Haha. Annoyingly, choosing a house is even harder than choosing speakers! But I do know there will never be carpets…
Without a doubt. Out of the box, they sounded terrible. Spendor did flag the running-in period but it was still a bit of a surprise (and did cause some mild panic). But they’re warming up fast and the resolution / clarity upgrade is increasingly apparent.
plastic penguin
Well-known member
Gray
Well-known member
Mine never have - there must be something wrong with me.
Room acoustics - now that's been a (massively) different story for me.
If they're wrong your speakers will always sound out of focus - always compromised - regardless of what 'burn in' might have done.
Revolutions
Well-known member
plastic penguin
Well-known member
My Dalis sounded fine out of the box, but noticed they sounded more cohesive as time went on.
The RS6s by contrast....
Stuart83
Well-known member
Mine either and that's quite a few over the yrs of all types.
I get the reason of why a speaker would need
mainly a "mechanical run in" not unlike a car needs to bed in/lubricate the components.
With speakers it's to slacken the inside spider reflex as the outer rubber surround contrary to belief (and what I also assumed needed the same) apparently does not need to be run in as it has to keep the same uniform elasticity from new to prevent early failure (like a car tyre springs to mind) and maintain the same sound characteristics 🤔
In short only the suspension elements "within" the speaker's body need time to break in, but unwittingly most people demo new speakers with no run in time or hardly any to select their favourite.
Those who home demo will know usually they are demoing new speakers thus making their choice on what they hearing before the run-in process.
I did read once obviously manufacturers would be wary of their being an audible change over time especially in view of the initial demonstrated sound being the chief reason people pick their brand over another.
Regardless of it being apparently for the better it's changed from what it was initially selected for.
Or are hoping that if you don't like the speaker at first, you hang on to it longer to lose the motivation or option to return them.
If (ie) 36hrs being the recommended time for a speaker to break in and a typical demo lasts 10 minutes (for examples sake I usually know in the first few minutes if I like something) then the said speakers would have to of been demoed 6 times to count for just one hour run in time.
Times that by 36 then the speakers would have to be of demoed 216 times before they are completely run in and I doubt that any demo speakers come close to that amount of usage especially within the niche market of hifi before the product line etc changes in most cases.
(I know the richer sounds had used an almost new pair on two occasions including the fynes I bought as I asked.
"They had only been demoed twice" as he said if his memory was correct
He seemed to think the newer and less used the better which reflects the usual opinion within the lion share of new goods.
I thought however unlikely, they maybe had a prior run in pair sent from the factory for those reasons but for richer sounds atleast they said not, my local dealership thinks run-in is for when your runnin late for a bus which tickled me)
That brings me to the physiological aspect of "getting used to a sound and the expecting it to get better therefore it is"
The old adage of "learning to like something"
To Quote "asr" when actually measuring break in results more scientifically than the YouTube examples much more in some cases-
"Objective analysis shows that there is no change to the frequency response and hence tonality of the speaker after a few hours of intensive running (full sweeps from 20 to 20 kHz). This completely mirrors research performed at Harman where they tested a new woofer and a "broken-in" one in a real speaker. While physical changes are occurring in the driver, they are at such low level that there is no hope of attaching them to audibility.
(This following part is what I've always thought to be the case)
Of course our perception of audio is not just connected to sound our ears pick up. Many other factors come into play from our faulty long term memory to allergies and mood. These are responsible for variations we hear even when nothing of import has changed in the system.
(One only has to listen to favourite track when happy then again when not in the mood to notice this abundantly)
Manufacturers either genuinely believe in the speaker break-in myth, repeating what they have falsely concluded like audiophiles. Or are hoping that if you don't like the speaker at first, you hang on to it longer to lose the motivation or option to return them later. Either way, there is no reason to listen to them unless they provide objective proof that sound changes with break-in. After all, this is no small difference so surely they can measure and provide proof"
The full article here-
Do Audio Speakers Break-in?
There are a lot of "everybody knows" type of rules in audio with one of them being that audio gear in general, and speakers in the specific, benefit from "break-in." That is, their performance improves after some time. This is mostly touted by audiophiles but manufacturers also fuel this...
audiosciencereview.com
I'm in no way trying to change anyone's mind as either way if a sound improves it improves, as of-course absolutely to the contrary there are articles saying the exact opposite.
Google afterall is good at making any answer correct or incorrect using varying degrees of fact or none at all.
I'm not saying either is "correct" or incorrect only what I've personally found is in-line with "grey" and the above "audio science review tests"
Afterall the fynes I liked so much after demoing and almost new pair which I then purchased sounded that good out of the box I didn't want a change to occur and gladly after accumulating a good few hrs play time they haven't.
