 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
205.206.107.186
In Reply to: RE: Moray, you're the man! posted by bartc on August 17, 2007 at 21:09:52
Well Bart: I never got into the difference between home freezer temp and cryo (LN2) temp. I was just impressed that a guy would have the pluck to try such a silly thing and then tell everybody here what he found. A novel concept which has resulted in flames and humilation for little or no good reason. So since he was trying I figured I would give him the chance to go most all the way (nitrogen only helium is just too costly). That seems fair to me then he will know what he will know.
Probably 8-9 tenths of my disk collection have been treated in LN2 so you can take from that what you will. Back when I was still working with Ed at Highwood audio (Meitner) we ran a slew of Stereophile disks for the boys and they were freaked out when they heard them. Treat a set of guitar strings for a player who knows his tone and ask him what he hears. Users will tell you they sound better stretch better and last longer than do the same strings non treated. I cryo every cable I make. I also like to sand my disks wash my disks and wax them and then treat them with a magic solution that fets them as smooth and shiny as they can be. Then there is damping. Oh oh this is getting stupid gotta go now.
moray james
Follow Ups:
Well since I spent 14 years as a Custom Knifemaker using exotic steels that have to be sub zero quenched to harden properly some of what has been said about treatment in liquid Nitrogen has struck me as very odd. If I wanted to take this experiment to the next level -110 can be easily done with dry Ice and Methanol in a cooler. Or since my best buddy is the manager of a large welding supply store Liquid Nitrogen and a dewier to store it in would be easy to come by.
DO I think there would be any reason to take this next step, save to say I tried it. NO I don't. I did this because in the original thread the home freezer method was being touted as having a marked improvement in the treaded CD's. I idsagreed witht he whole idea and was told I should try it or be quiet in a manner of speaking.
What I found in my personal experiment was not only no noticeable improvement but no difference between the two samples what so ever.
So as they say on TV for me "this myth is busted"
And with all things based on faith not fact your mileage might vary.
(I say faith because so far I haven't read anyone explaining why or how any of this freezing stuff might work)
NASA started it all with cryo treatment of space telescope optics and precision metal parts. Race car engine builders have adapted cryo treatment to relieve internal stresses in engine blocks and other parts. Making the cylinder bores truly round allows the piston rings to seal more completely. This gives a performance and endurance edge in the extreme conditions of motor car racing. See the link for an article on what it takes to get cylinder bores to be sufficiently round.
Most materials expand when heated and shrink when chilled. Heating metal parts anneals out stresses from casting or work-hardening, but can cause phase changes because the atoms have more thermal energy and can move around more easily. Your knife-blade experience is based on this.
Chilling parts applies increased mechanical force to the stressed regions. This can overcome the reduced mobility of the atoms and force them to move about in order to relieve the stresses.
Cryo treatment of metal parts in things like AC outlets and plugs may improve the mechanical performance and electrical conductivity of the parts. I don't have personal experience in comparing treated against untreated versions of the same parts, but I don't see any reason to doubt that there is an audible benefit in some cases.
Similarly, I don't know if there is any benefit to chilling compact discs from personal experience. My experience with other CD tweaks is that there has been little to no detectable benefit. The amount of benefit, if any, would depend on how robust the CD player read mechanism is. Making a given disc flatter or more transparent may help with marginal read mechanism performance, but give no benefit in another machine with a robust mechanism.
Your comment about faith cuts both ways: by that logic, your prejudice prevents you from hearing what others report.
was not heard is due to a matter of prejudice. I trust the guy to actually make an honest assessment.
Freezing a disc, while audible to myself, has not been deemed significant enough for a number of people I've demonstrated it to. Oh, they can hear the effect, but simply do not feel that the effort is worth the trouble. The other factor is that there are many other tweaks with greater sonic effects. Most of the people who report hearing the effect of freezing usually have gone through a series of other mods and tweaks.
That's why YMMV significantly in audio.
