SHM SACD's need to be burned in


I recently purchased Aja on a SHM sacd. I have never purchased any single disc at this price,but the chance of aquiring one of my favorite albums on SACD made me go for it.
I was so excited the day it arrived. I warmed up my system for a half an hour and popped it in. WHAT A DISAPOINTMENT!
The bass was bloated and the highs rolled off. It was inferior to my two redbook copies sonically(MFSL ultradisc and 1999 remaster).
I went on various forums to see if others had the same opinion as mine. To my surprise what I gathered was that playing these SHM SACD's about ten times to burn in improves the sound. I didn't beieve it but I had the disc already so .....
I played it on repeat on my cdp for two days straight. I then warmed up my system the same way and expected little change.
Much to my surprise the base tighten up,the highs improved and the soundstage organised itself. If I hadn't heard this for myself I never would have believed it.The mofi wasn't in the ballpark anymore!
Anyone else with a simular experience?

Regards,
montejay
Montejay - Are you talking about heat from the laser or from the player? Either way, if there is a coating that is coming off then you should be able to obtain the same difference using an oven. Also, if it's a coating then I'd say the manufacturing process should be the same on all of their SACDs and you should hear a similar difference.

The downside to trying to verify this type of thing is that you can't go back to the start. Your friend will have no chance of making a solid comparison between what he heard before and what he'll hear tomorrow. Comparing the present to a memory is nearly impossible.
Mceljo,in this particular case (SHM SACD of Aja only)there are specific sonic improvements that I have outlined that my audio friend will INSTANTLY hear.I think that a P01/G01 with the Gorb clock will offer the detail needed to confirm any change.The only question I will have for him is "does he like it now?" I stated that if he felt it was the same that wouldn't bother me in the least.I now enjoy this sacd very much.We both had a simular reaction to the sound quality when new and the lack of detail in both the high and low end of the frequency spectrum.
This is something I experienced and choose to share in this forum,and not in the least bit a scientific lab controlled experment.

Regards,
Folowup as promised earlier
Brought the now burnt in SHM sacd of Aja over to my audiophile friend last night along with a SHM sacd sampler we both just purchased.
For fun,I burnt in my sampler for about 24 hours and his remained unplayed.
The first thing was that he too heard the improvement in Aja to the point that he thought it very good digital (but not reference quality). He wasn't impressed with it at all the first time he heard it as previously discussed.
The second thing was that my burnt in sampler sounded better than his fresh one. The bass was tight and the resonances were clearer. The best way to discribe the differences between the two identical sacd's were if you changed your reading glass from a 1.25 to a 1.50.
The sampler comes with a second sacd that is identical but produced using normal material.It actually sounds better than both my burnt in sacd or the non burnt in one. I haven't a clue why they would do this. The SHM is cut higher so you have to use a spl meter but this was the biggest surprise of the evening.
I do not feel the shm's are worth the price and will not be buying anymore,but they are one of the few producing new sacd's these days.

Regards
Did you do any blind tests? Placebo and expectation can be strong with all of us from time to time.
Hi Mcejco,
It was apparent when listening to the two identical samplers.I did not load the player,so i wasn't aware of which SHM sampler was being used, but I knew which one I was hearing. The curious thing from a marketing point of view is why did they include a second sacd to compare the shm sacd with that sounds better!

Regards,