Get Free, Friendly, Expert Advice
Call 1-866-244-8796 or email

Designed and Manufactured in Canada Since 1980


AxiomAudio Blog

Blind Listening Tests

Sneak Peek into Axiom’s Current Research and Development

Axiom’s Newest Speaker: The In-Ceiling M3

Wall'O'Fame
Experimental Atmos
Greetings fellow Axiom owners...
Who's Online
1 registered (bridgman), 47 Guests and 6 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Financing
Forum Stats
13330 Members
11 Forums
22920 Topics
405226 Posts

Max Online: 378 @ 02/24/13 04:33 PM
Top Posters
Ken.C 17790
pmbuko 16289
SirQuack 13341
CV 11237
MarkSJohnson 10942
Meanwhile On Facebook

Did you get your "Golden Email"? The great gift certificate email giveaway star...

Here's a helpful article for everyone looking at putting a new stereo or home th...

Interesting article about who's getting the money from streaming radio services...

Page 3 of 7 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >
Topic Options
Rate This Topic
#59728 - 09/05/04 05:00 PM Re: Breaking in speakers -- is it for real ?
KCSkins Offline
veteran

Registered: 06/12/03
Posts: 138
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
Hey there NH-

Yeah, it just seems that no matter how many cases there are for or against it, the bottom line comes down to your own personal belief. I don't have an interest in trying to change people's minds about it. I'd rather just share my experience with the subject with the hope that maybe my story could do someone else some good.

I was reluctant to post again here on the topic because I really thought the thread I listed preveiously would be the last time I get involved on the matter. But, since it's not turned into a flame way and everyone seems open-minded about discussing it here, I figured I would chime in.

Be good. I always enjoy reading your posts.
Kev

Top
#59729 - 09/05/04 05:18 PM Re: Breaking in speakers -- is it for real ?
KCSkins Offline
veteran

Registered: 06/12/03
Posts: 138
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
In reply to:

What a shame you feel it necessary to insult people who believe differently than you. And NOBODY said "speaker break-in is all some form of psycho-induced fantasy trip." Implying others are liars, and putting words into their mouths just negates and weakens your arguments.




Ajax- You misunderstood what I was saying. I'm not calling the people who claim that speaker break-in doesn't exist liars. What I mean is that the people who say break-in doesn't exist usually are the ones who are very dismissing towards the people who claim it does (I being one of them). I was trying to say that since usually the naysayers are the ones telling the believers of break-in that they what they've experienced is all just their brain changing and not the sound, they should hook up the believers to a lie detector to prove that THEY AREN'T LYING about their experiences with speaker break-in.

I'm not trying to insult anyone here because frankly, it's beneath me to do that sort of thing on a message board. Please don't jump to conclusions like that. If you have any question about how I feel on the subject, or if I have a history of posting flames here (which I don't), look up my posts from the past. I come here to share my experiences with others in an effort to maybe help someone else they way this board has helped me.

As far as showing you proof, I can't. I can let you HEAR it, however. So you are more than welcome to come over with a new set of tweeters and we can sit back and hear the difference. Read what I had to say on the subject via the thread I had linked in my prvious first post in this topic if you have any questions about this. This isn't the first time I've been involved with this subject, and at no time did I simply just write off or insult those people who claim anything differnt than I do. I've said it before and I'll say it again- It seems that you either believe it exists or you don't. That's the only solid conclusion I've been able to come to about the topic.


Top
#59730 - 09/05/04 06:20 PM Re: Breaking in speakers -- is it for real ?
Ajax Offline
axiomite

Registered: 12/30/03
Posts: 6252
Loc: Cleveland, Ohio
I have no idea what your intent was, but your sentence read:
"I think that for some of the people who insist that speaker break-in is all some form of psycho-induced fantasy trip, they should be using a lie-detector instead of an SPL meter for their tests.

