Showing 1 of 130 conversations about:
View Full Discussion
Got mine today. And for 10 bucks.... It sounds like 10 bucks.
The cable feels cheap and probably will harden up and crack soon enough.
The bass end is messy. And the treble end sounds tinny.
Somehow Skull candies of ages past sounds a bit better than this. Both in the bass sounds messy but at least it doesn't sound tinny in the treble.
I've heard they sound better with a burn in period. can you report back in a week?
Burn ins are a placebo effect that eventually you will get used to something to eventually "like it."
that gives me the sad face :(
They're better than I expected for $10, but I won't be using them much myself based on the two and a half minutes I've used them for so far.
They lack resolution, they're somewhat muddy, the soundstage is... weird (like there's the center and the sides but nothing between them), and there's definitely a bit of distortion in the treble. I also have to wear them upside-down, since the microphones worn cable-down are unbearable for me.
Given the price, I'd say these are pretty decent, but given the other IEMs I have (which certainly cost more than $10) I have no use for these myself.
that is exactly what they sound like-- a crap version of skullcandy's old earbuds. and shit, my ancient full metal jackets still work just beautifully whereas these things look like they'll break within a month.
Its 2 mechanism playing on your brain. You wanting to like it thus believing in the burn in which will change your perception. (you wanting to see a change thus getting the change, sorta like you want to see jesus on a toast and you get it.) And the other is you will slowly like whatever.
The only piece of audio equipment that can be affected by a burn in is vacuum tubes. And I mean the really old ones. Mainly for that it's based upon the initial manufacturing tolerances.
I agree to a certain extent, but speaker/studio monitor drivers 100% experience break in due to the ‘spider’ that stiffens the cone. Running audio through them cracks and breaks the spider that surrounds the behind of the cone, and it is very audibly noticeable, especially depending on the process the manufacturer used. Headphones on the other hand...a bit of psychology plays a definite part
It's more psychology than anything. Modern day tech of a certain manufacturing tolerances above the minimum bar need no "burn in." The only "burn in" you need is to be burnt into your brain that you will like it. Believe in it hard enough and it will come true. (Noted that it's not like believing in god makes your cancer go away. You still have cancer.)
For questionable large speakers it just needs a small test run not blasting loud music or random noises for 3 weeks or longer. In that 3 weeks you will notice a change because you believe there is a change.
Also brand and cost plays a key. For this I suppose brand plays a key. If you ate the hype of the brand you probs think these are punching beyond its weight class.
I work in professional studios with multi-thousand pound speakers, I can assure you for anything more than budget Hi-Fi speakers, burn in is very real - with Studio Monitors especially. Regardless of ‘brand hype’. I deal with them everyday, it’s common knowledge that the rigid ‘spider’ that is connected to the cone diaphragm inside the cabinet needs quite a few hours of preferably low frequency material to break apart and become flexible for normal use. Before that, the sound can be quite different. It’s actually taken into account in the testing process. You can ask any professional manufacturer who makes their own transducers and they will openly admit that - it’s no secret. Some stores even offer a ‘breaking-in’ service for professionals who need to mix immediately and can’t afford to wait once they have the speakers (although that’s taking it a bit far if you ask me). Headphones on the other hand are of course different and require no such thing. I’ve certainly never discnerned a noticable change with any of mine. With that said, even small components and transducers need to have the right balance between rigidity and flexibility - the latter is helped with use, sound is just vibrations after all. It certainly doesn’t hurt to run them a bit beforehand but I agree the audible difference will be negligible at best.
I'll agree with neoclassicaldan. I mean it's just like shoes... SURE, the shoes will fit great when you first get them in the right size. But they don't feel *just right*, or, their optimal, until the physical material has a bit of time to wear in to the shape of your foot.
Of course that's an extreme example with a lot of differences. But the main point is that any sort of object that's malleable can probably use a little bit of stretching out before it really works its optimal. You wouldn't run a 5k without stretching, would you?
I think to a great extent that this is far reduced with earbuds and speakers with drivers that don't move so much.
