Cryo Treatment

[Primalsea]

Now, if any thing Hifi be it cables, isolation feet, sprays etc ets do make a difference to me then I am prepared to accept it. After all there does seem to be some companies that make stuff that does make a positive difference although it may cost a lot.

I have noticed that some manufacturers have been using buzz words from industry and using them in their marketing. Quite often the marketing is only a half truth of the actual process or product that is used in industry with results that can be documented.

Today I found this on Cryogenic Treatment of Metal:

CRYOGENIC TREATMENT: During manufacturing, metal components undergo many processes. One of which is the process of tempering. During the cooling or quenching period of metal treatment is where austenite (solid solution of carbon and iron) which is soft, tough, and ductile, is transformed to martensite, a hard and strong constituent. This process does not convert all of the material because the cooling/quenching session ends at ambient temperature. When steel is cooled to subzero temperatures, the stability of the retained austenite is reduced so that is more readily transformed. The ultimate transformation of austenite to martensite may take place in carbon steel without the aid of subzero treatment, but this natural transformation might require 6 months or longer, whereas by refrigeration this change occurs in a few hours. Cryogenic treatment more closely completes the conversion process of austenite to martensite by cooling the metal to near zero degrees Kelvin. Afterwards, the metal must be tempered by at least 3 cycles from ambient to 300 degrees F. This removes the brittleness from the newly converted martensite. Reduction of flex within the synchronizer rings and other carbon steel components extends the reliability/durability of the overall mechanisms.

I have to wonder if the cryo treatment of cables is bollocks or not after reading this. Again cryo treatment of cables just seems like something someone cooked up after hearing that it was used to treat metals.

[Marco]

Hi Paul,

Have a look at what Mark Bartlett from Audiocom and Anthony Matthews from Tube Distinctions have to say on cryogenic treatment. I've personally had positive experiences with it in terms of valves and cables. In the right application I’ve not doubt it can offer real and significant improvements.

*But* there are unscrupulous rip-off merchants out there who will say that things have been cyro-treated when they haven't and still charge for it - there is simply no way of proving whether or not the treatment has been applied, and that is where the danger is.

I would therefore only buy cryo-treated merchandise from suppliers/manufacturers who you know you can trust.

Marco.

P.S I'll be moving this thread later to the 'Artist's Palette' section of the forum as it's more relevant there :)

[StanleyB]

My take on this market is that buyers are in general only interested in buying something that is expensive and has a lot of 'scientific' work done on it. I regularly get questions emailed to me that makes me wonder what they were the results of. Sometimes too much info is a dangerous thing.
In the case of cryo, the process affects the audio transmission properties of the transmission line. Removal of the carbon through rapid cooling damages the molecular structure of the metal composition. PCOFC ( as used in my digital coax lead) or PCCCC are a far better and damage free solution due to the continuous and directional casting process employed to remove the carbon without destroying any inter metal bonding properties. Once you treat metal via the cryogenic process, you have to temper the metal a couple of times in order to get rid of the brittleness now introduced in the metal. Unfortunately this requires cooling and heating up the metal, thereby introducing minuscule air bubbles into the structure. Unlike carbon, which can conduct electrical audio signals, air is a non conductor within the voltage range that audio is generally operating at in your average audio device. The results of it is that cryogenically treated material is in fact less perfect as an audio medium due to its increased level of signal distortion and inaccuracies.
Maybe it is this lesser audio quality that some folks perceive as being better.

And yes folks, this is an AoS Technical Exclusive.

