burn in period of new hifi equipment

[Anonymous]

athenry:

JoelSim:Kit needs to warm up. I'd say at least half an hour, if not an hour before my stuff is really on song. It sounds a bit disjointed when cold.

JS - how do you know? Genuine question. Half an hour after I start a session I'm on a different track or album, an hour later it's a different album for sure. Different tempo, different production etc. Also, I've probably relaxed in that period so I'm definitely listening differently (kids to bed, glass of wine, chill etc). Maybe you can tell the difference - I'm not for a minute telling you your own system - but I know I can't tell the difference between 5 mins on and 5 hrs on. If you can spot the difference I'm actually quite envious that you have an insight which I don't.

Pheew ... no wonder mate! ... you have Cyrus .... no matter how 'warm' or cold it gets it gets, it still sounds s..t

just joking!

 

[JoelSim]

athenry:

JoelSim:Kit needs to warm up. I'd say at least half an hour, if not an hour before my stuff is really on song. It sounds a bit disjointed when cold.

JS - how do you know? Genuine question. Half an hour after I start a session I'm on a different track or album, an hour later it's a different album for sure. Different tempo, different production etc. Also, I've probably relaxed in that period so I'm definitely listening differently (kids to bed, glass of wine, chill etc). Maybe you can tell the difference - I'm not for a minute telling you your own system - but I know I can't tell the difference between 5 mins on and 5 hrs on. If you can spot the difference I'm actually quite envious that you have an insight which I don't.

Really. Mine always sounds like someone else's system when first turned on. So I tend to leave it playing for a few minutes and then come back in to the room, by which time it's flowing nicely. I know what you mean by relaxed, glass of wine etc etc though.

When first on it seems to blink along, sounds a little rough round the edges, not as much rythmn. Mind you my CDP has valves so that may explain it.

It's even better once I've warmed up my cables in F1 style tyre warmers.

PS The last line was a joke

 

[Anonymous]

dim_span:ÿ

Pheew ... no wonder mate! ... you have Cyrus .... no matter how 'warm' or cold it gets it gets, it still sounds s..t

ÿjust joking!

Hah, we're all comedians today. Just as well I'm not a sensitive wee soul ! Anyway you'll be laughing on the other side of your face when you see my splendid Cyrus with JoelSim's F1 tyre warmers on. Paid a bit extra for Ferrari, as I thought the red looked warmer. ÿ I've also ordered a balaclava and gloves just to be sure, plus a 1970s snorkel for that analogue sound. Bit concerned about the fire risk, but in the interests of scientific enquiry I suppose we'll see if the sound warms up between serious smouldering and actual ignition.

{On another subject, really genuinely looking for advice on older 2nd hand speakers - thread posted earlier today - if you have a view is there any chance you could take a look and see what you think? Ta much.}

 

[Anonymous]

athenry:dim_span:

Pheew ... no wonder mate! ... you have Cyrus .... no matter how 'warm' or cold it gets it gets, it still sounds s..t

just joking!

Hah, we're all comedians today. Just as well I'm not a sensitive wee soul ! Anyway you'll be laughing on the other side of your face when you see my splendid Cyrus with JoelSim's F1 tyre warmers on. Paid a bit extra for Ferrari, as I thought the red looked warmer. I've also ordered a balaclava and gloves just to be sure, plus a 1970s snorkel for that analogue sound. Bit concerned about the fire risk, but in the interests of scientific enquiry I suppose we'll see if the sound warms up between serious smouldering and actual ignition.

{On another subject, really genuinely looking for advice on older 2nd hand speakers - thread posted earlier today - if you have a view is there any chance you could take a look and see what you think? Ta much.}

did read your previous post on the speakers ... not really qualified to comment there as I prefer floorstanders, but can say that as far as 2nd hand vintage speakers are concerned, it's best to listen to them first before departing with your cash, especially when buying off ebay

some real bargains around ... cabinets may need some attention (scratches and nicks etc) ... and chech the surrounds ... I have always bought 2nd hand old speakers and never had any problems

people like Matthewpiano will be along shortly to advise on that thread

ps: been listening to some of your recomendations on the 'what are you listening to' thread ... good taste

 

[idc]

Funny this about warming kit up. As well as preferring the cold sound of my present MF amp, its predecessor, another MF X-CAN ran warmer and I kept it away from all other kit to help keep it cool. Then before that I had a Rega Mira which ran very hot. I ended up shifting cables and putting it on wooden blocks to improve ventilation and keep it as cool as possible. Again, I preferred the cold sound.

