In Reply to: Heat treatment of mechanical components is a given. posted by clifff on April 11, 2007 at 07:30:05:
Hello Clifff,I attempted to be somewhat objective on this issue. I'm not going to immediately naysay cryoing in audio. Personally I don't see it as being a large stretch to go from realizing that since it has been PROVEN to work on mechanical properties of metals (glass and plastics too by the way) that it would work on the metals and plastics of circuit boards, transistors, inductors etc, the metals in IC's and other wires as well as the metal and glass in vacuum tubes.
IMHO you're only obfuscating the issue with your suggestion that I am: cloud(ing)the issue by extrapolating that since it works on mechanical properties of metals it MUST therefore be good for cables, resistors, printed circuits etc etc and produce "better sound" - whatever that means. This suggestion of yours falls short in light of the fact that tests done by Boeing/Sunstrand have demonstrated cryogenic processing extended the life of circuit boards in military applications, specifically boards used in cruise missiles. As well as other tests performed by Honeywell on experimental thin film magnetic memory wafers showed increased conductivity of metallic layers, reduced residual stress between layers, and possible (but not fully confirmed) "healing" of vacancies in the layers. Even if cryoing doesn't produce "better sound" where better sound equals a more realistic replication of music, at the very least it improves component reliability by extending the life of the circuit boards.
According to Controlled Thermal Processing, Inc even the objectivists beloved "BLIND TEST" has been done numerous times and has shown that cryogenic processing of audio equipment has improved the quality of sound in virtually all audio equipment and audio equipment components. Like you said Clifff, maybe it does, I do not know for sure. I do have both cryoed and non-cryoed Bendix 6900 tubes. Subjectively the bass is considerably tighter and less bloated on the cryo treated 6900's. That's what I noticed straight away, but in all honesty I never really did any extended comparisions.
I don't think the arguments are confused here. Posy simply must realize that simply freezing something in a typical home freezer will NOT produce any of the results cryogenic processing is noted for. That's what I explained and said BEFORE discussing "if" cryoing works or not we need to determine what cryoing means and entails. If Posy doesn't understand this his arguement is lost before it begins. That's also why I both provided some additional links on cryoing components and stated: "So does cryogenic processing improve how an audio component will sound? That's a question everyone has to answer for themselves." I'm still undecided myself, but I am leaning towards believing it does affect wires, circuit boards, tubes, transistors, inductors etc. Thus the question is really not does cryoing affect these components, but rather is the affect a postive one that leads to a more realistic replication of live music? That still remains a question everyone has to answer for themselves. As of this time I remain undecided. Oh yes there's one last thing I'd like to say. It was pleasant to finally have a civil discussion with you.
Thetubeguy1954
"If you thought that science was certain - well, that is just an error on your part.†Richard Feynman theoretical physicist, 1918-1988
.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: Heat treatment of mechanical components is a given. - thetubeguy1954 04/11/0709:21:42 04/11/07 (21)
- "Ffreezing something in a typical home freezer will NOT produce any of the results cryogenic processing is noted for." ? - clarkjohnsen 12:50:12 04/11/07 (0)
- advertising blurbs - clifff 09:46:07 04/11/07 (19)
- I See Civillity Is Wasted With You - thetubeguy1954 10:35:24 04/11/07 (16)
- What is wrong with you? - clifff 10:56:31 04/11/07 (8)
- You're Way Of Responding Is What's Wrong... - thetubeguy1954 11:45:08 04/11/07 (7)
- "That same arrogant vein." Hard to get some folks out of it. nt - clarkjohnsen 12:53:24 04/11/07 (1)
- I assume you are referring to me? Are you going to apologise as well? - clifff 04:52:42 04/12/07 (0)
- So saying something you agree with is sarcastic? - Pat D 12:09:40 04/11/07 (4)
- Pat Your Obsession With Me & What I Is Showing Again. - thetubeguy1954 13:19:54 04/11/07 (3)
- This is what I actually said: - clifff 13:51:30 04/11/07 (2)
- I Apologize Clifff - thetubeguy1954 14:13:54 04/11/07 (1)
- Accepted. nt - clifff 00:31:07 04/12/07 (0)
- There was nothng uncivil in Clifff's post. (nt) - Pat D 10:45:34 04/11/07 (6)
- I Disagree - thetubeguy1954 11:05:16 04/11/07 (2)
- You missed the point. I was not rude or disagreeing with you. But no matter. - clifff 13:11:55 04/11/07 (0)
- Are you looking for slights? - Pat D 12:11:35 04/11/07 (0)
- No, TG was right. Cliff was acting like a twit. As usual. nt - Posy Rorer 10:57:05 04/11/07 (2)
- So you are from the UK, then? nt - clifff 11:08:13 04/11/07 (0)
- Truer Words Were Never Spoken (nt) - thetubeguy1954 11:07:35 04/11/07 (0)
- Ah, you hit on something - kerr 09:54:02 04/11/07 (1)
- The Structural Changes Are Permanent - thetubeguy1954 10:52:48 04/11/07 (0)