# Confirm or deny: Speakers need a break-in period



## ZAKOH

Is this true?


----------



## Scott Buwalda

Definitely true. Depends mostly on stiffness of suspension and moving mass. Some tweeters can be considered "broken in" in a matter of a few hours. Larger/heavier/stiffer drivers after 50-100 hours at reasonable play-back levels. I usually tell folks to not critically listen until after 50 hours at 90 dB.


----------



## cbrei1023

If you buy used speakers and the seller has them broken in but have had them sitting in a box for 6 months. Are they still broken in or will they need some play time to get back up to snuff.


----------



## Jani X

Scott Buwalda said:


> Definitely true. Depends mostly on stiffness of suspension and moving mass. Some tweeters can be considered "broken in" in a matter of a few hours. Larger/heavier/stiffer drivers after 50-100 hours at reasonable play-back levels. I usually tell folks to not critically listen until after 50 hours at 90 dB.



Is there a way to "speed up" the process anyhow...?

With playing certain test signals etc instead of music? 

It would take me months to get there just by listening music while driving to work etc.


----------



## chad

I'm getting ready to do some measurements of BNIB drivers and their installed cousins.


----------



## Scott Buwalda

I have witnessed T/S parameter swings as much as 50% pre- and post-break in. This is the efficacy of manufacturers that offer hand-matched speaker sets, post break-in *cough* like Hybrid Audio *cough* 

Chad, a better test would be to take the BNIB speaker and test before any signal applied, and then again after 100 hours. 

And to speed up the process...sure, get the new in box speakers out, hook them up to a home hifi receiver down in the basement, and run dynamic music or pink noise for several consecutive days while you're away at work, where they can't be heard or bother anyone. NB, for the home audiophile set-up I constructed for CES using HAT products and custom home audio enclosures, I put the towers in my office, and at 5:30 PM every day the volume got rolled up to 48 out of 66 on the receiver (likely 95-98 dB, maybe even 100 dB at peak), and let them run through the night. Did that for seven consecutive days and through an entire weekend. Come in the following Monday morning greeted to Michael Jackson's best-of album sounding superb and ready to demo for CES.

And no, once a speaker is "broken in", it remains broken in. Cold weather does affect a tight suspension though...


----------



## Oliver

Speaker Break In: Fact or Fiction? — Reviews and News from Audioholics



> Clearly, the differences in amplitude response between the pre- & post-break in systems are negligible. Indeed, maximum amplitude difference within the passband of the system is on the order of .09 dB! In passing it *should be noted that it was the broken in system that exhibited the down .09 dB amplitude response at resonance. *


Probably why SPLers who compete for records use brand new subs* ^^^
*
Vance A. Dickason said: To test for quality of a run of speakers might be beneficial.



> Taken together, it's clear the volume of air confined within the sealed cabinet of the enclosed box loudspeaker system moderates any measurable and/or audible changes that might arise as a consequence of driver compliance changes.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4G60hM1W_mk&feature=related

How is your hearing? ^^^



> In this article we'll look at a typical electrodynamic driver's operation as seen largely from the mechanical side, with a view to assessing the validity of various claims frequently made regarding driver break in. We'll also see why it's in a *manufacturer's best interest* to ensure their products *are broken in long before leaving the factory warehouse* and how that bears on subsequent attempts at burning a driver in.


----------



## XC-C30

I've had some different experience with speakers that had been standing there for several months actually... They had to loosen up again, though it didn't take nearly as long as break in from NIB speakers.


----------



## Angrywhopper

Yes they need a break in period.


----------



## Lars Ulriched

Angrywhopper said:


> Yes they need a break in period.


100% true....the speakers is just like a virgin when it came new...


----------



## CraigMBA

Lars Ulriched said:


> 100% true....the speakers is just like a virgin when it came new...


Awesome ESL non politically correct POTW.


----------



## ErinH

I've taken bnib drivers, measured t/s parameters, put pink noise on them for _days_, remeasured and gotten nearly identical (off at most by 0.01-0.03 on qts and about 1-3hz on Fs...iirc) reaults. These tests are always done in the same environment as to not allow for environmental induced changes. 

So, IMO, it's not do things change, it's:

Is the change truly audible or is it your hearing that has changed?
What other changes are there besides suspension? How does that effect the change you believe you heard?
Who's to say that the change is inherently for the better?

Personally, I believe it has more to do with listener adaptation than a small delta in parameters.


----------



## Scott Buwalda

I did a review for S3 Magazine a few years back on a popular subwoofer. Pre- and post burn-in T/S parameters were radically different. I conjecture that Mms and Cms play a big role in this.


----------



## Angrywhopper

I would venture out to say that subwoofers need a break in period more compared to mids and highs. I have no evidence to prove this though.


----------



## RangOH

Break-in period for what to happen? Prevent damage? Sound Like they will for the rest of their life? 
I believe that a speaker continually breaks in throughout their use until the end, as with any mechanical device.. 
I say enjoy them being new, before they wear out.


----------



## chad

bikinpunk said:


> I've taken bnib drivers, measured t/s parameters, put pink noise on them for _days_, remeasured and gotten nearly identical (off at most by 0.01-0.03 on qts and about 1-3hz on Fs...iirc) reaults. These tests are always done in the same environment as to not allow for environmental induced changes.
> 
> So, IMO, it's not do things change, it's:
> 
> Is the change truly audible or is it your hearing that has changed?
> What other changes are there besides suspension? How does that effect the change you believe you heard?
> Who's to say that the change is inherently for the better?
> 
> Personally, I believe it has more to do with listener adaptation than a small delta in parameters.


I'm leaning into this.

As for HAT, if it makes that much of a difference and they are that pricey, then break them in there. If you sell kill from the get go then break-in is moot.

Hook a brother up, no mystery. I bounce my recones around quite hard.

And I don't make FrankenWoofers  Absolutely refuse to.


----------



## fish

The only speakers I've noticed that changed in sound characteristics over a two or three week period during their "break-in" time were a pair of Digital Designs 1510's. Their website states this will happen... it did.


----------



## SQ_Bronco

chad said:


> I'm leaning into this.
> 
> As for HAT, if it makes that much of a difference and they are that pricey, then break them in there. If you sell kill from the get go then break-in is moot.


Agree- clearly, drivers _shouldn't_ require a "break-in" period, unless there is some intrinsic reason to deliver them in an unfinished form. If they do require "break-in", there is almost certainly something wrong with the manufacturing process.

if nothing else, a driver that requires post-production "break-in" would be extremely difficult to measure, using quality assurance tools, unless a large number of destructive samples are taken.


----------



## Scott Buwalda

Guys, we're talking about suspension compliance here. It has nothing to do with how a speaker is glued together, aka "something wrong with the manufacturing process."

Perhaps it is true that the user adapts to the drivers verses a small delta in parameters. To each their own I guess. I have found that after initial burn-in, suspension compliance shows a shift, then eventually drifts back to and settle at a 5 to 10% difference, if not more, than measured prior to burn-in. In most cases, it is just good prudence to take the time to burn-in drivers. If nothing else, it doesn't take any additional effort to do it - hook the new drivers up to a home audio device and let them play for a few days before installation.

NB: some manufcaturers also make it a huge point to request speakers to be burned in. Look at Image Dynamics, they have a warning sheet at the top of everyone of their gift boxes warning the end user to break the product in before it sees full power. Focal is also a large proponent of "100 hours of burn-in."

To each his own.


----------



## quality_sound

So the article Tom Nousaine wrote back in the 90s when he measured some Dyn drivers, which are widely accepted and even recommended by Dyn as needing 200+ hours to break in, and proved that speaker break-in is bunk wouldn't be relevant? 

The ONLY reason any manufacturer makes you wait hundreds of hours or even "several months", as in the case of DD, is to limit returns by giving your hearing time to adjust to your new speakers. That's it.


----------



## HondAudio

quality_sound said:


> So the article Tom Nousaine wrote back in the 90s when he measured some Dyn drivers, which are widely accepted and even recommended by Dyn as needing 200+ hours to break in, and proved that speaker break-in is bunk wouldn't be relevant?
> 
> The ONLY reason any manufacturer makes you wait hundreds of hours or even "several months", as in the case of DD, is to limit returns by giving your hearing time to adjust to your new speakers. That's it.


I concur on the alleged 200-hour burn-in rumor on the Dynaudios.


----------



## SQ_Bronco

Scott Buwalda said:


> Guys, we're talking about suspension compliance here. It has nothing to do with how a speaker is glued together, aka "something wrong with the manufacturing process."


"Manufacturing processes" go way beyond the "gluing of speakers together". That phrase includes everything from the procuring of raw materials, through assembly, to the final QA before shipping, and even extend to the processes used to package and ship the products. Bottom line is, when a user receives an end item, it should be fully functional, and should perform to the advertised specifications. 

If it takes a couple of hundred hours to "break in", how in the world does a manufacturer do the QA at the factory before shipping? How do they know *what* they are shipping?

And the idea of accepting a 5-10% difference in performance vs specifications for a mechanical device makes my head hurt. Is that an industry standard?


----------



## Jaredturp

This is quite interesting! I've never considered the idea that a manufacturer could suggest a break-in period simply to allow your hearing to adjust.


----------



## fish

quality_sound said:


> The ONLY reason any manufacturer makes you wait hundreds of hours or even "several months", as in the case of DD, is to limit returns by giving your hearing time to adjust to your new speakers. That's it.


While I agree your hearing may adjust to a different type of sound over time, this just wasn't the case with my DDs. I hated listening to them especially the first couple of days - sounded like over-exaggerated midbass speakers with no lowend. a few weeks later I had to EQ out some of the lowend.


----------



## quality_sound

fish said:


> While I agree your hearing may adjust to a different type of sound over time, this just wasn't the case with my DDs. I hated listening to them especially the first couple of days - sounded like over-exaggerated midbass speakers with no lowend. a few weeks later I had to EQ out some of the lowend.


I was referring to their subs, not their compoments, but I totally agree. Our hearing will never compensate for everything but certain things that stood out initially will blend in after a few weeks. 

Have you ever noticed that ANY new tweeter seems to have more detail when you first install it but after a few weeks you might be less enamored with them. That's what I'm talking about.


----------



## jpswanberg

I have never had a tweeter need time to break in, scan speak mid basses and dynaudio mid basses in the car, definitely sounded different after 200 hours. There was at least an additional 1/2 octave (according to ears) more music being produced after the break in period. My guess is that it has to do with the suspension components in the mid basses being able to move further afterwards. Or it could be something funky with Danish mid basses ) said as a Dane loving Swede). JPS


----------



## trojan fan

chad said:


> I'm leaning into this.
> 
> As for HAT, if it makes that much of a difference and they are that pricey, then break them in there. If you sell kill from the get go then break-in is moot.
> 
> Hook a brother up, no mystery. I bounce my recones around quite hard.
> 
> And I don't make FrankenWoofers  Absolutely refuse to.


Can I please get a west coast translation...thanks


----------



## chad

trojan fan said:


> Can I please get a west coast translation...thanks


*Google to the rescue!
*

Me estoy inclinando en esto.

En cuanto a HAT, si hace que gran parte de la diferencia y son los que caro, luego descanso en ese país. Si usted vende matar desde el ir a continuación, la doma es discutible.

Gancho de un hermano para arriba, ningún misterio. Me rebote mi recones todo muy difícil.

Y yo no hago FrankenWoofers. Por supuesto se niegan a.


----------



## Oliver

*Perfecto*


----------



## ErinH

Lol @ chad's reply.


----------



## Dangerranger

quality_sound said:


> The ONLY reason any manufacturer makes you wait hundreds of hours or even "several months", as in the case of DD, is to limit returns by giving your hearing time to adjust to your new speakers. That's it.


x2. on top of giving you time to get used to the new sound and accept it as the norm. We tend to adjust and adapt over time. Don't believe? Just hit defeat on your MS-8 or similar.

same went for home manufacturers. like all the Dynaudio systems that used that D21 tweeter with the huge peak at 10khz.


----------



## Brian10962001

"I believe that a speaker continually breaks in throughout their use until the end, as with any mechanical device.."

This is an absolute fact. You can't sit here and deny that changes occur during the life of a speaker, it has parts that wear! I don't care what anyone says, your woofers will take time to "loosen up". I just went through this with my 10in WMD. At first it had no upper transition, it got very hollow and airy sounding so i used the deck crossover and cut it at 80hz. After a week or so I upped the crossover back to 120, very nice transition now.

I remember a set of Kicker Comp 12's, I believe they were C serie's, that a friend of mine had. The spiders were so loose it was unreal, if you think those subs would have sounded the same as a new set, I just don't know what to tell you.


----------



## Oliver

I bought a pair of jeans once that looked like I had them for years !

Someone put some birdshot thru em while the were hanging up and prefaded em.

*P.S. I had to pay for em to do that !*


----------



## Wheres The Butta

Oliver said:


> I bought a pair of jeans once that looked like I had them for years !
> 
> Someone put some birdshot thru em while the were hanging up and prefaded em.
> 
> *P.S. I had to pay for em to do that !*


I saw a pair of jeans that came from the store with paint stains on them. I think that's taking it a bit too far.


----------



## quality_sound

jpswanberg said:


> I have never had a tweeter need time to break in, scan speak mid basses and dynaudio mid basses in the car, definitely sounded different after 200 hours. There was at least an additional 1/2 octave *(according to ears) *more music being produced after the break in period. My guess is that it has to do with the suspension components in the mid basses being able to move further afterwards. Or it could be something funky with Danish mid basses ) said as a Dane loving Swede). JPS


And this is what will screw this up, your ears. Nousaine tested Dyns specifically and found NO change after 200 hours. If you can't measure the difference, you won't hear it.


----------



## gijoe

Brian10962001 said:


> "I believe that a speaker continually breaks in throughout their use until the end, as with any mechanical device.."
> 
> This is an absolute fact. You can't sit here and deny that changes occur during the life of a speaker, it has parts that wear! I don't care what anyone says, your woofers will take time to "loosen up". I just went through this with my 10in WMD. At first it had no upper transition, it got very hollow and airy sounding so i used the deck crossover and cut it at 80hz. After a week or so I upped the crossover back to 120, very nice transition now.
> 
> I remember a set of Kicker Comp 12's, I believe they were C serie's, that a friend of mine had. The spiders were so loose it was unreal, if you think those subs would have sounded the same as a new set, I just don't know what to tell you.


As true as this may be, during what stage of break-in is a speaker optimized? Do they sound best brand new, after 9,210 hours, or the last 6 hours before they fail? I agree that speakers "break-in" but is it necessary or even advised to intentionally wear a speaker out faster by breaking it in?


----------



## carlton jones

you should use a break in period for most handmade subs so that you can loosen up the joints and the coils before trying to max power them. we usually dont set the amps up at full power in our shop to give them time to get settled then have the customer come back in for a re-tune and system check. sometimes we will put the subs on an amplifier in our shop and play a test tone through them for a few days or hours on and off depending on when the customer is coming in to get them.


----------



## Oliver

If you can get to a shop that sells the speakers you are interested in , then have them play your favorite song through a new set . . . disconnect the alligator clips from the new speaker and play it through some excellently sounding broken in ones used for demo purposes.

Whereupon you will go, *I'm Sold !!!*

I couldn't even tell those were both the exact same speaker


----------



## Wheres The Butta

Oliver said:


> If you can get to a shop that sells the speakers you are interested in , then have them play your favorite song through a new set . . . disconnect the alligator clips from the new speaker and play it through some excellently sounding broken in ones used for demo purposes.
> 
> Whereupon you will go, *I'm Sold !!!*
> 
> I couldn't even tell those were both the exact same speaker


I've only got empirical evidence, but I'd say certain speakers I have owned sounded "better" after break-in. Perhaps it's just that I got more seat time and began to appreciate them more, or just got "used to" them.

Regardless, there is definitely something to the premise that speakers sound better after a period of play time.


----------



## quality_sound

carlton jones said:


> you should use a break in period for most handmade subs so that you can loosen up the joints and the coils before trying to max power them. we usually dont set the amps up at full power in our shop to give them time to get settled then have the customer come back in for a re-tune and system check. sometimes we will put the subs on an amplifier in our shop and play a test tone through them for a few days or hours on and off depending on when the customer is coming in to get them.


Looen up the coils and joints??? Tell me you're not telling this to customers. Speakers have no joints that need to loosen up, just the spider and surround, and if your coil is loose you're going to have all kinds of problems.



Oliver said:


> If you can get to a shop that sells the speakers you are interested in , then have them play your favorite song through a new set . . . disconnect the alligator clips from the new speaker and play it through some excellently sounding broken in ones used for demo purposes.
> 
> Whereupon you will go, *I'm Sold !!!*
> 
> I couldn't even tell those were both the exact same speaker


I worked ME retail for just shy of 15 years and IME everything you said is untrue. After about 5 seconds at anything above a normal speaking volume a speaker is as "broken-in" as it needs to be. It's like stretching out a rubber band. You only need to do it once. 

