Whats the best burn-in for headphones?

[JoeE SP9]

Joe, It's feeding the speakers the frequency range that they are expected to encounter, therefore loosening the diaphragms and helping them to meet their potential. Different methods to deliver those frequncies, thats the issue at hand. I've chatted with alot of guys who think burning-in a total load, but once you experience the benefit, it's hard not to become a beleiver. Kind of like seeing an alien...man I'm liking 2left more and more each post.....2left my brutha!!

Let me begin by saying that I believe in and rely on burn in of all the devices in my system. I believe in and hear IC and speaker cable differences. I have heard for myself that IC's can be constructed to be directional. However, to suggest that a device should be burned in with the type of music it will be used to primarily reproduce is utter and absolute nonsense.
As an EE I am aware of and understand that some signal types and or combination's of waveforms may do a better job than others. However, to suggest that the 1812 should be used on a system that is primarily used for listening to classical music while Ray Charles should be used if the system is for an R&B lover makes the term snake oil seem like a compliment. C'mon guys I would lighten up on this if there was just "anecdotal proof" from widely separated sources.
In response to your opening sentence. I expect my speakers to encounter any and every frequency between 20Hz and 20KHz. What do you do if your listening is rather eclectic? Do you survey your listening patterns? Do you determine what percentage is devoted to each kind of music? Do you then burn in your devices with the same percentages of burn in material? The mind boggles at such a thought.

[poppachubby]

Let me begin by saying that I believe in and rely on burn in of all the devices in my system. I believe in and hear IC and speaker cable differences. I have heard for myself that IC's can be constructed to be directional. However, to suggest that a device should be burned in with the type of music it will be used to primarily reproduce is utter and absolute nonsense.
As an EE I am aware of and understand that some signal types and or combination's of waveforms may do a better job than others. However, to suggest that the 1812 should be used on a system that is primarily used for listening to classical music while Ray Charles should be used if the system is for an R&B lover makes the term snake oil seem like a compliment. C'mon guys I would lighten up on this if there was just "anecdotal proof" from widely separated sources.
In response to your opening sentence. I expect my speakers to encounter any and every frequency between 20Hz and 20KHz. What do you do if your listening is rather eclectic? Do you survey your listening patterns? Do you determine what percentage is devoted to each kind of music? Do you then burn in your devices with the same percentages of burn in material? The mind boggles at such a thought.

Whoa...interesting points Joe. However, all I was trying to say was, if you enjoy your music bass heavy for example, than perhaps some sort of bass heavy music to condition the speakers would seem reasonable. You're totally correct in saying that it would be an excercise in stupidity to try and "match up" burn in frequencies to listening frequencies. I for one, would not have the time and quite possibly the brain power either to attempt such a feat...