Cryogenically treated cables

Yes, LIGO does cool things down. Just not in the way these cables are ooled down. LIGO seems to stay cool. Calling LIGO as a reference for benefits of cooling cables down for a short period of time is slightly misplaced.

LIGO uses cryo. Glubson uses glue. 🤪

atdavid, you seem a little sluggish this morning. Did you forget to take your Smart Pill? Can I suggest a reading comprehension refresher? I hate to be so judgmental with newbees but this discussion is turning into a Rope-a-Dope. Float like a butterfly 🦋 sting like a bee 🐝 Funny, huh? Yes, I realize comedy is subjective. 🤡

"Did LIGO use cryo? Bet they did."

I bet they thought of it. As a constant low temperature for whatever reason they thought it would help. Not cooling down and then bringing back to room temperature like Voodoo Cables and all others do.

Cold Fusion (trademarked by Voodoo Cable, it seems) is an interesting name. Cold Bonding, in a way. Some people use that name in more terrestrial applications.

https://www.belzona.com/en/focus/cold_bonding.aspx

Geoff, do you have detachment from honest discord. If we are to believe what you meant on this last post (which you will probably edit), then the statement below is false, since they don’t use cryogenics they use cryo treatment which you have now differentiated as not the same ..... ooooops.

geoffkait18,021 posts11-06-2019 6:01amAdvanced audiophiles have been using cryogenics for twenty-five years. No big deal.

geoffkait18,021 posts11-06-2019 8:32amI said LIGO uses cryogenics. Don’t get your bowels in an uproar or put words in my mouth. I just had breakfast.

geoffkait,

"At the molecular level, electrons that make up any electrical pulse jump from one conductive molecule to the next."

Do you accept this?

I said LIGO uses cryogenics. Don't get your bowels in an uproar or put words in my mouth. I just had breakfast.

I am pretty sure they decided to call it Voodoo Cable to get the goat of pinheads.

If you want to make a bet about whether the majority of cables in Ligo were cryogenically treated (and not just used at cryogenic temperatures), I will gladly take that bet.

What are you willing to wager?

p.s. CRYCONNECT specializes in cabling and other assemblies that --operate-- at cryogenic temperatures, not treatment for room temperature use. Read more ..... post less.

geoffkait18,018 posts11-06-2019 6:01am Or maybe go to CRYOCONNECT.COM for Cryogenic Cables & Harnesses For Ground Based & Space Applications. Did LIGO use cryo? Bet they did.

"Voodoo Cable"

At least they are honest.

Oh, come on, all you negative Nellies, don’t be such a stick in the mud. 💩 Faint heart ne’er won fair maiden. Advanced audiophiles have been using cryogenics for twenty-five years. No big deal. Remember the Little Train that Could, “I think I can, I think I can, I think I can.” 🚂 Toot! Toot! And if you’re still too suspicious about cryo, remember, the home freezer is very effective for improving the sound, as I’ve been posting of late. Home freezing eliminates obsessive worry about micro fractures. 😩 Or maybe go to CRYOCONNECT.COM for Cryogenic Cables & Harnesses For Ground Based & Space Applications. Did LIGO use cryo? Bet they did. 

Audio Cable companies using cryogenics, this list is not intended to be all inclusive.

Purist Audio since 1995

AntiCables

Furutech

Stealth

VH Audio

Snake River Audio

Jena Labs

Audio Sensibility

Ultimate Cables

Shunyata

Revelation Audio Labs

JW Audio

Townsend Audio

Voodoo Cable

Museatex

Blue Marble Audio Cables

Silversmith Audio

Neotech

Reference 3A

Meitner (EMM) Cables

Darwin Cables

Silent Source

CryoClear

CryoParts

Connex Audio

It is way cooler now.

Oh, just a whole CD player I had cryo’d.

Did it have a thermal tag to indicate lowest temperature?
Time @ ?°K
Is it really better in some measurable way or just now has more cachet?

The quote above is nonsense. But especially this bit

Cryogenic treatment is typically -300° Fahrenheit, and, in a way, is the reciprocal of high heat (flame forging). Either technique could help a knife, but would you subject a piece of plastic or polymer to a flame? Cryo is no better.

Right. To subject a piece of plastic to cryo is no better than to subject it to high heat flame forging. A dazzling display of logic, as Spock might have said. Or the Red Queen.

No one in their right mind would subject a piece of plastic to cryo!

Oh wait, what’s this?

Oh, its just a stack of CDs I had cryo’d.

Oh wait, what’s this???

Oh, just a whole CD player I had cryo’d.

So....

