Actually, this is not a relativistic, everyone has his own philosophy matter. Either "break in" or other audio phenomena are real--in the sense that they can make an objective (if not necessarily measurable) audible difference--or not. It might be true that some people cannot hear such differences, but this doesn't mean that there are no differences. If they can't hear purported differences, they may well be more skeptical that there objectively are such differences. But this, too, is not a philosophical or personal values/beliefs matter: either their skepticism is warranted or not. Of course, if they can't hear purported differences, then the differences will make no subjective difference to them, in which case it wouldn't matter to them whether the phenomena are objectively/not merely psychologically real.
Equipment Break-in: Fact or Fiction
Is it just me, or does anyone else believe that all of the manufacturers' and users' claims of break-in times is just an excuse to buy time for a new users' ears to "adjust" to the sound of the new piece. Not the sound of the piece actually changing. These claims of 300+ hours of break-in for something like a CD player or cable seem outrageous.
This also leaves grey area when demo-ing a new piece as to what it will eventually sound like. By the time the break-in period is over, your stuck with it.
I could see allowing electronics to warm up a few minutes when they have been off but I find these seemingly longer and longer required break-in claims ridiculous.
This also leaves grey area when demo-ing a new piece as to what it will eventually sound like. By the time the break-in period is over, your stuck with it.
I could see allowing electronics to warm up a few minutes when they have been off but I find these seemingly longer and longer required break-in claims ridiculous.
- ...
- 91 posts total
- 91 posts total