The same is apparent with the older much more used QA's in another room they also stayed true to the original demo performance.
This time the demo pair were indeed brand new by way of a home demo in which I subsequently purchased them on.
BUT here's the thing
I have too experienced an improvement with speakers over time, yet realised it was because of the moving of them into another/bigger room right around the time I'd had a good few hrs played through them plus the becoming used to them, picking out more of what I like and due to choosing and paying for them being readily willing to disguard what I don't.
I never valued room acoustics until recently instead going for the old fill it with large quality speakers etc and what will be will be as long as it's loud.
I have now, due to a odd shaped room creating an echo had to tackle the issue and picked up on the massive improvement simple room acoustics can bring.
I'm certainly not dismissive of speaker break in as above is reasons I may of indeed unknowingly experienced it myself as one thing is apparent and that's I find that I like my two HIFI's more each time i put them on.
My2Cents
Well-known member
I can't see how 'burning in' will go from sounding 'terrible' to great (or even good).
As stated, room acoustics are everything when it comes to sound.
Their heritage goes back to the BBC LS3/5A's which were designed for a specific purpose i.e producing a flat, neutral and transparent sound in a small confined space. The 5a's were designed for studio use which, of course, would have been a treated room.
As stated, room acoustics are everything when it comes to sound.
Their heritage goes back to the BBC LS3/5A's which were designed for a specific purpose i.e producing a flat, neutral and transparent sound in a small confined space. The 5a's were designed for studio use which, of course, would have been a treated room.
Gray
Well-known member
I agree 100% with that.
I've also got no doubt whatsoever that what might initially seem like bad sound to some.....given a bit of time, (usually) becomes very likeable.
Not due so much (if at all) due to 'mechanical burn in', but because their brain - at first rejects alien, very real differences to the familiar sounds it has been used to......learns and understands that what the new speaker does is more correct - and so they end up loving what initially had seemed like a bad sound.
I call it 'brain burn in'.
I'm sure that's real.
podknocker
Well-known member
I do believe there is an amount of electrical and mechanical 'settling in' but it's no more than a few hours perhaps. The compliance of components is a real thing and I do think my speakers sound better after 3 years of use. It's not been a dramatic change though. They did sound odd and lumpy the first time they were fired up, although most of this was possibly due to them not having the foam bungs in. They do sound great with the bungs in and very boomy without them, with that very annoying 'car engine and exhaust drone outside your window' effect. Many speakers, in many living rooms, seem to generate a resonance at similar frequencies. Finding a normal sized speaker for a normal sized living room, without producing these effects, is really difficult. I'm not sure if front ported is better than rear ported, but foam bungs are critical to avoid the bass boom.
Last edited:
Gray
Well-known member
I have no doubt.
Unless I'm ever able to have speakers at least a couple of metres away from the front wall, I'll be avoiding rear ports like the plague.
Al ears
Well-known member
These days a lot of manufacturers have realised that not everyone can us a speaker situated way out into the room so rear ports have become slots, vents, or even passive radiators. Now it gets to a point where it doesn't really matter as long as you can get to a dealer that will allow you to try any speakers in your own home.
davidf
Well-known member
Rear ports can sometimes work. Slot ports work better than round ports near walls, and some use what are classed more as vents than ports, which don't throw out a lot of air violently like smaller round ports.
podknocker
Well-known member
I think using ports to augment the bass gives more problems than solutions, even with the RTL designs. I'd like to see more sealed designs to keep the bass in check and avoid acoustic anomalies, which arise in most situations. My QA3030i sound great with the foam bungs in and I don't intend removing them. Wayward and overblown bass kills the enjoyment. This article is short, but interesting: https://www.monacor.com/magazine/room-modes
Last edited:
davidf
Well-known member
podknocker
Well-known member
Speakers are tested in anechoic chambers to reveal their real frequency response and character. Nobody listens to speakers in one if these chambers and all living rooms are different. I'm sure they do design and listen to speakers for actual rooms also, but they will be ideal conditions, which are real world but not necessarily similar to most living rooms and listening spaces. It's impossible building a speaker to suit every room. It's down to physics in the end and how the speaker reacts with your own environment.
Gray
Well-known member
With good reason - and I'm more than happy with that situation.
I wouldn't want any speakers that I buy, adjusted to suit some of the horrendous listening environments that I see, thanks very much.
Gray
Well-known member
...before treatment, my room had some very obvious, terrible, fluttery reverb - that was ruining all sound.
How could any manipulation at the speaker design stage have done anything to help that?
....NEITHER could the worlds best room 'correction' software have helped the problem that I had.
It couldn't correct the room (nor the effects of it).
How could any manipulation at the speaker design stage have done anything to help that?
