"Burn in" Are you serious?


Tell me. How are you able to compare the "burned in" state to the original? Or is it simply a matter of acclimation nurtured by wishful thinking?
waldhorner3fc4
Jostler; Read, reread, and reread Redkiwi's above post. I'm outta' here. Have fun. Craig.
If it goes to reason that if someone can hear a diffrence because they want to couldnt the reverse be said that some people dont here the difference because they dont want to. Just because there is a science to pchycoacoustics doesnt mean it applies in every instance their is a disagreement. Just because I cant explain it in a way that convinces you doesnt mean it doesnt exist. And lastly just because someone cant hear the difference doesnt mean someone else cant. I use to run a small metal fabrication plant. The properties of metal changes during anneling at certain tempatures and after passing current through it. I think someone above had it right. Go out to Radio Shack and buy two pairs of cables and compare them after one set is burned in.
Perfectimage: Yes, people who firmly believe that two things will sound the same are more likely to hear no difference between them. But I'm not saying," It can't be true because I can't hear it." What I'm saying is, the most plausible explanation for what you are hearing is that you become accustomed to the sound. If you want to present a more plausible explanation, feel free, but you have to do better than "that doesn't mean it doesn't exist." What physical changes take place in a wire after an electrical current passes through it, and how do those changes affect subsequent currents that are passed through it?
Jostler: Expectation Bias is a two way street and may explain why you do not hear burn in. Although it seems that many of the members at this site appear to be well versed in white papers, most have progressed beyond their limitations to the real world of hearing and believing -vs- reading and believing. Many of our scientific principals are also in fact faulty and have been proven to be so over the past 25 years or so not necessarily to be replaced by new correct theories, but disproved nonetheless. IMO much of the modern technology that we take for granted today crashed to earth in the late 40's and has been being reverse engineered for the past 53 years or so (yes, I am one of those). If you do not hear a difference, then fine, but how about letting us in on more of what you do hear for a change? Don't you think that this approach might be a little more rewarding to everyone involved.