 

[Clare Newsome]

But then some would say MF kit sounds warm to start with

 

[idc]

Very true and tamed with the DAC, ICs and headphones that I use. I am happy with warmth at the heart of the system, but not that as the overall sound.

 

[Anonymous]

athenry:JS - how do you know? Genuine question.

It's THE question, actually.

We do not -- I repeat, DO NOT -- have anything like an absolute memory of sound.

The only way to compare sounds is by immediately switching between them.

Trying to identify differences between something you heard yesterday, an hour, or even one minute ago, is worthless -- you're dealing with your own processed memories; not with actual sound.

I'm surprised so few audiophiles realize this. It's not like esoteric wisdom only known to a few initiates -- it's basic knowledge, found in any text book.

I'm just as surprised that so few audiophiles actually compare equipment in a proper way. After all, all that's needed is a switchbox for the type of signal in question. I've bought several switchboxes myself the last year. Some are rubbish, and you soon learn to avoid them. But for the price of an entry level interconnect cable, you'll get a DIY kit with components as good as those that sits inside your pre-amp, or better. There's several choices with relays or mechanical switches, the former with the choice of remote control. Triple the amount, and you'll get it assembled. Then there's no end to what you can actually compare.

Beware that some of the 'night and day differences' you thought you heard earlier might be hard to discover though.

 

[Anonymous]

Fahnsen:

athenry:JS - how do you know? Genuine question.

It's THE question, actually.

We do not -- I repeat, DO NOT -- have anything like an absolute memory of sound.

The only way to compare sounds is by immediately switching between them.

Trying to identify differences between something you heard yesterday, an hour, or even one minute ago, is worthless -- you're dealing with your own processed memories; not with actual sound.

I'm surprised so few audiophiles realize this. It's not like esoteric wisdom only known to a few initiates -- it's basic knowledge, found in any text book.

I'm just as surprised that so few audiophiles actually compare equipment in a proper way. After all, all that's needed is a switchbox for the type of signal in question. I've bought several switchboxes myself the last year. Some are rubbish, and you soon learn to avoid them. But for the price of an entry level interconnect cable, you'll get a DIY kit with components as good as those that sits inside your pre-amp, or better. There's several choices with relays or mechanical switches, the former with the choice of remote control. Triple the amount, and you'll get it assembled. Then there's no end to what you can actually compare.

Beware that some of the 'night and day differences' you thought you heard earlier might be hard to discover though.

flippin heck! ... the day I buy a switch box to compare sound is the day I switch off my hifi completely .... I am happy just listening to my choice of music through my old 7 year old pc and £20 tesco pc speakers

 

[idc]

Fahnsen:

athenry:JS - how do you know? Genuine question.

It's THE question, actually.

We do not -- I repeat, DO NOT -- have anything like an absolute memory of sound.

The only way to compare sounds is by immediately switching between them.

Trying to identify differences between something you heard yesterday, an hour, or even one minute ago, is worthless -- you're dealing with your own processed memories; not with actual sound.

I'm surprised so few audiophiles realize this.........

No sorry, I do not think that is true. With practice you get to memorise and so recognise loads of sounds. We humans are programmed to do that from birth and it is the key for language amongst other examples.

With regards to hifi, I know exactly what to expect with my very familiar tester tracks. I can also make a very informed guess at music over different systems and which is better athan another. How is that? Because I have listened to enough music on very good systems to know when I am hearing a good or bad system. The closer two systems sound becomes, the harder it is to differentiate between them. But that is not down to memory, it is down to both systems sounding similar.

