I tested if speaker break in is real

[Life Eats Life]

I'm not apologizing to Geln Frickler

Too late, you name dropped him.

 

[KHAAAAAAANNNNNNN!!!!!!!!]

My York Audio Mesa 212 V30 IR pack has broken in nicely.

Not bad for a buck...

 

[Deadpan]

I don’t doubt that a change occurs when a guitarists uses a new speaker/cab for an extended period of time, but it‘s not the speaker, it’s just the guitarist learning the speaker/cab and knowing what to expect after putting a mic on it and/or hearing it blaring for years.

I have had experience with drastically change in one set of V30s I have. No other set of V30 have behaved like this and I have had no need to break them in.

I believe there are specific material variances that were used over the years that cause the issue.

On a side note, I had a set of T75s that had this same ungodly horrible frequency response. I didn't bother dealing with it as I generally don't like T75s much.

 

[headcrash]

What's up everyone?
Merry Christmas! I've been talking about speaker break in ever since I released my 50+ V30 shootout more than half a year ago. I finally got it done. Enjoy!

Hey John, thanks a lot for the effort !!!

I like the as-close-as-it-gets-to-a-scientific-approach, doing it, well, at home, with the tools you have at hand.

I think many don't know or forget, that the human ear and how it translates and interprets data (=sound waves) has a huge impact on how we evaluate these. Guess this is psycho acoustics.
I am by far no expert in that field.
In my first job at one of the Fraunhofer Institutes twenty years ago, I took part at many listening tests to evaluate acoustical phenomena.
A lot of effort was put into the design and procedure of these tests to rule out any effects of psycho acoustics, to be able to evaluate things as objective as possible.
For example the hearing memory is really short. Like under just a few dozens of seconds short, if not less. So the listening tests where always done with short pieces of sound and a quick change of the listening examples.
This has taught me to at least critically evaluate any effects I think I hear when, for example change tubes, or pickups or whatever, where the pause between listening is more like dozens of minutes (or dar more).

So for this test it's even more complicated since we expect the effects of speaker break-in to show after quite a time.
So IMO the only way to examine this can be done through measurements.

Just as a suggestion, John, I'd be curious, how the test samples measure with any distortion measurements, before/after the break in.
I'd also be curious, if there is any change in the dynamic behaviour, maybe like the response to an impulse-like signal.
Heck it would even be cool to have some laser vibrometer measurements of the cone at different frequencies.

I might have to dig out the Physics of the electrical guitar book, by Prof Zollner. He might have done things like that, because he might have the means at his university labs.

 

[The other John Browne]

Hey John, thanks a lot for the effort !!!

I like the as-close-as-it-gets-to-a-scientific-approach, doing it, well, at home, with the tools you have at hand.

I think many don't know or forget, that the human ear and how it translates and interprets data (=sound waves) has a huge impact on how we evaluate these. Guess this is psycho acoustics.
I am by far no expert in that field.
In my first job at one of the Fraunhofer Institutes twenty years ago, I took part at many listening tests to evaluate acoustical phenomena.
A lot of effort was put into the design and procedure of these tests to rule out any effects of psycho acoustics, to be able to evaluate things as objective as possible.
For example the hearing memory is really short. Like under just a few dozens of seconds short, if not less. So the listening tests where always done with short pieces of sound and a quick change of the listening examples.
This has taught me to at least critically evaluate any effects I think I hear when, for example change tubes, or pickups or whatever, where the pause between listening is more like dozens of minutes (or dar more).

So for this test it's even more complicated since we expect the effects of speaker break-in to show after quite a time.
So IMO the only way to examine this can be done through measurements.

Just as a suggestion, John, I'd be curious, how the test samples measure with any distortion measurements, before/after the break in.
I'd also be curious, if there is any change in the dynamic behaviour, maybe like the response to an impulse-like signal.
Heck it would even be cool to have some laser vibrometer measurements of the cone at different frequencies.

I might have to dig out the Physics of the electrical guitar book, by Prof Zollner. He might have done things like that, because he might have the means at his university labs.

Your background sounds fascinating! I'd love to hear more about this. If I had the means, I'd invest in more sophisticated tools because I love doing these kinds of things. While it might seem dry to a lot of people, it's very exciting to me. I love a good mystery.
I'll take another look at my test data and see what treasures are still burried within

 

[JasonE]

I am not sure what to take away from the video. I have had speakers that when I first got them I noticed the sound from them had a ton of high end in them. After a few hours of play time they mellowed out some. I have taken some speakers and played music through them for several hours at higher volume and felt like it helped them sound a bit more rounded after. I usually adjust the amp to get the tone where I want it but have noticed that after some, like hours, use I have tweaked the knobs from where they started.

I have a friend who works on speakers for a living. He has been doing this for a long time. He also believes that a new or rebuilt speaker needs a few hours of use to settle in. He has said to me multiple times that a speaker sounds it's best right before they blow up.

 

[Stratzrus]

I have a friend who works on speakers for a living...He has said to me multiple times that a speaker sounds it's best right before they blow up.

While I can't confirm that as a truism I'd heard that as well many years ago.

I was once playing an outdoor concert using an Ampeg Gemini II with an Altec Lansing 12" speaker and I had it really cranked. It was sounding better than it ever had and then it blew. That experience made me believe the saying but I wouldn't state it as irrefutable truth.