Oh yeah, the NASCAR cryogenic treatment led to one team dominating the race circuit one year, until the other teams figured out why they were going so consistently fast without failure.
Stu
but his use of the faith argument is insulting to those who do hear a difference.
Quote from Mark W.
> > > "During all this time at no time not once did I hear anything that even hinted at a difference between the two copies. They were as far as I can tell 100% identical.
So as they say on TV for me "this myth is busted"
And with all things based on faith - not fact - your mileage might vary." < < <
***********
I agree with you Al Sekela, Mark W's use of the faith argument is insulting to those who DO hear a difference.
Mark W and some others cannot hear the beneficial effect of freezing CDs etc - that is their experience - and nothing anyone can say can alter that experience - but they don't seem to just want to describe their experience, they seem to want to actively denigrate other people's experiences who CAN hear improvements in their sound.
The question I would ask Mark W is "If your wife does, in fact, say that she prefers the sound of the frozen disc, would you actually, arrogantly, tell her that the reason why she can hear it sound better is because of 'faith' ?"
As I have said previously, it is not only whose experiences you are going to believe but whose experiences you are going to choose to 'dismiss'.
People such as :-
Jimmy Hughes. "Audiophile" magazine UK Jan 1993.
Greg Weaver. "Soundstage" Dec 1999.
Carol Clark. "audioMusings" 2000.
Roger Gordon. "audioMusings" 2003. Who actually carried out some blind trials on the freezing of CDs using a domestic deep freezer. Three out of eight listeners heard no differences but five out of the eight heard differences. His article confirming that some can hear the effect of freezing and others cannot.
Bill Kenny. Musical Editor of "MusicWeb International" Aug 2005. Bill said "As it turns out, the idea of freezing CDs has been around for a while. The UK's Sunday Times (ST.10.10.93) carried an article by Mark Skipworth describing a controlled and blind-tested comparison between identical frozen and normal CDs in which the judging panel invariably preferred the frozen samples. The result was startling in all cases..........
The effect is enhanced with rather more subtlety by freezing the disc a second time after which the three dimensionality of the sound (on every disc tested) seemed even greater. Instruments and voices were even more precisely located"
These are some of the people whose experiences have been put down to 'faith' !!!
Or plainly dismissed (as below) !!
Quote from cheap-Jack
> > > "Please don't tell us a domestic fringe freezer compartment (-10 to -20C) can do the same job of cryogenics.
I have proven a -25C freezer does not give any noticeable sonic results on audio stuff." < < <
Quote from The Real Dick Hertz
> > > "I did a similar experiment and also didn't notice any difference. However, I cryo'd my nagging mother-in-law and she's much improved now." < < <
Regards,
May Belt.
For crying out loud. I didn't hear anything different and my wife looked at me and said she didn't have time to sit and listen to frozen CD's.The faith comment was just that a New Born Christian will tell you they have had a sign from God. Now no amount of science or convincing will change your opinion of the new born christians claim. I put this a kin to that.
It wasn't meant to insult you. Or anyone who says they hear a difference.
More power to you if you can hear something I can't now is this due to my hearing my system my freezer or my deep set roots in the Scientific method. I don't know. I reported to you goobers after I did the experiment there was nothing to come from it.
Take that for what it is.
I liked your well documented test, it provides a good data point. And your conclusion: "SO for me in my limited experience this Tweak is not something I will continue to pursue." is very reasonable and appropriate. Since in my opinion happiness is having a player that's not very susceptible to minor disk variations, you should be pleased with the result. I did a similar test when coating disk edges with a felt tip pen was the rage years ago and got the same happy result.
But it's like headaches, while I'm happy that I don't get them, I can't properly conclude from that that those who do are malingerers. The scope of your testing simply doesn't support your additional conclusion that other experimenters who had differing results are faith-based goobers. They may be, but you haven't proven your case.
