The Half Life of Expectation Bias

[MylesBAstor]

Hello Myles


No I am not. You ever hear of MilSpec space Qualified parts and the screening and testing involved? It's part of what I do for a living. I have been screening parts for 30 years. There are parametric changes in value, leakage currents, breakdown voltages, beta and so on.

Please explain the need for burn in times that exceed the time need for parts to be used in manned space flight?? The parts are burned in for reliability reasons not parameteric or functional reasons. There are exceptions like crystals where the aging rate may take 30 of more days to stabilize depending on the PPM rate required. But that is not at all typical.

Rob

So you're equating parts used in the space shuttle to audio? C'mon it's apples and oranges. A really bad analogy.

 

[Robh3606]

So you're equating parts used in the space shuttle to audio? C'mon it's apples and oranges. A really bad analogy.

Myles you are missing the point. You don't see really gross changes in parameters. That happens with lots that fail the screening process. It's not a bad analogy at all because many of the parts and part types are common. The only difference being controls through the manufacturing process and eventual screening for parts intended for Mil or Space applications.

On the other side I build speakers and measure driver parameters as part of it. FS is a good indicator of mechanical break in with woofers. You don't see that much change and what you do see happens realtively quickly.

I didn't say I don't think it's a factor, just not in the ridiculous increments seen in audio where it takes 100's of hour's.

That's not my experience.

Rob

 

[Joe Whip]

I think a more accurate description of expectation bias is that after we have heard a number of our audio buddies, reviewers or manufacturers vouching for the sonic improvement yielded by inserting component ABC in a system, we have created expectation bias said component will deliver the goods, influencing our subjective assessment of the sonic impact of the component. Whether we actually have bought the component is immaterial (you usually convince yourself something sounds "better" before buying).

There is another empirically proven psychological condition for audiophiles dismissing their own susceptibility to expectation bias. It is call "denial".

+1. I have seen expectation bias in action in audio and otherwise and have seen it last a long time. Some simply don't want to believe they made a mistake or were duped and will simply convince themselves they weren't.

 

[mep]

]Myles you are missing the point. You don't see really gross changes in parameters.[/B] That happens with lots that fail the screening process. It's not a bad analogy at all because many of the parts and part types are common. The only difference being controls through the manufacturing process and eventual screening for parts intended for Mil or Space applications.

On the other side I build speakers and measure driver parameters as part of it. FS is a good indicator of mechanical break in with woofers. You don't see that much change and what you do see happens realtively quickly.

I didn't say I don't think it's a factor, just not in the ridiculous increments seen in audio where it takes 100's of hour's.

That's not my experience.

Rob

Rob-When you and other people bring up using electronic parts for components that are space bound and they don't require break in, I think people are somewhat confused as to what is actually being said and what is actually meant. Nobody is hoping or waiting for a 8 mfd capacitor to turn into a 6 mfd capacitor after break in. Nobody is hoping that a 100k ohm resistor will turn into a 90k ohm resistor after break in. The effects of burn in that people are talking about are those that affect the sound quality of a component and by extension the entire circuit. Parts used in the space program or any other critical military program are using parts with tight tolerances and other special parameters for the applications they will be used in. Nobody is listening to the finished product those parts are going into. As long as the parts meet their specifications and the unit is properly assembled and tested, it will work. Thus, there is no need for break in so it's a bogus argument to use against those who are listening to their parts via a circuit contained in an amp, preamp, phono section, etc.

Now we can and do argue whether a capacitor for example changes enough during the break in process through lets say its dielectric properties that it affects the sound of the signal that passes through it. We can argue whether it happens at all or whether it happens after 10 hours, 100 hours, or even 600 hours. So maybe there is an evil plot on the part of manufacturers of high end gear that they are collectively lying to us and telling us to expect 600 hours of break in time for their latest gear that uses teflon caps in hopes that we will forget what our other gear sounded like before we inserted the new gear and we will recalibrate our ears and convince ourselves that we really love the sound of the new gear. Or maybe, just maybe, they know what they are talking about through experience.

 

[mep]

+1. I have seen expectation bias in action in audio and otherwise and have seen it last a long time. Some simply don't want to believe they made a mistake or were duped and will simply convince themselves they weren't.

I really haven't seen that myself, but it doesn't mean that people can't fool themselves over the long haul. I think at some point your brain tells you that you made a bad choice and you need to move on. How many people have re-bought a component they once owned and sold because they realized they made a mistake? And the flip side of that is I once actually bought the same model line stage twice because I had a hard time believing it didn't sound as good as my expectation bias told me it should. It didn't though and I sold it again. Thankfully there were and still are enough people wanting that line stage on the used market that I got all of money back out of it both times.

 

[mep]

this thread has nothing to do with your latest ARC ref acquisitions or does it?