Then there's this, aren't speakers QC'd before shipping??? If so they're broken in before they ever leave the warehouse.


----------



## Wheres The Butta

quality_sound said:


> Looen up the coils and joints??? Tell me you're not telling this to customers. Speakers have no joints that need to loosen up, just the spider and surround, and if your coil is loose you're going to have all kinds of problems.
> 
> 
> 
> I worked ME retail for just shy of 15 years and IME everything you said is untrue. After about 5 seconds at anything above a normal speaking volume a speaker is as "broken-in" as it needs to be. It's like stretching out a rubber band. You only need to do it once.
> 
> Then there's this, aren't speakers QC'd before shipping??? If so they're broken in before they ever leave the warehouse.


What is ME retail? Also I am no expert on the elasticity of spider material, but I suspect it may differ significantly from a 2 cent rubber band. 

There is a clear disconnect between those who say that the suspension changes *significantly* (up to 10%+) and those who say it doesn't. Obviously the only way to really settle it is to get proof. Has anyone yet conducted an experiment to answer this question?


----------



## quality_sound

Mobile Electronics. Car Audio. In-car entertainment. Whichever name you prefer. 

Rubber is rubber is rubber. Like a rubber band the surround is designed to stretch and return to it's original shape which it does. I'm NOT saying they're exactly the same, but the basic principle and function is. 

As for your question of proof. From an article in either the late mid-90s IIRC:
www.nousaine.com/pdfs/dynaudio.pdf

Here are the important part of the article I linked to above:

_"The bottom line: Based on this test, break-in had no effect on real-world performance. [] breaking in a high-quality driver has no more effect on performance than ordinary sample-to-sample variations among consecutively manufactured drivers. 

Consider that speakers are made from a bunch of electromechanical parts that can all vary slightly. When these parts are assembled, we get speakers with bigger sample-to-sample variances than any change caused by break-in. 

If you think about it carefully, the only thing that can change significantly with break-in is the compliance of the speaker. Human beings get bigger and stronger when they work out; speakers don't. Exercise won't change the moving mass of the system. It won't change the magnet or the motor strength. And it doesn't change the voice coil, the pole piece, or the top plate. *A change in compliance produces a lowered Fs and an increased Vas, which are exactly offsetting in both a mechanical and a mathematical sense*. This means that changes - when they can be confirmed - result in exactly the same speaker design and identical performance with or without break-in"._ 

He goes on to say the following: 

_"In fact, the concept of a component break-in often turns out to be a clever merchandising tool. When you complain about the sound of your new Godzilla speakers, the salesman tells you that they'll need extended break-in to sound their best - thus encouraging you to keep them for a little while longer"._ 

...and... 

_"It's a well-known fact that humans lose sensitivity to a stimulus with continued exposure. For example, you only hear a fan just after it's been turned on or off. With continued exposure, we equalize ourselves to our environment; given time, we just fill in the blanks and tune out the peaks. Extended break-in simply gives you time to equalize yourself to the speakers and may prevent a manufacturer from having to deal with a costly return.

Break-in periods allow normal adaptive changes in the listener to masquerade as changes in the product. "_ 

...and finally... 

_"There's nothing inherently wrong with breaking-in your speakers. It just doesn't lead to design enhancement or an improvement in performance."_


----------



## Wheres The Butta

quality_sound said:


> Mobile Electronics. Car Audio. In-car entertainment. Whichever name you prefer.
> 
> Rubber is rubber is rubber. Like a rubber band the surround is designed to stretch and return to it's original shape which it does. I'm NOT saying they're exactly the same, but the basic principle and function is.
> 
> As for your question of proof. From an article in either the late mid-90s IIRC:
> www.nousaine.com/pdfs/dynaudio.pdf
> 
> Here are the important part of the article I linked to above:
> 
> _"The bottom line: Based on this test, break-in had no effect on real-world performance. [] breaking in a high-quality driver has no more effect on performance than ordinary sample-to-sample variations among consecutively manufactured drivers.
> 
> Consider that speakers are made from a bunch of electromechanical parts that can all vary slightly. When these parts are assembled, we get speakers with bigger sample-to-sample variances than any change caused by break-in.
> 
> If you think about it carefully, the only thing that can change significantly with break-in is the compliance of the speaker. Human beings get bigger and stronger when they work out; speakers don't. Exercise won't change the moving mass of the system. It won't change the magnet or the motor strength. And it doesn't change the voice coil, the pole piece, or the top plate. *A change in compliance produces a lowered Fs and an increased Vas, which are exactly offsetting in both a mechanical and a mathematical sense*. This means that changes - when they can be confirmed - result in exactly the same speaker design and identical performance with or without break-in"._
> 
> He goes on to say the following:
> 
> _"In fact, the concept of a component break-in often turns out to be a clever merchandising tool. When you complain about the sound of your new Godzilla speakers, the salesman tells you that they'll need extended break-in to sound their best - thus encouraging you to keep them for a little while longer"._
> 
> ...and...
> 
> _"It's a well-known fact that humans lose sensitivity to a stimulus with continued exposure. For example, you only hear a fan just after it's been turned on or off. With continued exposure, we equalize ourselves to our environment; given time, we just fill in the blanks and tune out the peaks. Extended break-in simply gives you time to equalize yourself to the speakers and may prevent a manufacturer from having to deal with a costly return.
> 
> Break-in periods allow normal adaptive changes in the listener to masquerade as changes in the product. "_
> 
> ...and finally...
> 
> _"There's nothing inherently wrong with breaking-in your speakers. It just doesn't lead to design enhancement or an improvement in performance."_


Well that certainly sounds conclusive. Any rebuttal by those from the opposing view?


----------



## tornaido_3927

I'm no expert, and as such I'm not going to try and argue with anyone.. But I am sure I saw somewhere a while ago a page of some Tymphany drivers and their measurements pre and post burn in, and they differed on some of the specs. Some of the drivers had larger differences and some had little, but the tester also published the % of the change in params between the raw and burnt in versions. I'll see if I can find it..


----------



## HondAudio

bd5034 said:


> I saw a pair of jeans that came from the store with paint stains on them. I think that's taking it a bit too far.


Did you get them from the Gap? I saw some signs in their window a number of years ago that said "The Broken-In Shirt".

I read that as: "The Pre-Worn Shirt"


----------



## Oliver

The real question?

If speakers do change , what did you do to your setup to accommodate the changes ?

Did you build a bigger enclosure for the sub with it's broken in parameters?

Will the speakers in the doors and in the dash, or a-pillars need to have their status changed?

Now that they've broken in . . . let's lower the cross-over on em ! .... up the power ! 


OR - "DO THEY *STAY EXACTLY THE SAME*".


----------



## sqcomp

I run my speakers at 90 dB levels anyway. Scott tells me to break it in at that level, so I do. Whether or not I hear a difference is up to me. I did notice a distinct difference between my L4's and L4 SE's on the top end. They've been running since late December and I've adjusted my crossover points a little bit just recently. 

Whether or not it has to do with the break in or the speaker itself as a whole, I don't care. For me it's very much like my car, I buy it new, the manufacturer says I have to go easy on the car for a period...I do as instructed. Playing the mid ranges well below 200 Hz is revealing! 

I can tell you this much, if I had something go wrong with my speakers, Scott would help take care of it.

That's what a consumer needs. A good product and good factory support.


----------



## The A Train

I'm with Erin on this one. I mean, how drastic of a change could it really be? Any changes that I can seem happening will involve subwoofers or other high Xmax drivers where there is alot of suspension movement. Yes over time it will loosen up. But I also believe that it can get too loose as well. Find you just about any car from the 70's. Push down on the bumper and let go. You'll see the body bounce up and down quite a bit more than when it was new. So yes I believe it can change, but no I dont think speakers need a "break-in" period. More than anything its the placebo effect.


----------



## cvjoint

Scott Buwalda said:


> I have witnessed T/S parameter swings as much as 50% pre- and post-break in. This is the efficacy of manufacturers that offer hand-matched speaker sets, post break-in *cough* like Hybrid Audio *cough*


The only time I've seen 50% variation is when my Seas W26 midbass surround came lose. Same happened to the Morel 6.5s that unwounded their coil. I believe the proper name for that is DAMAGE. 

The only scenario where I see breaking in needed would be if assembly parts need heat to fully cure. 

Do your speakers come par baked??


----------



## tornaido_3927

A-Ha!

Burn in Myths Busted

Took me a while but I found it


----------



## ErinH

^ good link. Similar results to my own: notional shift if fs and qts.
So, how much does it really translate to a hearing difference?

Until someone is able to quantify that, given how little the parameters change, I'm not willing to go out telling everyone that break-in is the sole reason for a person's acclimation to a new driver.


----------



## Melodic Acoustic

Here is what I have to add to this. 

None of the component change, but the suspension does loosen up with play time. What this loosen of the suspension does do is allow the driver to move a bit more freely. So if the BL of the driver and mms of the driver is the same, but the suspension of the driver loosen ups, will this have a effect on the drivers performance. I would have to say yes. 

Attack and decay should increase and it would allow the driver to use a bit more of it usable xmax. Those couple things alone will cause a difference in sound. Will it be a noticeable difference in sound maybe maybe not, it will differ from series/brand of drivers. Can the changes be measure not sure. But it is a fact it happens. 

Just like over time the suspension start to loosen up a bit to much and the driver will start to bottom out a bit more quickly as the BL and moving mms has not change, but the suspension of the driver is starting the degrade. Just like the struts and shocks on your car. The car weight doesn't change, but the suspension does, and it really effects the way the car performs. 

Once more I'm not sure if these changes can be measured or not, but it is a fact is happens. 

Also on the getting use to the sound of a driver. There is no getting use to a bad sounding driver no matter how long you use it. I'm not sure on the whole 200 hour thing, I don't think it should that no where near that long, but I do think you should not be pushing your brand new drivers hard until the drivers suspension loosen up a bit. 

That is where my burn in period center around. I usually say about 30 hours of mid level listen is good. This is no marketing hype or wanting anyone to keep the drivers longer, it is to protect the customer investment.

But honestly this burn in has very little do to with the overall performance of the your speaker system. Enclosure and install, power and placement has more to do with it. Point blank.

Just my .02


----------



## cvjoint

tornaido_3927 said:


> A-Ha!
> 
> Burn in Myths Busted
> 
> Took me a while but I found it


Do you draw the same conclusions as the article? 

It seems like some parameter values fluctuate wildly. If the speakers are really breaking in we should see a convergence to some parameter value. Either the time played was not enough to break them in, or the temps changed too much during the testing, or the testing itself is unreliable. Even so, aside from teh GR speakers which varied a lot more than the pack, for the most part the variation was 15% at most.


----------



## ErinH

I took his data and dumped it into excel to see what the _average_ parameter shifts were. Here they are:
fs = 3.7725 hz
vas = 5.43125
qts = 0.0345

To me, the only one worth concerning yourself with would be the fs shift to a lower fs from the initial reading as the Vas is within tolerable limits and the qts is minimal. Now, the fs shift _could_ translate into a difference in audibility.

The biggest changing parameter, if you take the time to look at the data within excel yourself, is the Vas, which has an average % change on all tests of about 25%. Which, according to D'Appolito's book is certainly acceptable. To paraphrase his book _Testing Loudspeakers_, 25% variation in measured Vas equates to less than +/-1dB variation in the response of most common alignments and even less detrimental on sealed alignments below Qtc of 1.1.
Additionally, keep in mind that air temp affects measurements. He said he made sure this was not an issue, so we'll take him at his word. I would, however, be cautious of his 'findings'. The "obviously it's not our hearing that changes", to me, is a bit unbiased. He has nothing to back this up. We calibrate ourselves often. Don't believe me? Jump in your wife's car and listen... horrible, right? (well, maybe not for some of you guys ). Give it some time and it's not so bad. Then jump back in your car... you notice a change for sure. Give it some time and you're back to normal again. 

Furthermore, I like what Floyd Toole has to say about the topic:


> In parts of the audio industry, there is a belief that all components from wires to electronics to loudspeakers need to
> “break in.” Out of the box, it is assumed that they will not be performing at their best. Proponents vehemently deny
> that this process has anything to do with adaptation, writing extensively about changes in performance that they claim
> are easily audible in several aspects of device performance. Yet, the author is not aware of any controlled test in which
> any consequential audible differences were found, even in loudspeakers, where there would seem to be some opportunities for material changes. A few years ago, to satisfy a determined marketing person, the research group performed a test using samples of a loudspeaker that was claimed to benefit from “breaking in.” Measurements
> before and after the recommended break-in showed no differences in frequency response, except a very tiny change around 30–40 Hz in the one area where break-in effects could be expected: woofer compliance. Careful listening tests revealed no audible differences. None of this was surprising to the engineering staff. It is not clear whether the marketing person was satisfied by the finding. To all of us, this has to be very reassuring because it means that the performance of loudspeakers is stable, except for the known small change in woofer compliance caused by exercising the suspension and the deterioration—breaking down—of foam surrounds and some diaphragm materials with time, moisture, and atmospheric pollutants. It is fascinating to note that “breaking-in” seems always to result in an improvement in performance. Why? Do all mechanical and electrical devices and materials acquire a musical aptitude that is missing in their virgin state? Why is it never reversed, getting worse with use? The reality is that engineers seek out materials, components, and construction methods that do not change with time. Suppose that the sound did improve over time as something broke in. What then? Would it eventually decline, just as wine goes “over the hill”? One can imagine an advertisement for a vintage loudspeaker: “An audiophile dream. Model XX, manufactured 2004, broken in with Mozart, Schubert, and acoustic jazz. Has never played anything more aggressive than the Beatles. Originally $1700/pair. Now at their performance peak—a steal at $3200!”



My take:
I'd expect a subwoofer (or larger woofer type driver) to have some shift in parameters due to the compliance potentially changing. For smaller drivers, not so much. When I see a large shift (such as in the last woofers listed in the above link), I question the driver and the test. I'm not saying anyone is lying, but I am simply saying that such a large shift, to me, is a bit scary. A shift in Fs of 7hz isn't anything I'd think is acceptable. But, then again, I'm not a speaker mfg... so, who am I to say what is OK. It's not really a problem as long as the data can be obtained to build an enclosure or design crossover, etc. Otherwise, if you rely on mfg data, and the shift occurs that much, the design of the enclosure then loses effectiveness. After all, the three main components needed for enclosure design are fs, vas, and qts since just about all the other parameters can be calculated off those parameters. 
I would not dare say that our hearing doesn't get accustomed to these minor changes (or changes in various type drivers), and furthermore, with how small the changes are in most nominal cases, I'm a bit skeptical that anyone is really hearing the shifts themselves. I'm leaning to the camp that says, while the parameters may be changing somewhat, it's your acclimation to the drivers that changes; not that you're hearing the difference. I've done some stupid stuff to my system and been forced to listen to it for days until I can fix it. I grow used to it. Heck, I've liked some of the changes until I heard a car that actually sounded good. 

The real concern for me is that some of his test results were pretty distant from beginning to end, as if the 80 hours wasn't enough. He doesn't say that he did longer testing to verify that the parameters were 'finished' changing. Anyone else not think that's a bit odd? Why not test until you get repeating results???... 

The problem with this whole topic is that there is no proof for either side of the aisle arguing that you get used to drivers. We've seen data that shows it changes. We haven't seen data that says it's that you get used to the drivers that is the real change. I guess those two subjects are intertwined...


----------



## ErinH

cvjoint said:


> Do you draw the same conclusions as the article?
> 
> It seems like some parameter values fluctuate wildly. If the speakers are really breaking in *we should see a convergence to some parameter value*. Either the time played was not enough to break them in, or the temps changed too much during the testing, or the testing itself is unreliable. Even so, aside from teh GR speakers which varied a lot more than the pack, for the most part the variation was 15% at most.


exactly. I thought it was odd to see such a large shift in parameters and no mention that he found repeating results and therefore stopped. Why only 80 hours, then? Just to prove things change? 

Furthermore, I'd like to know the repeatability of his CLIO setup. I know the woofer tester doesn't have absolute repeatability. That's why I often take 3 sweeps at a time and average the results. Wonder if he did the same. A simple small signal sweep isn't enough to heat the coils to get adverse effects so I see no reason why he would only do a single sweep at the risk of getting inaccurate results.


----------



## final frontier

Innocent question from a noob: 
Are there not musical qualities that cannot be measured quantitatively? 
Are descriptions like richness and spatiality even measurable? 
I realize that one wants hard empirical evidence to confirm or deny this theory of break-in...but subjectivity is not scientific.

Carry on!


----------



## tornaido_3927

cvjoint said:


> Do you draw the same conclusions as the article?
> 
> It seems like some parameter values fluctuate wildly. If the speakers are really breaking in we should see a convergence to some parameter value. Either the time played was not enough to break them in, or the temps changed too much during the testing, or the testing itself is unreliable. Even so, aside from teh GR speakers which varied a lot more than the pack, for the most part the variation was 15% at most.


