Takes time, and storage space.
Some do, but at mid to low end I can’t imagine any sort of long process makes sense.
Manufacturers do often suggest that sound changes over time, Dan Clark suggests 90+ hrs on the Ether CX, and I think he’s changed that to 200.
Of all the headphones I have here, most had negligible change over time, minus maybe the first hour of use. But the Ether CX changed pretty dramatically over 100 or so hours of listening, not so much in tonality but in it’s ability to represent a cohesive sound stage at lower volumes.
I am in the ‘burn in helps’ camp. but agree with M0N…just listen! 
If anybody wants to buy a lightly used fully burnt in walkman fron 1985, let me know, lol. Audiophile rocks sold separately. 
You have the read the specific product spec’s and detailed manuals.
They usually mention if testing has been made in factory.
Few of the good manufacturers do this. Not everyone and usually in the high-end gear and expensive.
No need for cheap… stuff but like the JBL 3xxP speakers have this mentioned.
Would add cost’s and might be in “standards” of some manufactorer’s if only 5% of products breaks with-in guarantee time.
1 Like
Yes, not every company even if they make high end products will sufficiently burn them in, you just have to check or ask
does it come with a slightly smoked in dope 3.5mm trs mmcx cable by chance?
1 Like
Hmm with the blunt cables the used market might just go up in smoke
Just because it takes me back lol…
2 Likes
Best scene of the movie
1 Like
The brands that I can remember that I know the owners said they do it are Grado Labs and PS audio I’m sure they’re more.
PS Audio, Schiit Audio, Cavalli Audio all burn in the higher end amps for at least a hundred hours.
Cavalli recommends burning in the liquid spark for a 100 hours before you get the smooth liquid sound signature. It’s stated in the user manual. I’d have to look at my other manuals to see if they say anything.
I believe like Mon said that you should give yourself some time to listen to headphones before writing them off… I really disliked the He4xx when I first got them. You can read it yourself here in the HE4XX appreciation thread. I let them play overnight and the next day, just a normal music playlist.
The next day when I came home from work they sounded better and more pleasing. This is the kicker though, I tested them on the Magni 3 which was the strongest amp I had at the time. They came to life! I went back to listen to them on my liquid spark and noticed that I didn’t need to turn the volume up as much to get the same level/quality of sound. I can’t explain exactly what happened. I can only assume I freed up something that needed to be stretched or something.
Again to Mon’s point, Hifiman isn’t known for its quality control so it’s completely possible some of the glue may have been restricting the driver or something.
1 Like
It’s pretty consistent too . It never took too long to " burn them in". They are the only piece of gear though that I experienced "burn in " on a hardware level everything else was just me getting used to the sound.
What im trying to say is science doesn’t explain everything right now with our limited understanding. We’re nibbling at the edges of understanding the world around us. We like to think we know far more than we do. Our current understanding of things is limited as is our science. Theres still much to learn. So much. I dont think people can completely rule out burn in. as well as religion.
1 Like
Sure though there is no point in even talking about religion or God seeing as all religious language is meaningless. If you look at Wittgenstein’s language games or anything from John Hull you can clearly see that it doesn’t follow the verification principle.
Burn in is real, God isn’t
1 Like
Oh no lol don’t wanna see where this thread goes
1 Like
Just saying
1 Like
So flat earth, cartoon unicorns or cuddle bears, weed movies did not do it like 100 posts earlier?
It has goon to poop way way wayyyyyy ago.
Ehm… This thread…
3 Likes
How can you verify something when your science isn’t up to it? like a primitive man trying to science germs and bacteria. How can you science something like God? Its not in your purview. But we can look in the mirror or the world around us and see that God exists. Things are too complex to have come about by themselves. Creation is self evident. But we sometimes, with our limited understanding, “logic” ourselves into senselessness.
Have you not read David Hume’s argument against the Teleological Watchwaker argument?
His first objection is that we have no experience of world-making. Hume highlighted the fact that everything we claim to know the cause of, we have derived the inductions from previous experiences of similar objects being created or seen the object itself being created ourselves. For example, with a watch, we know it has to be created by a watch-maker because we can observe it being made and compare it to the making of other similar watches or objects to deduce they have alike causes in their creation. However, he argues that we have no experience of the universe’s creation or any other universe’s creations to compare our own universe to and never will; therefore, it would be illogical to infer that our universe has been created by an intelligent designer in the same way that a watch has.
3 Likes