2. misc-audio
  3. 159406-139209

Is Break-In essential and potentially dangerous for the Audiophile?

Recently, I started a blog on my website (amorsound.com).  Following is the first blog post...made a couple of month ago....

Let's begin with a basic definition. Break-In is the manufacturer's suggested (or required) usage time for the component to achieve FULL performance. I've seen a few recommended break-in periods as high as 400hrs. Ugh! Also, some manufacturers suggest (or require) a specific METHOD of usage to achieve full performance.

Break-In is often necessary, but also a potentially dangerous part of the Audiophile journey. Why? Three reasons...

Delayed gratification: We want our sound, and we want it now. ☺ Waiting up to 400hrs of PLAYTIME (i.e., almost 17 days) to hear your purchase is beyond unwelcome…., it's painful. We're audiophiles because we LOVE the sound. As modern consumers, we're not accustomed to (nor do we appreciate) delayed gratification.

Impaired selection: Audiophiles are EXTREMELY interested in achieving maximum performance of our systems and ANY components we select for audition or inclusion. We spend significant time and energy selecting SUSPECTS, then PROSPECTS and finally consummating PURCHASES of components to audition. After expending this effort, we shouldn't want to make selection mistakes. The following are a few common selection mistakes.

  • False-positive #1 (can't wait): Audition the component at the BEGINNING of the Break-In period, love it, and keep it. Later, as component elements complete break-in, the performance devolves so significantly that it's NO LONGER a good selection. Stuck!
  • False-positive #2 (self-fulfilling prophecy): Dedicate significant resources (i.e., time, energy, money, etc.) toward selecting a component. Once selected...
    • You want this component to deliver the anticipated joy and sound.
    • You want to hear improvement during the break-in period.
    • You want to believe this component is a winner.

During break-in, you become ACCUSTOMED to this component in your system (warts and all)…so you keep it. Once the new component EXCITEMENT wears off, you realize you made a selection mistake. Stuck!

  • False-negative (can't wait): This is the exact opposite of False-positive #1. Listen at the beginning of the break-in period, hate it, and move on. You're blessed in this case because "you don't know what you don't know." Admittedly, I've been the lucky benefactor of SEVERAL components that weren't fully broken in, did the required break-in, and found "manna from heaven." Good for me, but bad for the original owner.

Diminished performance: With some components, the break-in method isn't just crucial to achieving the full performance of the component…it's required. If a proper method of break-in isn't utilized, some components can be IRREPARABLY damaged…that is, they'll NEVER achieve full performance. I've not knowingly suffered this fate, but I'd be PISSED if I did. ☹

Since Break-In can ONLY introduce delayed gratification, impaired selection decisions, and/or poor performance, Audiophiles should try to avoid it. (Some of you masochists may actually love the break-in process. Not me.)

By design, ALL CH Acoustic products deliver 100% of their designed performance at first use. There's no delayed gratification, no impairment of your selection decision, and no performance risk from Break-In. You connect the CH Acoustic cables and cords, press play, and listen.

  • Your smile should show up in the first ten (10) seconds.
  • Your audiophile enjoyment will last LONG past the first 400hrs of playtime.
  • You can spend your time and energy ridding yourself (and your system) of the former cable loom, maybe even putting some money back in your pocket. ☺

128x128amorsound
mijostyn's avatar
mijostyn
8,229 posts
 
This is the silliest thread I have ever seen. The human imagination is a fabulous thing.
millercarbon's avatar
millercarbon
12,531 posts
 
What if one prefers the sound of the not yet broken-in, or burned-in, or burned-out state of a component or wire?

I don't prefer it, but usually do enjoy listening to the many different changes as time goes by. Especially early on when things change the most and fastest. My Herron phono stage did not sound near the same at the end of the first song as it had at the beginning, was even better by the end of the first side, and this went on all through the first few hours. Everything does this, always, just not always to the same extent. Something similar happens again every night as the system warms up and changes a lot over the first side, and continues to improve for quite some time thereafter. Good listeners will notice. Chris Brady did, and said so without being asked.  

Its obvious, consistent, and happens across a wide range of components. Its been a thing for like 30 years at least. I've brought stuff home for audition that sounded horrible until left on overnight. Next day, much better. Even though daytime AC is nowhere as good as night time AC.  

This is all so obvious its hard to know what to make of people who joke about it. Like its not for real. Are they really that hard of hearing? Are their systems so out of whack? I was hearing this stuff with a vintage Kenwood and JBL. Hard to think of a more low to mid-fi rig. So either they are near stone deaf, or never really tried. Although to be honest I wasn't really trying, and first noticed this stuff by accident. So back to stone deaf. 

That's it then. Stone deaf. And into audio. Dang. Oh well. Takes all kinds.

audition__audio
1,348 posts
 
I agree with millercarbon on this one. Not only do I hear differences in components as they burn in but I also hear differences on burned in devices as they are played over several hours. 
douglas_schroeder
3,281 posts
 
I am not saying that "differences" are not happening.  I am saying they are subjective,  not actual,  as demonstrated by my testing. It takes an overconfident person to not accept that possibility. I was such an overconfident person on this and other topics in audiophilia many years ago, but humbled myself to do informal testing,  which changed my opinions. 

I encourage those who think they are absolutely sure of this to check their pride by doing as I did in the article.  It will be a wake up call. 

BTW, I plan on revisiting such testing in the future with different gear, which if the results are similar,  would reinforce my conclusions. 
rodman99999
6,033 posts
 
Anyone ever heard of VAC Audio?     From their 70/70 manual (copy/paste/verbatim): "Any time that the VAC Power Amplifier has not been used for a few weeks the sound may be different.   This is also normal for high resolution audio equipment.   Optimum sound should return after a few hours of operation, preferably with an audio signal.   Refer to the discussion of break in contained in the INTRODUCTION section of this manual for further information.   Please note that although your VAC System has been run for 48 hours at the factory, they will continue to "break in" for approximately 150 hours.   Also be aware that many components display the need for a new break in period after being transported in unheated cargo aircraft."       How about Cary?    From their SLM-100 manual: "The tubes, capacitors and output transformers take approximately 100 hours of music playing to fully settle in for peak performance.   The SLM-100 may seem sterile or thin sounding right out of the box.   After the first couple hours you will notice increased depth and tighter bass.   This break in period defies all engineering theory, but is true with most audio amplifiers."       I’m rather disposed to accept their version of things, based on my own experience.    Deny, or call it whatever you like.      "Hubris", indeed!
More to discover