Search results

  1. G

    How much of burn-in/ break-in (in hours) is objective vs. getting used to sound?

    :b
  2. G

    How much of burn-in/ break-in (in hours) is objective vs. getting used to sound?

    No, not stupid (although some may disagree) just gullible, poorly informed and easily suggestible. :D This certainly doesn't apply to all audiophiles, but many are. Will believe in anything, hence all the melodrama.
  3. G

    How much of burn-in/ break-in (in hours) is objective vs. getting used to sound?

  4. G

    How much of burn-in/ break-in (in hours) is objective vs. getting used to sound?

    Rather limit or avoid embarrassment by keeping quiet. I can respect that. :cool: No vested interests? So you don't own a business selling cable? I'm sorry, I was mistaken then. I noticed your posts "proving" wire burn-in on several other forums too. No vested interests or is that denialism...
  5. G

    How much of burn-in/ break-in (in hours) is objective vs. getting used to sound?

    If you could show just one person who could hear (not imagine) hearing their daydreams in a controlled, ears-only, imagination-free listening test of cable burn-in you would have a case. At the *very* least. You don't even have that. :) There is no evidence of anyone having "heard" cable...
  6. G

    How much of burn-in/ break-in (in hours) is objective vs. getting used to sound?

    And you aren't? You set out to prove that cable "burn-in" makes a measurable difference and failed to show that the measurable difference had *anything* to do with cable "burn in". LOL. Your "test" was so irresponsibly conducted that it's results are meaningless. It tells us nothing about...
  7. G

    How much of burn-in/ break-in (in hours) is objective vs. getting used to sound?

    Apologies for not replying sooner to this abortion of an actual "test". This is what we call "pathological science". No actual science involved! So you took a measurement ... then took another measurement 5 days later ... and then decided to correlate whatever change took place to "burn in"...
  8. G

    How much of burn-in/ break-in (in hours) is objective vs. getting used to sound?

    I doubt studio's have any concerns for sonic apparition tales concocted by [Edited out] audiophiles. Sound quality is a pressing matter due to "burn in", you say? That's funny, "thedude". Very funny.
  9. G

    How much of burn-in/ break-in (in hours) is objective vs. getting used to sound?

    I was referring to his clients, not Mr Meitner. It's not outside the realm of possibility to think that perhaps, just perhaps, there are larger, more pressing issues for large studios to worry about than gear "burning in" etc.
  10. G

    How much of burn-in/ break-in (in hours) is objective vs. getting used to sound?

    If the measured change is consistent with known audibility thresholds then no. The burden of proof here is always on the positive assertion. (You cannot prove a negative.) If no one can show you an objective listening test that demonstrates audibility, and no one can show you a measured change...
  11. G

    How much of burn-in/ break-in (in hours) is objective vs. getting used to sound?

    No, there NO science that shows audible "break in". None. Whatsoever. There are measureable changes of equipment "warming up" / "burning in", but not everything that is measurable is audible. No demonstrations so far. The fact that you won't even entertain the possibility that yes, your...
  12. G

    How much of burn-in/ break-in (in hours) is objective vs. getting used to sound?

    The system sounding better or sounding worse can be explained by the listener, being in flux, changes in mood/state of mind, health, expectations, any number of biases etc. The "other factors". One moment the system is sounding great, the next it sounds different, not great, but different ...
  13. G

    How much of burn-in/ break-in (in hours) is objective vs. getting used to sound?

    Ed Meitner has no controlled evidence that his products need 10 days of "burn in" else this discussion would be done and dusted a long time ago. Based on ... a feeling, he thinks it takes 10 days which of course is anecdotal. If Ed Meitner set up a controlled test to demonstrate clear...
  14. G

    How much of burn-in/ break-in (in hours) is objective vs. getting used to sound?

    He "feels"? I guess 250 hours (??) is at least enough time to void the return policy. Clever strategy.
  15. G

    How much of burn-in/ break-in (in hours) is objective vs. getting used to sound?

    Positive, constructive dialog can't take place if there is a failure to comprehend what is written.
  16. G

    How much of burn-in/ break-in (in hours) is objective vs. getting used to sound?

    Zero reading comprehension I see. I said I believe people are hearing differences. Just that the differences may not have anything to do with "burn in". That was too difficult for your audiophile mind to comprehend? The folks claiming the equipment is "burning in", ie you. Hopefully you can...
  17. G

    How much of burn-in/ break-in (in hours) is objective vs. getting used to sound?

