"Burn in" Are you serious?

No Redkiwi, we actually do live in the same world. Perhaps that's the fundamental issue. We don't see reality in the same way. But that's ok. And why would only "new" equipment change over time. Robba used a turn of phrase which, I think, hits the mark. I.e., the listener is being burned in. And Robba, for the purposes of this discussion, it makes all the difference. I could easily be converted by evidence more substantive than anecdotal. Also, Redkiwi; have you never listened to the identical source and setup and heard it differently? Isn't that a common experience for you? And if it is, do you attribute it to never ending change in you hardware, or perhaps to the highly variable nature of your natural apparatus? (Of course, we're not talking about tubes or electro-mechanical devices.)

Waldhorner, your existentialism does not make an argument - it could be applied to argue all stereos sound the same and we are just deluded in believing otherwise. I just figure if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck - then I am happy to figure it must be a duck and move on.

Redkiwi: We're not talking complete systems here. But rather the supposedly perceived subtle manipulations of individual pieces.// Yes, but a video of a duck meets all of those criteria and yet is not a duck. As to denying "burn in",as implied before; It's not good science and it is not supported by many other's experiences(including mine). So, when science and experience agree, it is reasonable to me to accept. This is not a matter of taste.I am, however, open to change if it can be so demonstrated. I do agree that it is time to move on. Pax

Glad this is still going,and nobody has hired a hitman,(or have they?).On the subject of the frog turning into a prince:When I got my Aerial cc3; new, 'twas un listenable.Actually, HORIBLE !I pieced an old cd player/receiver/wires; stuck it all in the closet;threw some blankets over it;cranked it;left it on repeat.After 5 days, the volume was considerably louder.(Never touched the setting.)3 more days;the prince emerged. On burning in most all equipment,the bass is the easy "identifiable". You ( I ) can tell,just walking in the room,don't have to sit down and strain.While different pieces vary;some actually do the frog/prince thing.

Burn-in is not a case of beating your ears into submission. Of course many horrible things can at first be tolerated and eventually even liked (smoking, drinking), but most people who participate at Audiogon have the sense to leave plenty of time between critical listening to allow for a change to be accurately heard. Some items don't require as much burn-in as others. My Harmonic Technology cables had me worried for a while, but changed dramatically at the 85 hour point. Why not trust your ears instead of denying the reality of burn in? As a writer/producer for 28 years I have had to use my ears in critical applications hundreds of times requiring much more sensitivity than merely hearing a difference in a cable after 100 hours use. I think the "wishful thinking" might possibly be on your part Waldhorner. Life would be that much simpler for Audiophiles if burn in was not a factor in evaluations. You can try comparing two of the same cables at first and breaking in only one, then comparing them again. Even if the difference after break in in is difficult to articulate, I suggest you "trust your feelings" Waldhorner. Good listening and Happy Holidays to all.