Despite lack of hard evidence to support an audible change, this stuff continues to float around. Perhaps the wit who remarked that "Break-in was invented so that we couldn't return anything!" had it right.
I still recall the first time i bought and heard the Axiom M22s vs. my 8 year old Technics setup.
I really thought the M22s sounded thin from my very first impression and i didn't like it at all. After a bit of listening and slow, painful switching of speakers, i observed that the M22s sounded alot more clear, accurate compared to the Technics. However i did still feel they sounded thin and that impression never changed through the 30 day home try out period. If there was to be speaker break-in, should i not have heard some change in this quality?
There was no speaker break-in re: their "thin" sound. It was a more likely conclusion that i was just so used to my more bass heavy Technics sound it has long been my standard for what sounds good.
I contemplated whether i may just prefer more bass in my sound, or perhaps i wanted bigger, more room filling sound (which heavy bass can 'feel' like it accomplishes) and as such, i ordered the M60s instead and sent the M22s back. The M60s had the extra bass, room filling sound i was sort of expecting and the clarity was incredible. Clarity of the M22 but a more full sound. It's a bigger full size speaker. This physically just makes sense.
In this instance, i was so used to my 'reference' sound being more bassy or "full" and to recreate that experience, i needed an overly bassy bookshelf speaker (which does not define the M22s), or a subwoofer addition OR just a larger speaker with larger bass drivers.
I opted for the third choice.
The one thing i had long noted about the M60 bass vs. my old Technics is that it wasn't a bloated bass. My Technics would play a bass note and it wasn't well defined. The Axiom bass sounded accurate and precise, but yet just as 'loud' and room filling.
My opinion on the M60 hasn't changed since the day i bought them almost 13 years ago. They still sound the same as i wrote on my original notes. Should that not have changed as well? Especially after 13 years?
Should my speakers not be breaking down continuously over time if they also take 50 or 100 hours to break in? We are after all talking about driver units that move at several thousand cycles per second. Would they not break in within a few seconds of testing at the manufacturer?
I mean geez. I installed a new backdoor on our house and the door was a bit sticky. After 3 or 4 door openings the grooves made along the door jamb didn't continue to increase (and no it wasn't sticking enough to bother getting out the planer). If i could open and close my backdoor 1000 times per second, how many seconds would it take for my door to 'break in'?
It has moving parts just like a speaker. Back and forth. Back and forth.
Speaker break in?
Bah nonsense.