 

[chebby]

Indeed. It is often possible to tell who is on the telephone even before they utter a word just from non-verbal noises like an intake of breath or a sniff for example. These cues can also transmit mood and emotion. All without a word being spoken and over a medium as low quality as a telephone.

 

[scene]

idc:Fahnsen:

athenry:JS - how do you know? Genuine question.

It's THE question, actually.

We do not -- I repeat, DO NOT -- have anything like an absolute memory of sound.

The only way to compare sounds is by immediately switching between them.

Trying to identify differences between something you heard yesterday, an hour, or even one minute ago, is worthless -- you're dealing with your own processed memories; not with actual sound.

I'm surprised so few audiophiles realize this.........

No sorry, I do not think that is true. With practice you get to memorise and so recognise loads of sounds. We humans are programmed to do that from birth and it is the key for language amongst other examples.

With regards to hifi, I know exactly what to expect with my very familiar tester tracks. I can also make a very informed guess at music over different systems and which is better athan another. How is that? Because I have listened to enough music on very good systems to know when I am hearing a good or bad system. The closer two systems sound becomes, the harder it is to differentiate between them. But that is not down to memory, it is down to both systems sounding similar.

Agreed we do have a aural memory, and there are people in this world with perfect pitch - I had a friend at school (in the choir with me) who did. Now they can tell exactly what a note is, if it's off key, etc. And they can tell exactly what a piece of music should sound like. I can too, to a degree - I know when it's sounding hard or soft or bright or bass heavy and can hear the difference between my arcam amp when first switched on and 30 minutes later.

My first wife had grade 9 voice and perfect pitch, she had nigh on perfect pitch as well and listened to music and could tell when it was off key, or when the belt on her Rega was slipping...

OK, you're dealing with processed memories, but everything we see, hear, touch, etc in this world is processed from memory. There are people with eidetic memory, that means perfect re-experience of the event. Processing memories does not make them inaccurate.

 

[idc]

I know someone who has a music degree from Cambridge and he can listen to a piece of music and then replicate it. No memory of sound?

 

[chebby]

Can people just 'quote' the relevant bit when replying rather than half the entire thread every time?

 

[scene]

idc:I know someone who has a music degree from Cambridge and he can listen to a piece of music and then replicate it. No memory of sound?

Funnily enough my room was opposite a music scholar who could play back any piece of music as he heard it, improvise on it and bridge into the next. Got a lousy degree, but was writing music for London shows before he graduated and I don't think it bothered him.

Come to think of it, part of the standard Music A Levels is to listen to a piece of music and write down the score and recognise a piece of music from about 8 bars played.

Definitely memory of sound. And we can discriminate between voices, even when disguised - they have to be heavily disguised to prevent it. We instinctively hear nuances in speech as it is our primary mode of communication, how else can you tell when someone is happy, sad, lying, even over a phone?

 

[Anonymous]

scene:Agreed we do have a aural memory, and there are people in this world with perfect pitch
First, this ability is a rare one; not shared by a fraction of all those claiming to hear subtle differences between hi-fi components.
Second, it's something quite different. It's the ability to recognize single notes; not something as complex and subtle as the 'sound' of a certain hi-fi component.

Also the 'recognizing people over the telephone' example miss the target. It's a question of rather simple and easily recognizable sounds and sequences of sound; very far from the subtle differences of the hi-fi world.

Isn't it a little strange, that when people defense the idea of hearing 'nuances too small to be measurable' they choose examples of so obvious phenomenons? The fairy tale concept of 'hearing the grass grow' would be more appropriate.

Processing memories does not make them inaccurate.

There's innumerable psychological experiments showing this: Human memory of complex impressions -- or even the impressions themselves -- is simply not to be trusted...

There's also lots of reliable test showing that even seasoned audiophiles are unable to hear what they normally claim to hear, when hearing under controlled circumstances -- meaning, not being allowed to adjust their impressions to their expectations and prejudices.

Some of these tests also shows that the said audiophiles hear, and are able to describe, differences, when they thing they're hearing different cables (in this case) while they're actually using the same one all the time.

Isn't it a little strange, that people claiming to 'believe their own ears' seems so unwilling to put those ears to a proper test?