As you can see, the word "they" is referring to "people who insist.....etc. Nowhere in that sentence do you refer to the "believers," so I feel that stating it's "jumping to conclusions" to believe you meant the "naysayers" are liars, is passing the buck. If that is not what you meant, it was not unreasonable on my part to assume that it was.

Also, as you can see, you DID imply that people who don't believe in speaker break in "insist that speaker break in is some form of psycho-induced fantasy trip ." I have never said that, and I don't recall anyone else saying it. You've chosen to couch our argument in inflammatory terms to make our position sound insulting to yours. That just has not been the case. My post stated that everyone is free to believe what they wish.

Now, let's assume that you DID mean that "they (the naysayers) should hook up the believers to a lie detector to prove that THEY AREN'T LYING about their experiences with speaker break-in."

I can't speak for everyone on my side of the argument, but I don't believe, and I certainly have never said, or implied, that the "believers." are "lying." Again, you put words in my mouth. In fact, during the time I had the M22s in my possession (about 12 weeks), I KNOW there was a change in what I was hearing when listening to them. And I'M NOT LYING! Where we part ways, is deciding where the change took place; in the speakers or in my brain (or the ear-brain connection). I firmly believe that you heard a difference in your example (or at the very least firmly BELIEVE you heard a difference). Therefore a lie detector test would only show that you BELIEVE you are telling the truth. If you want to prove it, next time you replace the tweeters, graph a frequency response before AND after you make the change. If there is a change, the graphs should reflect it.

The thing that is difficult for us "naysayers" to understand is the "believers" apparent disbelief that their senses and/or brain could be fooled. My senses/brain has been fooled so many times. Optical illusions; the sound that seems to come from the left when it comes from the right; one person hearing the word "sizzle" when everyone else in the room heard "fizzle;" a pilot thinking he's turning left in a fog bank, when the instruments clearly tell him he's turning right; are all common examples of this phenomenon.

None of the above, however negates your point, in which I heartily concur." It seems that you either believe it exists or you don't." However, no test yet has supported the position that it does.
_________________________
Jack

"People generally quarrel because they cannot argue." - G. K. Chesterton

Top
#59731 - 09/05/04 07:07 PM Re: Breaking in speakers -- is it for real ?
craigsub Offline
connoisseur

Registered: 12/15/03
Posts: 1306
And as far as the new tweeters are concerned... Take one speaker, and out in a new tweeter. Leave the other one with the old tweeter, and do blind tests to determine if there is an audible difference.

The one caveat on this: Does the new tweeter have the same performance characteristics.

Better to do it with a pair of speakers... Take a pair of M-22ti's.... run pink noise through one for 100 hours at a high level. Leave the other new. Have someone else hook up both speakers on identical stands about 12-15 feet from you... and next to each other.

Listen to music in mono, and switch back and forth between the two for as long as you want... and chart the results... as long as you are honestly doing a blind test... you will have an answer.
_________________________
Remember, this is a HOBBY

Top
#59732 - 09/05/04 07:22 PM Re: Breaking in speakers -- is it for real ?
KCSkins Offline
veteran

Registered: 06/12/03
Posts: 138
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
Jack- why are you personalizing this? In no way did I mean to single you out here, or flame anything you have written in this post, nor in any other post you've ever put on in this board. My generalized statement has nothing to do with you personally. How much more open can I be about the fact that there are two camps on this issue, and no matter how much the two sides state each of their cases, it comes down to the fact that each person is going to decide based on his or her own experiences? I'm not going to insult someone for thinking a certain way that maybe I don't agree with. The conclusion I felt you're jumpping to is that I'm here to personally insult you or your point of view. Which I'm not. My statement "I think that for some of the people who insist that speaker break-in is all some form of psycho-induced fantasy trip, they should be using a lie-detector instead of an SPL meter for their tests, " is based on the history of reading and posting on the issue from previous threads. It's my take on how I usually get ridiculed when I claim I heard a difference over time with my speakers. I'm generalizing and I'm trying to use a little humor with colorful words to describe this issue, which I think is my right to do. My experience has been that most people who don't believe in break-in tell me that I've made it all up in my head. Which I don't agree with in the least bit.

