Cyro-treated DIY products worth the extra $$?
post-1472534
Post #16 of 45

Nixie

Banned
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Messages
143
Reaction score
0
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Posts
143
Likes
0
Quote:

haven't heard them vs non-cry versions of the same cables


Well that's all that matters. Try this for fun, and don't take it too seriously:

ABC w/hidden reference test
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Get cryoed and non-crioed versions of the cable. Get a friend. Label the cryoed cable 'C' with a piece of tape -- this is the reference (if you think the other cable is more transparent, then use it as the reference instead). Make a tape labelled '1' and another labelled '2', and attach them to the cables. Get in your listening position, facing away from your friend, and tell him/her to randomly pick (rolling a dice to be sure) either A=1,B=2 or A=2,B=1, and write it down (without telling you!). If you use a preamp that can selects between inputs, or a quality switchbox, this increases the chance of a positive result, since manual switching is usually too slow for audio memory. You can ask your friend to switch to any one of A, B, or C at any time, and you can control the music source as you please. Then decide which one, A or B, you believe to be the reference C. Now the critical part: repeat this several times, preferably at least ten. For every trial, your friend should roll the dice for a new random assignment of A and B to cables 1 and 2. Optionally, you can allow one cables to be assigned both letters. Generally, if there's no difference, then you'll pick the right cable about 50% by chance. Precision of the test incerases with the number of trials.

I've actually heard differences between interconnects in such a test, but they are generally very small and it takes a long time to pick them out. This would be much improved if you get the computer to drive the switchbox/preamp, since you don't have to give verbal command to a friend, taking away from the concentration. It's easier to click on a button. This way also the test is double blind.
 
     Share This Post       
post-1472568
Post #17 of 45

1UP

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
Oct 24, 2004
Messages
1,374
Reaction score
10
Joined
Oct 24, 2004
Posts
1,374
Likes
10
I can't be arsed to do that!
 
     Share This Post       
post-1472575
Post #18 of 45

Jam_Master_J

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Aug 25, 2003
Messages
1,851
Reaction score
13
Joined
Aug 25, 2003
Posts
1,851
Likes
13
I've got access to liquid nitrogen at school, maybe I could try this on my own when classes start up again.
 
     Share This Post       
post-1472639
Post #19 of 45

kevin gilmore

Señor Stax. Señor MAXX.
Can Jam '10 Organizer
Joined
Jun 21, 2001
Messages
2,851
Reaction score
486
Joined
Jun 21, 2001
Posts
2,851
Likes
486
You need to keep the cables at liquid nitrogen temperatures for
a few days. Dump what you want in a 40 litre dewar, fill to the
top, and let it sit till all the N2 evaporates. Typically about 2 weeks.
 
     Share This Post       
post-1472664
Post #20 of 45

Todd R

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Sep 27, 2001
Messages
4,167
Reaction score
85
Joined
Sep 27, 2001
Posts
4,167
Likes
85
Before you guys dismiss this, you might want to check out some places that do cold treating like Cryogenics International. Do a search, there are lots of companies that perform this service.

Don't confuse this with the quack tweaks like putting things in your deep freezer, it's not even the same thing.

"Deep cryogenics is the ultra low temperature processing of materials to enhance their desired metallurgical and structural properties. In our case, this is a temperature about -320°F, -196°C, or 77°K. These ultra cold temperatures are achieved using computer controls, a well-insulated treatment chamber and liquid nitrogen (LN2)".
The parts are slowly cooled over the course of a day, and then held at temperature for about a day, and then slowly warmed back to room temp.
So no, you won't be able to do this at school
.

It is a real, permanent process that has many uses in addition to audio.
Back when I was a machinist, we had tools and some cold forming dies treated, and they did last considerably longer.

I was considering getting a machine and start a side business doing this, but the cheapest one I have located was $13,000.

As far as audio goes, it works there too.