Not exactly no, I do believe that parameters change, as the article stated, but my train of thought lies along those of bikin's (data vs. audibility), albeit less technical 

I just came across that article a fair while ago whilst researching peerless drivers and when this thread came up I knew it might've had something to do with it, and presented it to the people to see what they thought, as I am not knowledgable enough to inform other of the implications of the results, and furthermore; question the testing method as Erin has.


----------



## quality_sound

Audible Physics said:


> Here is what I have to add to this.
> 
> None of the component change, but the suspension does loosen up with play time. What this loosen of the suspension does do is allow the driver to move a bit more freely. So if the BL of the driver and mms of the driver is the same, but the suspension of the driver loosen ups, will this have a effect on the drivers performance. I would have to say yes.
> 
> Attack and decay should increase and it would allow the driver to use a bit more of it usable xmax. Those couple things alone will cause a difference in sound. Will it be a noticeable difference in sound maybe maybe not, it will differ from series/brand of drivers. Can the changes be measure not sure. But it is a fact it happens.
> 
> Just like over time the suspension start to loosen up a bit to much and the driver will start to bottom out a bit more quickly as the BL and moving mms has not change, but the suspension of the driver is starting the degrade. Just like the struts and shocks on your car. The car weight doesn't change, but the suspension does, and it really effects the way the car performs.
> 
> Once more I'm not sure if these changes can be measured or not, but it is a fact is happens.
> 
> Also on the getting use to the sound of a driver. There is no getting use to a bad sounding driver no matter how long you use it. I'm not sure on the whole 200 hour thing, I don't think it should that no where near that long, but I do think you should not be pushing your brand new drivers hard until the drivers suspension loosen up a bit.
> 
> That is where my burn in period center around. I usually say about 30 hours of mid level listen is good. This is no marketing hype or wanting anyone to keep the drivers longer, it is to protect the customer investment.
> 
> But honestly this burn in has very little do to with the overall performance of the your speaker system. Enclosure and install, power and placement has more to do with it. Point blank.
> 
> Just my .02


Mark,

If the attack and decay are changed, it can be measured. CA&E has been measuring it almost as long as I can remember. Everything I've read on the subject shows that all of the changes offset each other so that there aren't any audible changes and the measurable changes are minute at best.

I do, however, agree that there are MUCH more important things to worry about than break-in.


----------



## The Baron Groog

All Alpine's subwoofer TS parameters state "measured after burn in" or words to that effect. I have a woofer tester and have pulled the TS off a couple of drivers-however I've found that the results can vary quite considerably so don't 100% trust the unit to do what it says!

Erin, IIRC you have one too-how repeatable are your results? I've taken to making a few measurements and averaging them!


----------



## Melodic Acoustic

quality_sound said:


> Mark,
> 
> If the attack and decay are changed, it can be measured. CA&E has been measuring it almost as long as I can remember. Everything I've read on the subject shows that all of the changes offset each other so that there aren't any audible changes and the measurable changes are minute at best.
> 
> I do, however, agree that there are MUCH more important things to worry about than break-in.


Listen guys I'm no EE and never claim to be and anyone who knows me know i'm not a spec guy or the type to relay on what measurements say. I listen and I listen a lot. I don't base a drivers design on what a spec say it should sound like. I have tested may prototype drivers with that was very low distortion designs with great looking specs and nice responses, to then listen to them an say ok not a very pleasing driver to listen to.

Listening to the driver in a real world environment is the only way to know how it will perform in a given enclosure or IB or mounting location. No measurement on a desk top or baffle in a large room can you that.

It just like you have some that say cone topology does matter. That is just not true. My old Ebony and Soul measure so close to the same it was not need for to graphs. That include BL, mms, qts etc...., but the to driver sound very very different from one another. The only difference was the cones. Now if the BL and Mms was change on either it would have change the way they preformed even more.

Now the flip side of that is because the Soul seem to be the more transparent sounding driver if distortion measurements where taken the Soul more then liking would be the slightly lower distortion driver. So in that aspect I would have to say it can be measured, but on the fact of the T/S alone, hmmmm i just don't totally agree with that.

All i'm saying as much as specs are great to look at and to see the amazing things that show, but they will never replace our ears. With real world testing of your drive designs and listening to what it sounds like and replying what you like about it and what you don't to and Designer/Builder they can say; Ok I just I know what I need to adjust to get the sound your looking for. That will relate in to a change in a few specs if the change is in the size of the vc used, amount of BL the motor has, the weight of the cone (mms), hell even the resistance (4-8 ohm) of the VC plays a big part, even if both the 4 - 8 ohm VC are the same size. So as minute as the difference may be they are still a difference, but are they audible or not will depend on the driver design itself.

I have learn more about driver design over the past 1 year then I thought I would ever know. You will be amazed at how one little change will effect the way a driver preform. Here is little Honesty for you guys, there are a few driver designs base of the Trinity on the market (Please don't ask what they are as I will never tell) small motor and all. The only difference are cone topologies and a very slight difference in mms of the cones and grade of parts used, same values just lower or higher grade, and that depended on if they wanted a wide-bander or more a true midrange and they all sound different. These drivers honestly measure very much alike from a T/S standpoint as they are all where base on one design, the difference was the quality of the parts used in the motor and the cones.

So what i'm saying is to say a very small difference even in the T/S is not audible is just not a totally true statement.


----------



## Oliver

I'll be impressed when the instructions say: break-in for 2 weeks - then lower the x-over one octave on your tweeters 

same for your midrange


----------



## Melodic Acoustic

Oliver said:


> I'll be impressed when the instructions say: break-in for 2 weeks - then lower the x-over one octave on your tweeters
> 
> same for your midrange


You know the funny thing is that is usually what happens. I wouldn't say a full octave as from 300hz to 150hz is quite a bit. In all honesty it is funny to see when people first start tunning they say I like the 300-400hz point better then a few weeks later they are tunning and come back on and say; man i lowered the crossover point to 250hz again and it works best. It is funny how most ever pay attention to this.


----------



## Hillbilly SQ

Audible Physics said:


> You know the funny thing is that is usually what happens. I wouldn't say a full octave as from 300hz to 150hz is quite a bit. In all honesty it is funny to see when people first start tunning they say I like the 300-400hz point better then a few weeks later they are tunning and come back on and say; man i lowered the crossover point to 250hz again and it works best. It is funny how most ever pay attention to this.


I think most people just don't want to believe that SOFT parts do indeed need a break-in period to get limbered up good. My new subs were bought used from a forum member that I know ran them through their paces on more power than they were rated for but I'm having to lower the sub level every few days because they keep getting more efficient. I love it when people denounce reality because they simply don't want to accept the truth. Mark, me and you think a lot alike and that's what I like about you so much

EDIT: On the Soul mids I hooked them up to the home reciever and put some Rippingtons through them for break-in. They weren't moving very much when I hopped in the shower. 15 mins later I step out and hear them moving and think "OH ****" and turn the volume down lol. I bet the nonbelievers will chime in and tell me my reciever spazzed on me:laugh:


----------



## Melodic Acoustic

bikinpunk said:


> We calibrate ourselves often. Don't believe me? Jump in your wife's car and listen... horrible, right? (well, maybe not for some of you guys ). Give it some time and it's not so bad. Then jump back in your car... you notice a change for sure. Give it some time and you're back to normal again.
> 
> 
> *The problem with this whole topic is that there is no proof for either side of the aisle arguing that you get used to drivers. We've seen data that shows it changes. We haven't seen data that says it's that you get used to the drivers that is the real change. I guess those two subjects are intertwined...*



hmmmm in red i'm not so sure about. I been driving my Lexus for almost 3 months now and it still sound like complete A**:mean::blush: I could never calibrate myself to the sound. It just not good. Then listen to my son little weak system and it sounds better, but not good either and i don't like it either, but it is better then my Lexus stock system. I just can't calibrate to bad sound and say it's ok. What i say is I will have the deal with this until I have time change it out or just turn it off, and i mostly just turn it off.

A great sounding car will always be a great sounding car. Will it be perfect nope. But everytime you listen to it you say man that car sound great. You listen for 2 hours and it still sounds great. Then we go listen to our own system and say man i have some work to do.

The Black Bold I 1000% agree with.

What? What? Don't make me shank you.


----------



## ErinH

The Baron Groog said:


> Erin, IIRC you have one too-how repeatable are your results? I've taken to making a few measurements and averaging them!





bikinpunk said:


> Furthermore, I'd like to know the repeatability of his CLIO setup. I know the woofer tester doesn't have absolute repeatability. That's why I often take 3 sweeps at a time and average the results. Wonder if he did the same. A simple small signal sweep isn't enough to heat the coils to get adverse effects so I see no reason why he would only do a single sweep at the risk of getting inaccurate results.


yep. I average a few results together.


----------



## Kenreau

I do agree with the need for speakers to break-in and imagine, to some degree, the driver performance measurements may flucuate some. It may be similar to what an engine goes through with rings seating, initial manufacturing / assembly parts wearing into a groove, etc. The type / size of driver and manufacturing tolerances probably influences that as well. 

Another aspect to be considered is the driver cross-over components, in particular, a passive x-over with high(er) quality film capacitors. I've read the teflon film caps (used in home stereo gear - not aware of use in car audio) can take as long as 400 hours to burn-in and sound their best. Polypros, polystyrene and others typically 100-200 hour range. 

I'm just tossing this out in case one is using an all new driver with an all new cross-over and what they may perceive as an audible change may be different from using a new driver with an older cross-over with significant hours on it (i.e. burned in already). As always, lots of variables and personal interpretations of significance.

Kenreau


----------



## Oliver

Kenreau said:


> I do agree with the need for speakers to break-in and imagine, to some degree, the driver performance measurements may flucuate some. It may be similar to what an engine goes through with rings seating, initial manufacturing / assembly parts wearing into a groove, etc. The type / size of driver and manufacturing tolerances probably influences that as well.
> 
> Another aspect to be considered is the driver cross-over components, in particular, a passive x-over with high(er) quality film capacitors. I've read the teflon film caps (used in home stereo gear - not aware of use in car audio) can take as long as 400 hours to burn-in and sound their best. Polypros, polystyrene and others typically 100-200 hour range.
> 
> I'm just tossing this out in case one is using an all new driver with an all new cross-over and what they may perceive as an audible change may be different from using a new driver with an older cross-over with significant hours on it (i.e. burned in already). *As always, lots of variables and personal interpretations of significance.*
> 
> Kenreau


I heard that there is $10,000.00 waiting for anyone who can show they are able to hear the difference between amplifiers, for wires and other such items , You can add a zero or 2 as this will sell the aforementioned equipment to people in droves [ millions or tens of millions]:laugh:


----------



## Kenreau

Oliver said:


> I heard that there is $10,000.00 waiting for anyone who can show they are able to hear the difference between amplifiers, for wires and other such items , You can add a zero or 2 as this will sell the aforementioned equipment to people in droves [ millions or tens of millions]:laugh:


Do you have a link to that reward ? Does it apply to everything except speakers? No doubt having a high price on something automatically increases the perception of higher quality.

You can't really knock it though unless you've got first hand experience. At least with Home audio, once you get to the really high end systems, their transparency and resolving power allows you to hear the subtle differences between cables, amps, tubes, recording quality, compression, etc. You probably won't experience that with a boom box/HTIB or OEM car stereo or similar. A good buddy of mine is a stereo equipment reviewer for a magazine (TONEAudio) and I've heard some state of the art equipment that is mind blowing ($80K dCS digital, $60K Burmester amps, $150K Gamut speakers, $80K Caliburn turntables with $10K cartridges into $30K AR phono preamps, etc). There are differences, however subtle. It's a lot like racing and other high performance sports where the cost to performance ratio gets crazy for diminishing returns. 

Kenreau


----------



## cvjoint

Kenreau said:


> I do agree with the need for speakers to break-in and imagine, to some degree, the driver performance measurements may flucuate some. It may be similar to what an engine goes through with rings seating, initial manufacturing / assembly parts wearing into a groove, etc. The type / size of driver and manufacturing tolerances probably influences that as well.
> 
> 
> Kenreau


Engines are specifically built for break in. Now what does a speaker manufacturer do to prep a speaker for break in? 

The better analogy imo is a car suspension. It takes a long time for springs to sag but they are constantly fighting against gravity. The speaker suspension shouldn't fight gravity if installed properly. Even here the analogy fails. 

So then what is it? Rubber, glues, and cotton that change...in 80 hours worth of play? What happens at 200hours? Does the speaker go kaput? \

None of the guys who believe in break in ever said my speaker sounds a lot worse after break in. Why is that? Why does it always get better? 

IMO a good speaker uses materials that HOLD UP through time. I would hope at least 80hours, I would hope as much as possible, decades... That means as little as possible parameter variance. 

No doubt the motor loses strength through time and the suspension softens, but do you want that in 80hours? Why would it be good?


----------



## cvjoint

Scott Buwalda said:


> I did a review for S3 Magazine a few years back on a popular subwoofer. Pre- and post burn-in T/S parameters were radically different. I conjecture that Mms and Cms play a big role in this.


 mms =	The driver's effective mechanical mass (including air load), in kg. "This parameter is the combination of the weight of the cone assembly plus the ‘driver radiation mass load’. The weight of the cone assembly is easy: it’s just the sum of the weight of the cone assembly components. The driver radiation mass load is the confusing part. In simple terminology, it is the weight of the air (the amount calculated in Vd) that the cone will have to push." 

from:
Car Audio: Thiele-Small Parameters

So what is the claim now, that the weight of the cone assembly varies? Because if the weight of the air changes that's just improper testing. What is the argument...the cone dries out in 80 hours? None of this makes sense to me.


----------



## cvjoint

bikinpunk said:


> exactly. I thought it was odd to see such a large shift in parameters and no mention that he found repeating results and therefore stopped. Why only 80 hours, then? Just to prove things change?


Yep Yep. Here's the thing, in any field remotely scientific you need a measure of testing variance, or sample variance if you may. In stats you always get a different parameter estimate, the question is, is it significant? Is the change in parameter significantly larger than the variation due to chance, or testing, or sample issues or what have you. You can't bust a myth without a measure of accuracy. If that's the case we can bust any myth, we always get significant results, it's silly. Good idea, poor execution imo. No inference can be drawn from teh test as it is.


----------



## Kenreau

cvjoint said:


> Engines are specifically built for break in. Now what does a speaker manufacturer do to prep a speaker for break in?
> 
> The better analogy imo is a car suspension. It takes a long time for springs to sag but they are constantly fighting against gravity. The speaker suspension shouldn't fight gravity if installed properly. Even here the analogy fails.
> 
> So then what is it? Rubber, glues, and cotton that change...in 80 hours worth of play? What happens at 200hours? Does the speaker go kaput? \
> 
> None of the guys who believe in break in ever said my speaker sounds a lot worse after break in. Why is that? Why does it always get better?
> 
> IMO a good speaker uses materials that HOLD UP through time. I would hope at least 80hours, I would hope as much as possible, decades... That means as little as possible parameter variance.
> 
> No doubt the motor loses strength through time and the suspension softens, but do you want that in 80hours? Why would it be good?


I like your suspension analogy better than my engine one. I just thought of another one - new shoes. When new, they are often stiff and not as comfortable until they've had some use and the flexing points and seams set up.

It appears you are tangling up speaker driver long term longevity with the initial break-in concept. My notion is a new driver initially breaks in to the flexing of the surrounds, suspension and forms seams, loosens up enabling it to respond more accurately to the signal input. Not unlike the process of a new pair of shoes perhaps?

On another topic, do you hear an audible difference when listening to your audio system from an initial turn on/cold start versus after say ~30 minutes, or more, of use (components fully warmed up to operating temperature)?

Kenreau


----------



## cvjoint

Ok, so you are saying a loose suspension is better. If that were the case manufacturers would compete to create the loosesest suspensions. Just like, if you had the money for custom shoes shoes you wouldn't have to stretch them.


----------



## Hillbilly SQ

Kenreau said:


> On another topic, do you hear an audible difference when listening to your audio system from an initial turn on/cold start versus after say ~30 minutes, or more, of use (components fully warmed up to operating temperature)?
> 
> Kenreau


I do on cold mornings for the most part. As temp drops the soft parts get stiff and brittle. That's why it's not a good idea to push speakers very hard until they've had a chance to limber up a bit when cold. I hear Dyns are horrible in this respect. My aluminum/poly blend cones don't seem to mind too much.


----------



## Hillbilly SQ

Oh, the suspention and surround on my Usher 8945a's in the house are insanely limber and they sound incredible.


----------



## Kenreau

cvjoint said:


> Ok, so you are saying a loose suspension is better. If that were the case manufacturers would compete to create the loosesest suspensions. Just like, if you had the money for custom shoes shoes you wouldn't have to stretch them.


Are you just twisting words to try to argue? Obviously, there are various degrees of looseness. No one is implying they need to be at a worn out /sloppy degree of looseness. So, are your custom shoes already optimized to the most comfortable amount of stretch / looseness when you get them? I've never experienced them before.

