magiccarpetride;618316 Wrote: > A question popped into my head today: if indeed audio component burn-in > is a verifiable (or, close to verifiable) fact (as many claim), how is > it that used components are cheaper than the new ones? Shouldn't it be > the other way around? > > The way I look at it, time is money, and also time is one commodity > that is very hard to buy. So if I'm willing to pay $x.xx dollars for a > spanking brand new component, and then be expected to invest yyy hours > of burn-in, shouldn't the already burnt-in component be worth $x.xx + > $yyy? > > Troll away!
Yeah, you'd think, right? I should try that the next time a trade in a car - "well burned in/high mileage...potato/potaato" :-). It's bad enough that consumers go on about burn in, but the manufacturers jump on the band wagon too. I see this with a lot with headphone equipment (amps and headphones). Ugh! Though, as you can see from my post above, I wonder about speaker and headphone break in. -- maggior Rich --------- Setup: 2 SB3s, 4 Booms, 1 Duet, 1 Receiver, 1 Touch, iPeng on iPod Touch. SuSE 11.0 Server running SqueezeBoxServer 7.5.0, MusicIP, and SqueezeSlave. Current library stats: 33,696 songs, 2,720 albums, 499 artists. http://www.last.fm/user/maggior ------------------------------------------------------------------------ maggior's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=9080 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=86359 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
