Studio Monitors
- Thread starter dbrook2010
- Start date
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
garww
New member
xenyx qx2442. online dude in Germany was showing off his new signature 22 mtk so I noticed the 48-month, today, checking that out. Actually, I think it was a sidebar ad for 48-mo that got my attention
"
Quote Originally Posted by ecc83 View Post
"they need around 20-40 hours of break-in time with dynamic range music before they settle in " Don't want to start a cow but if I were paying close to $4000 for a pair of monitors I would expect them to be bang on specc' straight out of the box!
Dave.
You funny man.
Even the most basic guitar amp speaker takes some playing for it to break in.
Most higher-end monitors require a break-in period...it doesn't mean they are inferior because of that.
It's not so much about any spec changes...more about the slight softening of the highs and the bass opens up a bit.
I don't have any problem with them needing a break-in period...which I would do anyway before really mixing on them, because they are not played during manufacturing...so everything is tight."
Guitar speaker suspensions are made of a different material from "hi fi" cones and their operation is barely pistonic nor comparable. In any case, although there MIGHT be some credence to guitar speakers, "burning in or "settling in" it would take much more than a few hours since few people would be able to run them at close to their rating for very long. In any case I have never read of any valid test or heard any samples that would support the claim.
In the case of hi-fi and monitor speakers there is even less evidence. There ARE a few tests done on headphones that show a tiny measurable change in a particular sample and SOME, subjective claim of a difference in sound but it is tiny and within experimental error. In any case even where a pair of cans is tested 24 or 48 hours after a pink noise blast how can the tester say their EARS (and brain) is the same after many hours of "life"?
In contrast Shure tested a pair of their high end IEMs and found no measurable change in a pair after 11 years use compared to a new set.
The myth has arrived at the serious recording scene from the beardy tweaks in the Russ Andrews hi fi world and until I see properly documented, independent, peer reviewed evidence I shall treat such claims as on a pair with Teflon wires and $1000 IEC cables.
Springs, be they in gunlocks, in your V8's valves or speaker suspensions do not fatigue.
Dave.
Quote Originally Posted by ecc83 View Post
"they need around 20-40 hours of break-in time with dynamic range music before they settle in " Don't want to start a cow but if I were paying close to $4000 for a pair of monitors I would expect them to be bang on specc' straight out of the box!
Dave.
You funny man.
Even the most basic guitar amp speaker takes some playing for it to break in.
Most higher-end monitors require a break-in period...it doesn't mean they are inferior because of that.
It's not so much about any spec changes...more about the slight softening of the highs and the bass opens up a bit.
I don't have any problem with them needing a break-in period...which I would do anyway before really mixing on them, because they are not played during manufacturing...so everything is tight."
Guitar speaker suspensions are made of a different material from "hi fi" cones and their operation is barely pistonic nor comparable. In any case, although there MIGHT be some credence to guitar speakers, "burning in or "settling in" it would take much more than a few hours since few people would be able to run them at close to their rating for very long. In any case I have never read of any valid test or heard any samples that would support the claim.
In the case of hi-fi and monitor speakers there is even less evidence. There ARE a few tests done on headphones that show a tiny measurable change in a particular sample and SOME, subjective claim of a difference in sound but it is tiny and within experimental error. In any case even where a pair of cans is tested 24 or 48 hours after a pink noise blast how can the tester say their EARS (and brain) is the same after many hours of "life"?
In contrast Shure tested a pair of their high end IEMs and found no measurable change in a pair after 11 years use compared to a new set.
The myth has arrived at the serious recording scene from the beardy tweaks in the Russ Andrews hi fi world and until I see properly documented, independent, peer reviewed evidence I shall treat such claims as on a pair with Teflon wires and $1000 IEC cables.
Springs, be they in gunlocks, in your V8's valves or speaker suspensions do not fatigue.
Dave.
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
You're even funnier than I thought.