Kenreau


----------



## Hillbilly SQ

lol the most comfortable pair of shoes I had right out of the box were top of the line New Balance and they fell apart in 3 months. I think the point of argument is from forgetting that soft parts do wear over time but take a while to wear out. Comparing a speaker to a pair of shoes is a pretty close comparison and think about how quick a pair of shoes can get broken in and how long they last after that. I work on my feet on a concrete floor for 40 hours a week and I can get a pair of New Balance 927's broken in in about a week or less but then get UP TO a year of comfortable use from them after that. Use a similar pattern for speakers and you have HUNDREDS of hours of prefectly good use. Even more if you don't hammer them to the ragged edge very often.


----------



## cvjoint

Im just testing out the shoe analogy. Now what if your foot gradually grew? Wouldn't the shoe keep on stretching? With speakers you don't apply less and less force on the parts. In both cases were talking about gradual decay, not braking in. That's my point. To have a braking in process you must design it like so.


----------



## Wheres The Butta

cvjoint said:


> Im just testing out the shoe analogy. Now what if your foot gradually grew? Wouldn't the shoe keep on stretching? With speakers you don't apply less and less force on the parts. In both cases were talking about gradual decay, not braking in. That's my point. To have a braking in process you must design it like so.


just fyi custom shoes don't/can't actually come broken in. 

The break-in can't be pre-done on shoes, for the simple reason that they bend and wear in a pattern specific to the individual user's movements. Each person walks differently and distributes weight differently.

This really doesn't have anything to do with speakers, I'm just pointing out that the analogy can't be extrapolated.


----------



## Melodic Acoustic

cvjoint said:


> Im just testing out the shoe analogy. Now what if your foot gradually grew? Wouldn't the shoe keep on stretching? *With speakers you don't apply less and less force on the parts. In both cases were talking about gradual decay, not braking in. That's my point.* To have a braking in process you must design it like so.



Hmmmm that is not an totally accurate statement. 

Anything that has any kind of suspension will settle in. Have ever put new struts and/ lowering springs on your car and notice it sets higher then you thought it would and a couple of days later you notice it as settle in and sets as you thought is should. Now it stays that way for years of use until you notice the ride is getting worse and worse, now that is a decay of the suspension.

Any type of suspension settles in or breaks-in or loosen up, and over time you are correct decay or wares out. Even an ink pen spring dose the same. At first use the pen feels a little tight. Then it just starts to feel normal to you. After awhile the darn tip seems like it just stays out a bit then it just loosen up and seems like it has no force on it at all. That is settling in and then decay.

The soft parts of a speaker is the same way. Your surround when manufactured is not moved back and forward to test them. The spider is not moved up and down when manufactured to test them. They are quite stiff when made and installed on the driver, some more then others. The motion of the driver cause them to loosen up.

Take a piece of hard metal and bend it by hand. At first you can't get it to bend very much. Not move it back and forward and it starts loosen up and you can bend it even more. Now does bending more make it weak or cause it to decay, yes the more you do it the more it decays and at some point it will brake.

Now take something like solider and do the same thing as above, you will be there a life time trying to make it brake. It gets a little softer at the bend, but never seems to brake. It will, but how long will it take.

The speaker's suspension is more like the solider. It loosens up, it just takes much much longer to decay. Now put more force (power or playing it lower, more motion) to it and it happen faster or to much and you can rip the spider, depending on the drivers design.


----------



## quality_sound

Most of the time the "settling" is just the car returning to it's designed ride height. Try this, go out into your garage and jack your car up and then let it back down without doing anything else. The car WILL sit higher.


----------



## Melodic Acoustic

quality_sound said:


> Most of the time the "settling" is just the car returning to it's designed ride height. Try this, go out into your garage and jack your car up and then let it back down without doing anything else. The car WILL sit higher.


Yep you are correct as the suspension is just expend for a period of time and then has to return to its designed hieght. But lowering springs are not stock height. They are suppose to lower say 1.75" but at first it is only bout 1.5" then it settles in to the stated specs and stays there for years until the springs start to sag (decay) a bit.

Come on now guys you can call it as you like decay or loosening up, brake in, the point is it loosens up with a bit of uses. And the fact is that changes the way it performs a bit. More travel (xmax) as the BL does not change, just the strength of the suspension.


----------



## cvjoint

The real question about the suspension settling in is what causes it to settle? During assembly the spring may not sit 100% right in the upper and lower supports. I would assume it's these adjustments of the whole assembly that lead to a settling in, not a change in spring rate. The speaker suspension is hopefully more like the spring, not like the overall suspension. It would be scary to imagine the spider is changing it's position with respect to the basket. 

The suspension will sag in speakers if mounted to fight gravity in the same way a car's suspension will gradually reduce it's spring rate. 

Imo to prove that brake-in is necessary you need to do the following:
1. Show how a manufacturer preps a speaker for break-in. If this were true, I would assume some spiders might be drenched in resins that take some temperature variations to fully cure. It would be tough to reason it through surround changes as both foam and rubber maintain their properties fairly well.

2. You need to have a test where the parameters of the speaker change in one direction ONLY towards some steady state equilibrium in the short run.

3. Repeat #2 or provide a thorough assessment of your test method reliability. 

4. Do a blindfold test to confirm that the change in parameters of the magnitude tested can be picked up in more than half the cases. 

As far as I know, there is no reliable information that break-in is a reality. Why would I live by some myth? There is lots of information that break-in is all in the user's mind. Again, why is break-in always a good thing? If loose is better, than why are speakers not designed that way to begin with?


----------



## Melodic Acoustic

cvjoint said:


> The real question about the suspension settling in is what causes it to settle? During assembly the spring may not sit 100% right in the upper and lower supports. I would assume it's these adjustments of the whole assembly that lead to a settling in, not a change in spring rate. The speaker suspension is hopefully more like the spring, not like the overall suspension. It would be scary to imagine the spider is changing it's position with respect to the basket.
> 
> The suspension will sag in speakers if mounted to fight gravity in the same way a car's suspension will gradually reduce it's spring rate.
> 
> Imo to prove that brake-in is necessary you need to do the following:
> 1. Show how a manufacturer preps a speaker for break-in. If this were true, I would assume some spiders might be drenched in resins that take some temperature variations to fully cure. It would be tough to reason it through surround changes as both foam and rubber maintain their properties fairly well.
> 
> 2. You need to have a test where the parameters of the speaker change in one direction ONLY towards some steady state equilibrium in the short run.
> 
> 3. Repeat #2 or provide a thorough assessment of your test method reliability.
> 
> 4. Do a blindfold test to confirm that the change in parameters of the magnitude tested can be picked up in more than half the cases.
> 
> As far as I know, there is no reliable information that break-in is a reality. Why would I live by some myth? There is lots of information that break-in is all in the user's mind. Again, why is break-in always a good thing? *If loose is better, than why are speakers not designed that way to begin with?*


Who said loose is better, The fact is, if it is loose from the start it will become looser with use. And some drivers are looser from the start then others.

Honestly guys it is no myth they the speaker changes the way it performs with use. I'm not here trying to sell you on a myth or idea. Nor am i here to say that break in is necessary and/or necessary on all drivers or that you will hear a difference. I have heard a difference in some designs and not in ours. 

And honestly as we know around here that no matter what method of testing you do some with find a weak point it in an effort to disprove it.

Furthermore if break-in is necessary or not. As long as the driver performs as it should and is pleasing to our ears and are reliable, It really doesn't matter does it.

This is like the does all amp sound the same thing, back and forth and no matter how much we good back and forward about it. It will always be differences of opinion. 

All i hope is that at the end we don't reply so much on what can be measured and not measured, but more on what we hear and can not hear.

To many times have people bought drivers base on some measurement to not like it when they here it. All because we went on what T/S and measurement say it should sound like.


----------



## cvjoint

Audible Physics said:


> Who said loose is better, The fact is, if it is loose from the start it will become looser with use. And some drivers are looser from the start then others.
> 
> Honestly guys it is no myth they the speaker changes the way it performs with use. I'm not here trying to sell you on a myth or idea. Nor am i here to say that break in is necessary and/or necessary on all drivers or that you will hear a difference. I have heard a difference in some designs and not in ours.
> 
> And honestly as we know around here that no matter what method of testing you do some with find a weak point it in an effort to disprove it.
> 
> Furthermore if break-in is necessary or not. As long as the driver performs as it should and is pleasing to our ears and are reliable, It really doesn't matter does it.
> 
> This is like the does all amp sound the same thing, back and forth and no matter how much we good back and forward about it. It will always be differences of opinion.
> 
> All i hope is that at the end we don't reply so much on what can be measured and not measured, but more on what we hear and can not hear.
> 
> To many times have people bought drivers base on some measurement to not like it when they here it. All because we went on what T/S and measurement say it should sound like.


A lot of break-in advocates bring in "it's better because the suspension loosens up". 

Some testing is better than others. While there might be differences in opinion, a speaker sounds the way it does. There is a reality. It's up to you to make your decisions. If you want to rely on your ears (one of the poorest instruments for testing) that is your choice. The RC challenge went a long way to show there are better options when choosing amplifiers. 

If you use your ears primarily for system design in this day and age you are far behind. 

I've actually had great results making informed purchases since I joined DIYMA. Not that it surprises me.


----------



## Melodic Acoustic

cvjoint said:


> A lot of break-in advocates bring in "it's better because the suspension loosens up".
> 
> Some testing is better than others. While there might be differences in opinion, a speaker sounds the way it does. There is a reality. It's up to you to make your decisions. If you want to rely on your ears *(one of the poorest instruments for testing)* that is your choice. The RC challenge went a long way to show there are better options when choosing amplifiers.
> 
> If you use your ears primarily for system design in this day and age you are far behind.
> 
> I've actually had great results making informed purchases since I joined DIYMA. Not that it surprises me.


Relay to the Blod: Really, can a RTA tell you how a sax is suppose to sound, Can a distortion measurement tell you how a piano is suppose to sound. Can a polar response tell you how oak acoustic guitar is suppose to sound, how about foot stomp on a hard wood floor. Way not after you do your measurements just leave it the way it is. Why listen and then tune. The MS8 has proven that a mic or measurement can only get you so close, as good as job as it does it has its limits. A mic just can't tell you how music is suppose to sound.

So your saying when a manufacture designs a speaker, they should just measure it and then put it for sale, just based on the measurements. No listening, no listening in a real world environment? 

And please not bring the RC's challenge into this, if you do your research you will find that the test has nothing to do with proving that amps sound the same or different.

I'm sure you have good luck, as have I. I have had some not so good ones also. As nice as the TG9 was in was not to everyones likings and it measures great.


----------



## cvjoint

A serious speaker manufacturer does not need BS to sell their speakers. Here is a respected company's product info:
THE ART OF SOUND PERFECTION BY SEAS - E0026-08S W26FX001

It doesn't tell you how it reproduces flutes and pianos. There is a short description about the quality of parts and then...a white sheet. From there, anyone with a slight clue can model how it would sound like in their environment. 

BTW, how would you tune for electronic music? Synthesized music does not have a reality analog in your methodology. 

I know how how a sound system should sound, flat 20hz-20khz. The mic can tell me how it sounds before I get to work with the EQ and it will do a much better job then your ear. In fact, to make it show me what the ear actually picks up I have to apply a smoothing algorithm!! How about that, the mic is dumbing it down for ya. 

You may say, but hey you have a preference for extra bass or whatever. No problem. I can eq to my liking in repeated samples. Average out the resulting mic readouts and apply the curve to any car I want before even stepping in to one. As a matter of fact it generally looks like the FM curve, no big surprise there.


----------



## Melodic Acoustic

cvjoint said:


> *A serious speaker manufacturer does not need BS to sell their speakers. Here is a respected company's product info:*
> THE ART OF SOUND PERFECTION BY SEAS - E0026-08S W26FX001
> 
> It doesn't tell you how it reproduces flutes and pianos. There is a short description about the quality of parts and then...a white sheet. From there, anyone with a slight clue can model how it would sound like in their environment.
> 
> BTW, how would you tune for electronic music? Synthesized music does not have a reality analog in your methodology.
> 
> I know how how a sound system should sound, flat 20hz-20khz. The mic can tell me how it sounds before I get to work with the EQ and it will do a much better job then your ear. In fact, to make it show me what the ear actually picks up I have to apply a smoothing algorithm!! How about that, the mic is dumbing it down for ya.
> 
> You may say, but hey you have a preference for extra bass or whatever. No problem. I can eq to my liking in repeated samples. Average out the resulting mic readouts and apply the curve to any car I want before even stepping in to one. As a matter of fact it generally looks like the FM curve, no big surprise there.


Ok sir, not sure what you meant by that statement in bold, but I do have an idea. hmmmmm BS?

But do you honestly think Seas just chose all the sound good parts built the driver, then measured the excel driver and said the driver is good to go and not listen to it? The Excel are wonderful driver when used with in their limits as with many order high quality drivers.

Flat from 20hz to 20khz. Hmmmmm are you sure about that. Most system I have heard that was flat from 20hz to 20khz didn't sound very well. The old RTA shoot out proved that.

But I will leave it at that as you seem to have taken this friendly decision to heart by your statement in bold.


----------



## cvjoint

Seas is in business because it's an engineering think tank. Many of the high fidelity build houses today have their roots in Norway. They certainly didn't make their living because they break-in or listen to speakers before they ship them out. 

If they go through with a final test I would think they apply power to make sure the speaker "works." If they are hardcore about quality control they might test the parameters (small or preferably small and large signal) and pair drivers with similar sets of attributes.


----------



## Melodic Acoustic

cvjoint said:


> Seas is in business because it's an engineering think tank. Many of the high fidelity build houses today have their roots in Norway. They certainly didn't make their living because they break-in or listen to speakers before they ship them out.
> 
> If they go through with a final test I would think they apply power to make sure the speaker "works." If they are hardcore about quality control they might test the parameters (small or preferably small and large signal) and pair drivers with similar sets of attributes.


Wow man so you don't think when they prototype their drivers they listen to them? Then let them play for a while to ensure all works as they hope and as they designed?

But you are correct, I don't any manufacture listen to every driver they ship once the design is in production stage.

And I can fell you in on Build Houses and where there Roots are, you would be highly surprised.

Darn it, stop it, you keep pulling me in.


----------



## cvjoint

Audible Physics said:


> Wow man so you don't think when they prototype their drivers they listen to them? Then let them play for a while to ensure all works as they hope and as they designed?
> 
> But you are correct, I don't any manufacture listen to every driver they ship once the design is in production stage.
> 
> And I can fell you in on Build Houses and where there Roots are, you would be highly surprised.
> 
> Darn it, stop it, you keep pulling me in.


The roots are in China? That would surprise me. We have lots of good ideas in U.S. too, XBL, Lambda, Dif.Drive. 

When you go and get your hearing checked, do you just compare it with somebody else? Maybe the golden ear? A judge? Local EMMA winna?


----------



## Hillbilly SQ

cvjoint, when are you going to shut the f*** up?


----------



## Melodic Acoustic

cvjoint said:


> The roots are in China? That would surprise me. We have lots of good ideas in U.S. too, XBL, Lambda, Dif.Drive.
> 
> When you go and get your hearing checked, do you just compare it with somebody else? Maybe the golden ear? A judge? Local EMMA winna?


Hmmmmm What? 

Cool my friend, whatever you say. Done?


----------



## cvjoint

Hillbilly SQ said:


> cvjoint, when are you going to shut the f*** up?


Clever! Are you part of the H-Audio Bully Crew? 



Audible Physics said:


> Hmmmmm What?
> 
> Cool my friend, whatever you say. Done?


I an easily shut up...if you give us all that fountain of knowledge that lurks inside of you. We were promised a history lesson on how build houses came about. Furthermore, I presume you represent a speaker company or some sort. How do you perform quality control after a speaker is designed. Are there long listening sessions after each driver is made? Are some of your drivers better for piano listening, and some better on the harp? 

Just so we don't deviate completely from the subject here, I found a little video on how speakers are built. It's 5 minutes in all but you can skip the first 4 to see how they perform quality control on this driver. 

See if you can recognize some of the faces:

YouTube - [How It's Made] Building a Speaker


----------



## Melodic Acoustic

cvjoint said:


> Clever! Are you part of the H-Audio Bully Crew?
> 
> 
> 
> I an easily shut up...if you give us all that fountain of knowledge that lurks inside of you. We were promised a history lesson on how build houses came about. Furthermore, I presume you represent a speaker company or some sort. How do you perform quality control after a speaker is designed. Are there long listening sessions after each driver is made? Are some of your drivers better for piano listening, and some better on the harp?
> 
> Just so we don't deviate completely from the subject here, I found a little video on how speakers are built. It's 5 minutes in all but you can skip the first 4 to see how they perform quality control on this driver.
> 
> See if you can recognize some of the faces:
> 
> YouTube - [How It's Made] Building a Speaker


There is no Audible Physics bully team sir, there is only me, *as it was just me and you hi-jacking this thread and I say Sorry to the OP and everyone else that had a real contribution to this thread. *I have honestly only been stating some things I have learn from working with one of the best transducer designer and builder around. No BS, just some things that i have learned and do my best every once and blue moon try and share them with my friends and fellow audio die hards. I have learn one thing over 39 years, my 8 years of Military Services, and in my professional career; never and mean never speak on anything I know nothing about. If I don't know something i'm sure one of the members around here does and i have no problem with asking. 