Stan

Copyright Notice: no parts of this article may be reproduced in part or as a whole on any other website or publication without the express permission of the writer or the administrators of The Art of Sound. Neither is any manufacturer allowed to design and develop any audio or video product based on the copyrighted information without first discussing royalty payments.
AoS Dec. 2008

[Marco]

In the case of cryo, the process affects the audio transmission properties of the transmission line. Removal of the carbon through rapid cooling damages the molecular structure of the metal composition. PCOFC ( as used in my digital coax lead) or PCCCC are a far better and damage free solution due to the continuous and directional casting process employed to remove the carbon without destroying any inter metal bonding properties. Once you treat metal via the cryogenic process, you have to temper the metal a couple of times in order to get rid of the brittleness now introduced in the metal. Unfortunately this requires cooling and heating up the metal, thereby introducing minuscule air bubbles into the structure. Unlike carbon, which can conduct electrical audio signals, air is a non conductor within the voltage range that audio is generally operating at in your average audio device. The results of it is that cryogenically treated material is in fact less perfect as an audio medium due to its increased level of signal distortion and inaccuracies.


Most interesting, Stan. I cannot comment on the technicalities - it would be interesting though to hear from experts in the industry on this.

All I can say is that I've never been disappointed with the cryo-treated valves or cables I've had and that the process undoubtedly resulted in improved performance whenever I've had it done in the past.

Marco.

[Audiocom AV]

Hello Paul

Deep Cryogenic Treatment, or DCT for short is a process we have been using for over a year now, undertaken for us by Frozen Solid Audio. As a company we tried the process with an open mind, aiming to understand the science behind it but not being blinded by science and instead using our ears to listen. What I heard fascinated and amazed us, the improvements were clear and anything but subtle. When applying DCT to products such as CD players, amplifiers; the noise floor is audibly lower, backgrounds are quieter, blacker. We also hear marked improvements in bass definition, solidity; we did not perceive an increase in depth but bass quality is better. The sound also opens up, has improved spatial qualities with more natural tonality.

Any of the above points can be argued and debated; the fact is that many will choose to read the science and draw a conclusion without listening.

Best Wishes
Mark Bartlett

[StanleyB]

When applying DCT to products such as CD players, amplifiers; the noise floor is audibly lower, backgrounds are quieter, blacker.
This is due to a reduction in detail. The 'black' bit is what many of us refer to as 'a dark veil'. In order to hear more details, the veil has to be lifted from the dark sound.

[Audiocom AV]

This is due to a reduction in detail. The 'black' bit is what many of us refer to as 'a dark veil'. In order to hear more details, the veil has to be lifted from the dark sound.

Hello

Interesting, but not what we hear; we hear 'more detail', less veiling.

We have had several CD players DCT processed with non treated players to the same specification to hand to A/B test. The player with DCT are always notably better in the areas described. We have run the A/B tests too many times to rule out any false positives.

There have never been any negative effects; if it did not work we simply would not use it.

Best Wishes
Mark Bartlett

[StanleyB]

We have had several CD players DCT processed with non treated players to the same specification to hand to A/B test.
Did the plastic elements not disintegrate during the process?

[Audiocom AV]

Did the plastic elements not disintegrate during the process?

Hello

No problems with the plastics. DCT and hot melt glues were an issue. If any part is questionable like the CD player display where hot melt glues may be used it is excluded from the process.

Best Wishes
Mark Bartlett

[StanleyB]

I see. So the DCT process is selectively applied to certain parts of the CD player without having to dismantle the player in order to protect any part of the circuitry that doesn't require treatment. That's some fancy engineering process. Nitrogen tends to evaporate in all directions when used in cryogenic applications. I assume its nitrogen that was used, but I could be wrong of course. I am surprised that it doesn't damage any capacitors. The metal cased ones would normally implode when the inner electrolytic compound is frozen stiff.

[Audiocom AV]

Hello

No, that is not what I said. There may be an occasion when a front panel with display is removed, otherwise the entire is DCT processed. We have had several audio grade capacitors separately DCT processed to evaluate, all metal cased, all working 100%, 12+ months on.

Have you had any products, cables cryogenically treated? If so, perhaps the methods the cryogenic company you used operate differently. What products do you manufacture?

Best Wishes
Mark Bartlett

[StanleyB]

I was most interested in the ability of certain electronic components to withstand temperatures far below what the manufacturers would deem safe, before they reached the point of no return to working condition.