Right. The quote above is nonsense. Cryo is not like flame forging. In fact it is the furthest thing from it. Might not be the silliest post ever, but will give a lot a run for their money.

Oh come on geoff, you must have been exposed to thermal analysis for cold temperatures in your Nasa days? I know I certainly had to do some crash course schoolin when I had to put something in space.

Space is of course much worse due to rapid heat/cooling, but at cryo temps, you are going to induce microfractures (feel free to Google), and can break bonds between dissimilar materials ...not to mention no guarantee of changing properties for good or bad.

@geoffkait 
Actually it's not something I would say, as I don't agree with them. I just found it ironic that your seemingly favorite wire manufacturer thinks so.

Actually, Jay Jay, AudioQuest’s explanation is absurd. It sounds like something you would say. Oh, well, nobody is expected to be great at everything.

Advice to all AudioQuest users - send cables off to the cryo lab immediately if not sooner! I cryo’d my AudioQuest Truth interconnects and they were far better after cryo.

“This is an old technology that has proven itself for certain metals when utilized in certain conditions (it’s standard in high-performance race engines). Unfortunately, its efficacy for audio products is inconsistent. We have found that many have over-used this and many other popular modifications and treatments. The idea that, “if it works here, certainly it will work everywhere,” is simply not true. In fact, this treatment can seriously damage many materials such as the polymers used in many audio, video, digital, and filtering components. Cryogenic treatment is typically -300° Fahrenheit, and, in a way, is the reciprocal of high heat (flame forging). Either technique could help a knife, but would you subject a piece of plastic or polymer to a flame? Cryo is no better.”

What's really funny is Geoffy's favorite directional wire manufacturer, Audioquest, does not use cryo treatment. 😏

P.S. Autocorrect made that "directional wife manufacturer" 😂

Whoa! I’m iGeoff?! No, I prefer to think of myself as 👁 Geoff.

Oh, I’ve been meaning to ask you, is it true that when you lie your pants really are on fire? 👖 🔥

As a kid I told people I was going to be a comedian and they all laughed at me. Well, noone’s laughing now!

What I have discovered is that geoff, you are unreal.

atdavid
While repeating the same thing over and over again may make it true on an internet forum, for at least a few people, it does not change reality geoff.

>>>>>Exactly! Then why are YOU repeating the same thing over and over? I did not create reality. I keep telling you. To discover the real reality you must look 👀 deeper, grasshopper! 🦗

"There is a fluid situation on the ground..."

Next time, try Depends.

While repeating the same thing over and over again may make it true on an internet forum, for at least a few people, it does not change reality geoff.

When my index of patheticity peaks and I start channelling popular movies I will let you know.

So not only are you lying but you're going to start using my jokes, too?

atdavid
If you cannot collect your thoughts before attempting to put them down into words, maybe it is the thoughts that are at issue? Pseudo science is making claims, that you are not able to back up with anything approaching typical standards for evidence, then claiming everyone who disagrees with you is lying, stubborn, "does not understand", etc., and yet never actually addressing any argument presented against your case.

>>>>You must be looking in the mirror. Those are actually YOUR tactics, not mine. You just quoted yourself! Besides, it’s not true I haven’t addressed your arguments. You either haven’t been paying attention or are straight up lying.

Standards for evidence. What on earth are you going on about? Do you really think this is some sort of peer review forum for Scientific American? Or a court of law? And who is going to be the arbiter of evidence and facts - you? Get real! Three hallmarks of the scientific method are curiosity observation and investigation. You are missing all three, Mr. Smarty Pants 👖

I reserve the right to edit my posts, it’s the protocol here. There is a fluid situation on the ground and I have many reasons why I might wish to edit a post within the allotted time. What you want or demand doesn’t actually count.

That wasn’t a dogmatic, silly. It was a Rolodex.

Quotes from 12 Angry Men 😡 😡 😡 😡

Juror #12: Oh, come on. Nobody can know a thing like that. This isn’t an exact science.

Juror #2: You said we could throw out all the other evidence!

Juror #8: Prejudice always obscures the truth.

Juror #8: Nobody has to prove otherwise. The burden of proof is on the prosecution. The defendant doesn’t even have to open his mouth.

Juror #7: I don’t know about the rest of ’em but I’m gettin’ a little tired of this yakity-yack and back-and-forth, it’s gettin’ us nowhere. So I guess *I’ll* have to break it up; I change my vote to "not guilty."

🤡

I totally forgot about double blind tests. I must have spaced out. 👨‍🚀

You can PROVE it. Double blind test.

Don't you like that, geoffkait?