It sure doesn't. First of all, I don't have my Nola KO speakers yet and don't even have a ship date for them. I'm slumming with a pair of Paradigm monitor speakers and a pair of subs while I'm waiting. So break in or no break in, I really have no idea how my new REF 5SE and REF 75 are going to sound over a much larger speaker system. My expectation bias tells me it will be fine.

 

[Robh3606]

Rob-When you and other people bring up using electronic parts for components that are space bound and they don't require break in, I think people are somewhat confused as to what is actually being said and what is actually meant.

Hello Mep

I never said that. The only thing I can think of is saying was that wire doesn't require burn-in /break-in in space applications. Everything else does as far as EEE parts.

So maybe there is an evil plot on the part of manufacturers of high end gear that they are collectively lying to us and telling us to expect 600 hours of break in time for their latest gear that uses teflon caps in hopes that we will forget what our other gear sounded like before we inserted the new gear and we will recalibrate our ears and convince ourselves that we really love the sound of the new gear. Or maybe, just maybe, they know what they are talking about through experience. .

Frankly I could care less what they say. If it doesn't sound right it's not staying in my set-up and I am certainly not waiting 600hr's for it to happen.

Seriously would you tolerate waiting for a component to sound right for 600 hours?? That's 600 listening hours unless you leave it on for 25 days straight.

So with the 600 hour's they give you a 25 or 30 day return policy no questions asked??

Rob

 

[DaveyF]

Hello Mep

I never said that. The only thing I can think of is saying was that wire doesn't require burn-in /break-in in space applications. Everything else does as far as EEE parts.



Frankly I could care less what they say. If it doesn't sound right it's not staying in my set-up and I am certainly not waiting 600hr's for it to happen.

Seriously would you tolerate waiting for a component to sound right for 600 hours?? That's 600 listening hours unless you leave it on for 25 days straight.

So with the 600 hour's they give you a 25 or 30 day return policy no questions asked??

Rob

I was wondering about this issue as well. What ever happened to manufacturer's burning in their gear BEFORE releasing it to the consumer? 600 hrs seems like a LONG time to have to wait for a component to sound right...OTOH, I guess some of us wouldn't mind waiting 6000 hrs before that happens, LOL.
Here's the twist....Dealer or manufacturer to final consumer: " well Mr. Buyer, of course it sounds like crap, what do you expect, you have ONLY burned in the piece for 6000 hours and it takes at least 12,000 hours to sound its best".

 

[Robh3606]

What ever happened to manufacturer's burning in their gear BEFORE releasing it to the consumer?

Hello Davey

That would make sense or at least the notorious Teflon caps. Not like it's at all difficult to burn them in.

Rob

 

[JackD201]

Back on topic. I think it takes me about 3 or 4 days before the new gear crush fades and I'm back to being my demanding self. I do beta testing for some companies and I have sent stuff back with "regrets" attached. If a product becomes part of the product line and I'll have to stock it or recommend it to clients that trust me, you can be sure I won't be toning down my observations.

To be honest, rarely have I found electronics that were just bad out of the box and an hour running. They get better generally but not to the point where I could say a lump of coal got polished into a diamond. They've all been pretty much listenable from the get go. However………

Teflon XOs and coupling caps on my DIY play amps on the other hand…….ugh. It's a roller coaster for the first 100 hours. Stabilized, maybe some more improvements until 300 then I have nothing to complain about. In any case the last two hundred or so are very listenable. Enough for me to be able to turn my OCD switch off.

For speakers I always jump start the process. Put 'em face to face with one speaker's leads inverted. Cover with a blanket, fire away for a few days with a fan on the amp. I realize this may not be an easy thing to do if you don't have a spare room to do it in but I do so why not?

 

[mep]

Hello Davey

That would make sense or at least the notorious Teflon caps. No like it's at all difficult to burn them in.

Rob

For the benefit of both you and Davey, this subject has been discussed at length on WBF before so there is no need to plow the same ground again. Audio companies are not manufacturing bourbon that has to be aged for 7 years or more. They are in the business of manufacturing products and selling products as soon as they are completed, tested, and boxed for shipping. And for the record, it's not like they sound like crap out of the box because they don't. Common experience that has been shared here and on other forums tells us the sound changes for the better as the components break in.

 

[mep]

Back on topic. I think it takes me about 3 or 4 days before the new gear crush fades and I'm back to being my demanding self. I do beta testing for some companies and I have sent stuff back with "regrets" attached. If a product becomes part of the product line and I'll have to stock it or recommend it to clients that trust me, you can be sure I won't be toning down my observations.