Considering that I have found substantial variations amongst my players just based upon the brand of CDROM I use, I would assume that they're observations are also reliable.
Rick
> > > "It was meant to insult you. Or anyone who says they hear a difference." < < <
WOW !!
May Belt.
I bought a pair of Bose 901's, and indeed, nothing made a difference. Went from zip cord to Monster cable to FultonGolds and there was no difference. Went from Shure v 15 type II to the latest type III, no difference. Tried a Mark Levinson amp, no difference from my Dynaco ST 120. Draw from that experience what you will.
But now I get insulted when someone questions my hearing and says that I am 'faith' based. I gave him the benefit of the doubt, but the true colors are showing. For some things, explanations may vary, but out right condemnation leads me now to pity you and your attitude.
Too bad ,
Stu
Hey Stu,
So how do you account for that? I'm thinking likely 'twas the electronic equalizer.
I've noticed that many folks who vehemently say they "believe in science" are actually participating in a religion, but don't realize it. Self-proclaimed 'skeptics' usually are the worst of the lot. Here I'm thinking of the bad-science guy at the Guardian and the old Audio Critic magazine, ironically both examples of truly bad science. In this case there does appear to be some grinding of axes in addition to over-generalization...
Rick
Well to tell the truth, the parts in the Equalizer are so very mundane, to be very charitable....The thing that really opened my ears was turning the speaker around 180 degrees. With the direct firing of the normally 8 rearward facing speakers, there was a significant increase in detail (this was inspired when the 801's, the disco version, came out). The 801's were set up with the eight rear drivers facing forward.
Then I realized that unless you had a perfectly treated wall behind, the direct/reflecting principle simply meant that the reflected sound arrived at the ear at various time intervals creating a huge phase issue. Going back to the original reviews that inspired me to purchase the damn things outright (I was still in high school and not very confident in my own hearing) I then noticed the total THD at 1 meter was over 5%. No wonder nothing seemed to make a difference. No wonder when Bose came out with their 500 watt receiver with 5% distortion, they claimed that it was still inaudible.
I believe my very next speaker was a pair of Maggies, the MG-1, being hooked the 'BIG' Sound. I have never been truly satisfied with most speaker systems. They have been the weakest link in the audio chain, IMHO. Not one, even those $100K systems I have heard at CES, achieve time and phase alignment with a decent frequency response. Oh, they get maybe two of the three OK, but rarely achieve a confluence of all three. Somehow, I seem to find an adequate balance between the three in much cheaper designs (fortunately). Either that or you have to a lot of DIY.
Stu
This is getting quite amusing, unclestu.
Your reply was to my 'posting' but the last sentence of your reply is a bit ambiguous.
Is your condemnation to me and to MY attitude (as your reply was to MY 'posting) or is your condemnation to Mark W and to Mark W's attitude ?
Should hate to start WW3 (World War 3) over a misunderstanding !!!
Regards,
May Belt.
OR we could go back about four steps and I could not type so damn fast and not miss adding the 'nt to the word "was" in the post that got you guys all frothed up.
I have edited the post to reflect what I was trying to say not what I typed (OK now we can have four more posts on the Freudian slip issue)
I am now convinced some people hear things others do not.
I don't.
Thanks for that correction, I was really beginning to wonder.
In light of that correction, I also must apologize to you. My apologies, sir.
Also to May, my comments were not aimed at you, as I had previously posted that I do hear differences.
Stu
Appreciated unclestu. Peace all round.
Now we have calm, can we continue to look at the subject of freezing - irrespective of whether it is freezing using a domestic deep freezer or freezing using cryogenic temperatures.
It is a 'red herring' approach to bring in the FACT that cryogenic temperatures are much lower than the temperature of a domestic deep freezer. Everyone and his uncle KNOW this FACT so, with intelligent people, it is already 'taken into account' in any ensuing discussions. Particularly when the descriptions given by people who CAN hear the beneficial effect i.e. greater height, greater depth, greater width, better separation of instruments, better resolution etc are identical descriptions - irrespective of which freezing temperature they have used.