So when the manufacturers tell you to run them in for 20-40 hours at moderate to loud levels, enough to see some cone movement, so that they settle in...and when everyone that's gotten a pair in the last 10 years (or however long they've been in production) says the same thing, that they needed to be run in, and then they really sounded as they should....
....you're going to be the skeptic, believing that all of that is "myth"....?
OK, Dave.
I just didn't realize you've been that involved with the "serious recording scene" to know which is fact and which is myth...but I think you should contact Focal and ask them to provide some "properly documented, independent, peer reviewed evidence" to you, and that until they do, you will remain a skeptic.
I'm sure they will get right on it.
In the mean time...I'll let you know how they sounded before and after I run them in as recommended...and you can believe it or not.
If Focal do indeed have some data on the subject I shall be pleased to read it (got a link?) but they are far from the only manufacturer of high end monitors and, as far a I am aware not all others suggest such a run in period?
I am also very well aware that the "marketing" side of even very prestigious audio companies* is a bit divorced from the science and engineering side and a little "mystery" often gets slotted into the adpuff! Focal are of course a very well respect manufacturer but so are B&W but I notice they have succumbed to the bollox of PTFE wiring and bi-wiring. I noticed in a recent review of a REALLY high end passive monitor that they had but a single pair of terminals.
But, to repeat my first comment. IF the speakers need a run in period why can it not be done during production? Easy enough to rig a 100 units up to 50Hz in a sound proof room. There are many, many products that need annealing, maturing, settling time and all sorts of time related treatment before they are fit for sale and meet their published specification. For a speaker mnfctr NOT to do this smacks to me of a bit of "spinning"?
I will admit that your experience and personal evidence suggests that the Focals need this this treatment. Might we have a couple of before and after clips?
*We even have an audio OP AMP company claiming a "unique distortion reducing circuit" but they give no schematic nor MO and Duggy Self found they were much worse for distortion than the venerable NE5532.
Dave.
I am also very well aware that the "marketing" side of even very prestigious audio companies* is a bit divorced from the science and engineering side and a little "mystery" often gets slotted into the adpuff! Focal are of course a very well respect manufacturer but so are B&W but I notice they have succumbed to the bollox of PTFE wiring and bi-wiring. I noticed in a recent review of a REALLY high end passive monitor that they had but a single pair of terminals.
But, to repeat my first comment. IF the speakers need a run in period why can it not be done during production? Easy enough to rig a 100 units up to 50Hz in a sound proof room. There are many, many products that need annealing, maturing, settling time and all sorts of time related treatment before they are fit for sale and meet their published specification. For a speaker mnfctr NOT to do this smacks to me of a bit of "spinning"?
I will admit that your experience and personal evidence suggests that the Focals need this this treatment. Might we have a couple of before and after clips?
*We even have an audio OP AMP company claiming a "unique distortion reducing circuit" but they give no schematic nor MO and Duggy Self found they were much worse for distortion than the venerable NE5532.
Dave.
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
Everyone's playback environment is a little different...that's why it makes more sense to break/burn - in at your location rather than at the factory.
Running-in period for hifi speakers | Focal | Listen Beyond
And some science for you too...with plenty of numbers-n-graphs.
Speaker Break In: Fact or Fiction? | Audioholics
Running-in period for hifi speakers | Focal | Listen Beyond
And some science for you too...with plenty of numbers-n-graphs.
Speaker Break In: Fact or Fiction? | Audioholics
"The compliance of the air enclosed within the enclosure is significantly less than the driver's suspension compliance, therefore the enclosure has the dominant influence where it comes to determining things such as system resonance. Thus, owing to the physics of the enclosed box loudspeaker system, any pre/post differences in driver suspension mechanical compliance are constrained from having as large an effect on parameters such as resonance frequency, etc as intuition might lead one to believe it should."
The drop in cone resonance over time has been known for decades (G.A.Briggs) but as the above states (from the link) the effect is marginal and restricted to the area around bass resonance. The "night and day" claims for burning in often cited are reckoned to be more the case of the listener becoming acclimatized to the speakers, or more especially the headphones. The fact that once "run in " there is nothing to refer back to make the whole debate pointless imHo!
