I've been mulling this whole "break-in" thing around in my head a lot lately. I haven't been thinking about "break-in" itself, as much as I've been thinking about the disagreement over it. What I've been pondering is why the debate over this can become so heated. I'd like to make a couple of points, and I hope it will be understood that I mean no offense to anyone who believes differently, and that I support your right to do just that.
I happen to be in the "break-in is primarily a psychological phenomenon" camp. One of the things I've noticed is that when our side says that break-in is all in your head, the other side reacts as though we're saying that you don't really hear a difference, and you are actually nuts, or crazy, or worse, stupid. I can't speak for everyone in my camp, but that is NOT what I mean. I firmly believe you hear a difference. I believe I noticed a difference in my M22s after a period of time. So we really don't differ on the question of a change in the way a speaker sounds after a period of time. Where we differ is where that change takes place. Break-in proponents believe it takes place in the speaker, while we believe the difference is caused by a change in one's perception of the speaker's sound.
Here are a couple of examples of the short term variety of this phenomenon. I'm watching TV using the TV speakers. A program comes on that I wish to enjoy through my system, so I make the switch. I ALWAYS am startled at how bad my system initially sounds. It's muddy, and unsatisfying. Within a relatively short period of time (I've never timed it), without changing volume or anything else, I find myself thinking "This sounds great! How could I have thought otherwise." It is my contention that I simply became acclimated to the difference between the TV speakers' sound, and my system's sound.
"AH!" You say. "But the system wasn't warmed up yet. The drivers were still cold and stiff, and they changed when warmed up." Well how about this, then.
When demoing my system for a visitor, the system having been up and running for a half hour or more, I have the volume at a satisfying listening level. We start to converse, but the system is a little to loud for easy conversation, so I turn it down. Immediately I find myself thinking " UGH, at this volume, the system doesn't sound very good, but we want to talk so I'll leave it there temporarily." Within a few minutes (again, I never timed it), and without changing the volume at all. I'm thinking "Son of a gun! Now the system sounds great."
These are two examples of a short term version of perception change. They don't exactly explain what we call "break-in," but they make the point that perception is a variable. It IS subject to change.
To the best of my knowledge, there has never been a test, or demonstration that supported the concept of speaker break-in. In fact every test or demonstration, of which I am aware, has done exactly the opposite. Craigsub did a test where he broke in one of a pair of Onix Reference 2 speakers, and in a blind test could tell no difference between it, and it's out of the box twin.
My main point is the we essentially do not disagree over whether or not one can hear a change in speakers after a period of time. I believe you when you tell me you hear a difference. The question is, where does that change take place; in the speakers, or in ones perceptions of the speakers' sound?
