Physical explanation of amp's break in?

Missile guidance systems ???????????? Are you seriously comparing the performance of missile guidance systems to that of audio circuits? If you insist on taking your experience in controlling the flight of giant bullets and using it to explain the function of audio circuits, then I fully understand your inability to grasp these concepts.

If I had known we were discussing two entirely different worlds, I would never have refuted your original position.

I too am "over and out" on this one :>)

Herman, et al....My experience with audio circuitry goes back to about 1953, when we built our own equipment, often from raw electronic parts, sometimes from kits, and also did a bit of circuit design on the side. My bread and butter job, as opposed to hobby, was in the missile guidance business. (Retired now but consulting part time). Because we may disagree, don't characterize my position as inability to grasp concepts. I am familiar with all the arguments put forth above. Although some facts cited are true (eg: component values settle with use) the conclusions drawn (eg:the amp sound better) just doesn't follow. Note that I did not say that the amp didn't sound better...just that you have not correctly identified the reason. I encourage you to think up some new explanations for review.

My comments on circuit design relate to philosophy and are general in nature and applicable to most if not all types of circuitry. You might consider study of the work of Genichi Taguchi, a Japanese disciple of W Edwards Deming (the "Father of Modern Quality Control") who was very influential in the development of superior products by Japanese industry following WW2.

Holy crap! this sounds like a threat i would be involved in.
laugh.

anyways, Hey Sean, Thanks for the great info, its completly one of those "Gee Duh" type things, simple to understand and why diddnt i think of that?

hell, i wish i thought of the pet rock. i would have one hell of a stereo from that cash cow.

ANyways, Sean, i hate to get in this heated post with a seperate question, but you made several references that you would burn in the non-believers cables? (sounds almost like a biblical smite in a way huh?) Well, how do you do it, besides letting slow roast for months on end in my rig?

better yet, "Ahem, Sean, You sir, do not know jack from shit"

Now, when i get new cables, can ya burn em in for me? :)

Bottom line:

If you buy a new amplifier, give it some time before drawing a conclusion as to its sound. If you hear
improvement, it may be because it "broke in," it might
be because your ears returned to normal after a period
of stress related to buying new equipment, it might be
some combination of both, or it may be that there really was no change at all -- you just imagined it, were
influenced by the power of suggestion, peer group
pressure, or by the need to feel you made a good purchase. On the other hand, if you hear no difference,
it may be because you have tin ears or it might be
that you are the type of individual who isn't swayed by
emotions, stress, peer group, or any other kind of pressure.

Have I left anybody out?

Good points Ed (Eldartford), Bomarc and Charlie.

Sean, I have a couple of questions. You claim or at least imply that you know what you are talking about. I don't see any evidence for that in the words you throw together. If I may ask, what is your educational background? Do you have an EE degree? Advanced degree? What professional experience do you have in designing audio equipment? Really, it isn't the same thing as repairing TV's.

Everyone I know who has an EE and has designed components that have actually been marketed by big well known companies agrees with Bomarc and Eldartford.

I claim to know nothing, but based on my own experience listening to a variety of hi-fi components over the last 35 years, I think that, except for phono cartridges and loudspeakers, components do not burn in. And I wouldn't want them to. They should perform as designed, period.

Best regards,

Paul