Digital Audiophile;168118 Wrote: > > Try listening to something out of the box for a few minutes over two or > three sessions and record your observations with copious notes. Next, > burn it in for 100 hours and then listen to the exact same material for > a few minutes at a time, again over a few sessions. See if you notice > anything different. That's how I was taught by a couple well-known > audiophile editors. Convinced me!
That reminds me of a cognitive psych study done a while ago. Take a bunch of people and give them a list of sentences. Some are true, some are false. Ask them to rate the truth value of each sentence, where -10 means they think it's definitely false, +!0 def. true, 0 don't know. Now send them away for a month, have them come back, give them a randomized and different list of sentences (but some are the same as before). At this point most people have forgotten which they've seen before (but of course the experimenters know); even so, on average they rate the ones they've seen before something like 4 points higher than those they haven't (that's an enormous effect). The implication being that even when you see information in a scenerio you know is totally unreliable, you still internalize it as likely to be true. That why advertising works and George Bush got elected, I suppose. I'm not sure what's the implication for this discussion, except that it's totally impossible to trust your impressions of break-in - that's just a fact, period. As cliveb says, any change is far more likely due to something in your head than in the electronics. Writing it down and coming back later... well, see above. -- opaqueice ------------------------------------------------------------------------ opaqueice's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=31311 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