_So Ok my friend so we can put this to rest; the manufacturer that designs and builds my driver and that i represent designs and builds transducer for more high-end companies around the world then you more then likely have heard of, I know there was a lot of them that I didn't know of when i first came on board. That includes mobile and Home, many of them you more then likely hold in high standards, once more as I did. I have learn more about speaker design in the last year or so then I thought I would ever know and I'm still just a grasshopper. And anyone who have talked with me or knows me i'm not a big specs person the end result is what is important. Yep that is my weak point. But i'm getting better._

Thanks for the video. But sir what you are looking at is after the design and prototype stage. There is no need a for a critical listening at the production stage as the design has been finalized. 

At the design and prototyping stage is when the driver is put through the ringers, Once the designer thinks he has it home in then they do some real world testing, they allow a few individuals that truly respects give their opinion. Once it performs to his and everyones standards the driver is then and only then are the transducer put into production. And yes sir the design and prototyping stage does include critical listening.

*Now back on topic, Erin etc..... please bring us back on topic so I have once more enjoy reading this thread. And done this time for real until some else brings something useful back to the topic.*


----------



## cvjoint

Audible Physics said:


> There is no Audible Physics bully team sir, there is only me, *as it was just me and you hi-jacking this thread and I say Sorry to the OP and everyone else that had a real contribution to this thread. *I have honestly only been stating some things I have learn from working with one of the best transducer designer and builder around. No BS, just some things that i have learned and do my best every once and blue moon try and share them with my friends and fellow audio die hards. I have learn one thing over 39 years, my 8 years of Military Services, and in my professional career; never and mean never speak on anything I know nothing about. If I don't know something i'm sure one of the members around here does and i have no problem with asking.
> 
> _So Ok my friend so we can put this to rest; the manufacturer that designs and builds my driver and that i represent designs and builds transducer for more high-end companies around the world then you more then likely have heard of, I know there was a lot of them that I didn't know of when i first came on board. That includes mobile and Home, many of them you more then likely hold in high standards, once more as I did. I have learn more about speaker design in the last year or so then I thought I would ever know and I'm still just a grasshopper. And anyone who have talked with me or knows me i'm not a big specs person the end result is what is important. Yep that is my weak point. But i'm getting better._
> 
> Thanks for the video. But sir what you are looking at is after the design and prototype stage. There is no need a for a critical listening at the production stage as the design has been finalized.
> 
> At the design and prototyping stage is when the driver is put through the ringers, Once the designer thinks he has it home in then they do some real world testing, they allow a few individuals that truly respects give their opinion. Once it performs to his and everyones standards the driver is then and only then are the transducer put into production. And yes sir the design and prototyping stage does include critical listening.
> 
> *Now back on topic, Erin etc..... please bring us back on topic so I have once more enjoy reading this thread. And done this time for real until some else brings something useful back to the topic.*


Ahh but there is a bully team because when you poke one the other screams. 

To sum up your last post: 
"Argument from authority (also known as appeal to authority) is *a fallacy* of defective induction, where it is argued that a statement is correct because the statement is made by a person or source that is commonly regarded as authoritative. The most general structure of this argument is:

1. Source A says that p is true.
2. Source A is authoritative.
3. Therefore, p is true.

This is a fallacy because *the truth or falsity of a claim is not related to the authority of the claimant*, and because the premises can be true, and the conclusion false (an authoritative claim can turn out to be false)."

source: Argument from authority - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Stop being a cry baby, other than your bully team every other forum member can tune in and out of threads as they wish. Secondly, I can tune out whenever I want, whether you or your team find it fitting or not. 

Now give me a substantial piece of information to ruminate on. You are full of promises but can you walk the walk?


----------



## Hillbilly SQ




----------



## asawendo

I always break in my loudspeaker with real music for 100-200 hours non stop in my music room (approximately one week) at normal level. 

Best regards

Wendo


----------



## robert_wrath

Absolutely true, usually a minimum of 80-100 hours is reference.


----------



## quality_sound

robert_wrath said:


> Absolutely true, usually a minimum of 80-100 hours is reference.


Why? What changes after 200 hours that doesn't change in the first few minutes?


----------



## Moon Track

For those who want real numbers. I had to break in this speaker intentionally before building a crossover. 
DLS RW6 woofer
New: Fs-53Hz Qts 0.58 Vas – 8.8L
The break in was performed in free air by 20Hz sinusoidal signal mixed with music .
2 hours: Fs-51Hz Qts – 0.53 
12 hours: Fs 49Hz
24 hours: Fs 47Hz Qts – 0.46 Vas- 11.2L
As you understand, that process slowed down but not stopped at 24h.


----------



## Brian10962001

80 to 100 hours seems excessive. It takes a subwoofer a few hours to break in, I've heard it personally. I'm not convinced a tweeter needs a break in, or that it would take the same amount of time for a mid to loosen up, it would depend on the spider. I just refoamed a pair of JL W6's for a friend, his spiders are so worn and loose now there is no way you can convince me that those subs would sound the same on the same wattage as they did when they were new and stiff.


----------



## chad

Brian10962001 said:


> *I'm not convinced a tweeter needs a break in,* or that it would take the same amount of time for a mid to loosen up, it would depend on the spider.


I was in the same camp but I found ONE tweeter that actually benefited from it... and I did it pretty fast and was not present so it was not "me getting used to it."


----------



## Brian10962001

I know subs need a break in from all the installs I done for other people. I will tell them "this will get louder and sound better over time" when I come back and listen to the same setup that they've broken in for a while it always sounds better. There's no way i magically convince myself that their subs handle higher bass notes and sound better over time. I have no reason to convince myself that their setup is getting better, nor have I had time for my ears to "adjust" to the sound.


----------



## goodstuff

When you buy a pair of jeans are they the same fit a year later? What are jeans made out of? What are speakers made out of?


----------



## Gonadwarrior

interesting read, thanks for the clarification guys
i always end up breaking in drivers..be it headphones, home speakers, or car audio. better keeping my investments working at their optimum, I figure


----------



## cvjoint

Brian10962001 said:


> I know subs need a break in from all the installs I done for other people. I will tell them "this will get louder and sound better over time" when I come back and listen to the same setup that they've broken in for a while it always sounds better. There's no way i magically convince myself that their subs handle higher bass notes and sound better over time. I have no reason to convince myself that their setup is getting better, nor have I had time for my ears to "adjust" to the sound.


Tests show that our ability to pick up distortion in the subwoofer frequencies is as good as none. It is not uncommon to have a THD reading at least as high as the level the subwoofer is playing (100% distortion) for it to become audible. If there is an improvement in the subwoofer as it breaks in, would you really be able to hear it? How much do the parameters have to change to make the most minute difference in sound quality?


----------



## Brian10962001

I don't know about the TS parameters of the sub, but most every subwoofer I have ever installed for someone else, or myself sounded better after a several hours of good use. I would say they sound best several hours after they're initially installed up until the point that the surrounds start to come off :laugh: I've seen some RAGGED equipment that still sounded pretty good. The same guy who I refoamed the JL W6's for has a set of older Fosgates that actually started to seperate at the spider/voice coil attachment point, so until something starts coming apart. Another good question would be, do these older speakers handle as much power as they used to? My guess would be no.


----------



## quality_sound

Brian10962001 said:


> 80 to 100 hours seems excessive. It takes a subwoofer a few hours to break in, I've heard it personally. I'm not convinced a tweeter needs a break in, or that it would take the same amount of time for a mid to loosen up, it would depend on the spider. I just refoamed a pair of JL W6's for a friend, his spiders are so worn and loose now there is no way you can convince me that those subs would sound the same on the same wattage as they did when they were new and stiff.


Unless you measured the parameters before and after then your argument is moot. 

Everyone here has already agreed there is a difference between "used" and "worn out". When all of the parts are working correctly that changes in some parameters offset the change in others with the net effective change being zero. Tom Nousaine settled this pretty conclusively with the tests done done about 5 years ago. I linked to that article WAY back in the thread.


----------



## quality_sound

cvjoint said:


> Tests show that our ability to pick up distortion in the subwoofer frequencies is as good as none. It is not uncommon to have a THD reading at least as high as the level the subwoofer is playing (100% distortion) for it to become audible. If there is an improvement in the subwoofer as it breaks in, would you really be able to hear it? How much do the parameters have to change to make the most minute difference in sound quality?


100%? Really? Everything I've read put that number at around 10%. 100% is just plain silly.


----------



## subwoofery

quality_sound said:


> Unless you measured the parameters before and after then your argument is moot.
> 
> Everyone here has already agreed there is a difference between "used" and "worn out". When all of the parts are working correctly that changes in some parameters offset the change in others with the net effective change being zero. Tom Nousaine settled this pretty conclusively with the tests done done about 5 years ago. I linked to that article WAY back in the thread.


^ Absolutely agree. And when manufacturers ask you to break your drivers in, what they really ask you to do is to let your ears adapt to the sound of their speaker  

Kelvin


----------



## Brian10962001

Moon Track said:


> For those who want real numbers. I had to break in this speaker intentionally before building a crossover.
> DLS RW6 woofer
> New: Fs-53Hz Qts 0.58 Vas – 8.8L
> The break in was performed in free air by 20Hz sinusoidal signal mixed with music .
> 2 hours: Fs-51Hz Qts – 0.53
> 12 hours: Fs 49Hz
> 24 hours: Fs 47Hz Qts – 0.46 Vas- 11.2L
> As you understand, that process slowed down but not stopped at 24h.


Funny how this was ignored, and since I didn't run TS parameters on my speakers with lab equipment my opinion is "moot". 

I guess all these manufacturers who ask you to break a speaker in at 20hz free air overnight are just shooting themselves in the foot then


----------



## quality_sound

Nobody skipped anything. Nousaine saw the exact same types of changes and if you read the article, all of the changes combine to exact a ZERO net change.

All of this is covered in his article. 

Manufacturers telling you to break in your drivers is nothing but hype and marketing. Period. I'll have to look again, but I'm pretty sure Nousaine had people blind listen a new driver and 200-hour "broken-in" driver and no one could hear a difference, and that was on a midrange driver playing sounds that we're the most sensitive to. If that's not pretty damned conclusive I don't know what is.


----------



## Moon Track

It’s a very fishy theme. As you can see, parameters are changing, but being combined with stiffness of air inside of the box, the total stiffness is changing insignificantly or almost insignificantly. The break in period is more important for vented box or free air installation before any tuning. But even with closed box design, I think there is number of people, critical to their sound systems ,who had to decrease amp gain for subwoofer after two-three months of use. 
As for midrange speakers, I had tested UR2i with RTA in near field . There was a wide and strong (-10db) drop, right at center of the frequency ranges. After break in period the FR was smoothed to -5 dB. These changes couldn’t be compensated by enclosure ,because of those speakers already have it.


----------



## cvjoint

quality_sound said:


> 100%? Really? Everything I've read put that number at around 10%. 100% is just plain silly.


Experimental Study : Distortion - Axiom Audio

Disclaimer: this is not the ultimate test of audible distortion, especially given their small sample size. The audibility of distortion depends on the frequency, test material, type of distortion, and the level of training the ear has had. The average listener, playing music with 40hz material is going to be subject to stupid levels of distortion before he is able to pick it up. Now pick that 1 in a 1000 subject that has a very well trained ear, give him a test tone at 5,000hz and he may even pick up distortion at 1%.


----------



## subwoofery

cvjoint said:


> Experimental Study : Distortion - Axiom Audio
> 
> Disclaimer: this is not the ultimate test of audible distortion, especially given their small sample size. The audibility of distortion depends on the frequency, test material, type of distortion, and the level of training the ear has had. The average listener, playing music with 40hz material is going to be subject to stupid levels of distortion before he is able to pick it up. Now pick that 1 in a 1000 subject that has a very well trained ear, give him a test tone at 5,000hz and he may even pick up distortion at 1%.


Just imagine with a subwoofer in a trunk... 200% distorsion figure is not impossible  

Kelvin


----------



## wannabesq

My koda tweeters needed a break in, way back when I installed them. At first they sounded like crap, but 30 mins later they opened up and sounded great. I'd venture a guess that the speakers that DON'T seem to need a break in period may have been "broken in" either deliberately, or just plugged in to test output long enough for the break in to occur. Or maybe vibrations during shipping can have an affect? I dunno.


----------



## Astral

Moon Track said:


> It’s a very fishy theme. As you can see, parameters are changing, but being combined with stiffness of air inside of the box, the total stiffness is changing insignificantly or almost insignificantly. The break in period is more important for vented box or free air installation before any tuning. But even with closed box design, I think there is number of people, critical to their sound systems ,who had to decrease amp gain for subwoofer after two-three months of use.
> As for midrange speakers, I had tested UR2i with RTA in near field . There was a wide and strong (-10db) drop, right at center of the frequency ranges. After break in period the FR was smoothed to -5 dB. These changes couldn’t be compensated by enclosure ,because of those speakers already have it.


I read the Nousaine article and I can see his point about low-end frequencies being much less susceptible to changes in FS. In the article, fresh vs fully-broken-in sample changed from 58.6Hz to 53.9Hz. Moon's sub changed from 51Hz to 47hz. The argument is that this is less audible at lower frequencies.

I never heard break-in differences with subs, but I have often heard break-in with higher-frequency drivers (mids + tweets).


----------



## bassboxboy

Just adding my 2 cents. I have a pair of 12" Almani subs that I was given from my cousin to replace a pair of Alpine type R's that I sold. These subs lived in a sealed box for their life that he had them paired to a 600 watt peak Pioneer amplifier. I placed them in my custom ported enclosure with my JBL 1200 watt amp. Needless to say the suspension on these subs were very stiff when I put them in but I thought "these are just inherently stiff and are already good to put some real power into them". Several times i put full power to them and started to smell the glue on the VC from the trunk into the cab of my car. I for sure thought I was overheating them and that they would burn up soon. Well not only can I now put that power to them all the time, but the suspensions have losened up and they can reproduce another 5 hz lower than initial installation. But i find that this "break in" is much more noticeable in a ported enclosure vs. sealed. I also have received a boost in total SPL and a change in the over all tone of the subwoofer system. Friends of mine have asked me if I had changed my subs in my car to a different brand.

Long story short I believe that subs audibly change but im sure most of you will find this post to be "moot"


----------



## subwoofery

bassboxboy said:


> Just adding my 2 cents. I have a pair of 12" Almani subs that I was given from my cousin to replace a pair of Alpine type R's that I sold. These subs lived in a sealed box for their life that he had them paired to a 600 watt peak Pioneer amplifier. I placed them in my custom ported enclosure with my JBL 1200 watt amp. Needless to say the suspension on these subs were very stiff when I put them in but I thought "these are just inherently stiff and are already good to put some real power into them". Several times i put full power to them and started to smell the glue on the VC from the trunk into the cab of my car. I for sure thought I was overheating them and that they would burn up soon. Well not only can I now put that power to them all the time, but the suspensions have losened up and they can reproduce another 5 hz lower than initial installation. But i find that this "break in" is much more noticeable in a ported enclosure vs. sealed. I also have received a boost in total SPL and a change in the over all tone of the subwoofer system. Friends of mine have asked me if I had changed my subs in my car to a different brand.
> 
> Long story short I believe that subs audibly change but im sure most of you will find this post to be "moot"


What kind of measurements did you do to know how much lower your sub plays? You state 5Hz... 

Kelvin


----------



## Moon Track

Lol , no one asked what the animal UR2i , I was heavily smoking when typed it, DLS UP2.5i.

Human hearing is less sensitive to the low frequencies, but in car audio we compensate it by higher gains for subwoofer, and even more, in most car audio systems the lows dominate over remaining bandwidths. So, any subwoofer changes are even more pronounced. Many physical processes as well as human hearing are logarithmic in frequency ranges context, end comparison of Fs changes between subwoofers and midranges should be done in octaves.
Are these small changes important, I think yes. In car audio it’s very easy to get a good response curve till 50Hz and there a real fight for every decibel in 20-40Hz bandwidth.


----------



## cvjoint

Astral said:


> I read the Nousaine article and I can see his point about low-end frequencies being much less susceptible to changes in FS. In the article, fresh vs fully-broken-in sample changed from 58.6Hz to 53.9Hz. Moon's sub changed from 51Hz to 47hz. The argument is that this is less audible at lower frequencies.
> 
> I never heard break-in differences with subs, but I have often heard break-in with higher-frequency drivers (mids + tweets).


Why would you hear the break in easier in mids and tweets vs. subs? Sure, our ears are more sensitive up top but the parameters that do vary over time in speakers have more to do with low end response. If most of the changes occur in the suspension parameters and xmax is most useful down low then what happens to a tweeter at 10,000hz over the first 20 hours of play that would become audible? 