My own process goes the other way, which involves the use of high temperatures. The component laden PCB is subjected to temperatures in excess of 300 degrees centigrades for a certain amount of time. This is partly to burn off the carbon elements, but not exclusively for that purpose only.

[Audiocom AV]

Hello

The formula developed by Frozen Solid Audio does not simply involve ramping the item down to – 190 degrees; there are other processing techniques involved.

The effectiveness of DCT for Printed Circuit Boards is the same as cables, the circuit boards have a conductor and a dielectric. Similar is true of passive parts; transformers, capacitors, resistors, semi-conductors, connectors, etc. It has been documented that the benefits of DCT processing was audible on a pair of Analog Device D/A converters. When the process is applied to the hundreds of passive parts, connectors, wires, etc, used in audio & video equipment the level of improvement is remarkable. We have conducted A/B tests on singular circuit boards in DAC’s, CD players to compare cryogenic treated and non-cryogenic treated boards. The improvements from the cryogenic processed boards was always markedly superior.

There are several audio manufacturers investigating DCT, I cannot disclose details, but suffice to say that when larger companies, those that have been in the industry for many years give the process the their approval without disclosure, they are investing because it sounds better.

Best Wishes
Mark Bartlett

[Primalsea]

Out of interest was the AB listening tests double blind by people who had nothing to loose or gain from their findings.

Evaluation of DCT would seem to be a perfect candidate for DB tests by totally impartial people. If there is a difference there would be a clear result averaging out after many tests.

If the tests were by people who were part of the project so to speak and were not DB then the result is questionable.

Stowmarket is not very far from where I live. I wonder if they will let me visit, I might be pleasantly supprised buy DCT. I doubt that they will want me to stay for the whole day though to get a good average of what I hear. I would have to bring a friend with no interest in hifi as a uncontaminated reviewer.

[Marco]

Out of interest was the AB listening tests double blind by people who had nothing to loose or gain from their findings.

Evaluation of DCT would seem to be a perfect candidate for DB tests by totally impartial people. If there is a difference there would be a clear result averaging out after many tests.

If the tests were by people who were part of the project so to speak and were not DB then the result is questionable.


No-one can challenge that assertion, Paul, but if one is to rigorously apply that rule to DCT treatments before believing in or giving credibility to their effect or not, then equally so must one apply the same principles to every other subjective aspect of hi-fi, which most people who have faith in their hearing acuity don't, nor are likely to do. I can't comment if DB testing was carried out or not but it wouldn't influence me one iota either way simply because I trust my own ears with such things, regardless of what was ascertained in a test which I wasn't part of.

Would it make a jot of difference to your hi-fi decisions if some egghead in a lab (or whomever, wherever) proclaimed DCT treatment as viable simply because of the results of double-blind testing? Would that mean then that if it were 'proven' otherwise using the same method by some unknown third parties that you'd automatically dismiss it before judging the effect yourself first with your own ears? If so, then you are unlikely to discover much of the magic of hi-fi which leads to an increased enjoyment of music, simply because not everything which is effective is always scientifically provable.

People believe/accept all sorts of things (obscure and not so obscure) in hi-fi all the time without the need for double-blind testing, and it's not necessarily imagined, so I don't see why the effect of cryogenically treating cables, equipment, or anything else for that matter, should be subjected to any more scrutiny than simply what is heard and reported accordingly by discerning and experienced ears. It's then up to an individual to try it or not. However, only by trying it will you be able to reach an informed conclusion on its efficacy or otherwise.

If actual objective 'proof' is available and can be submitted by the company claiming benefits from DCT treatment to support their findings then all well and good, but it should not be a prerequisite in order for it to be 'credible' or accepted as 'fact', because in the highly subjective world of how hi-fi equipment treats music signals 'facts' are fairly thin on the ground.

