Wow, that turned out way better than I would have imagined.
Wow, that turned out way better than I would have imagined.
It is cone angle, material, etc. Damping the dome can actually make things worse as it tends to decouple the dome from the cone/coil and it can take off on itself. However, sometimes it helps. That was tried on the 2214H with no success.
Sounds like the opinion of someone trying to promote really old speakers.
Surrounds and spiders break in fairly quickly, but “best sound”?
Perhaps more stabilized parameters. 100 hours would be a lot.
10,000 hours is 3 hours a day, every single day, for over 9 years. (At 24 hours a day non-stop it's more than one year.) So no, 10,000 hours of burn-in is NOT required.
Sheesh...
Following this kind of discipline it would be best NEVER to allow the drivers to rest lest they return to some form of stasis. Then another many hours of re-break-in to come back to optimum for a couple of hour's listening enjoyment. For me? Don't buy it. Life is just too short for this kind of pooh.
David F
San Jose
I agree. I found a very interesting page that compiles opinions of speaker manufacturers.
http://matrixhifi.com/ENG_contenedor_rodajealtavoces.htm
Someone from JBL Pro is also included, saying,
Short (if not non-existent) break in period, then many years of accurate replication and then many years later eventual cone fatigue and the need for recone. I have been using JBL products since the 70's myself and gone through many recones/refurbs so I have a good deal of experience with fresh paper. I have recently reconed my 20 year old 4412 studio monitors. They had gotten a little "floppy" sounding and even thought the compliance was still in tact, it was time for fresh cones.
Because that a respondent is kept anonymous, 10000 hrs believers are screaming "It is a fake news!".
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)