Moon Track said:


> It’s a very fishy theme. As you can see, parameters are changing, but being combined with stiffness of air inside of the box, the total stiffness is changing insignificantly or almost insignificantly. The break in period is more important for vented box or free air installation before any tuning. But even with closed box design, I think there is number of people, critical to their sound systems ,who had to decrease amp gain for subwoofer after two-three months of use.
> As for midrange speakers, I had tested UR2i with RTA in near field . There was a wide and strong (-10db) drop, right at center of the frequency ranges. After break in period the FR was smoothed to -5 dB. These changes couldn’t be compensated by enclosure ,because of those speakers already have it.


I'm not buying it. A *5 db* change in the first few hours of play in a midrange driver? If that is true, it is broken, literally. Most likely, your testing has a lot of variance. 


There is a reoccurring pattern here in our discussion. Those members who do not believe in break-in, like myself, can easily find supporting arguments. I can name dozens: humans have a rather poor auditory system, we can't hear amplitude changes or distortion under 1%, variations in speaker parameters cannot account for such a large change, wishful thinking, to prevent returns, temperature changes, speaker enclosure variations, etc

On the other hand I don't see any convincing evidence on why we should expect a speaker to break in? What is it that breaks in? How does that translate into a change whether that is linear, nonlinear distortion types or amplitude changes? How much? Why can we hear it? 

If we could have a blindfold, properly designed experiment I would honestly bet heavily against the idea of audible break-in. Easy money.


----------



## subwoofery

I think some have overlooked this post so I'm gonna quote it one more time: 


quality_sound said:


> Unless you measured the parameters before and after then your argument is moot.
> 
> Everyone here has already agreed there is a difference between "used" and "worn out". *When all of the parts are working correctly that changes in some parameters offset the change in others with the net effective change being zero. *Tom Nousaine settled this pretty conclusively with the tests done done about 5 years ago. I linked to that article WAY back in the thread.


Kelvin


----------



## Astral

cvjoint said:


> Why would you hear the break in easier in mids and tweets vs. subs? Sure, our ears are more sensitive up top but the parameters that do vary over time in speakers have more to do with low end response. If most of the changes occur in the suspension parameters and xmax is most useful down low then what happens to a tweeter at 10,000hz over the first 20 hours of play that would become audible?


I think tweeters break in faster than mids, I think often on the order of 5 hours.

The changes that have been documented here are related to Fs, but those are probably not the only changes. E.g., Scott Buwalda mentioned Cms and Mms. Let's take suspension compliance. A stiffer cone tends to be not as detailed (IMO). So as the stiffness drops slightly, I don't see why you wouldn't perceive effects over a wide frequency range.

Listen, I'm a man of science and I mock the idea of directional RCA cables as much as the next rational person. So of course I'd love to run some experiments. However, that's unlikely to happen. Based on what I've heard with my ears, I think there is break-in, to varying degrees, with various speakers. It's quite possible that my perception changed as well and it could be all in my head. However, I am skeptical of that.


----------



## bassboxboy

subwoofery said:


> What kind of measurements did you do to know how much lower your sub plays? You state 5Hz...
> 
> Kelvin


i used a high resolution RTA program to map my systems FR so I could reference what I needed to EQ.

Mic placement and other variables were reduced to a minimum so I could properly check the system again because something "sounded different". 

What I meant by lower is that the -10 db point on the subwoofer system had changed from 25hz to 20hz. It was quite noticeable to me because I like music that has a lot of synthesized bass that will easily play below 20hz.


----------



## Moon Track

subwoofery said:


> I think some have overlooked this post so I'm gonna quote it one more time:
> Kelvin


I hadn’t overlooked that post as well as the article. He has another article where he tests 5.3cuf speaker with 1.9 cuf box. Let say it straightly, this man is from opposite camp and he does everything to prove his theory.
When we put these parameters in math for Fc or F3 , yes, the lowered Fs and Qts tend to be compensated by increased Vas, in practice it’s affect of added constant stiffness of air. In result, the “break in” changes are devaluated by this constant , but they are not zero changes. 
You can check it.
Fc = Fs * sqrt ( ( Vas / Vc ) + 1 )
Qtc = Qts * sqrt ( ( Vas / Vc ) + 1 )
As an example. If a free air subwoofer, with small Vas, has changed its parameters, then it is a fact because of Vas/Vc+1 tends to be 1 . 
I don’t say you have wait 100 hours before install a box recommended by manufacturer.
Were parameters changed or not, what the difference, what you will do?
But, if you tune the port ,measure the T/S parameters for your own design, build a crossover , why you have to loose those two-three decibels, just because you had ignored the break in period.

Cajunner ,I would be glad if it took only 30 minutes, but I had to listen it during 3 days.


----------



## Astral

SQ_Bronco said:


> Agree- clearly, drivers _shouldn't_ require a "break-in" period, unless there is some intrinsic reason to deliver them in an unfinished form. If they do require "break-in", there is almost certainly something wrong with the manufacturing process.


I don't think anything is wrong with the manufacturing process. It's a trade-off that saves you money and doesn't add a lot of hassle.

Imagine the added time and cost (equipment, time product spends on a bench breaking in, logistics, management of the process) that the manufacturer has to add to deliver to you some 5 or 20 hrs of break-in on a speaker. Do you really want to pay more for your speakers, to cover the cost of breaking them in before they get to your door?

Just like a car, when you buy a new car, most have a caution advising you not to race your engine, not to cruise at same RPMs for a long time, avoid high revs, etc, for the first 600 miles or so. Could the manufacturer have broken in the newly assembled engine on a dyno? Of course, but that costs more money that most consumers would rather not pay. Most consumers don't mind taking the time to break-in a new car.


----------



## cvjoint

Astral said:


> I think tweeters break in faster than mids, I think often on the order of 5 hours.
> 
> The changes that have been documented here are related to Fs, but those are probably not the only changes. E.g., Scott Buwalda mentioned Cms and Mms. Let's take suspension compliance. A stiffer cone tends to be not as detailed (IMO). So as the stiffness drops slightly, I don't see why you wouldn't perceive effects over a wide frequency range.
> 
> Listen, I'm a man of science and I mock the idea of directional RCA cables as much as the next rational person. So of course I'd love to run some experiments. However, that's unlikely to happen. Based on what I've heard with my ears, I think there is break-in, to varying degrees, with various speakers. It's quite possible that my perception changed as well and it could be all in my head. However, I am skeptical of that.


Actually you will find that stiff cones are better sans their break up peaks. If you can xover low enough stiffer is better. Often times it is high sensitivity that prompts the use of a light cone with the side effect of soft parts.Soft cones store more energy and bend more easily at the surround joint.

If you appreciate the scientific method then certainly you will note that we dont have proper tests for break in. Look back at my comments and Erins on how the experiment should be carried out. We need to find a steady state for one, say at 200 hours, no test finds this.


----------



## SQ_Bronco

Astral said:


> I don't think anything is wrong with the manufacturing process. It's a trade-off that saves you money and doesn't add a lot of hassle.
> 
> Imagine the added time and cost (equipment, time product spends on a bench breaking in, logistics, management of the process) that the manufacturer has to add to deliver to you some 5 or 20 hrs of break-in on a speaker. Do you really want to pay more for your speakers, to cover the cost of breaking them in before they get to your door?


but those changes should be specific, and measurable. You should be able to estimate with high confidence what 99% of your drivers are going to do, after X hours, based on testing a relatively small sample of drivers, if you have consistent manufacturing processes. If you don't have control over your manufacturing processes, you usually have a much larger standard deviation in performance.

I would absolutely not buy a car (advertised at 310 HP, based on limited testing) that has between 250 and 311 HP, depending on manufacturing tolerances. The big difference is that all mechanical devices tend towards a mean, and auto manufacturers do enough testing against an appropriate sample of vehicles IAW ISO standards, to determine that mean within a very small margin before publishing specs. If you buy a G35 advertised at 300 HP, after the break-in, you'll get very close to 300HP. I'm not sure that is the case with most aftermarket drivers.


----------



## BowDown

Yes this is true. Everything on a speaker needs to shift/settle a bit, and stretch. More uniform the material the more accurate the sound reproduction.


----------



## Hispls

It has been confirmed that Fs, Vas, and Qts will vary by 8-12% . The extremity of varience and time it takes to soften up largely dependent on the materials and stiffness of the suspension.

If you model most speakers and vary those specs by that percentage it's really not that big a deal and you would need to have an uncommonly good ear to notice it without precision test equipment IMO. It has also been claimed that these parameters can vary by 5 or 6% just in normal manufacturing tolerances.

As far as I'm concerned speakers which fail mechanically right out of the box is poor manufacturing rather than user error in not "breaking in" I personally beat the tar out of stuff right out of the box (or as soon as the glue dries if I built it) and have only had failures on poorly built speakers.


----------



## cvjoint

Hispls said:


> It has been confirmed that Fs, Vas, and Qts will vary by 8-12% . The extremity of varience and time it takes to soften up largely dependent on the materials and stiffness of the suspension.
> 
> If you model most speakers and vary those specs by that percentage it's really not that big a deal and you would need to have an uncommonly good ear to notice it without precision test equipment IMO. It has also been claimed that these parameters can vary by 5 or 6% just in normal manufacturing tolerances.
> 
> As far as I'm concerned speakers which fail mechanically right out of the box is poor manufacturing rather than user error in not "breaking in" I personally beat the tar out of stuff right out of the box (or as soon as the glue dries if I built it) and have only had failures on poorly built speakers.


Post needs a link. This part is what I'm referring to: "It has been confirmed that Fs, Vas, and Qts will vary by 8-12% . " The rest seems legit to me. The only speaker that broke right out of the box on me was a Morel. Indeed, not a break in issue.


----------



## quality_sound

Look at the links I posted. Nousaine said that exact same thing in his article. The differences between a new driver and one with 200 hours on it were no larger than unit-to-unit variances in a given lot.


----------



## cvjoint

quality_sound said:


> Look at the links I posted. Nousaine said that exact same thing in his article. The differences between a new driver and one with 200 hours on it were no larger than unit-to-unit variances in a given lot.


I stopped reading after he said he used two different boxes for the broken and unbroken driver.


----------



## quality_sound

Just read the article.

Or Richard Price's post about 3/4 of the way down the page.
http://groups.google.com/group/[email protected]+and+speaker+break+in&pli=1


----------



## cvjoint

quality_sound said:


> Just read the article.
> 
> Or Richard Price's post about 3/4 of the way down the page.
> B&W loudspeakers - rec.audio.high-end | Google Groups


OH, I like this guy, a lot. Although he doesn't show any data his conclusions are far more believable than anything else in the break-in-believer camp. 

Did you see Zaph's test on temperature effect on small signal parameters? That's a good read and explains a lot of the variation under load or from one environment to the next. All of it can be misinterpreted as breaking in. That's one of my biggest pet peeves with this subject, make sure the temps are exactly the same. The other is the convergence to a set of parameters after break in.


----------



## Hispls

cvjoint said:


> Post needs a link. This part is what I'm referring to: "It has been confirmed that Fs, Vas, and Qts will vary by 8-12% . " The rest seems legit to me. The only speaker that broke right out of the box on me was a Morel. Indeed, not a break in issue.


http://www.gr-research.com/burnin.htm 
(do the math yourself on the parameters changing)

I have seen it in other links, and it is consistant with a few drivers I've built and tested before and after some physical abuse. I have some specs here somewhere and I have some specs from some subs I built recently and I plan to pull TSP's next time I pull them out of the box for comparison after I beat on them more.

I also discussed this recently with Shocker Mike and he agreed that parameters do change a bit as suspension stretches and softens, but few people have the golden ear to really notice and as I said in modeling the difference is very slight... less than half a db gain and only a couple cycles off (with subwoofers anyway).


----------



## cvjoint

Hispls said:


> http://www.gr-research.com/burnin.htm
> (do the math yourself on the parameters changing)
> 
> I have seen it in other links, and it is consistant with a few drivers I've built and tested before and after some physical abuse. I have some specs here somewhere and I have some specs from some subs I built recently and I plan to pull TSP's next time I pull them out of the box for comparison after I beat on them more.
> 
> I also discussed this recently with Shocker Mike and he agreed that parameters do change a bit as suspension stretches and softens, but few people have the golden ear to really notice and as I said in modeling the difference is very slight... less than half a db gain and only a couple cycles off (with subwoofers anyway).


There was an earlier test with these speakers, and a few others, mentioned in the thread. These ones had the largest parameter shift by far. This test seems to do ok with letting things cool down but I would also like to see room temps. Anyway, let's say temperature was accounted for. If the spider indeed is forming little cracks from playing, when does it stop? Is this really breaking in or a continous change? It's more proper to say the spider is continously changing but at a slower rate as time goes by. If there is any convergence it's because our measurement tools are not fine enough to see the continuation. 

If the FS does indeed drop over time why is this always a good thing? What if I want a higher FS? This parameter enters in the numerator of speaker sensitivity formulas. A lower value means a less sensitive speaker from what I can tell. 

Lastly, a different type of spider may not exhibit this behavior at all. Can we call it break in if only some drivers exhibit it?


----------



## Hispls

cvjoint said:


> There was an earlier test with these speakers, and a few others, mentioned in the thread. These ones had the largest parameter shift by far. This test seems to do ok with letting things cool down but I would also like to see room temps. Anyway, let's say temperature was accounted for. If the spider indeed is forming little cracks from playing, when does it stop? Is this really breaking in or a continous change? It's more proper to say the spider is continously changing but at a slower rate as time goes by. If there is any convergence it's because our measurement tools are not fine enough to see the continuation.
> 
> If the FS does indeed drop over time why is this always a good thing? What if I want a higher FS? This parameter enters in the numerator of speaker sensitivity formulas. A lower value means a less sensitive speaker from what I can tell.
> 
> Lastly, a different type of spider may not exhibit this behavior at all. Can we call it break in if only some drivers exhibit it?


I measured 10% or so varience with stuff I've built. According to my sources it does indeed vary based on the type and number of spiders (and I'm sure the surround material and thickness) but the softening of suspension will always happen to some degree..

I have used a few different spiders, but I'm not really paying attention to the materials or technical elements of their construction.

Lower FS is NOT always beneficial. From my modeling/testing you will get a slight gain in output at a lower frequency, whether or not that actually lowers the overall output probably depends on other factors.

I would agree that the majority of the change happens rather quickly then will progress at a very negligable rate to a particular point where the materials just won't stretch any more...again depending on the materials.

I believe this is a real phenomenon, but very over-rated by many people.


----------



## wannabesq

Hispls said:


> I believe this is a real phenomenon, but very over-rated by many people.


I agree. I also think that some of the more "high end" manufacturers will limit this factor by testing every individual speaker, thus, breaking it in, whereas the high volume manufacturers can't do this to every unit in the production line, giving the low end speakers a higher variance than the high end ones.


----------



## Hispls

wannabesq said:


> I agree. I also think that some of the more "high end" manufacturers will limit this factor by testing every individual speaker, thus, breaking it in, whereas the high volume manufacturers can't do this to every unit in the production line, giving the low end speakers a higher variance than the high end ones.



I know Jacob at Sundown pulls TSP's after some play/testing time.


----------



## goodstuff

cvjoint said:


> I stopped reading after he said he used two different boxes for the broken and unbroken driver.


Yeah, who needs to think about variables, ****. Lol.


----------



## cvjoint

goodstuff said:


> Yeah, who needs to think about variables, ****. Lol.


Yeah right, especially when you know what conclusions you are going to draw when you start the test. Kinda like labeling a test as FACT.


----------



## quality_sound

cvjoint said:


> I stopped reading after he said he used two different boxes for the broken and unbroken driver.





goodstuff said:


> Yeah, who needs to think about variables, ****. Lol.


Just an FYI, if you'd have READ the article, the enclosures were used for the listening (subjective) tests, not the data (objective) tests so your point, while potentially valid (I say potentially because in sealed enclosures the difference between the two enclosures used would be minimal at best) are moot since they didn't affect the objective portion of the test, which is the only part we're worried about, correct?

Let's keep out eyes on the ball here, guys.


----------



## cvjoint

quality_sound said:


> Just an FYI, if you'd have READ the article, the enclosures were used for the listening (subjective) tests, not the data (objective) tests so your point, while potentially valid (I say potentially because in sealed enclosures the difference between the two enclosures used would be minimal at best) are moot since they didn't affect the objective portion of the test, which is the only part we're worried about, correct?
> 
> Let's keep out eyes on the ball here, guys.


Ahh man, I was all about the subjective tests. 

The thing is we are looking for a needle in a heystack here. Any variation in testing procedure is bound to make the results useless. Breaking in, if it exists, is negligible. Precision is of outmost importance, it didn't seem to me that they were particularly careful in that article. I read it a while back when you posted it. I suppose I can revisit it. 