The question still stands. WHY don't they age the bloody things in the factory?
Dave.
The drop in cone resonance over time has been known for decades (G.A.Briggs) but as the above states (from the link) the effect is marginal and restricted to the area around bass resonance. The "night and day" claims for burning in often cited are reckoned to be more the case of the listener becoming acclimatized to the speakers, or more especially the headphones. The fact that once "run in " there is nothing to refer back to make the whole debate pointless imHo!
The question still stands. WHY don't they age the bloody things in the factory?
Dave.
Pinky
and The Brain...
First sentence on the Focal page...
I suppose they could break them at 50% humidity and 70F, an average studio environment.
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
I prefer 40% and 68F...
I don't see why any of this is odd or needs to be questioned with such skepticism.
We might as well ask why guitar string manufacturers don't break in the strings at the factory, instead of making us do it after we install them.
Many materials adjust with a little time and environmental impact. There's like a million things that require this type of process.
It's not like it's being used as some hyped selling point...like wooden knobs and such.
I don't see why any of this is odd or needs to be questioned with such skepticism.
We might as well ask why guitar string manufacturers don't break in the strings at the factory, instead of making us do it after we install them.
Many materials adjust with a little time and environmental impact. There's like a million things that require this type of process.
It's not like it's being used as some hyped selling point...like wooden knobs and such.
I have just scrutinized the manual for the Neumann KH310s. There is no suggestion of them needing a break in period. Indeed they state that once the setting have been optimized for a particular position they will not need touching again unless the monitors are moved or the objects around them (screens etc) are changed.
I DO agree this discussion gets nobody anywhere. I have had it several times in other forums (and I am far from alone in my position but yes, quite a way from the majority!)
Of course Miroslav! Enjoy those superb speakers.
Dave.
I DO agree this discussion gets nobody anywhere. I have had it several times in other forums (and I am far from alone in my position but yes, quite a way from the majority!)
Of course Miroslav! Enjoy those superb speakers.
Dave.
Lets change it to something more productive.
I dunno, maybe the chemical composition of monster cables and how that is degraded by atmospheric pollutants over time??
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
Well...next time I'll have to buy the KH310 monitors to avoid the break-in period.
The nice thing is that the break-in only requires that you play some music through them for awhile...so even if it is not really needed, it certainly goes well with the intended purpose of the monitors.
My only concern with the Twin6 is that they do have a somewhat forward mid range...which is good for mixing, since that is where all your detail is found...but I've been using the Mackie 824 monitors for so long, and they have the big 8" speaker with a huge low end...so it might take a bit of ear time to get use to the Twin6...but everyone says that the results on them tend to translate very well across most other systems...which in the end is what I'm looking for.
Apparently, the low end on the Twin6 opens up after the break-in period, and/or your ears adjust to them and you start to hear them as they should be. Also, the Twin6 give you the option to add the Sub at a later date if you really want the huge low end THUMP, which is better than having too much low end that you don't need from the basic monitors without Sub.
jimmys69
MOODerator
I personally have no problem spending the time to 'break in' a set of monitors. Just happy to have them. Curious why this is even a debate?
ADAM also suggests similar time on their site. I first wondered why they didn't do that at the factory myself, but whatever. They sounded a bit bright out of the box, and now not.
So, would that have been different if they did the 'break in' in a controlled environment? I don't know or care. They must have a reason or they wouldn't sell a product that needed this. That wouldn't make sense to require user to do such if there was not a basis for it.
ADAM also suggests similar time on their site. I first wondered why they didn't do that at the factory myself, but whatever. They sounded a bit bright out of the box, and now not.
So, would that have been different if they did the 'break in' in a controlled environment? I don't know or care. They must have a reason or they wouldn't sell a product that needed this. That wouldn't make sense to require user to do such if there was not a basis for it.