You can’t PROVE it! Hey, this is right outa 12 Angry Men, folks. You cannot make this stuff up! Somebody is channeling juror #3. 😡

hi evo845 
 where did you get the idea that cryo treating anything will make it sound different at all? what's the best sound youv'e ever heard ?were the cables there cryo treated? maybe in the recording studio? emmmm....(no!) . but it's so scientific isn't it?.sounds like you have no clue what to expect or why you are doing it so you need a survey before you upgrade something in your hifi system . like asking any more suckers here for that idea? any fashion victims?the good news are that you are unsure (not completely brainwashed after all)therefore i would advise you to stop this process before you spend a lot of money and make changes that can sound worse or do nothing.just forget about that stupid hype there is no proof that cryo sounds better but there is proof that cryo is more expensive so most cable companies will sell that because they want profit not better sound quality not science ,sales!.listen to your system.if you are not happy maybe you should change a component ,maybe everything is wrong and you should sell and buy something else. if you can describe a problem ,something like" i want more clarity" or "i have too much bass"then you can start looking for known solutions to that real problem. 

Rule number 1 - never get into a technical discussion with an English major. It will only end in a train wreck.

"Laws are for punishing people who do not fit the societal ideals."

This was supposed to be a joke but apparently nobody picked it up. A good one.

Oh look, more ad-homs (and inaccuracies).
1) Engineering has no laws since Engineering is predominantly an applied science and hence does not specifically deal with fundamental properties of the universe, though it will use those properties and it will often be used to both verify and falsify those properties. As well, Engineers, just by virtue of title and schooling path, do often get involved in fundamental science.

2) Fundamental science has many soft-laws, and a few somewhat hard laws, pretty much always defined by a mathematical equation, i.e. E=MC^2, which is well defined and bounded. This why when you hear Joe's Law, Joe is pretty much always defined as a scientist, not an engineer, again, because laws are pretty much always framed around fundamental science and never engineering.


"Laws are for punishing people who do not fit the societal ideals. " .... while there is truth to advancements in science (not so much engineering) that often it is death that advances science, this statement, when it cannot be backed up by sound and logical arguments for what you are promoting, just sounds like sour grapes.

teo_audio1,196 posts11-04-2019 1:15pmI don’t think you know the history and meaning of engineering.

and importantly, science has no laws. that’s an engineering thing and is a human weakness issue.

Laws are for punishing people who do not fit the societal ideals.

Laws have no place in science whatsoever.

“Seeing with humility, curiosity and fresh eyes was once the main point of science. But today it is often a different story. As the scientific enterprise has been bent toward exploitation, institutionalization, hyper-specialization and new orthodoxy, it has increasingly preoccupied itself with disconnected facts in a psychological, social and ecological vacuum. So disconnected has official science become from the greater scheme of things, that it tends to deny or disregard entire domains of reality and to satisfy itself with reducing all of life and consciousness to a dead physics.”

dear op
please get the same cable cryo and not and hear for yourself

Engineering is hard science. Make no mistake about it. 

Funny, it is dogmatic attachments to faith that normally allow people to attach onto concepts that they cannot offer any proof for. Hence, they tend to attack their detractors, not the arguments offered by their detractors just as you are doing here.

I am quite willing to discuss a competing theory when it actually becomes a "theory", heck, I would even be willing to consider a well thought our "hypothesis".


I consider it rather comical that you accuse me of insult, innuendo, and self-important proclamations when it is exactly those things that have been thrown in my direction, and yet still, not one well thought out or reasoned refutation of what I have wrote. You are the proverbial pot calling the kettle black. Some may come to the conclusion that the lack of reasoned arguments and the jump to attacking the person, not the arguments may be indicative of something, but what could that be?

clearthink966 posts11-04-2019 12:20pm
atdavid"You say stubborn, I say not gullible."

Those who have attained rigid, absolute, unqualified beliefs often resort to claims of superior knowledge, education, and/or experience to justify, rationalize and defend they’re beliefs which in fact are only beliefs and the refusal to entertain, consider, or even evaluate competing theories without resorting to insult, innuendo, and self-important proclamations reveal that underlying the "reason" is really "Faith".

I don’t think you know the history and meaning of engineering.

and importantly, science has no laws. that’s an engineering thing and is a human weakness issue.

Laws are for punishing people who do not fit the societal ideals.

Laws have no place in science whatsoever.

Ah look. More straw-man arguments.

You seem to have a problem with engineers? I am going to assume you are not one? Engineers with a graduate degrees are one of the most prolific generators of patents, and patents is something you appeared to indicate you place intellectual value in?