 

[0XI0]

@The other John Browne the test audio you used is all pre-shredded harmonics and mostly upper register, im not surprised with the results. the cone isn't doing a lot of work to reproduce that content at that register

if u sent pure sin wave intervals of 4ths and 5ths, in various keys, in the 75hz range (low guitar register), that makes maximum excursion, paper/spider/surround fiber material degredation/softening. I just has to be ear bleeding clean, and 4ths and 5ths (major 10th too) held out to maximize harmonic movement/pulsing. just a couple hours of that and see if there is no more high end softening/shaping, I did it with a stock 1960 cab and that cab sounded like god henceforth, smooth and creamy, drastic difference.

 

[la szum]

The people who never thought about this stuff made better music than the people that do.

Just sayin'.

 

[2dor]

@The other John Browne the test audio you used is all pre-shredded harmonics and mostly upper register, im not surprised with the results. the cone isn't doing a lot of work to reproduce that content at that register

if u sent pure sin wave intervals of 4ths and 5ths, in various keys, in the 75hz range (low guitar register), that makes maximum excursion, paper/spider/surround fiber material degredation/softening. I just has to be ear bleeding clean, and 4ths and 5ths (major 10th too) held out to maximize harmonic movement/pulsing. just a couple hours of that and see if there is no more high end softening/shaping, I did it with a stock 1960 cab and that cab sounded like god henceforth, smooth and creamy, drastic difference.

Oh man gotta try this sometime in the next couple of weeks on my Mesa 2x12. I'm also eyeing a 2551BV cab - this tip should help.
Do you happen to have a pre-recorded DI of what you used?
Ear-bleeding clean, I take it, is pretty much clean channel with volume as high as it goes without distorting? Could probably run the signal via the FX Return of my 100w head.

 

[Orvillain]

The people who never thought about this stuff made better music than the people that do.

Just sayin'.

What the hell did I tell you!?!!!

 

[0XI0]

Do you happen to have a pre-recorded DI of what you used?

no it was like thirteen years ago lol, I used a looper pedal and did palm mute power chord fifths, one chug at a time and let it ring out to maximize vibrations/excursion, really slow. just low E root + fifth, do a few on each fret and walk it up the fretboard, wherever you get a note that really hums like crazy and you can feel it, where it's a lot louder than the others, do that one a lot. as loud as you can get it without distortion, scoop the mids on the amp too so there's more headroom for the bass. fifths are best but major tenths are good too, like open low E and 11th fret A string. 4ths don't pulse as much. figure out what notes vibrate the most and loop it and let it run ear bleeding completely clean for a long time

 

[Deadpan]

no it was like thirteen years ago lol, I used a looper pedal and did palm mute power chord fifths, one chug at a time and let it ring out to maximize vibrations/excursion, really slow. just low E root + fifth, do a few on each fret and walk it up the fretboard, wherever you get a note that really hums like crazy and you can feel it, where it's a lot louder than the others, do that one a lot. as loud as you can get it without distortion, scoop the mids on the amp too so there's more headroom for the bass. fifths are best but major tenths are good too, like open low E and 11th fret A string. 4ths don't pulse as much. figure out what notes vibrate the most and loop it and let it run ear bleeding completely clean for a long time

Any idea what year the speakers were made?

 

[2dor]

no it was like thirteen years ago lol, I used a looper pedal and did palm mute power chord fifths, one chug at a time and let it ring out to maximize vibrations/excursion, really slow. just low E root + fifth, do a few on each fret and walk it up the fretboard, wherever you get a note that really hums like crazy and you can feel it, where it's a lot louder than the others, do that one a lot. as loud as you can get it without distortion, scoop the mids on the amp too so there's more headroom for the bass. fifths are best but major tenths are good too, like open low E and 11th fret A string. 4ths don't pulse as much. figure out what notes vibrate the most and loop it and let it run ear bleeding completely clean for a long time

This will get me pimped up speakers or a divorce

 

[0XI0]

This will get me pimped up speakers or a divorce

rent a band rehearsal room space for a couple hours, u pay for it nobody can't say nothin about anything

 

[0XI0]

Any idea what year the speakers were made?

it was a mint stock 1960 stereo cab I bought on Craigslist in 2010, it was brand new, still smelled like new shoes, u could see your reflection in the plastic corner protectors. G12T-75s were spikey af. are there changes over the years with G12T-75s too, like V30s?

 

[2dor]

rent a band rehearsal room space for a couple hours, u pay for it nobody can't say nothin about anything

That's a good idea. I'll probably look for one that can get me a full day so I can knock out 2 cabs.

 

[dronerstone]

pure sin wave

Yes, please.

 

[Desertdweller]

Its almost like guitar players are full of shit

My personal favorite is that the 90s rectifiers are better than modern ones because they have the Mark III transformer, but the Mark III is inferior to the Mark IIC+ because of it's transformer.

 

[MirrorProfiles]

My personal favorite is that the 90s rectifiers are better than modern ones because they have the Mark III transformer, but the Mark III is inferior to the Mark IIC+ because of its transformer.

the amount of emphasis guitarists (and musicians in general) put on transformers being some kind of magic tonal devices that make ALL the difference is mental to me. Not saying they don’t have a tonal effect, but I think musicians just like to associate things to what looks like it makes sense.

“Big expensive piece of metal? oh must be that. Glowing valves? yep. Lots of resistors and capacitors specifically arranged to process the audio signal? It’s the transformers”