How do I "break-in" an amp? (1 Viewer)

[Saurav]

Does anyone here subscribe to AudioXpress magazine? It's a DIY oriented publication. The current issue reviews some amplifier modules. With one of them, the reviewer measured the THD right as he plugged it in for the first time, and then after about an hour, and found a pretty significant difference. If anyone's interested, I can dig up the article and provide page numbers etc.

So... solid state electronic components apparently do experience some changes after being plugged in for a while. I don't know if this case was break-in or warm-up, and this test was perormed over a few hours, not the 100-200 hours that people usually talk about.

Like Craig says, speakers (and phono cartridges) have physical moving components, so the break-in there is much more noticable.

 

[Arthur S]

It is more likely that you get used to the sound of the amp than that the sound of the amp changes. We get used to things after a while.

How many hours does it take to break in cables and speaker wire?

 

[Chu Gai]

Dig it up Saurav. Always good to have information. Btw, did you read odyssey's site with respect to breakin. How much of that made any sense to you?

 

[John Royster]

How many hours does it take to break in cables and speaker wire

Can be anywhere between 50 and 300 hours or even longer. depends on the cable.

 

[PhilS]

Getting back to the issue of amp break-in, my amps were supposed to break in at 100 hours, but they actualy broke in at 123 hours, 17 minutes and 32 seconds. Do you think this is covered under warranty? Should I return them?

BTW, the notion that those who claim that break-in has no effect have the burden of proof on the issue is absolutely ludicrous. It is only logical that the one claiming a difference has the burden of proof.

 

[RichardMA]

Don't worry Larry, Jaleel just likes to threadfart w/o offering any logical discussion. This is just the norm for him. The thread starter didn't say do you believe it in, yet jaleel throws his unwanted opinion in though.

There may well be electrical/sound changes that happen
as an amplifier is exposed to electric current. But it's
not up to people who don't believe it to prove it, it's
up to the people who theorize that break in happens
to follow up and provide some evidence (if possible) that
break in actually occurs. If puny human hearing (not that
good in the animal kindom) can detect differences after
a time period, then surely electronic measurement devices
can do the same. In any case, rather than simply maintaining there is a thing called, "break in" it would be
very interesting to know why this seems to happen.
The question is, why has this never been approached from
a scientific testing standpoint and if it has, has any
evidence been found to support it? Human hearing is an odd
thing; It even changes depending on how much food you've
just injested so some real measurements would go a long
way to eliminating some of the contentiousness this subject
produces.

 

[Chu Gai]

You know Phil, those bastards at www.trsgreatamerican.com have yet to acknowledge my complaint which was given by email, to the 'receptionist', and via an email sent to supposedly the president. I'm an ornery fella though, and the next batch won't be so friendly. I take it you've read my other thread in the amp section regarding my email exchange.

 

[Robert_Dufresne]

Richard

I think you are absolutely right. After all how often
do you hear "it will grow on you" or "you will get used
to it".To me , break in period is the time it takes
for a person to get used to the sound of a new component.

As for the burden of proof it as always been on he who
makes the claim. It is one of the basis of science and
holds true for all fields of human endeavor. Why should it
be any different when it comes to audio.

Robert

 

[John Royster]

To all nay-sayers:

How many amplifiers have you owned? I've owned six from harman kardon, to denon, to adcom and even a krell for 9 months. All did indeed sound different after some time. So there is my proof, good enough for me.

If you'll read my previous posts this is not uncommon among all forms of electronics. All components have certain tolerances, where said component falls within those tolerances changes with time/use. You learn this in second year EE. This is basic, no smoke and mirrors here.

If components did not change then there would be no failure right? What is failure? A component exceeding its stated tolerance. But components can't change right?

That means all electronics should last forever. now that simply isn't the case now is it?

 

[Saurav]

Quote:

Sorry, I didn't.

 

[ling_w]

Saurav,

That is not breaking in, but warming up. It is well know that once transistor, tubes or oher components reaches operation temperature, it performs more optimally.

 

[Jason Bell]

I've seen break in occur with CPUs and overclocking. These were measurable and could be seen. To use my P3700 as an example out of the box it would take 1.90 core volts to reach 933mhz. After about a week I could reach 933mhz at 1.7v with 100% stability. Maybe this dont apply to amps but to me it shows that electronics due break in and become more efficient and after all amps are electronic.

 

[Saurav]

That is not breaking in, but warming up. It is well know that once transistor, tubes or oher components reaches operation temperature, it performs more optimally.

I wonder how well known that is. I've seen people ask about warming up amps, and be met with similar derision and ridicule as people asking about amps breaking in.
Anyway... I'm not on one side or the other in this discussion. That was just a factoid that I thought others might find interesting, that's all.