Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Pro 'Burn in' time.
#11
(13-Nov-2016, 20:02)Hifi_swlon Wrote: ...maybe London power isnt great either. I wish it was possible to just hire a proper scientist to do serious measurements at home and clarify whether it's all psychoacoustics or any real environmental causes.

The 200 also fluctuated throughout my ownership so who knows.

For the first point.
Yes the D's are much and I mean very much dependent on the quality of power they get feed of. My D gets a lot to different locations  (it's so handy with the nice bag  Big Grin ) and the difference in SQ due to the quality of powerlines is quiet astounding. Most times the D performes just the way it ever does but now and then with a slight annoyance of this "digital" textures and if you know how fabulous the D can sound there is no way you can stand those "digital artefacts".

For the third point.
Fluctuating SQ of your D200 is mostly due to quality of power fluctuating throughout 24hours. There may also be some occasions of special events on the powerline when it used to be good for most other days if you live in London.

For the second point.
I don't believe in psychoacoustics for most events they are suggested to be the case of origin.
For me psychoacoustic argumentation is a lame excuse of phenomena that can not be explained and if there was an explanation, it would not fit into the believe system.

I don't think a scientist can help you out because there might be phenomena he can not meassure or if he could his instruments are not precise enough or he just doesn't know of the real functional dependencies. They might not fit into the cage of his books.

Is your believe system that we (or scientist) know everything there is to know and therefor they can conclude about "new" phenomena. Why not stay open minded and accept there might be something else to explore and trust your senses.

What you hear is real. I trust your ears  Wink

gui
"Oh, you can buy the other. But then it is a cost intensive learning process"
berlin
Reply
#12
I trust what I hear, but since hearing is indirect and relies on the brain, it doesn't really provide a way to tell exactly why you're hearing it. I know the 200 and 250pro both audibly vary from my perspective. Whether their sound is always varying I couldn't say. I don't honestly believe hifi is beyond scientific measurement, more simply that most serious scientists are busy doing other 'real' things and the ones working in hifi often have an agenda. Interestingly Devialet probably has the right kit - I'm guessing dcs and meridian and many others with experience in digital audio would too - but it's expensive and so is people's time so are unlikely to be interested!  And all would have an agenda.

My tv picture never noticeably changes. I've never once thought 'dirty power tonight the colours are subdued'. Surely that's something to think about. I'm also a professional in visual imaging so I reckon I'd have a chance to see it.

Anyway I welcome the views - none of us really know what's right and what's not in this area. It's a tricky  one.

[edited to say I would actually be interested in trying some mains conditioning/regeneration but it's hard to get evaluations, and they're big and expensive. And gui your post deserved a better answer but walking and typing on iPhone that was the best I could muster. It was also meant to be very polite if it didn't come across! ]

>>> 1st Place Award: Devialet, last decades most disappointing technology purchase.  <<<

Reply
#13
(13-Nov-2016, 20:54)Antoine Wrote:
(13-Nov-2016, 18:51)Xander Wrote: Do I need to have the loudspeakers connected to do a burn in?

Situation is that I expect my Pro this week, my plan is to have them on the kitchen table connected with a CD player on repeat for a couple of days before have it all back into the rack and connected with all 'cable management' done properly. Next is that I normally stream using Air and I need to bring my laptop to the work, so can not stream 24 / 7.

Without connecting loudspeakers (or some heavy duty resistor Wink) no current will flow in/through the ouput section. You'll only run in parts of the amp this way like the PSU, DAC, input sections.

As Antoine says.