To be honest, rarely have I found electronics that were just bad out of the box and an hour running. They get better generally but not to the point where I could say a lump of coal got polished into a diamond. They've all been pretty much listenable from the get go. However………

Teflon XOs and coupling caps on my DIY play amps on the other hand…….ugh. It's a roller coaster for the first 100 hours. Stabilized, maybe some more improvements until 300 then I have nothing to complain about. In any case the last two hundred or so are very listenable. Enough for me to be able to turn my OCD switch off.

For speakers I always jump start the process. Put 'em face to face with one speaker's leads inverted. Cover with a blanket, fire away for a few days with a fan on the amp. I realize this may not be an easy thing to do if you don't have a spare room to do it in but I do so why not?

Jack-I agree with your thoughts. If something sounded horrible out of the box, I would be greatly concerned. That has not been my experience. I expect good components to sound good out of the box. If they continue to improve as they break in, so much the better.

 

[elcorso]

Hysteresis?

On Capacitor Dielectric Materials - A Chemist's View
Karl A. Weber, Ph.D.

"When an audio signal is passed through a capacitor the dielectric absorption prevents full charging and discharging of the capacitor at the frequency of the alternating current signal. When the signal reverses the charging on the plates the dielectric absorption presents a lagging current of the former polarity, a hysteresis effect results. This effect becomes more acute with increasing frequency."

I'm sorry but the link is dead now. But we, Conrad Johnson owners, exposed to their tefflon capacitors knows what break-in means.

The same with some audio cables where the dielectric needs to "form" by use, this is stated en some cable manufacturers like Cardas. BTW a lot of them uses tefflon.

In some other forum (DIY) are graphics showing some tefflon cap forming, beginning with some spikes observed in the oscilloscope in the traced curve and finishing with an smooth curve (no spikes).

In new cars (if you read the manual) the brakes are not smooth until 300-500 miles of car usage. But this doesn't mean that you began driving your new car without brakes!...

My humble opinion,

Roch

 

[mep]

On Capacitor Dielectric Materials - A Chemist's View
Karl A. Weber, Ph.D.

"When an audio signal is passed through a capacitor the dielectric absorption prevents full charging and discharging of the capacitor at the frequency of the alternating current signal. When the signal reverses the charging on the plates the dielectric absorption presents a lagging current of the former polarity, a hysteresis effect results. This effect becomes more acute with increasing frequency."

I'm sorry but the link is dead now. But we, Conrad Johnson owners, exposed to their tefflon capacitors knows what break-in means.

The same with some audio cables where the dielectric needs to "form" by use, this is stated en some cable manufacturers like Cardas. BTW a lot of them uses tefflon.

In some other forum (DIY) are graphics showing some tefflon cap forming, beginning with some spikes observed in the oscilloscope in the traced curve and finishing with an smooth curve (no spikes).

In new cars (if you read the manual) the brakes are not smooth until 300-500 miles of car usage. But this doesn't mean that you began driving your new car without brakes!...

My humble opinion,

Roch

Now there is something that objectivists can sink their teeth into.

 

[dallasjustice]

This study more closely describes what I normally see on audiophile forums:
https://www.math.ucdavis.edu/~suh/metacognition.pdf

 

[microstrip]

This study more closely describes what I normally see on audiophile forums:
https://www.math.ucdavis.edu/~suh/metacognition.pdf

Considering the tittle "Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties in Recognizing One's Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-Assessments ", we can ask if you feel that, in general, members of audiophile forums are incompetent in audiophile matters?

 

[puroagave]

This study more closely describes what I normally see on audiophile forums:
https://www.math.ucdavis.edu/~suh/metacognition.pdf

that's why i'm reluctant to join another audio club/society, they're full of them

 

[edorr]

Of course, we all exclude ourselves from the "Incompetent hobbyists with inflated self-assessments", and think we are highly competent with accurate self-assessment. This is ironically the whole point of the study.

 

[microstrip]

Of course, we all exclude ourselves from the "Incompetent hobbyists with inflated self-assessments", and think we are highly competent with accurate self-assessment. This is ironically the whole point of the study.

Sorry, some of us can consider themselves competent because we know Ohms law , how to use a voltmeter and how to set the scales in an osciloscope. If someone owns a soundmeter he only needs to fulfill two of the previous requirements to be considered competent.

 

[MylesBAstor]

Microstrip writes: Considering the tittle "Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties in Recognizing One's Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-Assessments ", we can ask if you feel that, in general, members of audiophile forums are incompetent in audiophile matters?

This study more closely describes what I normally see on audiophile forums:
https://www.math.ucdavis.edu/~suh/metacognition.pdf

Everyone except Michael is incompetent, Francisco. Don't you know that? If you don't I'm sure he'll be glad to tell you again.

Actually if Michael knew anything about psychology and the field of motivation, that report is hardly ground breaking. That's been known for decades.

And the corollary is that we succeed in spite of it. Michael might also be served by reading the book Decisive.