If you would like, I can go back and change my statement to add the word "believers" to my original post, as you've stated I should. I'd be happy to if this would make it more clear for you or anyone else reading my previous post.

So, from what I'm reading, you and I are in complete agreeance to the fact that we've heard a change in the speakers (or my new tweeters) that support the break-in theory. I hope I'm correct on this.

As far as my brain being fooled, I agree with you that it happens to human beings all the time, which I of course am subject to as well. The fact that MY EARS PHYSICALLY HURT ME when I installed tweeters on TWO DIFFERENT SETS OF SPEAKERS AT TWO DIFFERENT TIMES MONTHS APART is enough to tell me that this wasn't something that my brain simply made up. Both times I installed new tweeters on my two sets of speakers this happened and I had to turn the sound down to a very low level to continue listening. I don't need to chart a graph to tell me that something was different sounding about this because I trust my physical reaction to pain as all the proof I would need. Beyond that, I agree with what you said about there not being a scientific test yet that supports the position that it does.

Peace.

Top
#59733 - 09/05/04 07:34 PM Re: Breaking in speakers -- is it for real ?
NeverHappy Offline
connoisseur

Registered: 12/12/03
Posts: 1424
Loc: Western Canada
Well I'm still on the fence over this. You guy's ever see the Good Sound review on the M60's? Anyway, Axiom has it all over there site and one of the things that got me about Good Sound was this:

In reply to:

speaker break-in is primarily a mechanical phenomenon of X amount of driver motions that loosen up the internal spider suspension and external rubber/foam surrounds. I've never heard warnings about reduced output levels during this period. In fact, rather the opposite -- play the speakers as loudly as is reasonable in your environment and for their type, and use bass-heavy material. A common trick is to put the speakers face to face (as closely as possible), wire one out of phase, and cover both with a thick blanket. This will cancel a lot of their output and be sonically less obtrusive. Still, the easiest thing is to simply play music 24/7 for a few days -- normally when you're sitting down to listen, at barely audible levels when you go to sleep, and cranked (not insanely, of course) when you leave the house. Don't worry about it too much. You'll note the speakers changing for a certain period, sometimes possibly seeming to make a step back before going forward again, and then one day, bingo -- they no longer change. That's it.




Why?


Top
#59734 - 09/05/04 08:25 PM Re: Breaking in speakers -- is it for real ?
Ajax Offline
axiomite

Registered: 12/30/03
Posts: 6252
Loc: Cleveland, Ohio
In reply to:

Jack- why are you personalizing this?


Oy! Why did you personalize it? I think the personalization occurred when you SAID, whether you meant to or not, that "I think that for some PEOPLE WHO INSIST that speaker break-in is all some form of psycho-induced fantasy trip, THEY should be using a lie-detector instead of an SPL meter for THEIR tests."

If you meant something other than what you said, you didn't say it very well. I think perceiving that as an insult is perfectly reasonable and NOT jumping to conclusions. I'm not a mind reader. I can only go by what you put on the paper.

In reply to:

So, from what I'm reading, you and I are in complete agreeance (sic) to the fact that we've heard a change in the speakers (or my new tweeters) that support the break-in theory. I hope I'm correct on this.


NOOOO! Perhaps I didn't say it well. I heard a change in my M22s, but I don't, for one minute, believe the speakers changed. I believe my perception of the speakers' sound changed. Please do not construe that to mean that I support the break in theory, or imply that I do. I don't know how to say it any clearer, though my mind remains open to any proof you can provide.

If you'll cease implying I've done something wrong, I'll be happy to let this drop.