Here is a link to discussion on test loads and a diagram. Measurements show both reactive (speaker simulation) and resistive results. http://www.thegearpage.net/board/index.p...d.1072793/
Tube amps are mentioned here, but this would work just as well with solid state. The "line out" part is not needed for power amp loading.
*
Devialetless!
Roon, ROCK/Audiolense XO/Music on NAS/EtherRegen/RoPieee/USPCB/ISORegen/USPCB/Sound Devices USBPre2/Tannoy GOLD 8
250 Pro CI, MicroRendu(1.4), Mutec MC-3+USB
Reply
#14
An update to mu original post. Luckily for me (and very unusually for a Monday) I have some free time today. The amps have been up and running since about 7:00am this morning, so I reckon I've not far off double their total running since my first post in this thread. Anyway, I reckon Antoine made some very good points in his earlier post, more of that later, but the key point for me is that I have broken one of my own golden rules. That rule is to never change more than one thing at a time, and if you do change one thing, change nothing else for at least two weeks, better still a month. This is a rule that I have learnt the hard way over a number of years. You can fiddle around with your system, try this, try that, make a couple of changes one weekend, have a quick listen and it sounds great. Result! A couple of weeks later, you are listening to something, and you notice something significant, it could be good or bad, and the trouble is, you have no idea what has caused it. I made this mistake last weekend. What I should have done is got the new amps, and simply switched them into my system, changing noting else for at least a month. If I had done that, all would be clear now, anything new or different I might be noticing in listening would be due to the 1000 Pro. I had my reasons, the reconfiguration of the rack and system I knew would be a time consuming and frustrating task, and I also knew it was something that I could happily put off almost indefinitely, hence my plan to take the opportunity of having to switch amps to get all this done.

Anyway, for whatever the reason, I was left thinking, was there anything I had changed that might be having a negative impact? Antoine picked up on the additional connection to the Mutec. In fact this extra connection was optical, so I doubted that this would be problematic. Also, I have an additional CD player connected to the Devialet. Could this be generating a ground loop? Unlikely I thought, but it was a change, so for good order I disconnected this and the optical to the Mutec. I could not see that these items would make much difference, and this proved to be the case. However, the principle remains the same, had I inadvertently changed anything else? One thing occurred to me. When I first had the microRendu, powered by 9V iFi, it ran nicely warm. When I added the Mutec, which draws current via USB, the microRendu ran worryingly hot. At the time I solved this by getting a large drill box from my garage, and this is quite a substantial box which includes all the additional +0.5mm drill sizes. Crude, but sticking a large metal mass on the microRendu did keep the temperatures in check. During my rack rebuild last week I looked at this stupid drill box and put it back where it belongs in the garage and replaced it with a metal plate that I found, far neater, but far lower in mass. Anyway, thinking about this change this morning, with the Mutec switched on the microRendu was again getting worryingly hot, so I reinstated the drill box. With a bit of listening this morning, things do appear much improved, I think the super hot microRendu was having a negative impact on sound quality. (coincidentally, Pimm has posted comments about super hot Mac Mini's today, so we have an inadvertent trend here) So I am happy to report that after a bit more listening this afternoon, yes, things are sounding quite splendid! So, is it the microRendu running cooler, or is it just the fact that I've stuck a few more hours on the amps? Due to the breaking of my golden rule I will never know!

One thing, reading back through a few posts, I have noted one or two comments that brand new Pro's maybe sounded a bit forward, more treble, a touch harsh, all comments I recognise during my first 20 hours or so of running in anger. So as someone who does not really believe in 'burn in' or electronics settling down, I have to say that I am beginning to become genuinely convinced that for what ever reasons Devialet's do not sound their best when very new. This comes after my experience of the Mutec, which I am also convinced kept improving over about two months.

On top of this I think that new kit paranoia does kick in and mess with your mind, but it is fair to say that this afternoon the Pro is sounding very good indeed. I am also hoping that my soon to be delivered LPS-1 power supply for the microRendu will allow me to put my drills back in the garage.

Slightly off topic, I did have a chuckle at Antoine's comment 'I hope you've also paid some attention to 'cable dressing' so how you wired your cables, eg. no signal cables running close and in parallel to power cables, putting some distance between digital and analog interconnects/speaker cables etc'. OK, this is a perfectly sensible suggestion, but the reason this amused me slightly is because I have effectively done the exact opposite, this is because my rack has large holes at the back for neatly routing cables, but if you use these to the full you do end up with signal cables and power cables running very neatly in parallel to each other. To be honest, this aspect is more or less unchanged, so my system before and after the recent reconfiguration will be just as bad in this respect. However, the point is taken and I think I will improve the cable layout in the future, another thing to add to my to do list! But I will leave this one for a couple of months, only change one thing at a time remember, and the next change will be the UpTone Audio LPS-1.
1000 Pro - KEF Blade - iFi Zen Stream - Mutec REF10 - MC3+USB - Pro-Ject Signature 12
Reply
#15
(13-Nov-2016, 14:01)Confused Wrote: Thinking about this, I have been very busy over the last week, the Pro's have been on standby 24/7, but only running in anger maybe about 10 hours as a grand total.  I also recall the tail of Guillaume's O'dA, where he had OAC's fully run in demo unit on loan for a couple of weeks, then his own O'dA, after which there was maybe two weeks of burn in woes followed by eventual joy.

