Adda
Super Member
Wavecor shows pre and post 24 hour burn in specs for some of their drivers:
http://www.wavecor.com/html/wf152bd03_04.html
According to their measurements, the T/S parameters change over time.
Did we abandon science/any objective tests??
- Thread starter MexicoMiike
- Start date
Wavecor shows pre and post 24 hour burn in specs for some of their drivers:
http://www.wavecor.com/html/wf152bd03_04.html
According to their measurements, the T/S parameters change over time.
robgmn
Super Member
The question that a discussion like this would raise:
What if empirical data showed that there is actually no difference between the FR you heard first and the FR you hear now?
Maybe not you, but there are plenty of people (some AK members even) who would argue that their experience goes well beyond scientific measurement and that measurements are not nearly as sensitive as their hearing, especially since their system is TOTL and much more revealing of such intricacies of reproduction (certainly more than the ploebes who have only spent thousands on a whole system and not tens of thousands on just their cables)...
loonze
Super Member
look on the back of any 70s 80s low to middle range speaker-see that response graph on the sticker? basically ruler flat from 20-20k hz-----it's science! you can't argue with it! scientists never lie! and since we all have 20-20k perfect hearing and all amps sound the same and cables don't matter and all rooms are equal and ect ect. we reached the pinnacle of audio reproduction 30 years ago! [screw science]
Copa1934
My ears are bleeding
Too often people place too much value in "specs", mostly I'd say sensitivity. Where there is little play room in budget, room size, etc. I feel sensitivity may play a larger role.I have no issue with the idea that science and hearing may disagree on what sounds good. A speaker that tests better response-wise may not sound better to my ears - I've personally heard that happen several times. The Heil AMT-1 would literally drive me from the room due to what I heard as painfully bright treble. But the response curve was quite good as I recall.
What I wonder about though is when we hear a perceived difference over time, are we really hearing an actual difference or are we just getting accustomed to the sound? That difference - for good or ill - should be able to easily be measured. IOW, if the bass really does get better (deeper), the old/new response curve would clearly show that.
Another "ear thing" that is quite common is the need to turn up the volume after extended listening to get the same satisfaction as you did when you first sat down. To me, that fits into the same concept… but did the speakers change in that relatively short period or did ears/brain perception change?
Oh well…it's not THAT hard to buy some speakers and then box them up, send them back.
That aside, I agree totally. I don't know how many times I've tried to listen to speakers that make me want to leave the room that others swear up and down are the bees knees in sound reproduction. I don't fault them. I don't criticize them. They simply have different hearing from myself, or I from them. Depending of course on how you wish to look at it. JBL speakers I've listened to, and own, too bright for me. HPM speakers, again I own and have owned, too bright for me.
However. I have found some selections of recordings that benefit from these attributes. So while they are not the answer to all my listening, they do serve well with certain selections.
However, what you touch on is most important and that is acclimatization. Our ears are amazingly adaptable. As long as what we are listening to hasn't extreme anomalies (too bright, too dead, etc.) our ears will acclimatize and what we are listening to will invariably get better over time. It's when we deal with extremes that not even our ears can adapt. Maybe too bright a tweeter. Maybe too dull. Maybe too "bloated" bass. Extremes are things we can't often adapt to, so thankfully we have choice. Sadly, however, some people are really sensitive about other peoples opinions. Your ears can, and likely will, adapt much faster than the break in period of ANY speaker system.
Send back? That is the part I wonder about with 400+ hrs. What if the "break in" time exceeds the point of "no return". If that were the case, I'd pass before laying down ANY coin for those speakers. Without the benefit of listening before buying, I doubt I'd ever buy "new" online. I buy used, based on feedback. What I don't like, I flip. I haven't yet lost money, so works OK for me.
As to the "ear thing", yes your ears adapted. In economics they teach students about "diminishing returns". It's a brilliant concept that often can be applied to many subject areas. One which many people can and should learn about.
Copa1934
My ears are bleeding
Those graphs are the favorite pet peeve of many audio nuts. People like myself who made a living analyzing data and finding suitable ways to present that data visually, also learned that other people can cleverly present the same data in a different light simply by changing the characteristics of the chart. If you compress certain frequencies, or even expand them, you can make a speaker magically turn into an incredibly flat speaker. people who have purchased and used software to measure their own speakers have discovered this truth AND confirmed what they suspected they WERE actually hearing, which usually wasn't what was published. Thankfully for the manufacturer, what they published wasn't a lie. Marketing is such a fun game.
