To cryo or not to cryo


Hi All,

I searched the threads and couldn't find any dedicated to explaining and/or evaluating the benefits of having electronic gear cryogenically treated. I'm considering buying a BPT Pure Power Center, and the company strongly recommends I have the whole thing treated.

Is it worth it? What kind of benefits? Audible difference?

Thanks,
the rustler
rustler

Showing 4 responses by hdm

I believe it's Albert Porter that has his outlets cryoed at NASA. You might want to check out Mr. Porter's reputation here before heading into chuckle mode-I am quite sure that he would not be stretching the truth. While I am not personally totally convinced that his NASA cryo is any better than cryo performed at other facilities, there are many people on Audiogon who have tried the outlet he treats (I use the same outlet personally cryoed at another facility) and can vouch for its efficacy.

Before you start shooting your mouth off, here's a suggestion. Take any piece of copper wire, and measure it's resistance with a simple, cheap ohmeter. Then have that piece of wire cryoed and measure it again. It's a cheap experiment (then again, you could have an interconnect or set of speaker cables or power cord cryoed for the same cost, so maybe you should just do that).

If you want to say it's a load of crap, fine, go ahead, but don't expect me to take your opinion seriously when there's a myriad of people with real experience with cryo who have heard the differences. Some people (they tend to be in the minority) don't like what it does, but at least they've tried it.
Double4w: There's a ton of information in the archives here, including a review of the World Power cryoed Hubbell 5362 which I wrote a number of years ago. I've since moved from that outlet to Hubbell 8200H's which I've had cryoed locally as I slightly prefer that outlet to the Hubbell 5362; my review of the 5362 will give you a sense of what you can expect.

I've also cryoed every piece of wire in my system (power cables, speaker cables, interconnects) with similar results. I cryo all my CD's as well, treating them with Auric Illuminator following the cryo. Even my wife, who is a research technician, does not have much interest in my music or equipment, and, as a result is rather skeptical, can easily hear the difference between a cryoed and non-cryoed CD. I've spent time in the past in cryo threads which ultimately end in the same kind of "he said this-he said that" BS. I'm fortunate to have a cryo facility close by and it is a dirt cheap tweak that works for me. If someone else can't hear any difference, that really makes no difference to me. Inevitably, though, the vast majority of people on these threads who are critics of cryo or who denigrate the process have absolutely no experience with it.

Ross, seems to me I just gave you a measurable difference above relating to lowered resistance in wire/receptacles following cryo treatment. Does that not count? Now if you want to tell me I can't hear that measurable difference, or that I am imagining it then we are in exactly the same boat that all these cryo threads end up in. As I said, search the archives, or better yet, do some real research or experimentation with cryo yourself. Here's a site with some interesting info (note it's from SUNY at Farmingdale and not from a cryo company):

http://info.lu.farmingdale.edu/depts/met/met205/cryogenictreatment.html

Also note the remarks with respect to welding and copper tips, which may explain in part the reason power cables, interconnects and speaker cables all sound different to me following cryo treatment. As to CD's, I have no idea why they would sound so different (perhaps reduction in residual stresses in the CD resulting in better reading of the laser and less error correction, who knows and I don't care).

If measurements were all that were necessary to make great audio, I'm sure I'd be happy with a Bose wave radio. And every piece of similar equipment at varying price points that measured the same would sound the same. Science could explain everything and we'd all have perfect sound on the cheap. Believe me, I certainly don't subscribe to the theory that you have to spend huge amounts of $$ to put together a satisfying audio system. My system is pretty modest by Audiogon standards. There are lots of tweaks that I'm skeptical about and wouldn't pop the money for and there's certainly a lot of overpriced crap in audioland. I just don't think that cryo is one of them. Considering the fact that you can probably cryo every piece of wire and all receptacles that your system is running on for the price of 2 or 3 new CD's or records, I figure it's a huge bang for your buck in terms of performance. Then again that's based on my subjective experience and my ears.
I'm not any type of scientist either, Double4w, but I do have 1) a set of ears and 2) I can read information and make a relatively simple interpretation of it.

With respect to #2 above, take for example the following info, quoted directly from the article referenced:

"Fine eta(h ) carbide particles (precipitates) are formed during the long cryogenic soak (chromium carbides, tungsten carbide, etc., depending upon the alloying elements in the steel). These are in addition to the larger carbide particles present before cryogenic treatment. These fine particles or "fillers", along with the larger particles, form a denser, more coherent and much tougher matrix in the material."

"Retained austenite is a softer grain structure always present after heat treatment. By applying cryogenic treatment, retained austenite is transformed into the harder, more durable grain structure - martensite. The range of retained austenite in a material after heat treating may be as high as 50 % or as low as 3 %. The amount depends on the heat treating operator and the accuracy of the heat treating equipment. Cryogenic treatment simply continues the conversion initiated by heat treatment, whereby almost 100 % of the retained austenite is converted to martensite. As greater amounts of retained austenite are transformed, and wear resistant martensite is increased, the material obtains a more uniform hardness."

"Copper electrodes exhibit longer life, show less wear and deformation and they can be used with less power input. Cryogenic Treatment reduces tip burn-off and carry reduced amperage on heliarc tungsten electrodes."

Let me translate it simply for you. Cryoed materials allow better transfer of 1) power to your component and 2) signal from the component to the speaker because of the above.

Let's break it down even further. You know the audio guys who place a very high emphasis on "the source" as being critical, the guys who tell you "garbage in, garbage out". They make a valid point. However, let's take that thought one step further: the power and the signal transfer are the ultimate source, the equipment is only facilitating that (that is a slight exaggeration, but without power and signal transfer, the equipment does nothing).

Cryo, by its very nature, enhances both power delivery and signal transfer. It is the ultimate el-cheapo form of power conditioning and cable upgrade all rolled into one. That's about as simple as I can make it for you.