I looked through this thread and this discussion has happened umpteen times over the past 20 years i've been on these forums.
DO NOT ACCEPT EVERYTHING YOU READ ONLINE /YOUTUBE AS FACT!
Sorry about the caps BUT, proof of concepts are provided in published science and engineering journals. You have to go to that source to find out what is what. Every speaker company (as rrlev inferred) is going to market stuff to sell.
If i recall, Ian mentioned (back during my first factory tour) that Axiom tested every speaker with a sweep to ensure it's response was consistent and flawless (to use the term loosely). The mere testing phase would let you know if the speaker response was changing or had changed and as such, let them know there might be a quality issue. These drivers beat at thousands of reps per second! Even a minute of sound playback is punishing.
RE: this video linked above, there is a MAJOR experimental error with this fellow's trials
He used TWO different drivers; one old, one new. Why not use the same driver out of the box, beat the crap out of it then test it again? And again years later?
Two same model drivers may have slightly different measurements that still fall within the design specs averages.
Add to that idea, do these small differences make a difference SIGNIFICANTLY (on a measured spectrum) and AUDIBLY in A/B testing?
Add to that, if drivers break in, then they also break down. How does a driver break in only to a certain point and then stop magically after 10 hours? 100 hours? 200 hours? The very point of making a driver with durable materials is so that it DOESN'T change it's sound over time.
Good lord people, think a bit deeper.
Last edited by chesseroo; 10/01/21 01:32 AM.
