear, warmed up or not, and would make me wonder if your unit may have a fault. A few days break-in certainly helps, especially with mechanical devices (speakers, CD transports), but 1000 hours? That's 42 days straight running 24/7, and doesn't sound right to me.
I only have a fairly budget system (Denon DVD1920 source, NAD c320 amp and B&W 602's), but could never describe it's sound as harshly as you have yours; I'd be looking for some other reason than break-in as your problem.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
