For some noted mechanical assemblies, because of moving parts, a break-in is typically required - such are standards, documented, and the reason understood.
For some mechanical items, another process to check preparedness of an equipment is to stress-test - like in a printer, make so many passes before putting them on the line. This is true for commercial activities - not really applied at home.
But for electrical, (or electronics), it really intrigue me who started this break-in - and what is exactly resolved in the break-in process (which is quite clear in mechanical assemblies).
I am a fan of full range high sensitivity speakers. This type of speakers can hardly be seen vibrating (except for some like the corals). Imagine hearing here that speakers will be subjected by hobbyists to hours of vibration just to expedite burn-in! To my reasoning, such burn-in is a no-no in speakers I regard to be good.
Of course, speakers are mechanicals, and loosening them up will typically change their sonic characteristics to the hobbyist's goals - whether it will be for good or bad is another thing.
Factories have standards in putting out their products - it is not to burn them in. In a typical CRT factory, they will subject all finished monitor to a number of hours of just 'ON'. This is to identify early breakdowns (lemons) from among the bunch - not really performance-enhancing process.
Items just subject to about a few hours & survived are classified class C
Items at moderate number of hours as class B
and items that passed the rigid hours of test as class A
Items not subjected to any burn-in process are the one sold at cheap price at your own risk.
They do not need to shutdown their factory for the burn-in process - in fact this is quite a standard considering that they also knew the head ache of supporting returns and the image they project in making such a product.
Lastly, assumptions can be applied in many ways
... if it is not written it i not true
... if it is heard by somebody I trust, it is true
... if it is not heard by another, it depends whether I knew him or not
A very good example is the observation I noted with todays generation of ipods and gamers. Listening with the headphone (sometimes at high levels) at extended time, and doing games in front of the PC with dim lights. I nthe US, eating hamburgers will make you fat!
Peddlers of iPods and gaming console (McDo & Jollibee
) do not write the warning!
But the warning is clear and documented.
Such extended listening in a headphone will destroy the hearing & watching with no acceptable ambient light will destroy eyesight. We are raising a future generation of deaf & blind!
Going back - burn-in of electronics, if true, should be documented (maybe not by the manufacturer) but as matter of standard in general electronic/electrical gear (IF EVER such burn-in is true and has technical basis).
In the absence of a clear technical basis, it can be relegated to the types of those snake oils - no matter how hard one swear! Of course, they experience snake oils, it improved the sound, the monster heard substantial difference in sound with their OFCs, and many swear peks man -
... not until everything has to be challenged, measured, and proven baseless ... and they go home scratching their heads