    If this subject is impossible to answer then making objective claims of gear "burn in" is a tacit admission that this circus tale is pure wheel spinning on the audiophiles part. I think you have our roles switched here - the real trolling is insisting we take a "hypothesis" seriously based on no...
  18. G

    How much of burn-in/ break-in (in hours) is objective vs. getting used to sound?

    Anyone can make a "hypothesis". :) Proving negatives is a logical fallacy, I'm sure you know. If there was evidence to support the "hypothesis" that gear "burns in" and physically affects the sound waves audibly, as opposed to psychologically, to human ears , it would have been presented decades...
  19. G

    How much of burn-in/ break-in (in hours) is objective vs. getting used to sound?

    Hypothesis' supported by no reliable evidence are indeed anecdotal. I refer you to ghost-hearers.
  20. G

    How much of burn-in/ break-in (in hours) is objective vs. getting used to sound?

    LOL. If this were a court case the anecdotal "I heard it, it must be true" findings would be laughed at. The case would be thrown out for an overwhelming lack of reliable evidence and Stehno would be fined for wasting the courts time.
  21. G

    How much of burn-in/ break-in (in hours) is objective vs. getting used to sound?

    You don't seem familiar with the null hypothesis. An experience is registered - assumed to be "break in" or "burn in". An experience. Not yet established, hence the controversy over the subject. Did you know that millions of people world-wide "hear" ghosts? The fact that people experience it...
  22. G

    How much of burn-in/ break-in (in hours) is objective vs. getting used to sound?

    Well, you have ignored, entirely side-stepped and evaded the psychological component of hearing, affecting all humans, except apparently you. "Unbright" you say? Ah, yes, being in denial of your own humanity and it's implications on "hearing" escapes your comprehension. As a human being you...
  23. G

    How much of burn-in/ break-in (in hours) is objective vs. getting used to sound?

    Please walk us through your method of "listening through" these other factors. Do you listen one moment and think "the equipment is beginning to burn in", and the next think "my perceptions are changing, hence the change in presentation"? How do you know? That is the crux of the situation...
  24. G

    How much of burn-in/ break-in (in hours) is objective vs. getting used to sound?

    Well, at the same time that these "burn in" changes are taking place over time, as claimed, whether it be minutes, hours or even days, your perceptions too are changing over time, entirely outside of your control. So the simple question is : how did you manage to isolate gear "burn in"...
  25. G

    How much of burn-in/ break-in (in hours) is objective vs. getting used to sound?

    Very interesting. Your method for parsing out gear "burn in" changes from simultaneous perceptual "burn in"?
  26. G

    Audiophiles Who Don't Trust Their Ears...

    Sorry, if that was the case then I apologise. If you heard something in your listening session then I don't see any conflict. You heard what you heard. I wouldn't dispute your experience. I never read your earlier posts so I made assumptions. I was in error. I don't dispute your experience...
  27. G

    Audiophiles Who Don't Trust Their Ears...

    Hundreds and hundreds of examples littered all over the forum. In almost every sub-forum. On every audiophile forum. Something was heard, the evidence for that is "I heard it". That is it. Could be psychogenic differences, or real differences resulting from changes in sound waves meeting the...
  28. G

    Audiophiles Who Don't Trust Their Ears...

    Nonsense and gibberish? Psychoacoustics and pyschology? Goodness. :) Limiting confounding variables in a test to establish audibility thresholds in audio testing ie audible differences. Part of the scientific method. Used in all fields of science, not just in audio. Please look it up. If...
  29. G

    Audiophiles Who Don't Trust Their Ears...

    According to whom? I don't need to drive a Ferrari in order to know it handles better than a Yaris on a race track. I don't need to listen blind in order to understand and appreciate its effectiveness in perceptual testing. I'm cognisant of the fact that subjective perception may not be an...
  30. G

    Audiophiles Who Don't Trust Their Ears...

    Claiming the sound (as in physical sound waves in air) had changed as a result of the audio component, not due to subjective perception. Audiophiles hardly ever pull the perception card when discussing audible claims of sound quality. They attribute the sound (physical waves in air) to audio...

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

Home Forums Contact us

User Menu

Login
Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing
Top Bottom