CD Player break in period


Guys, I'm not looking to start a debate on break in periods, if it's real, a myth, etc.

I have purchased a new Esoteric X-03 SE SACD player on 12/26/07 along with new Tara Labs The One (w/ISM) balanced interconnects. I let the player warm to room temperature as it was stone cold when I opened the box, evidence that it was either in an unheated warehouse or truck for a while-confirmed by my dealer. After a half a day, I hooked it up and the sound was incredibly poor. Very hard sounding, harsh mids and highs, narrow soundstage, no impact to bass, no definition. I am now on hour 674 and it's almost there. Soundstage opened up, detail is awesome, everything is, as I said almost there, but I still have a bit of a sting on female vocals. I have done an extensive amount of research and although Esoteric's website says break in should be 250 hours, I have found some information stating it would take 800 to 1,000 hours to sound excellent, with it still improving there after.

Again, I am not looking for responses disputing break in, that this is a fantasy and it must be some other culprit in my system (my dealer prchased the same player on the same day (same shippment) and he is experiencing the same).

I would love to hear about other members experience with equipment requiring a rather extensive break in period.

I appreciate your input.
128x128cerrot
Guido,

I appreciate your input greatly, not because you agree, but because of the detiled info you provided which has actually assisted me in my task. I was going to post last night but, instead, just had to run in the sound room and listen to some Yo yO Ma ( I also wemt back and read some of your other posts, and, I did upgrade to a Python Helix Vx last week). His Cello sounded amazing.

Thank you for yor refreshing perspective.
Cerrot: "made the flaw in the recording evident"...

This is a bit of a tangent, but if you spent just five minutes in a professional recording studio, you might realise there's no such thing as a perfect recording.
In my former life as a muso and having done several recordings in various small and large studios (in Australia), I think you'd be horrified to see the way some things are done and with what equipment, as I was.

That's not to say there aren't plenty of brilliant recordings out there, but at some point, your system is likely to exceed the limits of many recordings. You have to decide how much of that you're prepared to live with.
Cerrot, I purchased my UX-3 used, but I'm reasonably certain the unit had not been played very many hours (mfg date was just 3 months from the date I received it). My starting point with the UX-3 is therefore somewhat unknown, but this is what I found: upon first listen I was a little worried that it would be too "digital" sounding. It didn't sound as "smooth" as my previous APL3910, but it was more dynamic and detailed.

After a week of non stop play, it became significantly "smoother", but still the strengths of the player were evident...dynamics, detail, and impact. Over the next few weeks, the player became "balanced". By this I mean, the strengths of the player were clearly the same BUT, the player "opened up" in a way that helped transport me to the event. High frequencies were no longer spot-lit, but contributed to putting in context the venue of the recording and filling out the overtones of the instruments in a more natural way. I was very happy with the player at this point, but wondered what was possible, given the obvious strengths of the player.

I then sent my UX-3 to Steve Huntley of GNSC and he spent a great deal of time performing a Statement mod to the player. This mod involved the addition of a great many Black Gate caps in the power supply section as well as many other passive part upgrades and power supply filtering. When I got it back, it was clearly a half step back from when I sent it out. Over the next few weeks of constant play, it opened up in such a natural way...much better than before. The strengths no longer stand out, it's extremely well balanced and serves to bring me to the event. This is not to say that it is not dynamic and detailed...it is...it's just always in support of the music, not something of its own.

Bad sounding CD's still sound bad, but the difference is that they are listenable AND I can tell why. Different spaces, mic placement, mixing and mastering decisions are much more easily discerned. To me, particularly with the UX-3, the burn in process is a balancing process.

The dynamic and low-level detail capabilities of the UX-3 allow for a more involving listening session. In particular, the micro dynamic capabilities, combined with the detail retrieval allow me to get alot closer to what a musician is doing. They are not, however, something by themselves...dynamics and detail are present in such a way as the sound is more believable, not "impressive" if you understand what I mean?

To me, these qualities are an essential platform to get closer to the music. It must be balanced though...the highs have to open up and they do with time. If your system tends to emphasize some of the stronger qualities of the Esoteric though, you could lose the balance.

Good luck!

Jordan
Thank you Cerrot, my experience with the Shunyata Python and Anaconda Helix VX on X-01 is they tend to create a slight candy-coating of reality, paradoxically accompanied by harshening in some situations. I found the Alpha chords ultimately more satisfying on the X-01. Have you tried the Alpha variant of the Python on X-03? My findings on the subjects are discussed in "A tale of Two. . . Anaconda Helix" at:
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?fcabl&1146623467&openmine&zzGuidocorona&4&5#Guidocorona
This discussion prompted me to contact the dealer I bought my X-03SE from and get his take. He said that while there is considerable difference of opinion on break in of components his own views tend to square with what Cerrot and a few others have said here--namely, that the Esoteric's require quite a bit of run in time. Cerrot, I looked at the website after reading your post and did see the reference to 250 hours. I have sent Esoteric an email requesting clarification on whether double or triple that amount of time is necessary or not. According to my dealer, the Esoteric's will reach 90-95% of their potential after around 750 hours. Again, Cerrot, very much in line with your experience. He did not state, however, that the machine sounds as bad as you report during the break in phase. Additionally, I have decided to pass up a learning opportunity and have now begun breaking in my machine while waiting for my speakers to arrive. I had considered leaving the machine unused until I could listen and then reporting back to the thread with any changes in the sound at various break in points (100, 250, 500, etc). But, listening to everyone's experience here and then having it confirmed by my dealer, I decided to forgo the learning opportunity and just get on with burning in the player. I've been without music for five freaking months--the last thing I want to do is have to wait another two weeks while my player reaches it's peak potential. So, I concede the argument that Cerrot never wanted to have by giving up the opportunity to inject evidence from my own experience breaking in this machine. Finally, on the question of how to break the player in, my dealer suggest I put the Esoteric on "repeat" mode and run it into my preamp while it is turned on. Just a slight twist on what was reported here--that the preamp should be on while the player is doing its thing.