Incidentally, this is not an attack on you personally (or your viewpoint); I merely wanted to nip this one in the bud in case the discussion degenerates into a pointless subjectivist/objectivist bun fight often seen elsewhere and exactly not what this forum is about :)

Marco.

[anthonyTD]

hi all,
most of you will know that i have on a few occasions discussed my own findings on the cryo-treatment process and its perceived affects on all things audio. it was however only after having my own individual items treated in a trusted and controlled environment that i was presented with a situation i could no longer ignore.
There is no doubt in my mind that the changes i have experienced certainly with valves before and after the cryo process are real and not a figment of my imagination, and those changes have always been for the better, ie, extended dynamics, bottom and top, with more definition, attack, etc. Also for those who need some sort of scientific proof of differences before and after the process, well, where valves are concerned, there is almost always a characteristic test measurement change. that is indeed how i know the process has been done, as all valves are measured before and after and a record kept. there are many people with just as many theories as to why this change should/shouldn’t take place, some more acceptable than others, i too have my own opinions, but believe me only real sonic benefits would have convinced me that cryo-treatment worked... all that’s left for me to say on the matter at this particular time is this,,, Anyone with a true open mind and a good set of ears will certainly hear a difference in a non cryo valve to one that has genuinely been treated, and i suspect this goes for many other items in the audio replay chain.:)
regards,anthony,TD...

[Marco]

Nicely put, Anthony :)

I totally agree.

Marco.

[Audiocom AV]

...anyone with a true open mind and a good set of ears will certainly hear a difference in a non cryo valve to one that has genuinely been treated, and i suspect this goes for many other items in the audio replay chain.:)
regards,anthony,TD...

Hello Anthony

Cryogenic treatment is a 'no brainer' with valves. I recall buying two matched pairs of Mullard CV4003's, have DCT applied to one pair only. I ran the non cryo pair for week, then switched; like you say..."extended dynamics, bottom and top, with more definition, attack, etc"

Switching back to the non cryo pair the sound lost definition, bass was softer, looser; the music closed in.

For the fraction extra in cost to have valves cryo treated why settle for less?

Best Wishes
Mark Bartlett

[Primalsea]

No Worries Marco, I was not in any way offended by your post. It was actually quite a good argument. As I said before some things do make a difference I'm just a bit wary about claims in hifi as many don't always have a firm footing.

It's not about egg heads and empirical testing, this had never influenced my decisions. I just see it as being sensible to see some evidence of robust subjective testing. Sceptical but not cynical is the way I approach things.

[Marco]

I totally agree, Paul. That's the right way to go about things. I'm glad you took my post in the spirit in which it was intended :)

Marco.

[Primalsea]

But going back to double blind tests if someone were to show documented findings that double blind testing by impartial individuals that took place over an extended time actually confirmed that a difference could be heard would you not be impressed??

[Audiocom AV]

But going back to double blind tests if someone were to show documented findings that double blind testing by impartial individuals that took place over an extended time actually confirmed that a difference could be heard would you not be impressed??

Hello Paul

The information at the following link may interest you;
http://www.frozensolidaudio.com/Freezing%20Issue.htm

Best Wishes
Mark Bartlett

[Primalsea]

Yep that's impressive. Now if that could be repeated many times and yield the same result (over averages) that would be really impressive.

[Marco]

But going back to double blind tests if someone were to show documented findings that double blind testing by impartial individuals that took place over an extended time actually confirmed that a difference could be heard would you not be impressed??

I know where you're coming from, but I have to be honest and say no. I'm just not particularly influenced by such things, Paul. I only really care what my own ears tell me or those of whom I trust - everything else is of secondary importance :)

Marco.

[StanleyB]

Frozen food does taste different, but I wouldn't say better.

[Audiocom AV]

Frozen food does taste different, but I wouldn't say better.

To that you might add...some people still think the earth is flat and the moon made of cheese :confused:

[StanleyB]

Yeah, but then again some people don't believe in Father Christmas but still celebrate his good work by buying presents for others and pretending that it was from Father Christmas. Are they doing it in order not to offend the believes of others, or because of ulterior motives?