Thank you,



_________________________
Jack

"People generally quarrel because they cannot argue." - G. K. Chesterton

Top
#59735 - 09/05/04 08:57 PM Re: Breaking in speakers -- is it for real ?
bridgman Online   content
axiomite

Registered: 08/25/04
Posts: 5433
Loc: Bowmanville, Ontario, Canada
Uh-oh... I feel like the jerk at the party who starts a fight then steps back and watches while the house gets wrecked. That wasn't my intention at all... I was a charter member of the "it's all in your mind" camp until the Axioms showed up.

Just to be clear, I know that MOST of the perceived change is your mind normalizing the sound of the new system. I'm just starting to think that maybe the change is not 100% in the mind -- that for some speakers there might be a physical component as well.

Oh well, at least I still don't believe in $5,000 speaker cables

I guess the next step is to try some experiments. I have a Jeep so I'm used to driving around with a ton of spare parts (everything from oil to belts, hoses, u-joints and even a spare driveshaft) -- so I guess ordering a spare tweeter from Axiom "just in case of trail damage" might be the next step.

Auggh, how did I get into this ? I just wanted to pick up some nice speakers so I could listen to music again








Top
#59736 - 09/05/04 08:58 PM Re: Breaking in speakers -- is it for real ?
KCSkins Offline
veteran

Registered: 06/12/03
Posts: 138
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
In reply to:

Oy! Why did you personalize it? I think the personalization occurred when you SAID, whether you meant to or not, that "I think that for some PEOPLE WHO INSIST that speaker break-in is all some form of psycho-induced fantasy trip, THEY should be using a lie-detector instead of an SPL meter for THEIR tests."




When did I use your name specifically? My statement was being general towards "SOME PEOPLE" not YOU, specifically. I didn't even realize that you had posted anything here until you told me that I was insulting you. I had to go back to see that you were in this thread. My original post was intended towards the first person who wrote here on this topic. I understand that no one here reads minds. But let's not let this get out of hand or off topic. I apologize that you thought my statement was insulting or somehow directed towards you specifically. My intent was neither, which I've done a good job of explaining earlier.

Honestly though, your statement was a bit confusing because I still think you're misreading my post. I read that you heard a difference that supports the theory of break-in, precicely because you heard a difference, opposed to others who claim they've heard no difference over time. The way you've written it here is a bit easier to understand than your previous post. So the fact is that you heard a difference and you have no scientific proof as to why that is, nor do you believe in speaker break-in. That's awesome that you have a point of view that is well defined on the matter. I'm not taking that away from you or anybody. So, good luck with it. I personally can't prove scientifically the difference in what I heard. I'm not a scientest. And I don't want to spend my time graphing changes on a chart on my speakers. I'll leave that to people who would enjoy such a chore.

I am confused by how I'm implying you've done something wrong. I don't see how I've done that here. But I really don't care, to be quite honest with you. I think at this point it's a complete waste of time and energy for everyone involved to keep this going.

Top
#59737 - 09/05/04 09:10 PM Re: Breaking in speakers -- is it for real ?
NeverHappy Offline
connoisseur

Registered: 12/12/03
Posts: 1424
Loc: Western Canada
Boy's, I have read and re-read this thread. I'm not sure I see KCSkins pointing a finger at anybody specific here. Maybe I missed it or there is something else going on here but I didn't take offence to it in anyway.

He has gone as far as to say he was not. Can we move on?

This is a nice little debate on a "What if" and nothing more. Let's leave it at that. We can all agree to disagree at the end of the day.

The one thing that still has me is my own warped thought process. If something moves it tends to move more over time. Would this not be true with a speaker? If so this would in fact change certain tonal qualitys of said speaker. If not why?

Top
Page 3 of 7 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >



Moderator:  alan, Amie, Andrew, axiomadmin, Brent, Debbie, Ian, Jc 

Home  |  Corporate Info  |  Products  |  Message Board  |  FAQs  |  Warranty  |  Site Map  |  Privacy Statement   |  Contact Us

©2014 Colquhoun Audio Laboratories Limited
All Rights Reserved.