At this point I could buy that some speakers with a particular treatment on the spider or surround could exhibit something that looks like a break in. I don't take it to be a formal break in since if it is true we observe stationarity only because we fail to observe further break in. But then the initial variation is minor too. At what point to we take the changes to be meaningful? 

Imo, if you are worried about break in as a hobbyist, you can run a low frequency test signal through the speaker at xmax for 10 minutes or so. That seems to crack that spider loose. I wouldn't expect audible changes. It's not a game changer by any means. You should be more careful about matching drivers, and who does that in a car?


----------



## quality_sound

TBH, I had to re-read it as well since the last time I REALLY read it was when it was printed. 

I'm of the opinion that ANY decent manufacturer is going to QC their drivers before shipping them out. That QC process should be all the "break-in" a driver needs.


----------



## Hillbilly SQ

Folks, Mark Brooks is sending several drivers to Bikinpunk to put on the Klippel. Two of which I'm running right now. If something happens and Mark doesn't send the big lot of drivers over I'll gladly pull my well used drivers out and let Erin test my current drivers and the new identical set. Would that help put this chinese fire drill to rest? I havn't read most of this thread but do know the same people are going back and forth. I'm going back to the combustion engine analogy by saying it's just like a speaker. Abuse will slowly (or quickly) degrade the integrity until it finally goes out completely. A coil being slowly cooked can be compared to losing compression. A surround blowing out or coil making contact with something it shouldn't causing failure can be compared to a ring failing causing the cylinder to blow. If you don't believe a speaker WITH SOFT PARTS doesn't need to be gently broken in you're clearly dillusional. At least I know who not to buy speakers from in the future.


----------



## cvjoint

Hillbilly SQ said:


> Folks, Mark Brooks is sending several drivers to Bikinpunk to put on the Klippel. Two of which I'm running right now. If something happens and Mark doesn't send the big lot of drivers over I'll gladly pull my well used drivers out and let Erin test my current drivers and the new identical set. Would that help put this chinese fire drill to rest? I havn't read most of this thread but do know the same people are going back and forth. I'm going back to the combustion engine analogy by saying it's just like a speaker. Abuse will slowly (or quickly) degrade the integrity until it finally goes out completely. A coil being slowly cooked can be compared to losing compression. A surround blowing out or coil making contact with something it shouldn't causing failure can be compared to a ring failing causing the cylinder to blow. If you don't believe a speaker WITH SOFT PARTS doesn't need to be gently broken in you're clearly dillusional. At least I know who not to buy speakers from in the future.


This analogy is failed to say the least. Let's pick up some engine performance parameters like Torque, HP, or gas millage. What happens to these parameters as the engine goes through its life?

Torque, HP and MPG goes up until the engine is fully broken in. After the point all three begin a gradual decline until the block needs to be resleeved. If we were to use calculus to find the peak performance of the parameter the algorithm would net us the point at which the brake-in has taken place. The first order derivative is zero at this point and the second is negative. This will net up a concave function for any of the parameters.

You CANNOT use the same algorithm to find the point at which the speaker breaks in. The derivative is never zero, and no second order derivative at that point is negative. Therefore no peak has been found, so no break-in. 

The only thing delusional about this whole thing is someone walking in many pages latter, neglecting all that's said and claiming we're all fools for debating.


----------



## Hillbilly SQ

cvjoint said:


> The only thing delusional about this whole thing is someone walking in many pages latter, neglecting all that's said and claiming we're all fools for debating.


Actually, I admire you for standing your ground. I still think you're an annoying little **** that needs to shut the hell up. So much gray area in these debates. You'd be surprised at how many people have said in private how much they dislike you and the ones that have heard your system seem to wonder what the **** you're thinking.


----------



## Hillbilly SQ

ok cvjoint I'm not sorry for unloading on you but am still going to put this myth to bed with the Klippel. Might be several months though.


----------



## Babs

I know for a fact some rather nice paradigm reference speaks I had sounded positively aweful until they had some hours left alone playing. They came to life and cleaned up a lot afterwards.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk


----------



## cvjoint

Hillbilly SQ said:


> Actually, I admire you for standing your ground. I still think you're an annoying little **** that needs to shut the hell up. So much gray area in these debates. You'd be surprised at how many people have said in private how much they dislike you and the ones that have heard your system seem to wonder what the **** you're thinking.


 I've always had a hard time making friends with bipolar people. You're no exception. I don't care about everyone liking me. If you speak your mind anywhere you are bound to find people that agree with you and some that disagree. You guys talk though Pm about how my car sounds? We thought we had drama here in OC...

As far as the klippel test dispelling the myth what's there for it to do? Maybe you can enlighten us. Small signal parameters seem to do fine. The weakness comes in the testing procedure and sample size restrictions. The klippel is not immune to any of them.


----------



## ErinH

did someone say Klippel? I've got just the test (and data) for that. 
.........

You'll have to download the reader file linked in the same directory.
Here's Patrick's FTP info:


Redrock said:


> I have put a copy of the Klippel Reader software on my FTP for anyone who wants to look at the raw data files. This is really interesting stuff and I will be going over each graph type and its meaning over the weeks to come.
> ftp://ftp.redrockacoustics.com
> User: Klippel (upper case K)
> PW: klippel (lower case k)
> 
> Patrick



After that, you can open up the two .kdb files in the same link (also, feel free to open the T/S and Impedance results). The file names say it all: pre or post-break-in. Use common sense here. 

That'll give you results for the same woofer tested about 2.5 hours apart. One test done with the woofer fresh out of the box and the other test done with about 2 hours of 20hz @ xmax (1-way) for break in. 

Enjoy!

- Erin



forgot to add...

In this particular test, the woofer NEVER MOVED. Mass was added to get Bl/Sens and a few other parameters but not for the Fs/Q(xx) values. The Klippel test was done with the same parameters, IIRC. 
Regardless, if nothing else (and if you can't/don't want to read the Klippel data), the T/S and impedance tests are pretty cool to look at. This is in my upstairs room, thermostat @ 75*F all day/week long.


----------



## ErinH

Hillbilly SQ said:


> Folks, Mark Brooks is sending several drivers to Bikinpunk to put on the Klippel.


I had no idea about this and he and I just talked 2 days ago. But, cool!!!


----------



## Hillbilly SQ

bikinpunk said:


> I had no idea about this and he and I just talked 2 days ago. But, cool!!!


Hope I didn't make public something that shouldn't have before he was ready. If something happens I'll get a fresh and well used Soul and x2 to you for testing. We all know that these are some really well regarded drivers that are of good quality. My well used set that's installed are still holding strong even after nearly two years being run through the wringer. That's what I like about the Klippel, there's little to no opportunity for debate when you have hard facts looking at you. Still want you to test the stock turds out of a Chrysler vehicle as well


----------



## cvjoint

bikinpunk said:


> did someone say Klippel? I've got just the test (and data) for that.
> .........
> 
> You'll have to download the reader file linked in the same directory.
> Here's Patrick's FTP info:
> 
> 
> 
> After that, you can open up the two .kdb files in the same link (also, feel free to open the T/S and Impedance results). The file names say it all: pre or post-break-in. Use common sense here.
> 
> That'll give you results for the same woofer tested about 2.5 hours apart. One test done with the woofer fresh out of the box and the other test done with about 2 hours of 20hz @ xmax (1-way) for break in.
> 
> Enjoy!
> 
> - Erin
> 
> 
> 
> forgot to add...
> 
> In this particular test, the woofer NEVER MOVED. Mass was added to get Bl/Sens and a few other parameters but not for the Fs/Q(xx) values. The Klippel test was done with the same parameters, IIRC.
> Regardless, if nothing else (and if you can't/don't want to read the Klippel data), the T/S and impedance tests are pretty cool to look at. This is in my upstairs room, thermostat @ 75*F all day/week long.


I like that the ambient temps are fixed, that's a nice one for sure. How much cooling time did you allow? .5h? 

If you and Patrick ever release these results in a format I can add to my toilet reading library I would be the first buyer! Somehow I don't feel like carrying my laptop in there. It will be a nice addition to the PE catalog and Klippel seminal papers.


----------



## ErinH

cvjoint said:


> I like that the ambient temps are fixed, that's a nice one for sure. How much cooling time did you allow? .5h?
> 
> If you and Patrick ever release these results in a format I can add to my toilet reading library I would be the first buyer! Somehow I don't feel like carrying my laptop in there. It will be a nice addition to the PE catalog and Klippel seminal papers.




I think there was somewhere between 1/2 to 1 hour between the tests. Can't recall for sure exactly, though. 


Get an ipad or tablet. lol. 
On a serious note, the reader software might allow you to make your own report. I'm not sure b/c I haven't downloaded the reader since I don't need it. Check on that, though. If it does, you can generate the report anyway you want and print it out to take with you to the toiletten.


----------



## Hillbilly SQ

Poopin takes too much concentration and happens too fast for me to take reading materialHowever, I have a coworker that takes the paper in every morning and drops a 30 min deuce along with other breaks to fill out his day of doing practically nothing


----------



## BuickGN

I can't open ****. Can someone please give me just a one line summary of the TS parameters before and after break-in. It sounds like they did not change but it would be nice to know for sure. Sorry for being such a pain in the ass. This computer is about to go in the pool.


----------



## cvjoint

All parameters change, including mms. Not sure what to make of it.

The Fs does go down a bit, but sensitivity goes up too, just like I predicted in a previous post. If this is a general trend with break in I'm not sure break in is always a good thing. What if I use a high HP and I'm only interested in sensitivity? A low FS can only be bad then.

I think at this point there have been enough of these tests showing FS going down. The next question is does it happen in all speakers? It would be nice to have a boat load of tests with spiders of all sorts of materials. 

I'll be testing the four Faital Pros I'm getting in the mail this weekend. I'll post results here.


----------



## Hispls

cvjoint said:


> All parameters change, including mms. Not sure what to make of it.
> 
> The Fs does go down a bit, but sensitivity goes up too, just like I predicted in a previous post. If this is a general trend with break in I'm not sure break in is always a good thing. What if I use a high HP and I'm only interested in sensitivity? A low FS can only be bad then.
> 
> I think at this point there have been enough of these tests showing FS going down. The next question is does it happen in all speakers? It would be nice to have a boat load of tests with spiders of all sorts of materials.
> 
> I'll be testing the four Faital Pros I'm getting in the mail this weekend. I'll post results here.


I actually got MMS to change on some of mine as well. I chalked it up to inaccuracy in the testing, anyone have a theory on this?


----------



## The Baron Groog

MMS could be affected by the moisture in the-more humidity=denser air-did you cut one in between tests

Otherwise MMS could also be affected by plain old dirt building up on the driver


----------



## cvjoint

I was thinking of using some of the variation in parameters that shouldn't change to gauge the test sample variance so to say. If mms varies by 5% and FS varies by 5% than all the change could be due to testing variance. It's a dirty way of getting a statistical confidence but what else do we have.


----------



## ErinH

more data.

BNIB HAT L4SE. Break in @ 85hz for 2.5 hours near xmax. Driver sat for 30 minutes after break in and was tested again.

*Before Break In (Fresh out of box):*
Re = 4.1110 ohms
Fs = 102.8586 Hz
Zmax = 22.4491 ohms
Qes = 1.1264
Qms = 5.0247
Qts = 0.9201
Le = 0.1213 mH (at 1 kHz)
Diam = 79.0000 mm ( 3.1102 in )
Sd = 4901.6704 mm^2( 7.5976 in^2)
Vas = 1.4701 L ( 0.0519 ft^3)
BL = 3.6210 N/A
Mms = 5.5588 g
Cms = 430.7052 uM/N
Kms = 2321.7734 N/M
Rms = 0.7150 R mechanical
Efficiency = 0.1334 % 
Sensitivity= 83.2711 dB @1W/1m
Sensitivity= 86.1626 dB @2.83Vrms/1m


*After Break In:*
Re = 4.1406 ohms
Fs = 97.3227 Hz
Zmax = 22.4715 ohms
Qes = 1.1078
Qms = 4.9043
Qts = 0.9037
Le = 0.1073 mH (at 1 kHz)
Diam = 79.0000 mm ( 3.1102 in )
Sd = 4901.6704 mm^2( 7.5976 in^2)
Vas = 1.3991 L ( 0.0494 ft^3)
BL = 3.8615 N/A
Mms = 6.5238 g
Cms = 409.9297 uM/N
Kms = 2439.4424 N/M
Rms = 0.8134 R mechanical
Efficiency = 0.1094 % 
Sensitivity= 82.4080 dB @1W/1m
Sensitivity= 85.2683 dB @2.83Vrms/1m


Think about what we say changes due to break in and then think about what's not been discussed the past couple pages (hint: suspension... C & K (=1/C).


----------



## cvjoint

Post break in the motor got stronger and the speaker cone got heavier according to the evidence. Is that what break-in does?


----------



## BuickGN

cvjoint said:


> This analogy is failed to say the least. Let's pick up some engine performance parameters like Torque, HP, or gas millage. What happens to these parameters as the engine goes through its life?
> 
> Torque, HP and MPG goes up until the engine is fully broken in. After the point all three begin a gradual decline until the block needs to be resleeved. If we were to use calculus to find the peak performance of the parameter the algorithm would net us the point at which the brake-in has taken place. The first order derivative is zero at this point and the second is negative. This will net up a concave function for any of the parameters.
> 
> You CANNOT use the same algorithm to find the point at which the speaker breaks in. The derivative is never zero, and no second order derivative at that point is negative. Therefore no peak has been found, so no break-in.
> 
> The only thing delusional about this whole thing is someone walking in many pages latter, neglecting all that's said and claiming we're all fools for debating.


If it's anything like an engine, you have a rapid break-in, a leveling off stage that usually lasts for hundreds of thousands of miles and the a quick decline but not as quick as break-in.


----------



## cvjoint

BuickGN said:


> If it's anything like an engine, you have a rapid break-in, a leveling off stage that usually lasts for hundreds of thousands of miles and the a quick decline but not as quick as break-in.


Agreed, that would roughly be the magnitude or slope changes. I was interested more in the inflection points. There is a stark difference between the speaker and the engine in the parameter function.


----------



## mikelh2010

cbrei1023 said:


> If you buy used speakers and the seller has them broken in but have had them sitting in a box for 6 months. Are they still broken in or will they need some play time to get back up to snuff.


New to forum...i always dial back the amps before they leave my shop and set a 2 week appointment to final adjust the amps....its like new boots....gotta wear em for a couple weeks before they're comfortable....it lets the rubber surround soften a bit...get the spider moving smooth...i never thought of your ears adjusting or anything like that.....i think the manufacturers are referring to that more so than your ear protection....any company that sells 1000-2000 watt subs cant be too concerned about our ears!....my thoughts


----------



## cvjoint

WT3 results of a brand new Faital Pro break-in (if any):
New out of the box:
* f(s)= 105.60 Hz
* R(e)= 6.48 Ohms
* Z(max)= 57.99 Ohms
* Q(ms)= 5.344
* Q(es)= 0.672
* Q(ts)= 0.597
* L(e)= 0.19 mH

Room temp: 85F

After 25min of running at approximately xmax with 20hz tone:

* f(s)= 105.60 Hz
* R(e)= 6.47 Ohms
* Z(max)= 56.19 Ohms
* Q(ms)= 5.158
* Q(es)= 0.671
* Q(ts)= 0.594
* L(e)= 0.19 mH

Room temp. 80F, 2 hours of cooling was allowed after test tone material.

*Update*

After and additional 45min, 70min total, of running at approximately xmax with 20hz tone:

* f(s)= 105.60 Hz
* R(e)= 6.46 Ohms
* Z(max)= 55.37 Ohms
* Q(ms)= 5.044
* Q(es)= 0.666
* Q(ts)= 0.588
* L(e)= 0.19 mH

Room temp. 81F, 2 hours of cooling was allowed after test tone material.


More testing on this driver throughout the week.


----------



## cvjoint

continuation of break in:

After and additional 60min, 130 min total, of running at approximately xmax with 20hz tone:

* f(s)= 105.60 Hz
* R(e)= 6.47 Ohms
* Z(max)= 56.43 Ohms
* Q(ms)= 5.184
* Q(es)= 0.672
* Q(ts)= 0.595
* L(e)= 0.19 mH


Room temp. 80F, 2 hours of cooling was allowed after test tone material.


----------



## ErinH

those values seem nearly identical (fs/qts). I think I read in Dickason's book that he noticed the ratio of fs/qts stayed pretty much the same after break-in even though the individual values changed.


----------



## cvjoint

Well, the FS has stayed exactly the same so far. The QTS seemed to be going down constantly but in the last test, the longest yet, it seems to have gone back to the original value. 

I'm going to give it a couple of hours of material next and then maybe half a day.


----------



## Babs

I would be interested in distortion graphs before/after play time. If it's been covered my apologies. I suspect that is where differences would be more apparent.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk


----------



## 808Munkyeee

use a o scope


----------



## cvjoint

After and additional 3 hours, 5 hours total, of running at approximately xmax with 20hz tone:
* f(s)= 105.00 Hz
* R(e)= 6.50 Ohms
* Z(max)= 57.40 Ohms
* Q(ms)= 5.263
* Q(es)= 0.672
* Q(ts)= 0.596
* L(e)= 0.19 mH

Room temp. 82F, 2 hours of cooling was allowed after test tone material.


