Already a member?
Audio Myths... A mostly civilized discussion
You are currently viewing a single conversation.
Return to Full Discussion
I was reading an article about whether or not headphone burn-in was really necessary and it referenced Pascal’s Wager. "Indeed, what keeps this debate going is really the lack of quantifiable evidence debunking the advantages of burn-in. Well, no one has disproven it, say audiophiles. Who are we to say what’s going on between people’s ears, say manufacturers. It’s kind of a Pascal’s Wager for audiophiles: It costs them nothing, it does no harm to the headphones, and you potentially have more to lose not believing in burn-in than you do believing in it." https://www.wired.com/2013/11/tnhyui-earphone-burn-in/
That's the thing. It's a silly argument. Yea parts are moving, with plenty of vibration, and things will slowly shift and find the path of least resistance. We know that. Why argue that?
It will produce a quantifiable change in the audio spectrum. But, good or bad? Totally subjective. Warmer, dryer? Also subjective if you are not testing it yourself.
We can also look at a frequency chart or an oscilloscope and argue over it based on what little understanding we have of it. It doesn't end.
It grinds my gears how people take a small bit of information and over apply it. They think they learned something, and due to hubris, refuse to keep an open mind and keep learning!
I'd rather look like a dumb shit and keep absorbing all of the information around me that I can.
Couldn't this be tested relatively easily with an ABX test?