It has now been acknowledged that some people can 'hear' the beneficial effects of freezing, some cannot but ALL can try the technique, for themselves, at no cost (except in time and patience) but for the people who CAN hear improvements in their sound by carrying out the freezing technique, the time spent and the patience devoted to it is well worthwhile.
Nor can one dismiss these people's experiences as "It must be because of suggestion, the placebo effect, imagination, audio faith healing or effective marketing." because one would then be dismissing so many 'professionals in audio' THEIR experiences !! As I have said previously you can have some disbelief, some scepticism that what many people are describing actually happened (that the sound actually improved) but to not try something when it is so easy to do so but yet still be prepared to dismiss 'out of hand' other serious and sensible 'audiophiles' and 'professionals in audio' experiences borders, in my opinion, on arrogance.
Over the past 25 years I have seen people go through the whole spectrum of reactions.
Some people do not want to try things for themselves but they don't want others to try things either so they make every attempt to discourage others from trying things.
Some people do not want to think things out for themselves but they don't want others to think for themselves either so they make every attempt to discourage others from thinking things out for themselves.
Yes, everyone is entitled to and can voice their opinions but it seems, on so many occasions, to be a downright prolonged attempt by certain people - way beyond what could be regarded as an 'opinion' - to be naysayer regarding anything out of their experience as well as self appointed policemen for the audio world.
So, I would encourage people to experiment, for themselves. At the least you might be pleasantly surprised, at best you might be amazed !!
Regards,
May Belt.
There are procedural consequences also. When I freeze my discs, I allow 48 hours in a standard freezer, and developed this time frame when comparing results to items I had treated with a sry ice/liquid nitrogen process. Too short a freezer stay time, and the actual amount of change was rather limited.
Some times an xperiment with different procedures can lead to various and different conclusions also.
Stu
Going back four steps is fine with me.
Peace is quickly restored.
Regards,
May Belt.
Exactly. Does he think I'd really consider copying all my commercial cds onto black cdr if it was just a self delusion that they sounded better? I'm naturally quite lazy after all! I doubt if people would go to all the trouble of cryoing their cds on a mere self delusion.
Kudos to you Mark for being prepared to experiment. That is all we can ask that people do - try things for themselves. I would echo Moray James words, that it will be interesting to hear of your wife's reaction after she has also listened to the 'frozen' discs and maybe other friends reactions.
The problem for so many people is 'who to believe' or as I said earlier 'who to dismiss'.
I know from how Moray James describes his experiences that he has heard what we have heard. How he also describes the reactions of the Stereophile people after cryo'ing some discs for them "and they were freaked out when they heard them".
As people are aware, I have said, repeatedly, that I consider Robert Harley's 1990 article describing Ed Meitner's discoveries as 'one of the most significant articles in the history of audio'.
So, I am sure (without putting words into his mouth) that Moray James is as perplexed as I am when some can 'hear' the effect of cryogenic freezing CDs etc and others cannot. I know, from interviews which Ed Meitner has given, that he is also perplexed.
To quote Ed Meitner from an interview he gave to Keith Howard.in 2005 :-
> > > "As well as freezing CDs another thing that happened which was probably more interesting was that Analogue Devices came to us and we treated some 20-bit DAC chips. They sent out untreated and treated chips for people to try and again the same thing happened: the treated ones sounded better......... There was never a failure. We treated tons of solid-state stuff, whole circuit boards, and the only bad thing that happened was that the electrolytic capacitors would lose their shrinkwrap. That was it. We even treated speaker voice coils.