I had a pair of speakers that I sent in to be upgraded to the latest version. When I got them back, they played slightly louder, the bass was stronger, and sounded more refined. Quite a nice improvement.
When I pressed the manufacturer for the details of the upgrade, he finally admitted, the only change was substituting Cryo treated crossover components. No other changes.

Recently I was sent a set of Cryo treated 6JN6 output tubes for my Berning ZH270 amp from my dealer (no charge!). They also sounded considerably better.

Jam_Master_J, if he's only charging $10 extra it might be worth a try.
 
     Share This Post       
post-1472665
Post #21 of 45

Nixie

Banned
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Messages
143
Reaction score
0
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Posts
143
Likes
0
There was a discussion at roguesci.org for DIY construction of a freezer that could do comparable temperatures, but not 40 gallons. From what I remember, somebody actually built it. Of course, I don't know how many people have 40 gallons of cables.
 
     Share This Post       
post-1472682
Post #23 of 45

Nixie

Banned
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Messages
143
Reaction score
0
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Posts
143
Likes
0
For $10 you can feed ten starving third world country children for a day.

You know why audiophiles are afraid of blind tests? Because deep down inside they know there's no difference, and they want to suppress any more indicators to that end, lest they are no longer able to pleasantly fool themselves.
 
     Share This Post       
post-1472695
Post #24 of 45

Nixie

Banned
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Messages
143
Reaction score
0
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Posts
143
Likes
0
Quote:

Originally Posted by Todd R
"Deep cryogenics is the ultra low temperature processing of materials to enhance their desired metallurgical and structural properties."
...
It is a real, permanent process that has many uses in addition to audio.



No one is disputing the usefulness in cryogenics in other areas. Actually, it is audio that doesn't have a use for it -- other than making money by selling something that cannot possibly make an audible difference. What you quoted says it: metallurgical and structural, not electrical.

I thought this was the DIY forum, where (amateur)engineers talk, not the cables forum, where the mystics and the naive marks hang out.

To be fair, much fault goes to the other side as well, of those like D. Self who assume that measurement apparatus and the distortion metrics they use carry significant meaning as far as auditory perception is concerned -- they do not, of course; THD, IMD, etc., in general have no correlation with perceptual measurements (the latter can very much be scientific, viz blind tests). On both sides people forget that perception can be objectively studied. Otherwise psychology wouldn't be a science (well, it only really became a science when cognitivism took over in the 80s).
 
     Share This Post       
post-1472733
Post #25 of 45

Todd R

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Sep 27, 2001
Messages
4,167
Reaction score
85
Joined
Sep 27, 2001
Posts
4,167
Likes
85
Quote:

Originally Posted by Nixie
No one is disputing the usefulness in cryogenics in other areas. Actually, it is audio that doesn't have a use for it -- other than making money by selling something that cannot possibly make an audible difference. What you quoted says it: metallurgical and structural, not electrical.


Since cryogenic treatment of metals aligns the crystalline structure and reduces stress, why wouldn't that make it a more effective and quieter conductor?

"Problem:

It is well known that disparate materials used in connectors, solder joints, pc board circuitry as well as residual stresses and gaps within the lattice structure of materials all serve to degrade and/or hamper sound reproduction. These imperfections are caused by the un-even cooling and shrinkage of the liquid or molten material into a solid. All these imperfections cause noise. Electronic noise often contributes to a lack of focus, detail and resolution in audio and lack of sharpness and color definition in video.

Solution:

Reduce or eliminate the inherent stresses and other imperfections which cause noise, through precise deep cryogenic processing. Our process removes built-in stress, reforms microstructure and uniforms or blends solder junctions and connections to improve the free flow of current. The result is greater transparency and less noise."


Remember,
I have personal experience with what cryogenic treatments can do for audio. If it didn't do anything I would have said so!
Why you guys always doubt the people who've actually tried something, without trying it yourself, I'll never understand.
TR
 
     Share This Post       
post-1472753
Post #26 of 45

Nixie

Banned
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Messages
143
Reaction score
0
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Posts
143
Likes
0
First of all, where does that quote come from? I dare the original source to submit this to a peer reviewed publication!

