break-in--bane or boon ??

09-06-12: Nonoise
The changes I've heard during break in usually take me by surprise. I'm not expecting it, it just happens. My brain is in its usual auto mode when I hear the difference. It's when I'm listening for listenings sake. Nothing scientific here. This is with recordings I'm very familiar with. It's like I'm being tapped on the shoulder (ear). Subtle, yes, but noticeable.

That's when I focus my attention. That's when I break out other familiar recordings to see what else parallels what I'm hearing, or compliments with other areas of improvement. This is usually followed by one or two more levels of improvement, over time, and then no more.

It's something I've come to expect but not anticipate.

But how do you know that you are not, on a significant fraction of those occasions, attributing the change to the wrong variable? And that the change is not actually due to one of the several different kinds of extraneous variables I listed in my earlier post in this thread, or to tube aging, or to the kinds of variables you and others have been discussing in this thread, such as changes in humidity, differences in the power levels of AM radio transmissions during the day vs. the evening, changes in power quality, etc.

Not to mention, as indicated by me and others above, some degree of change in the breakin status of transducers that can occur and re-occur periodically, depending on how frequently they are used and also perhaps on what they are used to play.

And doesn't it also stand to reason that once your attention has focused on a perceived change, and you then "break out other familiar recordings to see what else parallels what I'm hearing, or compliments with other areas of improvement," that in doing so there is an increased likelihood that you will perceive things that may have been present in those recordings all along, but you were not previously as conscious of?

I'm certainly not saying that ALL perceptions of breakin-related changes of cables or electronic components are being attributed to the wrong thing. But my point is that without a methodology that includes the kind of disciplined comparison Doug has described, it is all too easy for that to happen. Ultimately resulting in belief systems evolving that are self-reinforcing as well as misleading.

Best regards,
-- Al

Ivan wrote,

"But, here’s the thing, if I understand it right and if I can manage to do
the concept any justice: what I also believe is happening in this response is
that the brain is also playing some additional roles in this in that, in effect
and to a degree, it begins subtly suppressing, or filtering out, sensory
perception in our consciousness. Mainly this is a survival mechanism,
which in effect may be an evolutionary advantage to help keep us from
losing the initiative (both in terms of instinctual decision making and in
terms of the differing brain functions that facilitate it) of our brains being
able to suddenly process a dramatically swift and near-global shift in our
state of consciousness from, say (among perhaps many other examples),
the state of our deep and extended (read: relaxed and open) involvement
with our connection to our immediate environment or surroundings to that
of the brain actively controlling and preparing virtually our entire body for
possible, all-out ‘war’ – the moment of the impending “fight-or-flight”
decision."

Exactly! And because the phenomenon - the mind picking up on external
stimulii like a radio receiver - is largely subconscious and automatic we
cannot control it consciously.

"So, of course you have a vested interest in influencing people."

Geoff, you as a vendor make money when you influence people regarding audio. I am not a vendor and do not. That is the difference. Pretty cut and dry. No mysticism there!

Some might argue the human factor is the only one that can account for results perceived that others would attribute to snake oil.

BTW I am an active practitioner of tai chi and other martial arts as well as yoga, meditation, and other rituals and practices that are not well understood by many but have proven effective over the years. Some might consider these, whether quantum in nature or not, snake oil as well. Some perhaps even placebos. I understand enough about them and see enough results to believe these things in particular work.

Mapman wrote,

"BTW I am an active practitioner of tai chi and other martial arts as well as yoga, meditation, and other rituals and practices that are not well understood by many but have proven effective over the years. Some might consider these, whether quantum in nature or not, snake oil as well. Some perhaps even placebos. I understand enough about them and see enough results to believe these things in particular work."

Ah, so you reserve your snake oil and placebo admonitions for things that you haven't any experience with, like fancy fuses and controversial or implausible tweaks. :-)

"Other rituals and practices"? Hmmmm, sounds interesting. Care to elucidate? Share, share.

GK

Thank you for your input, Charles1dad, Ivan_Nosnibor, and Nonoise. Obviously, we're of the same mind.

Mapman, I hope you'd be willing to share a soft drink at my expense at a high-end audio show in either NYC or DC next year.

Douglas_schroeder, "I would not accept hand-wired/made units made over time with possible variances in wiring, solder, caps, tubes, etc. to be close to two mass-produced units."

Douglas_schroeder, "IOW, I don't care if capactitor looks different electronically when used/broken in. I care about if the component will sound different."

Beyond overlooking my point that given the same parts, two DynaKits always converge sonically after break-in, those statements appear contradictory.

At any rate, the implication that a component employing capacitors that measure differently will not sound different flies in the face of the experience of many an audiophile, regardless of whether they believe in break-in. Even cable skeptics I talk with will often concede that if electrical properties of two cables can be differentiated, potential sonic differences could exist, even if put forth with the caveat, "the design one of the cables must be fundamentally flawed."

Regarding your question, my recollection is that the capacitor was not listened to prior to run-in, and the author's opinions on the sonics of the caps in the test followed whatever routine he used. That would fall in line with most of the capacitor write-ups I've found over the years.

Douglas_schroeder, "Don't lump me in with cable skeptics!"

Douglas_schroeder, "I'm not saying that things such as wire, caps, etc. cannot change over time. I am saying that IF they change at all the human typically cannot hear it - it is beneath the human hearing threshold."

Hopefully, you do realize that over the past three decades, the cable skeptics have parroted those very same words.