What I've found over the last 15 years of being in high-end audio is that most of the minds are pretty closed. And this is strange it's the opposite of what you would expect..... What's even more puzzling is that you have all this megabucks equipment out there where the cost of the treatment would be of no concern. It would be a tiny fraction of the overall cost." < < <
************
I do not intend or wish to get into a 'shoot out at the OK coral' between the effects of freezing using a domestic deep freezer or freezing using the lower cryogenic temperatures - what I say is that if EITHER technique gives an improvement in the sound, then it should 'knock people back on their heels' because of the implications.
Bartc, you ask "What the hell would you then do if you found out cryoing them actually DID make a big improvement?"
My answer would be that "The importance of finding that cryogenic freezing a CD improves the sound is that after that experience you would have to challenge your belief structure !!!!"
Let me try to explain why I regard the (either) freezing technique and Robert Harley's article as so significant. Let me use both kmarikos and Todd B's experiences using a domestic deep freezer and Moray James' experience using the lower freezing temperatures - and both hearing improvements in their sound. And I will stay only with CDs at the moment, although what I am going to say extends to everything else where people have heard 'freezing' give an improvement in the sound.
Let us say that kmarikos (or Todd B) has a CD of a particular piece of music which he really loves. He has had that CD for 5, 10 or 15 years but each time he has played it, he has felt that the sound is a bit harsh, shouty, aggressive and has quite a 'boxy' sound. He firmly lays the blame for the harsh, shouty, aggressive, boxy sound on (say) the speaker system and is constantly saying "Oh, I must really look for a better sounding (more expensive ???) speaker system - one which is not so harsh, shouty, aggressive. Then, once I get a better speaker system I will be able to enjoy my favourite music much better."
He then has this particular CD cryogenically frozen and is amazed at the improvement in the sound. The sound is now described as 'more open, spacious, filling the room, better separation of musical instruments, better definition and - definitely - can NO LONGER be described as harsh, shouty, aggressive and 'boxy'. Which, logically, now means that the belief structure he has had for the past 5, 10 or 15 years (that it was the speaker system to blame) is no longer valid, no longer holds water. He has not done anything to the speaker, to the speaker drive units, to the speaker box and yet the 'harsh, shouty, aggressive, boxy' sound has gone !!!! Which means that he has been having the wrong belief structure for 5, 10 or 15 years - but he would never know this, he would never be aware of this without he had had the experience of hearing the 'treated' CD. He would have carried on with his original belief structure or he would have relied on other people's belief structure that 'it is the digital technique that is the problem'.
But, as soon as people describe the effect I have just described, they are told by so many 'audio engineers', by so many 'audio experts', "You must be wrong, it must be suggestion, the placebo effect, imagination, audio faith healing, effective marketing. Digits - 1s and 0s, once encoded CANNOT be altered !!! And certainly could not be altered by 'freezing'."
Even more serious to the whole audio industry is more and more people like the kmarikos's and Todd B's of this world discovering the effect of 'freezing' - whether it is by domestic deep freezer means or by cryogenic means. Because it begins to make people begin to ask pertinent questions.
If 'freezing' an item of equipment cannot be 'seen to have been carried out', then how does a reviewer know what has been 'treated' and what hasn't if they cannot see any differences (and are not told of any )?
A manufacturer (or an importer) could have ONE item of equipment cryogenically frozen and submit THAT particular item of equipment for review. The reviewer cannot tell/see what might have been done to that equipment but the reviewer gives the 'treated' piece of equipment a 'rave review' because of how good it sounds. What no one is aware of is that only THAT ONE item of equipment which was submitted for review could be the only piece of equipment which had been so 'treated' - and that every other piece of identical equipment, coming off the production line, has not been cryogenically frozen. The manufacturer (or importer) could then be selling identical (but unfrozen) equipment on the back of a rave review of the one item of equipment which HAD been cryogenically frozen !!!!
Some manufacturers are actually claiming that they ARE cryogenically freezing the products they sell which is above board and honest, but who knows what else is going on because everything (frozen or not frozen) looks identical. How can one possibly know whether the new CD player or the new amplifier or the new speaker system is identical to the one given the 'rave review' ?