I actually had Jon's OdA for a couple of months so became very accustomed to its sound. When we disconnected his and installed my brand new units there was a considerable collapse in the soundstage and the image became more strident and forward. It was quite a dramatic change. It was also quite thin sounding. It took about 2 or 3 weeks of 24/7 playback for my OdA to sound as good as Jon's.

Guillaume
Industry disclosure: UK distributor for Shunyata Research

220 PRO, totaldac d1 server with additional external power supply, totaldac d1-seven, Echole PSU for Totaldac, Wilson Audio Sasha 2, Shunyata Research cables, Shunyata Hydra Alpha A10 + DPC-6 v3, Various Entreq ground boxes and cables, Entreq Athena level 3 rack, 2 X SOtM sNH-10G with sCLK-EX + 10MHz Master Clock input + sPS-500 PSU, i5 sonicTransporter w/ 1TB SSD

UK
Reply
#16
(14-Nov-2016, 10:04)yabaVR Wrote: ...
I don't believe in psychoacoustics for most events they are suggested to be the case of origin.
For me psychoacoustic argumentation is a lame excuse of phenomena that can not be explained and if there was an explanation, it would not fit into the believe system.
...
What you hear is real. I trust your ears  Wink

Gui - I hope this is not entirely off-topic, but I don't understand how you can reconcile those two statements.  I agree very much that one should trust ones ears, but doesn't that inherently mean that you must also accept that psycho-acoustic effects will be important?  Surely when ears and brain are "in the loop", psycho-acoustics is more or less the whole explanation of everything!  Conversely, if you said "trust measurements, not your ears" then you could reasonably argue that psycho-acoustic effects should be ignored.  In any case, I think to describe them as "lame excuses" is a bit unreasonable unless one can offer a compelling (and testable) alternative explanation.
Roon (Mac Mini), Wilson Benesch Full Circle, Expert 1000 Pro CI, Kaiser Chiara
Warwickshire, UK
Reply
#17
(14-Nov-2016, 16:02)GuillaumeB Wrote:
(13-Nov-2016, 14:01)Confused Wrote: ...So as someone who does not really believe in 'burn in' or electronics settling down, I have to say that I am beginning to become genuinely convinced that for what ever reasons Devialet's do not sound their best when very new. This comes after my experience of the Mutec, which I am also convinced kept improving over about two months.


Thinking about this, I have been very busy over the last week, the Pro's have been on standby 24/7, but only running in anger maybe about 10 hours as a grand total.  I also recall the tail of Guillaume's O'dA, where he had OAC's fully run in demo unit on loan for a couple of weeks, then his own O'dA, after which there was maybe two weeks of burn in woes followed by eventual joy.

I actually had Jon's OdA for a couple of months so became very accustomed to its sound. When we disconnected his and installed my brand new units there was a considerable collapse in the soundstage and the image became more strident and forward. It was quite a dramatic change. It was also quite thin sounding. It took about 2 or 3 weeks of 24/7 playback for my OdA to sound as good as Jon's.

Guillaume

Is it just me who sees a common ground here? Why question the burn in observation as so many of us are having this experience?
What pit is there to fall in? Nothing to loose other than a bygone belief.
Just accept it as fact and have a calm sleep  Rolleyes

gui
"Oh, you can buy the other. But then it is a cost intensive learning process"
berlin
Reply
#18
Hi Confused,

Sorry, if you're using Toslink out from the W4S Remedy to the Mutec then of course absolutely no harm done, still full galvanic isolation. Smile I misunderstood the post in your other topic and though it was connected to the Mutec using the coax output.
PS Audio P3, Shunyata ΞTRON Alpha Digital and HC/Furutech power cables, Paul Hynes SR7EHD-MR4, DIY Roon Server & Roon Endpoint running AudioLinux Headless, Phasure Lush^2 USB cable, Audioquest Diamond RJ/E ethernet, Uptone Audio etherREGEN, Mutec MC-3+ USB, Shunyata ΞTRON Anaconda Digital XLR AES/EBU, Devialet Expert 250 Pro CI, Nordost Tyr Reference LS cables, Von Schweikert VR-5 SE Anniversary Edition, Anti-Mode Dual Core 2.0, JL Audio Fathom F112. More detail here.