I'll admit this COULD be considered pure speculation, as I've never done any formal scientific tests. I don't fall on the side of belief that speakers need 24 hours of white-noise burn-in, but I can say for SURE that some speakers of mine were shrill and bright out of the box and tamed down after a bit of regular use. Definitely not just my ears getting used to them, because some products that were unbearably sharp and bright to begin with are still just as unbearably sharp and bright.
The only real test is double blind. And nobody did it yet.
Shoes are not a comparable comparison.
One way to check although not reliable. Is to listen to something else for a long period of time till you forget how other IEMs sounded like. Then swap to another IEM and stay with it for a long period of time till you forgot how the bolt sounded like. Then grab the Bolt.
The audiophile community is plagued with placebos and mind trickery. Just like how silver cored usb cables connecting your dac to the PC makes the sound somehow more "better" However the power of belief is a strong one, more you believe your silver usb cables does something, it probs will for you.
The only possible time stretching something would be where the cone actually has to move a great volume of air. However, your 8mm driver in the Bolt isn't moving a great deal of air.
Don't get me wrong, like I mentioned, I agree that products with smaller components that move less air are probably not going to have a significant change in performance over time. Thus the Bolt is probably not gonna sound much different 7 months from now.
Hopefully one of these days a proper double blind test CAN be done with the same speaker in both used and unused condition and this community can settle the score
Speakers are usually tested at the factory, as are the drivers. You are also underestimating the power of neural attenuation ("getting used to it"). Are you noticing the clothes you are wearing? Probably, now that I mentioned them, but the perceptual system is, fundamentally, a difference detection system. I will also point out how burn in, as far as I can tell, has *never* made something worse. I have not even seen one person saying "these sounded great at first, but burning they turned to rubbish after they got burned in".
One of the few tests that the audiophile community regard as "scientific" is where some guy had 2 same headphones and those headphones are connected to different DAPs. I think one was a Ibasso and another was an AK The guy mentioned the one on the AK was something he had for ages and the one Ibasso was something in the mail. And the one on the AK sounded better thus burn ins work. But in the video it was clearly marked which one was "old" and "new."
However there is many variables at play there and in a real double blind. You need a good amount of data (people) testing on 1 person doesn't really count.
The only reason that I said large enough air is that. Air it self can be at different temperatures and different temperatures moves differently. But you need one mighty large speaker.
But couldn't some solid conclusions be drawn by actually recording the output of two sets of the same model? That way one could use a spectral analyzer for example and actually compare in a sort of sterile way detatched from human bias
i might be wrong here too... But it's a thought! Definitely a test I'd like to see performed because I personally am no audiophile- "burn in" is just something I've seen many communities split over and I sort of have a hard time believing it DOESN'T play a large role, but I'll gladly come to the other side once I can see some hard data proving its lack of importance.
Being pedantic, I will point out that it is impossible to directly prove a negative. Look at what speakers are made of, and tell me what there might benefit from breaking in. The only thing that might be plausible is the surround, but those are made of rubber and thus are not likely to change much after a few hours or even a few hundred hours of playing in normal conditions. The nail in the coffin for burn in is that there is no solid objective evidence to support it making any kind of audible difference.
There are tests done for a person's "feelings" and raw numbers. However stuff done for numbers could fall into the range of error.
Also a thing to note, There is nothing to disprove if the thing to disprove doesn't exist. So the burden of proof lies upon your hands showing that burnins does something that others trying to prove burnins does nothing.
Like I said - I'm open to being convinced that "burn in" is a false concept. I honestly just wanna know the truth, but I wanna know it's been thoroughly tested in a sterile setting by someone impartial to be sure the results aren't skewed.
Post some links to tests and stuff if you've got them.
On the other hand thPugh, a lot of people get some sort of satisfaction or security in believing in the concept of burn-in. For that sake it's useless to try to convince them otherwise - not only because they won't change their biewpoint but also because it makes them feel better about the quality of their purchases... regardless of whether it's a psychological placebo or something measurable