Science isn't at fault here. But in the end, you should allow your ears to make the final call anyway.
MexicoMiike
Active Member
WELL…that raises the very interesting question of why SET amps are the trendy thing. If they really do have better sound (when coupled with the proper speakers), it would seem that the best amps stopped being made in the '30s.
That being said, I am personally interested in a SET and an appropriate pair of speakers, which is what got me going on this new speaker thing in the first place…
I think it is possible to separate the idea of "accurate" sound and "pleasing" sound. IOW, I think a SET/proper speakers can probably sound wonderful but I'd bet it isn't accurate.
Copa1934
My ears are bleeding
I'm trusting luck over reviews more and more...
That first part reminds me of "Fiddler on the Roof". With so many factors at play, speakers, equipment, recordings, room acoustics, it's a wonder we find that happy medium at all. It's nice that our ears have the capacity to acclimatize, otherwise we likely would never be able to settle on one thing.
I've luckily stumbled onto most of my favorite gear. Only a couple things were I actively searching for, and most of those I've parted with.
That first part reminds me of "Fiddler on the Roof". With so many factors at play, speakers, equipment, recordings, room acoustics, it's a wonder we find that happy medium at all. It's nice that our ears have the capacity to acclimatize, otherwise we likely would never be able to settle on one thing.
I've luckily stumbled onto most of my favorite gear. Only a couple things were I actively searching for, and most of those I've parted with.
Copa1934
My ears are bleeding
First abandon the word Accurate. No such thing. Period. Accurate, by definition, will NEVER be achieved by way of audio reproduction. There are people who will swear that a electronic piano sounds just like the real thing. Accurate they say. I beg to differ. Close? Sure. Accurate? Not a chance.WELL…that raises the very interesting question of why SET amps are the trendy thing. If they really do have better sound (when coupled with the proper speakers), it would seem that the best amps stopped being made in the '30s.
That being said, I am personally interested in a SET and an appropriate pair of speakers, which is what got me going on this new speaker thing in the first place…
I think it is possible to separate the idea of "accurate" sound and "pleasing" sound. IOW, I think a SET/proper speakers can probably sound wonderful but I'd bet it isn't accurate.
Realism? Sure. I look at it this way. Unless you were present, when something was recorded, how could you possible ever know how accurate a recording is? And then consider this, if you took everyone present, had them audition different pieces of "gear", how many do you think would agree on a system being "accurate"? They might agree which was closest, but accurate? I don't think so.
I too have had an interest in SET amps. For what I spend on vintage gear I'm not yet ready to plink down the coin for something new without hearing it first. Hopefully some day I'll have a chance as I truly am curious to how they sound and their limitations.
barkerd
Super Member
The marketing is the thing. "Modern high end audio" stuff is invariably tube / 50-70 yr old circuits / topologies, and technology. And the best tubes ? NOS baby .... The older and rarer the better. Speakers to go with those tubes ..... you guessed it. Does this mean we have gained nothing ? No. It just proves that the whole audio scene has very little to do with objective science.
An appeal to the absurd--some information is false therefore all is false.
WELL…that raises the very interesting question of why SET amps are the trendy thing. If they really do have better sound (when coupled with the proper speakers), it would seem that the best amps stopped being made in the '30s.
That being said, I am personally interested in a SET and an appropriate pair of speakers, which is what got me going on this new speaker thing in the first place…
I think it is possible to separate the idea of "accurate" sound and "pleasing" sound. IOW, I think a SET/proper speakers can probably sound wonderful but I'd bet it isn't accurate.
If you found that SET amps don't measure all that well, scientifically speaking, would that put you off that path?
loonze
Super Member
''An appeal to the absurd--some information is false therefore all is false.'' this guy just got into audio last week-You can tell! All information IS false from a given point of view-or true...or somewhere in between.....you figure it out Einstein- MYSELF-..I'M going to go listen to some gear I picked out with my own ears and some music [YEAH M U S I C] NOT TEST TONES or sine waves ...which I enjoy.
kahlfin1k
Well-Known Member
That's a pretty bold thing to type on a computer, on a forum about something that would never exist without science, on the internet. That likely bounced back and forth from space a few times before I read it on my tiny yet incredibly powerful computer (phone).
