2. amps-preamps
  3. 156142-976

Break in time that extends to months or maybe even years!!

On another thread, we have a well known and well respected piece of gear ( and great sounding too, IME) that according to the member who is reviewing it, needs in excess of 1000 hours to fully break in!! 

While we have all heard of gear that needs immense amounts of 'break in' time to sound its best, usually gear that involves teflon caps, I question whether this very long break in time is the job for the consumer? Is it reasonable for a manufacturer of audio gear to expect the consumer to receive sub-par performance from his purchase for potentially several months ( years?) before the true sound of the gear in question can be enjoyed? Or, is it ( or should it be) perhaps the job of the manufacturer of this gear ( usually not low priced) to actually accomplish the 'break in' before releasing it from the factory? Thoughts...
daveyf

Showing 5 responses by cleeds

cleeds
6,072 posts
 
heaudio123
I believe that is the suppliers making the 1000 hour break-in claims ...
That's an interesting belief. Is that like a faith-based belief, or do you have something that actually leads you to that belief?
cleeds
6,072 posts
 
daveyf
ARC didn't state anything about the long break in time in the manual of the piece I am referring to ( I did not say they did, you somehow read that?) , but in a response to a review ...
What review was that?
I doubt any company mentions much about 'break in' time in their manual ...
ARC does. That's why I mentioned it.
cleeds
6,072 posts
 
daveyf
The ARC preamp I mentioned, would have required a number of months or more...perhaps more than a year, to actually break in IF the user was not listening every week ( and for extended periods) ... ARC stated that their large Teflon caps needed 600+ hours to break in!
That's not at all what ARC states. Check your user manual.

If you don't actually own any ARC gear, you can "look it up," if you care. Many ARC user manuals are online.
cleeds
6,072 posts
 
daveyf
This isn't a court of law...so your post is a little off, IMHO.
Why? Because I question the claim?
The claim that the member made was that he heard that the amp in question was still improving after 900 hours, and i am not going to call him to task for what he heard, not do I have any reason to do so, do you?
Yes. I'm not accusing anyone of dishonesty - after all, I don't even know who you are talking about - but I do question the claim. Sorry. And I'm basing that on my own first-hand experience. Again: correlation is not the same as causation.

I simply haven't seen that it takes months to break in an audio component, and it certainly doesn't take years.



cleeds
6,072 posts
 
daveyf
... according to our esteemed member, on his review of the product, 900 hours has been reached and he is still hearing advances ...
That's just hearsay and the claim is unsubstantiated. Please note that there's a difference between correlation and causation, something that's discounted in claims like this.
Remember that the ARC preamp that utilized Teflon caps was 'supposedly' only broken in after 600 hours!
Key word: "Supposedly."

More to discover