The Netherlands
Reply
#19
(14-Nov-2016, 16:21)thumb5 Wrote:
(14-Nov-2016, 10:04)yabaVR Wrote: ...
I don't believe in psychoacoustics for most events they are suggested to be the case of origin.
For me psychoacoustic argumentation is a lame excuse of phenomena that can not be explained and if there was an explanation, it would not fit into the believe system.
...
What you hear is real. I trust your ears  Wink

Gui - I hope this is not entirely off-topic, but I don't understand how you can reconcile those two statements.  I agree very much that one should trust ones ears, but doesn't that inherently mean that you must also accept that psycho-acoustic effects will be important?  Surely when ears and brain are "in the loop", psycho-acoustics is more or less the whole explanation of everything!  Conversely, if you said "trust measurements, not your ears" then you could reasonably argue that psycho-acoustic effects should be ignored.  In any case, I think to describe them as "lame excuses" is a bit unreasonable unless one can offer a compelling (and testable) alternative explanation.

Actually, I can see two sides of this argument.  Many times I have seen one person reporting that they have tried A, then tried B and noticed an improvement.  Then someone comes along and says 'it's just expectation bias'.  OK, sometimes it might be expectation bias, but if I were to say that I listened to a full dCS rig with 100K amps and speakers and found it to sound better than the same song played via my iPad speakers, this would be because it does indeed sound better, so expectation bias does have it's limits.  I do recall a microRendu thread on the Roon forum, whatever anyone said something about how the thing sounded, one guy responded 'it's just expectation bias', this gets annoying because although expectation bias exists, it works two ways and does have it's limits.  Does my very new Devialet sound a bit more forward, maybe more treble emphasis, yes, I am certain that this has been the case.  But for sure, at times I have been listening very hard, analysing, thinking, this is not normal and I'm sure it does change your perception.
1000 Pro - KEF Blade - iFi Zen Stream - Mutec REF10 - MC3+USB - Pro-Ject Signature 12
Reply
#20
(14-Nov-2016, 16:21)thumb5 Wrote:
(14-Nov-2016, 10:04)yabaVR Wrote: ...
I don't believe in psychoacoustics for most events they are suggested to be the case of origin.
For me psychoacoustic argumentation is a lame excuse of phenomena that can not be explained and if there was an explanation, it would not fit into the believe system.
...
What you hear is real. I trust your ears  Wink

Gui - I hope this is not entirely off-topic, but I don't understand how you can reconcile those two statements.  I agree very much that one should trust ones ears, but doesn't that inherently mean that you must also accept that psycho-acoustic effects will be important?  Surely when ears and brain are "in the loop", psycho-acoustics is more or less the whole explanation of everything!  Conversely, if you said "trust measurements, not your ears" then you could reasonably argue that psycho-acoustic effects should be ignored.  In any case, I think to describe them as "lame excuses" is a bit unreasonable unless one can offer a compelling (and testable) alternative explanation.

Ok, I said for most events. There is ever a chance of psychoacoustics as a case of origin.

But I was involved in so many cases of modifications (as with customer systems or in the shop or with my own system) that were altering the SQ of an audio system that once you witnessed these multiple occasions you know how fragile this whole scenario of audio reproduction is. Everything counts at the end and be it the slightest touch of a cable on the floor. You won't believe it until you hear it.

The term 'lame excuses' is a bit aggressive I have to admit.
But from my experiences the term 'psychoacoustic' is too often (with offending intense (not here Wink )) used ( and I'm fed up with it) when in fact there are sensible reasons for repeatable SQ-changes but only not understood.

It's the same every time: 'You can't meassure it' 'science says other' 'I'm an educated (school) scientist. There is no way this can be' . All this arguments without a foundation.
It is the golden rule of science: If they can not meassure it and they don't know it, have no explanation, it HAS to be 'psychoacoustics' 'placebo' and the like.

I do not have all the answers myself. But I rely on my experiences and they tell me other than 'psychoacoustics' in many occasions.

gui

edit: this was perhaps a bit emotional Angel . No offending though  Wink
"Oh, you can buy the other. But then it is a cost intensive learning process"
berlin
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)