Quote:

Why you guys always doubt the people who've actually tried something, without trying it yourself, I'll never understand.


I've performed a blind ABC with hidden reference test of the same geometry cables, one with regular copper and one with OFC high purity copper (not mine, I use silver for my interconnects, not because I think it makes a difference, but because it's cool). If that doesn't make a difference, even less likely cryo would. Five people, two of them audiophiles, were the subjects (excluding myself). No statistically positive result after ten trials per person. This doesn't prove it's not audible, but is evidence towards that end. I'd be perfectly happy to place a bet on a large trial. Just find enough willing participants.

Quote:

It is well known ...


Well known by whom? Readers of that rag Stereophile and AudioAsylum members, I bet.
 
     Share This Post       
post-1472760
Post #27 of 45

philodox

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Dec 12, 2003
Messages
10,244
Reaction score
16
Joined
Dec 12, 2003
Posts
10,244
Likes
16
Quote:

Originally Posted by Nixie
I use silver for my interconnects, not because I think it makes a difference, but because it's cool.


Sorry if I misunderstood, but are you saying that there is no audible difference between copper cable and silver cable? I know that on my system, silver was very bright and by using a copper interconnect everything had much more synergy. This was not a subtle change and many people at the Detroit meet [everyone who listened to both] thought the copper was clearly superior.
 
     Share This Post       
post-1472767
Post #28 of 45

Nixie

Banned
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Messages
143
Reaction score
0
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Posts
143
Likes
0
Do both cables have the same geometry, and the same conductor gauge? You can only make a meaningful comparison if you control for all other differences.

If they were indeed the same in all other respects than the conductor material, then I'm willing to place a bet on a negative result on a blind test for any subjects you choose. I will probably come to Ontario in the fall for a bit, so if you are up to it...
 
     Share This Post       
post-1472773
Post #29 of 45

Todd R

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Sep 27, 2001
Messages
4,167
Reaction score
85
Joined
Sep 27, 2001
Posts
4,167
Likes
85
Quote:

Originally Posted by Nixie
First of all, where does that quote come from? I dare the original source to submit this to a peer reviewed publication!


It came from http://www.cryogenicsinternational.com/, the page I referenced in my first post. Click the tab that says Audio. Apparently you didn't bother to read it?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nixie
performed a blind ABC with hidden reference test of the same geometry cables, one with regular copper and one with OFC high purity copper (not mine, I use silver for my interconnects, not because I think it makes a difference, but because it's cool). If that doesn't make a difference, even less likely cryo would. Five people, two of them audiophiles, were the subjects (excluding myself). No statistically positive result after ten trials per person. This doesn't prove it's not audible, but is evidence towards that end. I'd be perfectly happy to place a bet on a large trial. Just find enough willing participants.


Actually a test like that is going on right now:
http://www6.head-fi.org/forums/showthread.php?t=72890
http://www6.head-fi.org/forums/showthread.php?t=116203
 
     Share This Post       
post-1472779
Post #30 of 45

philodox

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Dec 12, 2003
Messages
10,244
Reaction score
16
Joined
Dec 12, 2003
Posts
10,244
Likes
16
Quote:

Originally Posted by Nixie
Do both cables have the same geometry, and the same conductor gauge? You can only make a meaningful comparison if you control for all other differences.


Not sure, good point.


I have heard silver/copper cables by the same manufacturer in the past and heard a difference, but preffered silver in that test. That was with my old system that was less resolving though. I'm not completely sure that they were the same gauge in that case, but terminations and geometry were definately the same. Oh well, I prefer my copper IC's in any case... regardless of the reason.


Hmmm... I am still of the mind that if you listen to two components and hear a difference [preferring one] that means the difference is in fact there. I dont make a habit of doubting my senses.
 
     Share This Post       

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top