Absolute top tier DAC for standard res Redbook CD

Excellent question Charles. I freely admit of being pathologically picky when it comes to break-in process. I deem a device to be broken in only when I no longer perceive any further change in sound over the span of about one week of 24/7 operation, regardless of what the manufacturer has told me, or has published.

during the last 10 years or so, I have broken in a number of components, including 4 digital front end devices.. Esoteric X-01, GamuT CD3, Esoteric K-01, and recently Rowland Aeris DAC. Aeris is the very first front end that in my experience may have stabilized before crossing the 1000 hours mark.

Admittedly, Aeris does contain a lot of technology that is well known to take time to stabilize, like input transformer an 6-layer ceramic boards, yet break-in seems to have been a little faster than other front-end devices I have had in system. If you are interested, there are 27 mostly technical entries on Aeris hardware and firmware in the Rowland Knowledge base at:

http://jeffrowlandgroup.com/kb/categories.php?categoryid=205

Salluti, Guido

Hi Matt,
I get your turkey analogy, but is it done baking in 8 hours or 8 days?
Guido, thanks for your reply. Good thread.
Charles,

I have a friend who slow roasts a Briscuit over 36h. And he does taste it to adjust seasoning along the way. So that blows my culinary analogy.

Trust me. I hate the wait!!! Especially in this case.

Sorry guys. Patience, as they say, is a virtue....

Component "burn in" times are purely subjective. Having to wait 800 hours is absolutely ridiculous! 50 or 100 hours might easily be enough time for the component to perform mighty fine. Unless a component is severely flat or lacking extension at X hours, I highly doubt you are going to be able to quantify the exact differences 100 or 200 or whatever hours later based on memory.

There are far too many attributes in the listening room, temperature, humidity, time of day, listener's mood, electrical power voltage,, etc. that can easily result in perceived changes. We all have experienced a time or two where something just did not sound right and we return another day for the magic again to be there.

One way to actually document differences would be to use a "fully-burned in" component as a reference, and do a comparison day to day, documented/detailed. This would determine if the differences are now constant or whether the additional day of burn-in time of the component under evaluation is truly "changing" quantitatively/qualitatively relative to the differences documented the day before. After a few days of no documented differences, it's time to end the "burn-in" process. To expect additional time to result in a black sheep suddenly becoming a golden unicorn at burn-in between day 33 vs. day 34 (800 hours) is silly at best. This comparitive process is far more objective than relying on personal memory of exactly how a component sounded or changed the day or days before.

When I first powered on the L6, I was very concerned about weak bass. In an hour or so, the expected low-end presence was there. This is very typical of tube products. I always turn them on an hour or so before I even sit down for serious music listening.

Jafox,
Yes, I don't own the Aeris DAC so have no first hand experience with its burn in process. Logically I really can't understand what on earth requires such excessive hours of use to reach its sonic peak. It would seem (I could just be wrong) 200 hours for synthetic material capacitors or large transformers should be sufficient. Guido documents 800 hours, he has one and I don't. From say 400 hours to 800 hours what is audibly changing? Why choose parts that demand extreme hours in order to finally sound good?
Charles,