Aggielaw,
There was a noticeable bloom in the mid rpm range and more valve closing detail in the lows. However, at the upper rpm range it was rather shrill for a time. This did smooth out after several races. But then, maybe my ears just became accustomed to it. As an autophile, cryo'ing is for me. |
I'm not going to offer any kind of post with regard to positive or negative effects of cryo'ing bits and pieces of audio gear since it's pretty controvertial. Many believe in it and many don't. Most are closed minded on the subject independent of which camp philosohy they ascribe to. What I will offer is asking you to do your own investigation into why NASA, NASCAR, INDY and a miriad of other world class engineering teams DO cryo? Sometimes our educations trap us. |
Newbee,
I'm staying out of the pros or cons argument. Geez, you can tell already that minds are made up. I don't want to get criticized for expressing a point of view one way or the other. FWIW, every golden eared reviewer and manufacurer that I know of hears the differences. Some like it others hate it. I'll be out for the afternoon but I'll email you direct later on.
Please, let's keep this civilized. It's not like we're talking religion or politics. So many insults thrown around in these type of topics and THIS is supposed to be an educated and enlightened group. Show us some class. I'm outta here. |
Elizabeth,
Good point. I've even noticed that if I disconnect something for awhile I need a short break in to get back where it was. BTW, I don't own any cryo'd cables, just outlets. My experience is with broken in cables taken out to audition something else and then reinserted a few days later.
Question about the basic thought Elizabeth brought up. I cryo'd an engine block and reciprocating assembly for a gound pounding small block. The benefits of the cryo process were quite evident after the normal duty cycle of this motor. You know, tear down, inspect, reassembly. The cylinder walls didn't even need to be rehoned. So, my question is if the materials in an internal combustion engine with all the heating and cooling from prolonged abuse retain the benefits, will coiling and handling of cables make the cryo process go away? |
Ejliu,
I think I'm beginning to understand the purpose of you posting this thread. Maybe I have it wrong and I'd welcome some clarification if so, but I think this is the type of troll meant to start a fight. Let me explain.
You state that "Cold tempering requires heat treatment cycle". Not true. It's not a matter of being in vogue either. While I concentrated on deep cryo immersion of engine blocks and reciprocating assemblies in order to stay under the radar, the principles remain the same. If one were to heat treat a block and then cryo treat it the resultant brittle casting would last less than sixty seconds after start-up and subsequent shatter. Heat treating is a part of the equation only if you wish to add hardness. In fact, most applications of cryogenics don't want the material to also be hardened. If only you would do a small amount of research you'd find this to be true.
Large firms like Rockwell, IBM, 3M, etc. cryo many parts and have participated in important research. The findings are yet to be fully understood. An example is the theory that molecular reorganization occurs through cryo'ing. The results seem to prove this because holes in silica wafers become filled after. They don't know why. Science hasn't gotten that far yet.
Your mistaken claim that heat treating is required destroys any validity you may wish to have garnered with your diatribe. Obviously, you ain't no scientist. In a hobby where what matters is what one hears you conveniently dismiss anecdotal evidence. Our ears will always and forever be anecdotal devices. They are not meters. Your proposition is totally absurd and I'm calling you on it. BTW, I'll be glad to have some brake pads heat treated and cryo'd as a gift to you as long as you promise to install them and hit the brakes hard the first time at about 140 entering a curve.
To my simple way of thinking discussions like this could be fun and interesting and as science evolves eventually enlightening. Nobody needs to agree about any aspect of these technologies. At some point most of us learn that life is too short for this kind of twisted enjoyment. I wish you luck in getting there. |
Eric,
Are you assuming that my engine block was first heat treated and then cryo'd? That's not the case. I used exactly what NASCAR and INDY teams use which is cryo treatment of a new block. These benefits are well documented but have nothing to do with audio. Parts last much longer and experience fewer failures. Prior to cryo'ing the block and reciprocating assembly I did pay to have the new block shaken to simulate prolonged use of approximately 100k miles. (Engine builders refer to used blocks in good condition as "seasoned".) This process is where the parts are bolted to an exceptionally heavy, intentionally unbalanced platform and shaken for over a week. It's a very violent process. When done, the final machining prior to assembly becomes more accurate vs. machining of a new, unshaken block prior to assembly. FWIW, the machining process requires a block to be held in place for the processes. Without the treatment once the block is removed it will twist and not be square to itself. With the shaken treatment once released it stays square. Again, I'm not getting into the middle of the audio argument and I'm not trying to poke holes in your logic. I just want to clarify that cryo'd engines only undergo cold immersion and controlled thaw AND that it is worth it for racing applications. |
Ejliu,
Jneutron didn't say what you allude to. You don't get it, or more likely are trying to deflect justified criticisms. The fact is, in most applications of metals undergoing cryo treatment there is NO heat treatment. Of course, I suppose that lower temperatures may be considered heat treatment in the negative sense. Still, with very little research you yourself can confirm that heat treating metals in the conventional sense is rarely practiced. Post your name, address and the school where you received your Masters degree in Material Science Engineering so we can verify it as I don't buy into the anecdotal evidence that you possess such.