Engineers with advanced degrees, and certainly PhDs are involved in research as much as anyone, "exploring" to your verbiage. Your comment about "making" versus exploring has little to do with what field you are in, and far more to do with your roll in that field. Few doctors "explore". They explore far less than the average engineer in electronics. But just like engineering, some doctors focus on research and some engineers focus on research.

There is no "engineering" maxim of negative proofing, no more than any field within the sciences. The only aspect of "negative" proofing that ever comes into play is turning a "theory" into a law in the scientific sense.

What I see more at play here is an attempt to remove the concept of falsifiability to a topic in order to shield it from criticism. That is most definitely not science. That is classic dogma. Classic dogma attempts to shield itself from criticism by never addressing evidence against it, but by attacking its critics, but never their arguments.

So, if you want to get back to science, then address my arguments, or I will assume the only dogma in this discussion is coming from those attacking the person, not the arguments.

teo_audio1,195 posts11-04-2019 12:11pm@atdavid:
The gullibility wording thing, as a way of expression...is tied to the engineering maxim of negative proofing.

Negative proofing belongs to the engineering mindset and mental type ---and engineering is very much ---not science.

Negative Proofing is very much a expression of the underlying aspect of engineering which is purely, intentionally -dogmatic. Dogmatism is all about ensuring that the future is the same as the past, and so on, re the nature of dogmatism as expressed throughout the ages. This is an excellent choice for what engineering is intended as and meant for. Engineering is for making, not exploring.

This is science. Exploration. (no facts, only theory)

So drop the gullibility horsemanure.......

If you cannot collect your thoughts before attempting to put them down into words, maybe it is the thoughts that are at issue?
Pseudo science is making claims, that you are not able to back up with anything approaching typical standards for evidence, then claiming everyone who disagrees with you is lying, stubborn, "does not understand", etc., and yet never actually addressing any argument presented against your case.
I am still .... after what ... 5 or 6 posts, waiting for anything at all that is not ad-hoc to support your position and/or make anything other than a straw-man against what I have posted.
It is rather funny, as the pile-on that is starting is just more of the same ... ad-homs, straw-mans, etc.  .... but no one actually putting forth anything beyond ad-hoc evidence and no one addressing arguments .... that would be poster child activity for pseudo science.

geoffkait17,968 posts11-04-2019 12:10pmYou say not gullible, I say pseudo scientist. You’re also stubborn for not letting me finish editing my posts. That’s rude, dude!

atdavid"You say stubborn, I say not gullible."

Those who have attained rigid, absolute, unqualified beliefs often resort to claims of superior knowledge, education, and/or experience to justify, rationalize and defend they're beliefs which in fact are only beliefs and the refusal to entertain, consider, or even evaluate competing theories without resorting to insult, innuendo, and self-important proclamations reveal that underlying the "reason" is really "Faith".

@atdavid:
The gullibility wording thing, as a way of expression...is tied to the engineering maxim of negative proofing.

Negative proofing belongs to the engineering mindset and mental type ---and engineering is very much ---not science.

Negative Proofing is very much a expression of the underlying aspect of engineering which is purely, intentionally -dogmatic. Dogmatism is all about ensuring that the future is the same as the past, and so on, re the nature of dogmatism as expressed throughout the ages. This is an excellent choice for what engineering is intended as and meant for. Engineering is for making, not exploring.

This is science. Exploration. (no facts, only theory)

So drop the gullibility horsemanure.......

You say not gullible, I say pseudo scientist. You’re also stubborn for not letting me finish editing my posts. That’s rude, dude!

You say stubborn, I say not gullible.

geoffkait17,965 posts11-04-2019 12:03pmI have 30 minutes to edit my posts. I sometimes take all 30. It would be wise to wait the customary 30 minutes before responding. Besides, you recent spate of responses has taken the tone of a stubborn pseudo skeptic. You need to open your mind but mYbe not so open that your brain falls out. That’s messy and hard to clean up.

atdavid, be advised I have 30 minutes to edit my posts. I sometimes take all 30. It would be wise to wait the customary 30 minutes before responding. That way there won’t be any misunderstanding. Besides, your recent spate of responses has taken the tone of a stubborn pseudo-skeptic. Are aren’t the first cowboy to come down the pike slapping your EE 301 book on your knee. Furthermore, it’s not proper protocol for newcomers to question the experience of forum members. I have been cryoing and freezing since you were wearing white socks.

Except for the fact that it is me who is the world’s strongest and smartest, other things are correct. I do not have any document about it but it is true. Only pseudo-skeptics would argue this well-known fact.