Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Burn in process with new firmware?
#1
Ok, it's a suspicion that I have with a question into deeper technical understanding.
My feeling is that with every new firmware I installed there was a burn in process, as it is rigth now with the 10.0.5. I belong to those who actually benefit from the 10.x.x firmware updates, but have also noticed a slight more harsh sound in the beginning when updating from 10.0.2 to 10.0.5. It lessens over the past 48h and my D200 is getting a tinny little bit more transparent with 10.0.5. But it seems to me that burn in is not yet done.

My question to the more advanced technicians.
I know it's only software, but to my understanding every virtual software-code actually leads to a physically switch even if it is only in the structure of an IC or is that wrong?
So the electrons have to take  new "paths" or new "switches" when some software is altered?

I had that experience with an Arcam Amp that has an electronic (IC?) Volume control. As I use(d) a SBT with variable volume control the Arcam's volume was ever (over years) set to the high volume "digit 67".
It happend one day that I hit the volume by chance and it went to "digit65". I didn't notice that I hit the button BUT immediatly heard the difference in form of less fluendly, harsh sound even though the music was that 2digits quieter then.
My conclusion was that the signal at the new volume had to take a different path in the resistance network of the IC and therefore sounded different because at "digit67" it was burned in over years.
Am I wrong with my conclusion?

gui
"Oh, you can buy the other. But then it is a cost intensive learning process"
berlin
Reply
#2
Frankly, it seems to me that you're trying rather too hard to ascribe a technical explanation to things that are much more likely psycho-acoustic in origin.  The most plausible and economical explanation to my way of thinking is that during the few days after upgrading the firmware you've simply stopped listening (consciously or unconsciously) for changes.  Whether or not there are any objective changes doesn't really matter, it's the change in mental state that's significant.

If there were any objective, technical effect such as you describe -- which personally I doubt -- then it would surely result in changes that were orders of magnitude smaller than normal levels of distortion and noise, changes in listening conditions, mental state, etc.  Furthermore, why should such an effect always lead to improvements in sound quality over time?

On a related note, there was a very interesting programme on BBC TV yesterday about how unreliable our senses are.  In particular, it highlighted how much of what we hear, see, taste, etc. is determined by input from our other senses and by our expectations.  The McGurk effect is a clear demonstration of the effect of sight on hearing, for example.  It's worth Googling that if you're not familiar with it, because it's a very strong effect which apparently can't be ignored even if you know what's going on.  When you see demonstrations like that it puts a lot of these discussions about sound quality into perspective.
Roon (Mac Mini), Wilson Benesch Full Circle, Expert 1000 Pro CI, Kaiser Chiara
Warwickshire, UK
Reply
#3
What program was that Ian? I feel an iPlayer moment coming on.

Back to the original topic, my system does tend to sound a little bit better or worse from one day to next. Maybe due to cleaner mains, my mental state, choice of music, who knows.
1000 Pro - KEF Blade - iFi Zen Stream - Mutec REF10 - MC3+USB - Pro-Ject Signature 12
Reply
#4
(12-Oct-2016, 19:23)Confused Wrote: What program was that Ian?  I feel an iPlayer moment coming on.

Horizon: "Is Seeing Believing?" (here on iPlayer)
Roon (Mac Mini), Wilson Benesch Full Circle, Expert 1000 Pro CI, Kaiser Chiara
Warwickshire, UK
Reply
#5
(12-Oct-2016, 19:34)thumb5 Wrote:
(12-Oct-2016, 19:23)Confused Wrote: What program was that Ian?  I feel an iPlayer moment coming on.

Horizon: "Is Seeing Believing?" (here on iPlayer)

Ah ha!  Luckily I have Horizon on series link, just checked and I already have it recorded, I look forward to watching this, it's cirtainly a fascinating subject.  Thanks for the link anyway, I'm sure it will be useful to others. Shy
1000 Pro - KEF Blade - iFi Zen Stream - Mutec REF10 - MC3+USB - Pro-Ject Signature 12
Reply
#6
(12-Oct-2016, 20:07)Confused Wrote:
(12-Oct-2016, 19:34)thumb5 Wrote:
(12-Oct-2016, 19:23)Confused Wrote: What program was that Ian?  I feel an iPlayer moment coming on.

