burning in new headphones

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/newbie-audio-engineering-production-question-zone/718510-how-properly-burn-headphones.html
 
I found this. Generating pink noise with Audacity is pretty easy (as described in the thread) and you can just loop it and go to bed.
 
To tell the truth, I never would have considered doing this myself.

The whole 'burning in' thing is a fallacy. There's a recent article on it, I think possibly in Sound on Sound. Basically it may have made some sense in the days of cardboard speaker cones but modern materials and magnets don't require any burnin and the sound you get on day one is the sound you should get years from now. Of course, psychologically you may feel better and it's harmless, but definitely a total waste of time. Unfortunately there's a lot of nonsense floating around in the audiophile area (like special 'oxygen free' cable etc) but it's simply not worth trying to engage with true believers in this area. Many years ago I entered a debate on the subject and one of the protagonists got so angry I heard several weeks later he actually died of a heart attack!. So now I just say, 'whatever'....
 

Not to be argumentative, but the manual that came with my Focal CMS 65's recommended playing bass heavy music through them at a fairly high volume for 20-25 hours. I'm not saying they are right or wrong, but after a few days, there was a very noticeable difference in the low end.

Leadfoot
Well thanks for ridiculing me, but like I said, this was stated in the manual. I don't have much in the form of money, and an investment like this is huge for me. So I didn't want to take a chance on blowing them from not breaking them in like the manual said.

It wasn't aimed at you. You didn't write the procedures. You'll have a good day today--it's Friday!

Have a look at this: http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/evidence-headphone-break
 
Before you get excited about the apparent hard evidence that break-in really does something, note the Y-axis scale on the graphs.

Higher end headphones do benefit from a burn in period.  It has nothing to do with the magnets but making the "cone" material more responsive to vibrations.  Every device with a vibrating diaphragm from speakers to grand pianos have an immaturity stage.  Burning in your $30 ipod earbuds if pointless, but large over-ear phones do benefit.  Long hours of moderate to low volume music is best to encourage fast transient response and tame harsh high frequencies.  
 
And yes if you pay more than a $1/ft for raw cable and $4 for a connector, you are a sucker.  

bitflipper
Have a look at this: http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/evidence-headphone-break
 
Before you get excited about the apparent hard evidence that break-in really does something, note the Y-axis scale on the graphs.

It seems like the fellow confides that, regardless of the fact that he has lots of data to present, his testing procedure wasn't consistent enough to draw a conclusion. I am perplextertained by the fact that the comments left on that page suggest that no one who left comments actually read the page.
 
 
 
His presentation begs the obvious question; How does he know it wasn't his microphones breaking in that caused the deviation in test results?
 
:-)
 
best regards,
mike

I  have officially added "perplextertained" to my vocabulary. Whether it earns a spot in permanent rotation or not depends on how often other people understand its meaning.
 
Never mind that the data was not conclusive - even if it had been, the results would still have been inconsequential. Look at the numbers. With the exception of one narrow band, the changes were tiny fractions of a decibel. Even the most significant change was less than a single decibel. Your headphones can change more than that just by wearing them slightly a-kilter or by adjusting the headband. 
 
The adaptability of hearing is a recurring theme in the study of psychoacoustics. The fact is, your perception of sound adjusts to the environment automatically. Over time it will adapt to flaws in your speakers and in your room acoustics. Your speakers and headphones will actually sound better to you the more you listen to them, which might lead you to conclude that some profound physical change has occurred in the speakers, when in fact the change happened entirely in your head.
 
This, BTW, is a good thing. It's why the single best thing you can do for your listening environment is to simply spend time listening in it. 

Was the increased low end extension on my Focals all in my head? I honestly don't think so. I hope not. If my perception can make that much of a difference in sound, who knows what else my brain is making up. Am I really here? Do I even have a studio? And are we really even having this conversation? Aww man, I think I feel a flashback coming on...

Leadfoot
Was the increased low end extension on my Focals all in my head? I honestly don't think so. I hope not. If my perception can make that much of a difference in sound, who knows what else my brain is making up. Am I really here? Do I even have a studio? And are we really even having this conversation? Aww man, I think I feel a flashback coming on...

There is no way to know without tightly-controlled objective measurements. Subjective conclusions must always be suspect because yes, your brain has a greater effect on what and how you hear than any other factor.
 
As for whether you're really here, I can only quote the eminent Dr. Sheldon Cooper: "I know we're not in the Matrix because if we were the food would be better."
 

Break-in, break-in, break-out!
Ooops they're not working anymore.
I still think it is hype and your hearing is what is breaking in to how they sound.
 

This subject is also very interesting to me.  I always took for granted a break in period.  If the sonic results are more pyschoacoustics, then our brains must memorize the response it "hears" for the individual.  I wonder how we can actually trust our monitors if the sound is more influenced by the user than the hardware?  Maybe there is some string theory going on hear.