Making the following comment on Mark's experiment, I am not doing it as a criticism - as Moray James says "You decide as always what you hear and what you don't". It is Mark's own experiences we have to go with - if he didn't hear any changes, then he didn't hear any changes.
However, to pick up on two of your sentences Mark :-
> > > "I listened to complete Diana Krall songs before switching to the other copy as well as switching every couple seconds during songs.
I then switched back and forth on a number of tracks not listened to earlier on the main system." < < <
It is the "switching every couple seconds" which gives me the problem.
For example, when professional wine tasters or tea tasters are conducting their tasting tests, they would never switch between wines or tea 'every couple of seconds'. They taste, savour the taste for some time, give their working memory time to register that particular taste, then spit it out (i.e. halt the intense brain activity) then go on to make the next taste. They are aware that it takes a short time for the working memory to register a particular standard before asking it to make comparisons/judgements. They would never be able to taste differences in different wines or teas if different wines or teas were fed (so to speak) one after the other into a continuous straw, second after second. Yes, if one was tasting vinegar in comparison to wine, one could make the comparison IMMEDIATELY but with music, one is trying to make comparisons between (possible) changes to exactly the SAME music.
Quite often, some people only 'hear' differences after they have allowed their working memory to unconsciously register any changes (improvements ??) and then when they go back to listening to an 'untreated' disc, they realise they do not particularly like the sound of the untreated disc any more. In other words, they did not instantly register improvements but after their working memory had been given chance to upgrade itself to a better standard, they can then hear a deterioration when they go back to an 'untreated' disc cause they 'cringe' at the sound.
This is merely a comment for other people to consider if they are thinking of trying the experiment which Mark has tried.
Again kudos to you Mark for experimenting.
One thing however Mark I do wish to take issue with you is in your reply to Moray James
> > > "So as they say on TV for me "this myth is busted"
And with all things based on faith not fact your mileage might vary.
(I say faith because so far I haven't read anyone explaining why or how any of this freezing stuff might work)" < < <
As I said earlier "it is who to believe' or 'who to dismiss'. But surely you cannot be labelling the different peoples' experiences described as 'faith' just because you cannot understand how 'the freezing stuff' might work ?
Regards,
May Belt.
Hi.
Only at below -180C cryo temps through an appropriately CONTROLLED freezing & de-freezing procedure, the dislocation of the material's microstructures can be eliminated & the normal structure can be restored.
Hence its phyical property can be improved.
A CD, for example, is an polycarbonate plastic disc with the music signal etched onto its surface by a high-power laser beam, & is then coated with aluminium metallic film ontop to provide a readable reflective surface for the laser pickup system of the CD player to read back the music signals previously encoded.
It is the below -180C cryo process that can improve the aluminum reflectiveness & the plastic substrate structure of the CD, resulting enchansed sonic performance.
Please don't tell us a domestic fringe freezer compartment (-10 to -20C) can do the same job of cryogenics. That are totally different ballgame.
I have proven a -25C freezer does not give any noticeable sonic results on audio stuff.
c-J
So, did you have any positive results with cryogenic treatment or is that too expensive for you?
Great prose!
You touched upon my complaint of a reviewer reviewing something loaned to them by the manufacturer (importer).
One magazine I've read for more than 30 years always goes to a retail store and buys whatever they review. After the review, they put the item up for sale in an auction.
The conundrum I often face is that if I change something in my system, and I think it gets better, what am I hearing? Did the change show how good my system is? Or, did the change compensate for a deficiency in my system?
I always chuckle when I see someone proclaim that they are just zeros and ones. Seems as if they forgot that the light has a frequency.
I've been debating buying audio points that change vibration into heat. But, I can't figure out how much additional heat they will produce and how much more it will cost to run my air conditioning to remove the extra heat? :-)
Bob
A novice in basic electronics; verify anything I post with an expert.
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