Horizon: "Is Seeing Believing?" (here on iPlayer)

Ah ha!  Luckily I have Horizon on series link, just checked and I already have it recorded, I look forward to watching this, it's cirtainly a fascinating subject.  Thanks for the link anyway, I'm sure it will be useful to others. Shy
Downloaded to watch tomorrow on the train, sounds interesting.
Roon, Rega P9 + Dynavector XX2Mk2 > 440 Pro > Sonus Faber Guarneri Evolution
Reply
#7
(12-Oct-2016, 19:23)Confused Wrote: What program was that Ian?  I feel an iPlayer moment coming on.

Back to the original topic, my system does tend to sound a little bit better or worse from one day to next.  Maybe due to cleaner mains, my mental state, choice of music, who knows.

I'm in the same boat. I did think of trying a mains conditioner to see if that might be the issue, but I've been doing a hell of a lot of research these past weeks - trying to find anything scientific that's out there about digital cables, speaker cables, mains, and linear power for digital circuitry - and I might be leaning back to my old beliefs that's it's more up top than anything else.

I'm gonna checkout that Horizon too. I've come across many studies around similar themes.

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

Reply
#8
Oh sure I thougt of the sceptical non believer answers, but as a first reply?
I left this wall of psycho-acoustic doubt behind me years ago.

I do comparisons of components, cables and all the stuff as a daily business and these differences one can hear (must not hear) are real in our profession. Neglecting them implies a standstill for us even in mind and empirical knowledge. For me some of the effects we can hear mainstream sience can not messure neither explain. So what? It's just something else to discover.
I understand if you commit yourself to one side or the other you can argue to death about this topic. That's not my point.

To put it short. I don't want to discuss the pure effect but I like to have a technical explanation from some open minded technician who knows his stuff about writing software in junction with the processes this initiates in hardware.
What is the real technical process here? Is there somebody who can explain it to me?

gui
"Oh, you can buy the other. But then it is a cost intensive learning process"
berlin
Reply
#9
Just for the record, I am an embedded software developer and do firmware updates on custom-designed hardware almost daily.  So I would say I'm pretty familiar with the processes involved both at a software and a hardware level.

When you refer to "the real technical process" what exactly do you mean?  If you're talking about what happens during a firmware update then that's something I could talk about in more detail about (if it's helpful).  But I suspect you're asking about what's the process by which the firmware update could influence sound quality.  Since that's something you've just postulated I think the onus is on you to explain it to the rest of us...no? Smile

ETA: I don't think of it as "psycho-acoustic doubt", by the way.  On the contrary, it validates what you hear independently of any objective cause -- more a case of "psycho-acoustic freedom from worry".
Roon (Mac Mini), Wilson Benesch Full Circle, Expert 1000 Pro CI, Kaiser Chiara
Warwickshire, UK
Reply
#10
My science background says there isn't a mechanism to explain, but I have to admit to being a very open minded person and probably not a tradional scientist in that sense (well, I'm into hifi right). This is of course an educated guess though, and not based on any notion that I would have a clue really.

I very much doubt you'd find the answers here (no offence intended to thumb5).  Probably the most likely to answer (at least whether they think there is a mechanism) would be the Devialet head of R&D - since they apparently measure everything it would surely have shown up - or perhaps Rob Watts of Chord Hugo/DAVE fame, who openly discusses that he uses listening as part of his development - albeit strictly controlled against a reference system and music.  I would have thought he would have detected the issue if it existed.

Or go to 'real' (or should I say non-audio) scientists - there must be millions of firmware updates every year in machines that are the most precise and life critical things in the world, and so the phenomenon would be documented and procedures based around it. But, of course they'd laugh at us silly audiophiles for asking, and if they said it didn't exist, we'd say they just don't have the ears for it and their measurements and experience don't equal that of an audiophiles opinion....

Big Grin Angel

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

Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)