 

[JoelSim]

Fahnsen, when I put the Chameleon on the sound was vastly different to what I had just played. Hardly any memory needed.

 

[lonely boy]

Fahnsen:
scene:Processing memories does not make them inaccurate.

There's innumerable psychological experiments showing this: Human memory of complex impressions -- or even the impressions themselves -- is simply not to be trusted...

Can you link us directly to data and actual examples of these experiments?

 

[scene]

lonely boy:Fahnsen:
scene:Processing memories does not make them inaccurate.

There's innumerable psychological experiments showing this: Human memory of complex impressions -- or even the impressions themselves -- is simply not to be trusted...

Can you link us directly to data and actual examples of these experiments?

I'm sorry, I should have said:

Processing memories does not necessarily make them incaccurate

And I agree, there are experiments that have proven the inaccuracy of human memory. There are equally experiments that prove how accurate human memory can be. Here's something you can try yourself if you've got a belt-driven turntable. Get someone to play a track you know well (repeatedly) with minor adjustments on the speed slower/faster/none. Get them not to tell you what (if any) adjustments they have made. Write down whether you thought the speed was different from the previous time and from how you are used to the track sounding. Correlate the results and post them here. I'd be willing to bet that you'd be surprised at how little a piece had to be off-key (by being faster / slower) for you to notice.

Most of the experiments on processing memories and the unreliability have concentrated on visual memory, because it is of importance to criminology.

 

[lonely boy]

lonely boy:Can you link us directly to data and actual examples of these experiments?

And perhaps I should modify my post to include the words - pertaining to audible memory, especially.

 

[scene]

lonely boy:lonely boy:Can you link us directly to data and actual examples of these experiments?

And perhaps I should modify my post to include the words - pertaining to audible memory, especially.

Hey, I'm with you - I'm looking forward to seeing the links to these experiments...

Though here is are some abstracts on the subject of the reliability of aural memory:

A classic one from 1896: click

Or a more recent one on music teaching from 2000: click

Basically aural memory is unreliable in the medium to long term, but in the short term and when comparing to a well-known memory, it can be very accurate. If it wasn't there would be no professional singers, otherwise how could they reproduce the songs they have learned?

 

[Anonymous]

It's taken me 42 years to burn out my ears.......

 

[lonely boy]

scene:
Hey, I'm with you - I'm looking forward to seeing the links to these experiments...

Though here is are some abstracts on the subject of the reliability of aural memory:

A classic one from 1896: click

Or a more recent one on music teaching from 2000: click

Basically aural memory is unreliable in the medium to long term, but in the short term and when comparing to a well-known memory, it can be very accurate. If it wasn't there would be no professional singers, otherwise how could they reproduce the songs they have learned?

Thanks for the links scene.

 

[idc]

Fahnsen:

......Also the 'recognizing people over the telephone' example miss the target. It's a question of rather simple and easily recognizable sounds and sequences of sound; very far from the subtle differences of the hi-fi world......

It took you and me years to learn how to deal with sound ourtt of a telephone. Give a child a phone and they have no idea where the vioces are coming from, why the other person cannot see anything and even who it is. That all has to be learned. It now seems easily recognisable, but your memory has failed you as to how you got to that stage.

Differentiating between the subtle differences of hifi also needs a degree of time, practice and experience. Now I am seriously into hifi and Have listened to thousands of hours of music in analytical way, I can tell differences with greater ease and accuracy than before.

 

[idc]

Fahnsen:

......Also the 'recognizing people over the telephone' example miss the target. It's a question of rather simple and easily recognizable sounds and sequences of sound; very far from the subtle differences of the hi-fi world......

It took you and me years to learn how to deal with sound ourtt of a telephone. Give a child a phone and they have no idea where the vioces are coming from, why the other person cannot see anything and even who it is. That all has to be learned. It now seems easily recognisable, but your memory has failed you as to how you got to that stage.

Differentiating between the subtle differences of hifi also needs a degree of time, practice and experience. Now I am seriously into hifi and Have listened to thousands of hours of music in analytical way, I can tell differences with greater ease and accuracy than before.