"It's strange though as my front speakers are Axiom M80's which are supposed to have alot of bass. But the bass is increased dramaticaly by setting them to small sending alot more signal to the sub. I also have full sized rears which I had set to large. All my speakers are now set to small at 60 hz"

As it was noted above by sdurani, there are very few speakers that can handle the bass as well as a good dedicated subwoofer. You may also find that setting the crossover higher, even as high as "gasp" 120 hz, may improve the response. It is worthwhile to play with different settings. There are a lot of variables in a normal environment setup, we do not live in an anachoic chamber.
I have a 1050 upgraded from a JVC, and I found that the greatest difference, "improvement", came when I changed my speakers; from a varily expensive set to some wonderful diys. I think speakers are the most important part of a system, yes even though a system is made of various intergal parts.

Okay, I'll stick my head out and lay it on the block. My home theater has been in operation for about one month. New 950 & 7x M200. Speakers, cables, and DVD player have many hours on them. At first my system sounded thin and bright. I was disappointed. After one week, probably less than 10 hours, I played a CD that had been used several times during the previous week. To my ears, the system sounded much improved. No scientific study was performed.

"Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted." - Albert Einstein.

Certainly a smarter man than me.

Does burn-in exist on some or all solid state components? Beats me. Intellectually, I tend to side with the technical arguments that suggest that it is unlikely (unlike components like speakers, where mechanical parts can experience a physical "breaking in," burn in of solid state components is less explicable). On the other hand, I have heard and read a significant number of reports of people experiencing "burn-in" type changes in equipment and as noted above I could have sworn I heard a subtle sonic evolution with the blue-day 950 that I did not encounter with earlier designs (although one could argue that this was due to my ears adjusting to the design changes). In the end, I think perhaps the best approach might be the following: give new gear that seems a bit "off" time to settle in to the system, if only to give yourself time to finesse settings such as bass management - setting changes that can significantly alter a piece of equipment's behavior (as experienced above by SirAnthony).

Fair enough. My system sounds different to me depending on the mood I'm in or how tired I am. The important thing is not the difference in perception but the reason for this difference. Some will claim that solid state equipment goes through enough of a physical transformation during normal use that it actually produces an audible change (always for the better, stops when it's optimal, never going too far). Others will say that we're simply getting used to a new piece of gear. I guess we each have to decide for ourselves which of those two scenarios sounds more real-world plausible and which sounds more fantastical.

Burn in is real!!! I just experienced it with the Cambridge Audio Azur 640c CD player I just got. At first it sounded good but there wasn't any depth. After about two days running it continuiosly the sound was much improved. Bass tightened, treble improved and depth improved. And adding a better power cable helped too. The thing is.. I don't think break in is so dramatic that the overall character will change that much. If you don't like it at all.. Breaking it in won't help. The 950/755 combo was a bad match for my Axiom speakers. I returned it. Sorry. Now if they would sort out the charges for the missing cables I never got this audition will have only cost me a couple of hundred bucks. I do have a couple of cables to show for it.

Gently putting forward some questions for those that believe in “break in” in those items that do not undergo physical changes with use:

When you say that the performance of a piece of electronics changed over time, are you assuming that your ear/brain analyzer is a “constant state” device and that changes in perceived performance can be wholly or largely attributed to the equipment only?

Was everything in the room, including the exact location of your ears, unchanged during the comparison time? I once was listening to some very familiar music in my car. After a while I straightened my posture which raised the position of my ears and inch or two. Because I was paying close attention to the music, the change in perceived system performance was quite noticeable, yet nothing about the system or the environment itself changed.

Specific test equipment exists that can monitor and measure small changes in both electronic and acoustic response well beyond the level of our ear/brain analyzer. If this type of equipment does not detect significant change, but your ear/brain analyzer tells you there has been change, which do you believe? (Why is it important to have an IFR qualified pilot at the controls of an aircraft?)

As to the comment regarding a match between the 950/7xxx combo and Axiom speakers, there are many satisfied owners of this teaming. That doesn’t guarantee everyone will be satisfied, but the detractors are very few.

Again, I must ask, why does "break-in" always result in an improvement - how come the change is always for the better? This defies all logic. Heck, we're not talking aboug a pair of shoes here. I have never heard of someone who claimed to hear "break in" resuling in a degredation of performance.

Actually I have had a couple of experiences with equipment that I liked at first but got bored with over time. Don't know if it was because of break in or not.

I must agree with SH.
While new speakers can often have significant "break-in" periods, I believe that people are far more likely to have "ear/brain break-in" than solid state electronics.

I do have a related question however...
When turning on a cold solid state amp, how sigificant can the difference in sound be, as compared to a hot (warmed-up) amp?

In most cases, my ears and the amp start warming up at the same time, so it is often hard to tell how big the sound shift might be.

I believe that the optimal design operating temperature for most amps is probably on the hot side. Some amps are said to sing best when they are hot enough to fry eggs. Any thoughs or observations would be appreciated.

Allan