What differences should I be hearing as my new system breaks in?


I recently upgraded and replaced my entire stereo system. I have been using the new components a few weeks now, maybe two or more hours per day. I’ve been reading here the components have various burn in times. My question is, what differences or improvements should you expect to hear as the system breaks in over time. All the components were purchased brand new except the power conditioner. I understand different components take longer to burn in than others. From what I’ve read, on the low end, the cartridge should take maybe twenty or so hours to break in. On the high end the speakers might need up to three or four hundred hours.

My new system consists of a pair of Magico A3 speakers, a Luxman L-507uX MkII integrated amplifier, a VPI Classic 2 SE turntable with an Ortofon 2M Black cartridge, and a Marantz SA 8005 CD player (which I have had for a few years). I also acquired a Shunyata Hydra Denali 6000/S power conditioner, used, which everything is plugged into. Wiring consists of Audioquest Rocket 88’s to the speakers, VPI’s house brand cable from the turntable to the amp, and an Audioquest Colorado cable fom the CD player to the amp. The Shunyata Hydra Denali uses a Shunyata Venom power cord to the wall outlet.

It’s been interesting so far. Thus far some records or CD’s sound very different form what I’ve been used to listening to over the years. I had my old Dahlquist DQ-10’s, Bang and Olufsen Beogram 4002 turntable and Phase Linear 400/4000 amp/preamp combination since the late seventies.

Some sparsely orchestrated Joni Mitchell sounded wonderful and beautifully articulated. Art Blakey’s Jazz Messengers with Wayne Shorter, playing as I write, really shows off Mr. Shorter’s sax playing in full bodied way I’d not heard before. I really enjoyed Shostakovichs 5th symphony, where I’ve usually not been able to warm up to classical music. Stuff I’ve heard a million times before and was a little bored with has come alive for some reason. The Grateful Dead’s "Wake of the Storm" sounded inexplicably different and better for some reason. Bill Wyman’s bass intro into on the Stone’s "Live With Me" off Let It Bleed was a revelation. I’d never heard it before like that, although I’ve listened to Let It Bleed hundreds of times as the daily played soundtrack of my senior year in high school. Oddly, Let It Bleed sounded poor, particularly Mick’s vocals, at the speakers demo, to which I had taken it. Go figure.

On the other hand Pink Floyd’s Dark Side of the Moon on Mobile Fidelity sounded like a muddy mess and super crackly to boot, although an almost brand new pressing. Next up is a record cleaning machine to see if that makes any difference with well cared for records like the Pink Floyd recording. Paul Desmond’s alto sax practically jumped out of the speakers on the Brubeck’s Take Five album, which had previously left me non-plussed, but now was quite enjoyable. I’ll have to try a little more West Coast jazz. I’ll stop rambling right now.

Anyway, I’m curious how much better things may get and what may change, as the system gets burned in properly. I’d appreciate any input about what to expect from those of you who have some experience in this area. There’s been mostly nice surprises so far. Thanks,

Mike
skyscraper
Thanks glupson. I will try that and would like an improved Let It Bleed recording.

Geoffkait are you aware of another version of Let It Bleed I might like to sample as well. I’m open to suggestions.

Mike
skyscraper,

I forgot to mention that there are at least two versions of Let It Bleed SACD. Second one is Japanese SHM something (it will certainly brag about it on the packaging and wherever you see it for sale). First one is the "original" one from 2002 in Digipak/gatefold and that was the one I had on my mind, if for no other reason but because it is likely cheaper. Gurus on the Internet have different preferences but it seems that more people prefer that 2002 Digipak version. I have never heard SHM version but this "original" one is quite good, I think. Just make sure it is a SACD and not only DSD. Later in the cycle, they started printing same CDs with signs DSD but those were not SACDs. They came in regular plastic boxes.

Here are a few observations from others...

https://www.sa-cd.net/showreviews/6498

I know, it has nothing to do with burn-in, but you may find it useful anyway.
I have quite a few of the Abkco 2002 Stones DSD CDs. They are all fabulous! 🤗 Check out Through the Past Darkly, which is about the cost of a six pack on eBay.

As one can plainly see from the data even the SHM SACDs from Japan 🇯🇵 are quite compressed compared to their vinyl brethren.

http://dr.loudness-war.info/album/list?artist=Rolling+Stones+&album=Let+it+bleed
Glupson and Geoffkait, thank you both for your suggestions. I'll check out both your links soon as I have a minute. I wish I had a DSD player to try out that format. I understand that a standard SACD player will not be able to play DSD's. Correct me if I've misunderstood.

Are recordings in a DSD format not similarly compressed like some other formats?  I'm completely unfamiliar with DSD.  My old Phase Linear 4000 pre-amp had a Peak Unlimiter function that was supposed to help "de-compress" recordings. Bob Carver loved all those fun special features designed into his equipment. 

As it is, it's vinyl or CD/SACD only. I've never owned a SACD disc for that matter, although my Marantz SA 8005 will play them, so I'd like to try that format as well as the DSD if I could. Most of my source material is vinyl, with maybe a 150 CD's. I do mostly buy CD's anymore as new records are so expensive for no apparent or legitimate reason. And the only used record store in nearby Roanoke closed it's doors about a year or two ago further limiting choices.  

Mike
You may want to replace 1 item at a time with your old equipment (except speakers) Listen for awhile to see what may be making the greatest difference.