----------



## Hispls

No Vas numbers on that?


----------



## goodstuff

cvjoint said:


> After and additional 3 hours, 5 hours total, of running at approximately xmax with 20hz tone:
> * f(s)= 105.00 Hz
> * R(e)= 6.50 Ohms
> * Z(max)= 57.40 Ohms
> * Q(ms)= 5.263
> * Q(es)= 0.672
> * Q(ts)= 0.596
> * L(e)= 0.19 mH
> 
> Room temp. 82F, 2 hours of cooling was allowed after test tone material.


This is awesome. 
Wanna test some id xs69's? Just kidding. Damn I wish I had one of these, I could do it myself as my speakers are brand new. I'm very interested in the long term testing, i.e what happens in 1 year, 2 years etc.


----------



## cvjoint

no vas for now guys, gotta do some work to get vas, bl, spl. all of these would also have a higher margin of error simply because i have to attach mass to the cone or build a perfect box.

if the faitals win the best wideband test im running right now, ill pull them out and test them no problem.(after they spend some time in the car). if it takes a year to get parameters changed is that breakin or something else? 

And another:
After and additional 8 hours, 13 hours total, of running at approximately xmax with 20hz tone:
* f(s)= 105.00 Hz
* R(e)= 6.47 Ohms
* Z(max)= 56.63 Ohms
* Q(ms)= 5.150
* Q(es)= 0.664
* Q(ts)= 0.589
* L(e)= 0.19 mH

Room temp. 81F, 1.5 hours of cooling was allowed after test tone material.


----------



## goodstuff

cvjoint said:


> no vas for now guys, gotta do some work to get vas, bl, spl. all of these would also have a higher margin of error simply because i have to attach mass to the cone or build a perfect box.
> 
> if the faitals win the best wideband test im running right now, ill pull them out and test them no problem.(after they spend some time in the car). if it takes a year to get parameters changed is that breakin or something else?


Just curious to see the changes over time. It's break*ing *after a year, lol.


----------



## cvjoint

goodstuff said:


> Just curious to see the changes over time. It's breaking after a year, lol.


I'll try to set up the rig today, Erin gave me some tips. I have three more new Faitals I can put to the test. 

How many more hours should I try to break this one in? I'm thinking I can do 8 hours every night for a few days.

Imo this is what will happen after a year. Some of the BL will drop, the Neo magnets will go through enough hot days in the car and heated sessions that they are bound to loose some steam. The suspension will deform slightly as well. Even though mine are mounted vertically there will be sagging in that direction as the spider heats up and cools down in that position. For those of you that mount speakers horizontally the changes will not be so subtle.


----------



## quality_sound

What good are these results without Vas? In everything I've read Vas was one of the parameters that changed the most but was offset by the other changes. I think without Vas all of these other tests and posts are a waste of time as they're painting a VERY narrow picture.


----------



## Hispls

cvjoint said:


> I'll try to set up the rig today, Erin gave me some tips. I have three more new Faitals I can put to the test.
> 
> How many more hours should I try to break this one in? I'm thinking I can do 8 hours every night for a few days.
> 
> Imo this is what will happen after a year. Some of the BL will drop, the Neo magnets will go through enough hot days in the car and heated sessions that they are bound to loose some steam. The suspension will deform slightly as well. Even though mine are mounted vertically there will be sagging in that direction as the spider heats up and cools down in that position. For those of you that mount speakers horizontally the changes will not be so subtle.



Unless you're parking in a volcano there's no way the neo will deteriorate from normal outside weather conditions. 

I would suspect if those woofers you keep testing haven't changed 5-10% by now they're not likely to change noticeably after another 8 hours, or possibly even 40. Most dramatic change should be in the first few hours. Time to test some different brands/parts/woofers.


----------



## goodstuff

cvjoint said:


> I'll try to set up the rig today, Erin gave me some tips. I have three more new Faitals I can put to the test.
> 
> How many more hours should I try to break this one in? I'm thinking I can do 8 hours every night for a few days.
> 
> Imo this is what will happen after a year. Some of the BL will drop, the Neo magnets will go through enough hot days in the car and heated sessions that they are bound to loose some steam. The suspension will deform slightly as well. Even though mine are mounted vertically there will be sagging in that direction as the spider heats up and cools down in that position. For those of you that mount speakers horizontally the changes will not be so subtle.


I didn't think about real world environment like a car, with heat...But I meant test it now, use it like you normally would and then test again in a year and see where it's at...but that's just what I would be looking for, not what you should do.


----------



## cvjoint

Well if they are getting any break-in past 20 hours they will be in a car somewhere. I thought it would be relevant to say where they would be used as a year in a car is equivalent to 3 in a home. (needs citation  )

I'll do a VAS test next. Off to buy some materials. 

For now I'd say my testing is evidence that break-in does not effect any of the free air parameters. We'll see if there is an effect on VAS.


----------



## ErinH

to me, I think it's interesting to see how the suspension parameters change (Cms/Kms)...


----------



## Babs

bikinpunk said:


> to me, I think it's interesting to see how the suspension parameters change (Cms/Kms)...


Agreed.. Physically, I'd think besides internal material forces in the cone, the suspension and surround are where torsion forces are at work directly on material. But I'm going on what little I admitted know about the construction of a typical transducer. Even an archery bow of magnesium or other materials will quickly loosen into an operating range of flex (term elludes me), after some time being drawn repetitively from "new" condition. the bow pull weight will reduce significantly by the bow material loosening in, and of course some stretching of the string. From there, it will remain in that range for it's operational life until it gives up the ghost.


----------



## cvjoint

I can get VAS, BL etc now. However, I won't. The variation I've seen from testing sample to sample is ridiculous. Not sure what to tell you guys. If I move my nickels on the cone a few mm the test is completely different. It goes from 81db spl to 92db just by messing with the weights around. 

Furthermore, that rule of thumb for 1/2 mms on the weight did not work. I had to add at least 3x mms for WT3 to pick up a 25% change in FS. 

I did all I could to put this thing to bed. Someone that is willing to build a box for this thing can go ahead and take this further. 

For anyone that wants to do the VAS this method or another I'd love to see a series of tests back to back to see how consistent the measurements are. If it's a box, I'd like to see mounting and unmounting a few times with a test between.


----------



## ErinH

yea... for smaller drivers, you're going to need a box to get consistency. that's why I built one. I thought it would be more of a pita but found out that it's actually much easier once you cut about 5-6 blanks and cut 'standard' size holes (ie: 4, 5, 6, 7"). Most drivers can fit on these standardized cutouts. It's more work up front, but really does save you time and gain you accuracy/repeatable results in the long run. Fitting and spreading tack on a cone is annoying and it can mess up the cone, depending on the type of material used. 

I've tested drivers days apart and had nearly identical results with the sealed box method. I really do recommend it if you're wanting to build a library of data. If not, then it's up to you.

D'Apollito's book has more info on this and I'll try to post it up when I get a chance. I believe he has different percentages for different sized drivers, or something like that. I may be wrong, but let me check and post back.
Edit: He recommends "at least 60% of the cone mass". Thing is, you have to know it either by measuring it with a suicide driver or trust the mfg spec, to figure out what that 60% is. I overload the crap out of woofers just to negate any potential in error... and that's why I don't do added mass with smaller drivers.


----------



## ErinH

Peerless HDS Nomex 8"

BNIB; showed up today. 
Measured it with the woofer tester and tested it on the klippel. Put a 30hz tone on it for 2.5 hours at ~xmax, then tested 2 hours later, then klippeled. Results are attached for the woofer tester sweeps. Klippel results will be linked later (once I figure out a way to convert my .doc files to .pdf without paying for it).
Note: My tests are taken in my upstairs 'test room'. Same temperature all day long. 


*Pre Break-In (fresh out the box):*
Re = 5.9928 ohms
Fs = 29.3837 Hz
Zmax = 111.7465 ohms
Qes = 0.3555
Qms = 6.2734
Qts = 0.3364
Le = 0.7026 mH (at 1 kHz)
Diam = 162.5634 mm ( 6.4001 in )
Sd =20755.6058 mm^2( 32.1713 in^2)
Vas = 69.5923 L ( 2.4576 ft^3)
BL = 8.9606 N/A
Mms = 25.7989 g
Cms = 1137.1714 uM/N
Kms = 879.3749 N/M
Rms = 0.7592 R mechanical
Efficiency = 0.4667 % 
Sensitivity= 88.7079 dB @1W/1m
Sensitivity= 89.9625 dB @2.83Vrms/1m


*Post Break In (2.5 hours of 30hz @ xmax):*
Re = 6.2463 ohms
Fs = 26.6670 Hz
Zmax = 113.1058 ohms
Qes = 0.3364
Qms = 5.7552
Qts = 0.3178
Le = 0.6838 mH (at 1 kHz)
Diam = 162.5634 mm ( 6.4001 in )
Sd =20755.6058 mm^2( 32.1713 in^2)
Vas = 83.1501 L ( 2.9364 ft^3)
BL = 9.0310 N/A
Mms = 26.2160 g
Cms = 1358.7111 uM/N
Kms = 735.9916 N/M
Rms = 0.7632 R mechanical
Efficiency = 0.4404 % 
Sensitivity= 88.4567 dB @1W/1m
Sensitivity= 89.5313 dB @2.83Vrms/1m


----------



## Schizm

cvjoint said:


> from:
> Car Audio: Thiele-Small Parameters
> 
> So what is the claim now, that the weight of the cone assembly varies?


All the cones are so fast they approach the speed of light thus gain much mass!


----------



## BuickGN

I really wish I could have had one of my IB15s tested before they were broken in. The suspension is so "loose" I was worried there was a problem with them. For the majority of the first day I only had one of them playing (don't ask) and you could feel the difference in stiffness between the two. Now they both feel the same. It would be really interesting in how this would show up in TS parameters.

Just curious if there's more or less of a change in a sub with a looser suspension. I'm going to order a couple SBP15s when/if he starts making them again, maybe I could have one of those tested.


----------



## Minus (-)

yea i def agree with the break in period....fresh out the box is nice n tight....let them joints knock n breathe


----------



## AwBimmer

I would confirm, no doubt, reasons have already been covered it seems though!


----------



## sqcomp

Well...coming back to this thread...

It looks like what Bikinpunk put up clearly shows measurable change even over the short term. Audible? Personally, IDC. I'll simply adjust settings if I need to...

I really don't see what the big deal is about it. The manufacturer says go easy on the speaker for a while. Okay, go easy for a while...and move on.

I recall purchasing my car new. It's first three fill ups were around 39 MPG, after the manufacturer's recommended break in period...yesterday's fill up was at 43.75 MPG. Break in period difference? Yup, right under 10%.


----------



## Hillbilly SQ

Don't know how much this has to do with this thread if any but I had an Arc 12 (the black one) that had a much more limber cone after several months of play than it did new. It was a wonderful sounding sub but I needed something with a little more meat in the sound to better match the ID OEM'z at the time. The Arc sounded wonderful with the Audax Aerogel mids and honestly wish I still had them at times.


----------



## Hillbilly SQ

sqcomp said:


> Well...coming back to this thread...
> 
> It looks like what Bikinpunk put up clearly shows measurable change even over the short term. Audible? Personally, IDC. I'll simply adjust settings if I need to...
> 
> I really don't see what the big deal is about it. The manufacturer says go easy on the speaker for a while. Okay, go easy for a while...and move on.
> 
> I recall purchasing my car new. It's first three fill ups were around 39 MPG, after the manufacturer's recommended break in period...yesterday's fill up was at 43.75 MPG. Break in period difference? Yup, right under 10%.


All the engines I've broken in had a "not yet" feeling if I plowed into it too hard. It's no different from breaking in a virgin from what I can tell. After about 1000 miles or so my HEMI turned into a scalded ape with an attitude


----------



## BuickGN

Hillbilly SQ said:


> Don't know how much this has to do with this thread if any but I had an Arc 12 (the black one) that had a much more limber cone after several months of play than it did new. It was a wonderful sounding sub but I needed something with a little more meat in the sound to better match the ID OEM'z at the time. The Arc sounded wonderful with the Audax Aerogel mids and honestly wish I still had them at times.


That's exactly what I noticed with my IB15s. When I received them, of course I had to poke at them and "test" them lol. I had one running for only an hour before the other. While at first the two cones felt identical, the one that had been running for an hour was noticeably looser. I would imagine if you can tell just by pressing on the cone, it would be easily measurable. These subs already felt very loose, I was worried they were broken because I had never felt a sub this soft before.


----------



## Hillbilly SQ

My main concern with really limber cones is the chance of erratic flexing causing distortion. I've had the best luck with stiff paper cones to be honest when it comes to subs.


----------



## ErinH

something to chew on. This was found during the testing of the Audiotechnology 18h klippel testing in this thread:
http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...chnology-c-quenze-18h-automotive-version.html




bikinpunk said:


> No problem. I actually tested this driver 4 different times over the course of 24 hours. I put pink noise on it, band limited from 10-400hz @ near xmax after my first 2 tests last night. Left it playing that pink noise for about 12 hours today. When I got home, I re-tested it twice for accuracy.
> 
> Below is the difference between the very first test (right out of the box) vs the last test (what I posted) results of T/S.
> You can see the suspension values changed (cms, qts, etc).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here is the difference in Bl and Nonlinear Parameters between the first and last test. You'll also see that the xmax increased about 0.1mm but that's negligible and can be attributed to difference in test alone.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's an overview of the *first* LSI test. You can compare this to the snapshot of the one I posted as the final data.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Note: If you're looking at the left side column, the test marked as "... (1)" is the final test of the same one above it. That's the one I used to post as the data. The item above it not marked as "... (1)" is the very first test I did.


----------



## snaimpally

I was skeptical about speaker break-in but have experienced it first hand with all types of drivers, including subwoofers.


----------



## rideit

Lars Ulriched said:


> 100% true....the speakers is just like a virgin when it came new...


Play Slayer on them until they bleed. Just like back in college.


----------



## kartunesauto

Have to agree 100%, never fully fine tune the system till it has played for 50 hours at least, as it will change during this time, amps and others components also change slightly, like the caps in the amps stabilizing, and burn in. 



Scott Buwalda said:


> Definitely true. Depends mostly on stiffness of suspension and moving mass. Some tweeters can be considered "broken in" in a matter of a few hours. Larger/heavier/stiffer drivers after 50-100 hours at reasonable play-back levels. I usually tell folks to not critically listen until after 50 hours at 90 dB.


----------



## chrishencz

carlton jones said:


> you should use a break in period for most handmade subs so that you can loosen up the joints and the coils before trying to max power them. we usually dont set the amps up at full power in our shop to give them time to get settled then have the customer come back in for a re-tune and system check. sometimes we will put the subs on an amplifier in our shop and play a test tone through them for a few days or hours on and off depending on when the customer is coming in to get them.


I just bought a Phoenix Gold 8 inch subwoofer from Car Tunes in Santa Rosa and also some hurts speakers and tweeters that are all hooked up to a 5 channel Alpine amp. The salesman told me to take it easy on the sub for 7 to 8 hours before turning them up all the way in order to break it in. He said after that it will be even more crisp. he didn't say anything about the speakers or tweeters needing to be broken in. I have been taking it somewhat easy on them besides a few times I turned it up pretty high leaving the gain about half way up to the sub which had 300w going to the sub and 70w to each speaker. Does that sound correct to you?


----------



## lesliev

ZAKOH said:


> Is this true?


 I usually tell folks to not critically listen until after 50 hours at 90 dB.


----------



## 14642

There's a big element of ******** in the whole idea of speaker break in. The part of the speaker that changes over time is the spider. It's a spring. It wears out. Depending on how it's made, the stiffness is sometimes set by using more resin. That resin cracks pretty quickly and the spring becomes looser. 

Now...does it matter? It does matter a bit for subs because we use them at resonance and that's where the spider matters. Below resonance it matters too, but not as much. About a half octave above resonance, it doesn't matter because the spider has no real affect on the sound. 

When the subwoofer "breaks in", the resulting change in frequency response is a reduction in Qtc--that means a somewhat shallower rolloff in a sealed box and a slightly peaky response in a vented box designed for the un broken in driver. Both are often heard as improvements. The idea that you should take it easy on the driver until it's broken in is ridiculous.

For a midrange driver that isn't used at its resonance and with a high pass filter, it doesn't matter. For a tweeter, it doesn't matter. 

The real thing that happens during "break in" is that you get used to the sound of your new system.


----------



## gstokes

Oliver said:


> How is your hearing? ^^^


it could be youtube or it could be my crappy laptop speakers but i couldn't hear anything until about 250Hz, the signal had a definite peak at 700Hz and was completely gone after 9kHz, have to do this again on my desktop with quality speakers in a controlled environment but it sure surprised me..


----------



## bobby23

thanks for info


----------