As a great scientist once said: "The good thing about science is it's true whether or not you believe in it".
Copa1934
My ears are bleeding
Absent of science you would have nothing to listen to. Your ears help you decide which product of science pleases you. Should someone suggest that science would pick your system for you, I would suggest that is smoke and mirrors.
Let's say we eliminate anything that was the product of science. We couldn't even communicate in Morse code.
No one here, that I'm aware, is suggesting science "picks" your system for you, which is what you ultimately allude to. You might want to go back to your "digital" recordings, which are the result of liberal applications of science.
It's still kind'a early in the day, isn't it?
I learned a long time ago to buy with my ears, and not by a manufacturers spec sheet. That being said I do pay attention to the scientific findings in reviews as they do show a units electrical capability etc. Accurate specs do provide a comparison baseline.
Let's try and keep this on point, and not make comments towards other members please!
Regards,
Jim
Let's try and keep this on point, and not make comments towards other members please!
Regards,
Jim
Science is always right, it may not be the most accurate but it is right (until proven wrong).
Speaker burn in? I don't know. Driver suppliers test them at the end of the line. Do they account for future break in? Is there future break in? My gut says there is some break in (truthiness?) but it probably isn't audible. Break-in of things like cables, SS electonics, speakers is pretty much marketing junk. "If it doesn't sound good at first, lets see if we can get your ears accustomed to it then hope you keep it". Things never seem to get worse with break-in do they?
I think science has proven over 99% of things going on in the audible frequency. This stuff was settled science back in the 50's. Some modifications later but the basics are fixed. Do things get better with age? What is better?
More accurate? Probably not. Stuff does wear out, both electronics and mechanical mechanisms.
Even a Strad violin that has aged a long time wears out, and some prefer the sound of new violins. That is an instrument though, our stereos are reproduction machines they don't create new sounds.
Speaker burn in? I don't know. Driver suppliers test them at the end of the line. Do they account for future break in? Is there future break in? My gut says there is some break in (truthiness?) but it probably isn't audible. Break-in of things like cables, SS electonics, speakers is pretty much marketing junk. "If it doesn't sound good at first, lets see if we can get your ears accustomed to it then hope you keep it". Things never seem to get worse with break-in do they?
I think science has proven over 99% of things going on in the audible frequency. This stuff was settled science back in the 50's. Some modifications later but the basics are fixed. Do things get better with age? What is better?
More accurate? Probably not. Stuff does wear out, both electronics and mechanical mechanisms.
Even a Strad violin that has aged a long time wears out, and some prefer the sound of new violins. That is an instrument though, our stereos are reproduction machines they don't create new sounds.
mhardy6647
Lunatic Member
Science isn't a thing; it is a philosophy. A way of thinking about things; a systematic and (ideally) unbiased way to approach the understanding of a system or the solution to a problem.
Engineering is not science, nor is technology -- those two disciplines are much more pragmatic and end-focused; complements to the scientific methods. Good science enables good engineering and technology.
Engineering is not science, nor is technology -- those two disciplines are much more pragmatic and end-focused; complements to the scientific methods. Good science enables good engineering and technology.
MexicoMiike
Active Member
No, it wouldn't, I already own plenty of stuff - from guitars to speakers - that a different set of ears would say (have said) they don't sound good. But, I would like to see something more than "These are the best speakers in the world" ( a quote from one of the boutique speaker makers selling a single driver speaker) to help me do some initial evaluating before I actually spend money to buy and audition speakers and then decide I don't like them/send them back.
In any case. if I don't like them out of the box, they would go back in a couple of days. There is no way I would wait 400 listening hours to return a component I didn't like. PLUS, at the end of that time the return policy has long expired. So basically they are asking you to listen to the speakers waiting for that improvement until you can no longer return them. It's a marketing work of genius!
OK, I'll try to restrain my natural cynicism. It is entirely possible that I would like some of the speakers in question. I just object to the method they use to promote them. "Best speaker in the world?" Reminds me of the restaurants/bars in the Chesapeake Bay area who all seem to claim "best crab cakes in the world." How they can ALL have the best crab cakes in the world is a mystery to me; seems like only one place could be the best in the world.