I'll go to the effort to tell you about a cartridge, turntable and tonearm shootout I was invited to early this year. I live in Idaho and the event was hosted in Miami. Approximately ten people were in attendance. The host had arranged enough equipment where we could listen to identical cartridges on the same turntable for immediate comparison. We could also listen to identical cartridges on different tonearms. Further, we could listen to identical tonearm/cartridge combinations on different turntables. By my estimation we played with over $150,000 in analog gear. This isn't even taking into consideration the reference system that allowed us to hear the music. The host of this event? Cello.
I feel honored to have had the opportunity to be a part of something of this magnatude. I have absolutely no problem posting the usernames of all of the attendees as every one of them is a well respected member here at Audiogon and you can follow up with investigation to confirm it. I can tell you in no uncertain terms that Cello makes every effort to be as scientific as possible without the aid of public money to further real world gains in music reproduction. This event was obviously not inexpensive for the host. Cello speaks truthfully about whatever efforts he went to in regard to cryo being beneficial or not. To dismiss out of hand such extreme measures a guy like this goes to for the love of music is insulting to these seasoned ears.
Son, you're out of your element here. You posting this thread was a troll. |
Eldartford,
As the poster child for the type of behavior I take issue with it doesn't surprise me that you ask this question. If you don't get it then there's no use trying to explain. You must be very lonely. |
This thread is hilarious. The naysayers don't trust their ears! And, it seems that they won't even try to listen. Success of every audio product I know of is dependent upon anecdotal evidence. No matter what the gizzmos that measure things say, if it doesn't sound good people won't buy it. In this case, especially considering that free offers were made, all one would need do is listen and then decide for themselves. The kind of fear to not try something is evidence of a problem other than audio. Whoever made mention of selecting a television based on picture quality hit the nail right on the head. Eyes are wonderful measuring devices and so are our ears. End the end the question becomes are we listening or bench testing. |
Jordan,
I mean no disrespect either. Though this thread was posted under the "tech" section I fail to see why it's scope should be limited as you suggest. The threadhead did not ask to keep replies to known measurements Or whatever other "true" scientific priciples you allude to. As one looks at the enitire process of science many phenomena are first observed long before they are measured. In fact, observation is the norm.
A few MSE "experts" have chimmed in with fairly exhaustive remarks gleaned from textbooks and even they exchanged disagreements about heat treated being required or not for cryo treatment to actually occur. Plain and simple, measured science is not at this time able to answer the posted question. Does this make the claim that cryo'ing works in the audio realm not true? No, as measured science cannot prove that negative either.
As I prepare to exit this troll I'd like to offer that I thought this was an audio site where enthusiasts share our experiences for the benefit of the passion we all enjoy. Thirty years ago the conventional wisdom was that interconnects and speaker cables didn't make a difference at all but today it's generally accepted, with the exception of a few flat earthers that hang around here, that wires can have a huge impact on component performance. Even after three decades science still isn't able to fully explain the "whys" but most audiophiles sure hear it.
I'm not sure that the nay sayers can even be involved in this hobby and are likely anti-audio. First, by their own standards set forth here it would be impossible for them to buy any one piece of equipment without first understanding in a measured way why it sounds the way it does. Comparing two amplifiers with nearly identical specifications and price would certainly place them in an emotional tailspin trying to understand why they sound so different. Second, while the advocates (or at least those with an open mind) post their systems therefore proving they belong in this community none of the naysayers are involved enough to do so.
Don't blame me for doubting the intentions I've taken issue with. A lack of historical helping within these threads, as well as being outside the statistical norm of regular contributors, is anecdotal evididence of the type that I use in discerning most things in life. Of course, no anecdotal evidence, no listening experiments and no human judgements are valid to you guys.
My offer to Ejliu to heat treat and cryo some brake pads for him is still open. |
I'll do the right thing here and offer an apology for some of my remarks. No, I wasn't serious about the brake offer. It was a response to the alleged requirement that parts must first be tempered to recieve the benefits of cryo. Normally I would take my own advice and just stop posting as the conversation degenerates. My mistake. I guess the steroid program I'm on is making me more aggressive than usual. Still, no excuse. I do still believe this thread to be a troll however. What I find frustrating is that my sense of science is that many things are observed first and the proof follows. That's what makes us unique. Our curiosity is boiled down to "I wonder why that happens?" Here we have a proposition that it can't be measured therefore it isn't happening. So many of the advances in science have been accidental and cryoing audio gear seems to be one of them. I maintain that my description of speaker cables and the evolution of their "acceptence" as a valid product proves my point. Science still cannot explain why they sound the way they do except in very basic terms. If it could, then there would be DIY instructions for making state of the art speaker cables. The MSE's here have expressed a belief that cryo'ing audio parts cannot have an affect based on their understanding of applied science. As frustratingly curious as I am about things I don't understand I would have posted the threadhead in a different way. I would have asked if anyone had a theory about why cryo'ing audio parts would make a difference in light of the indisputable, widely held fact that people do hear changes whether good or bad. Honestly, the attack by the naysayers is more along the lines of "it's in your head" which is insulting to the vast majority of people who's hearing is good enough to discern minute differences between other non-contovertial areas of audio. Why this is ignored as real is where I get my buttons pushed. Still, it's my responsibility to control myself, not yours. I'm sorry. |