....NEITHER could the worlds best room 'correction' software have helped the problem that I had.
It couldn't correct the room (nor the effects of it).
Last edited:
Well, all I can say is that I can’t stop listening to these Spendors! The compromises remain but they’re just ace. Feel like they’ve warmed up properly now and will share more details soon…
Gray
Well-known member
Spendor 4/5 Classic. Some bloke’s review
So the positioning compromises obviously remain. The speakers are too high (unless I stand up, which would be weird), and the chimney breast is blocking proper integration between the two units. Plus the way they’re supported on hollow shelves is no doubt detracting from the sound. But they’re still genuinely a joy and I can’t stop listening to them. They have made me realise just how good my AEs are, which are front and slot ported, interesting given recent comments. But the Spendors have also laid bare their limitations. I’ll start with a couple of minor cons. The Spendors are super transparent (I think that’s the right word), so crappy or old digital recordings can sound a bit crappy and old. They’re defo a bit bass light, which I was fully aware of and it was part of the deal, but that’s probably being slightly exacerbated by the compromised positioning. Can’t wait to hear them on proper stands in my new place. Lots of pros of course. Resolution and clarity are different level, they reveal so much more detail that I hadn’t heard before. Bass might be light but it’s so tight and melodic. Soundstage is much wider / deeper, even with the compromised position. These little fellas just ‘sing.’ And they’re so wonderfully rhythmical. Re-listening to my music library and hearing stuff in a different way is very addictive. Plus they’re beautifully made and I’m loving the retro look more than I thought. And I got £100 off due to the 3 week lead time, result!
So the positioning compromises obviously remain. The speakers are too high (unless I stand up, which would be weird), and the chimney breast is blocking proper integration between the two units. Plus the way they’re supported on hollow shelves is no doubt detracting from the sound. But they’re still genuinely a joy and I can’t stop listening to them. They have made me realise just how good my AEs are, which are front and slot ported, interesting given recent comments. But the Spendors have also laid bare their limitations. I’ll start with a couple of minor cons. The Spendors are super transparent (I think that’s the right word), so crappy or old digital recordings can sound a bit crappy and old. They’re defo a bit bass light, which I was fully aware of and it was part of the deal, but that’s probably being slightly exacerbated by the compromised positioning. Can’t wait to hear them on proper stands in my new place. Lots of pros of course. Resolution and clarity are different level, they reveal so much more detail that I hadn’t heard before. Bass might be light but it’s so tight and melodic. Soundstage is much wider / deeper, even with the compromised position. These little fellas just ‘sing.’ And they’re so wonderfully rhythmical. Re-listening to my music library and hearing stuff in a different way is very addictive. Plus they’re beautifully made and I’m loving the retro look more than I thought. And I got £100 off due to the 3 week lead time, result!
DougK1
Well-known member
Excellent outcome, I'm sure you're chuffed, but guess they'll take a bit of getting used to with their warts and all presentation. I'm sure they will sound better a ear height but if they're anything like my Harb's they sound great from the doorway into the lounge. None of these little sealed box designs are bass monsters but the bass they produce is wonderfully tight and punchy, I'll take that any time over flabby bass-boom from ported speakers.
Last edited:
Al ears
Well-known member
Agreed. Some of the tightest bass I have heard from a standmount speaker comes from my EB Acoustics EB2's
davidf
Well-known member
There are aspects that can be addressed and design features that can be utilised to make a speaker work better in more rooms though. Having to use a pair of speakers a metre or more away from a wall in the average living room is just ridiculous nowadays - it's like manufacturers are presuming their customers have a dedicated listening room in their stately mansion. More and more people cannot or will not accept that nowadays, and you could probably draw more people into the hobby if they weren't confronted with some of the ridiculous photos you see from high-end shows with huge speakers in the middle of the room, cables as thick as a 30ft Amazonian snake, sat on cable lifters that could hold up a Range Rover. The industry scared a lot of people away during the 80s by telling them they couldn't have tone controls, and it continues to put people off in other different ways nowadays.
Stuart83
Well-known member
Yes once the bar is raised and equipment is of higher quality then all the music inputted is laid bare in all it's tuneful glory usually........
Or
The pitfalls of a bad recording are exacerbated even more making some otherwise listenable media a toe curling mess but it's never a small fee away from obtaining it in better quality.
Of course as you know it's more than worth it, when that good quality track you like catches you in the mood the exponential joy and frisson has it all make sense instantly justifying the upgrade both sonically and for the amount added pleasure you now get.
Indeed some music is even added to.
I noticed backing singers that where barely audible come alive and the sound of fingers slipping up the fretboard become a normal occurrence.
It's nice to hear someone enjoying what they've got 👍
Similar threads
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram