Several years ago I recall reading the the Large Hadron Collider at CERN would only operate at 50% power for 1 year following startup to allow the magnets and other heavy electrical components settle in. I recall that the physicist mentioned that the crystal structures in some component needed time to align or de-stress. Maybe 1000 hours to break in some audio gear is not unheard of.
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...
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...
Showing 13 responses by fundsgon
Regarding the LHC, this is from Wikipedia. Initial lower magnet currentsEdit In both of its runs (2010 to 2012 and 2015), the LHC was initially run at energies below its planned operating energy, and ramped up to just 2 x 4 TeV energy on its first run and 2 x 6.5 TeV on its second run, below the design energy of 2 x 7 TeV. This is because massive superconducting magnets require considerable magnet training to handle the high currents involved without losing their superconducting ability, and the high currents are necessary to allow a high proton energy. The "training" process involves repeatedly running the magnets with lower currents to provoke any quenches or minute movements that may result. It also takes time to cool down magnets to their operating temperature of around 1.9 K (close to absolute zero). Over time the magnet "beds in" and ceases to quench at these lesser currents and can handle the full design current without quenching; CERN media describe the magnets as "shaking out" the unavoidable tiny manufacturing imperfections in their crystals and positions that had initially impaired their ability to handle their planned currents. The magnets, over time and with training, gradually become able to handle their full planned currents without quenching.[80][81] The LHC is down for a major upgrade, when it comes back up it will be called the High Luminosity LHC. Sounds kinda like a god... So yes, the LHC required a break in period, and yes, like us audiofools, the physicist at CERN have an insatiable urge to upgrade. |
Thanks, my only point being that break-in is a real thing, but I certainly don’t know how long it takes. Speakers, amps, caps will likely take different lengths of time. Now, can I interest anyone in a newly designed amp using superconducting magnets? Break in will be 20 to 30 years at the specified power output. |
Yep. Break in of an audio component such as a capacitor or speaker surround, or more importantly an audio system, such as a preamp or speaker, could easily form the basis of a masters thesis or PhD dissertation. This would not begin to cover the multitude of material combinations that can be applied to any one loudspeaker or preamp system, so we’re left with debating assertions, which is entertaining and educational. |
Start the a/b test with a component for which it should be easy to discern the difference between new out of the box and then after 1000 hours of normal playing. A pair of full range speakers should do the trick, handily. Well, actually two pair would be needed, one new the other run in for thousands of hours. That would be a really fun test to take part in. I’ll supply the post test beer, win and snacky things. |
Albert Einstein could predict the orbital precession of a star around a black hole, but not even he could predict the break-in period of a pair of bookshelf speakers. But seriously, I recently purchased a pair of speakers. I demoed them at the dealer with my amp and CD player. The dealer would not sell me the demo pair because, according to him, they took forever to break in. The new speakers sound fabulous right out of the box, but aren’t quite as dynamic as the demo pair. We shall see if they become so, but for now the music brings tears to my significant other. Well, maybe me too, on occasion, after a few drinks. |
Geoffkait, true enuf. He did however, predict orbital precession. His calculations perfectly predicted mercury’s orbit, which is subject to a higher degree of precession than the outer planets. Orbital dynamics using classical physics are not able to accurately predict the orbit of Mercury, Einstein’s Gravitational physics is needed for that. recently, a star orbiting the milky ways central black hole was shown to be behaving as Einstein’s calculation predict. Astounding. Anyone know what music Herr Einstein listened to? Okay, now we’re light years off topic. My fault. |