D
Deleted member 133
Guest
The engineer in me is curious. Unfortunately this engineer is mechanical, not electrical.
In mechanical engineering, but for a few situations that I can think of, most devices don't "burn-in" (ie. get better in the short term and then run at that better level for the rest of their productive lives) but rather wear out: a gradual decline in performance until component or system failure.
Car engines (at least older ones) would go through a break-in period, where things would wear into place, and then run smoothly. Supposedly performance (however one defined it) would improve during that period - although car owners were urged to not push the engine too hard less damage, more than break-in, occur.
Gas turbine engines have abradable seals: as blades get longer (material creep) they literally dig their way into the engine casing (abradable seals) thus creating a near-perfect fit whereby air / gases can't escape interacting with the blades - increasing engine performance. Abrasion is high when the engine is first run up, and then the seals continue to abrade over the rest of their lifetime as blades continue to lengthen.
In both cases the designer takes all this into account through the choice of materials and tolerances.
But what is the analog / equivalent in the electrical engineering world for audio systems. How does the designer design for "burn-in"? How does he or she ensure that that initial change is positive (ie. sound initially improves - by whatever measures) rather than negative (sound gets worse, rather than better)? What tools are available to make this happen?
Take the simplest of devices commonly used: resistors and capacitors. (And remember I'm now fast out of my depth...) These have defined specs that measure their resistance and capacitance, their power handling (voltage as well?) and a tolerance (typically a +/-). Is it that tolerance that a designer works with? (But if so, how does one know in which direction the value will drift: plus or minus?) Is there something else at play? And going beyond individual components, what about the interaction between components - if any? What about things like transistors? Is that where the magic happens? Do the manufacturers of all of the components that go into making the device each somehow characterize how their component will "burn-in" and the designer then somehow takes all of that into account somehow to ensure that the finished device burns-in correctly?
Does all this go to ensure that the end-user can rest assured that after burning in his new audio device for a clearly defined-for period of time, that it will then reach an optimum performance point, stop the burn-in process, and perform flawlessly, with no further degradation / change, for many years to come, before eventually succumbing to old age.
Call me curious.
Jeff
In mechanical engineering, but for a few situations that I can think of, most devices don't "burn-in" (ie. get better in the short term and then run at that better level for the rest of their productive lives) but rather wear out: a gradual decline in performance until component or system failure.
Car engines (at least older ones) would go through a break-in period, where things would wear into place, and then run smoothly. Supposedly performance (however one defined it) would improve during that period - although car owners were urged to not push the engine too hard less damage, more than break-in, occur.
Gas turbine engines have abradable seals: as blades get longer (material creep) they literally dig their way into the engine casing (abradable seals) thus creating a near-perfect fit whereby air / gases can't escape interacting with the blades - increasing engine performance. Abrasion is high when the engine is first run up, and then the seals continue to abrade over the rest of their lifetime as blades continue to lengthen.
In both cases the designer takes all this into account through the choice of materials and tolerances.
But what is the analog / equivalent in the electrical engineering world for audio systems. How does the designer design for "burn-in"? How does he or she ensure that that initial change is positive (ie. sound initially improves - by whatever measures) rather than negative (sound gets worse, rather than better)? What tools are available to make this happen?
Take the simplest of devices commonly used: resistors and capacitors. (And remember I'm now fast out of my depth...) These have defined specs that measure their resistance and capacitance, their power handling (voltage as well?) and a tolerance (typically a +/-). Is it that tolerance that a designer works with? (But if so, how does one know in which direction the value will drift: plus or minus?) Is there something else at play? And going beyond individual components, what about the interaction between components - if any? What about things like transistors? Is that where the magic happens? Do the manufacturers of all of the components that go into making the device each somehow characterize how their component will "burn-in" and the designer then somehow takes all of that into account somehow to ensure that the finished device burns-in correctly?
Does all this go to ensure that the end-user can rest assured that after burning in his new audio device for a clearly defined-for period of time, that it will then reach an optimum performance point, stop the burn-in process, and perform flawlessly, with no further degradation / change, for many years to come, before eventually succumbing to old age.
Call me curious.
Jeff