[Audiocom AV]

Yeah, but then again some people don't believe in Father Christmas but still celebrate his good work by buying presents for others and pretending that it was from Father Christmas. Are they doing it in order not to offend the believes of others, or because of ulterior motives?

Hey

You mean Father Christmas doesn't exist, damn...that was some trick!

I once had a friend who believed the earth was flat, he took a walk and I never saw him again :)

Let's keep it light.

On a serious note, given Frozen Solid Audio a call, Neil there is very approachable and will answer your questions. The best advice I can offer you is try cryo treatment on a cable and listen, it might not be for you, but no amount of speculation will replace listening. It is by continued listening and research that we develop our ideas and products. We know we are getting it right when our customers provide us with positive feedback.

Next year we a planning to offer some products with cryogenic treatment, this includes the Squeezebox Duet receiver. This will allow the customer to listen and compare without commitment, and the option to purchase on approval.

Best Wishes
Mark

[StanleyB]

On a serious note, given Frozen Solid Audio a call, Neil there is very approachable and will answer your questions.
Thanks for the offer, but as this is a AoS topic for all of the members to learn from, please ask Neil to join in instead. That would be a far better solution:).

Coming back to the subject matter:

The only time cryogenic cooling really does anything is if you need enough under cooling to overcome the barrier to a phase transformation toward a more energetically favourable state. For instance, in heat treated high carbon steels (like drill bits and files, etc.), you heat the steel above its austinizing temperature and then quench (in water/oil) to room temp to achieve martensite. Sometimes you can get retained austinite which is less energetically favourable than martensite, so cryo cooling can force the transition. This only applies for a select number of materials such as heat treated steels which may be stuck in a "higher temperature phase." As far as I know you won't get much of a response from pure copper, plastic, or organic material like wood. On the other hand, you can cause microcracking. If there is any retained water (e.g. in wood) and you freeze, the water will expand and cause microcracks (e.g. freezer burn in your steak). This is not desired. Also, in an inhomogeneous material changes in thermal expansion of the different phases could cause similar thermal cracking even at slow cooling rates.
Also reaching a materials superconducting state wouldn't matter, the atoms do not significantly rearrange on the transition so once you raise the temp again there would be no remnants of a change.

In many instances thermal treatment of materials can cause a large change in material properties. However, in almost all cases the thermal treatment involves raising the temperature for a short while, not cooling it. The electrical properties of metals and semiconductors tend to improve as the the degree of crystallines improves. At higher temperatures, the atoms are more mobile and the crystal can "heal" the defects such as vacancies, dislocations, grain boundaries, etc created during the initial solidification. Raising the temperatures increases the rate at which the material decays to its equilibrium state (in this case closer to a single crystal of silicon). You can also anneal steels by raising their temperature and cooling slowly to room temp to soften them, increasing their ductility. You are thermally activating diffusive pathways for the micro structure to reorganize.
I briefly touched on this when I inadvertently disclosed that I carry out such a process on on my products:doh:. I don't use it in my marketing and would rather wished I had kept it a secret in order to deter my competitors from following suit.

Lowering the temperature would do the opposite, slow down atomic mobilities and freeze a particular crystal structure in place preventing any atomic restructuring from occurring. Most components have an environmental temperature range. If you put an IC chip, cap, etc. through a thermal cycle down to -180 you might cause something to crack.

I can't comment at weird existences of material phases that occur far below room temperature that the material can be trapped in on cryo treatment, but this is highly unlikely for any material found in audio equipment. There could be other instances that I have not considered, but from a material science standpoint, there is no reason to expect any benefit from cryo treatment.

Stan

[Marco]

...but from a material science standpoint, there is no reason to expect any benefit from cryo treatment.


*AND YET*, despite that, I (and many others) who own revealing, high resolution, hi-fi systems and possess discerning ears, can clearly hear a significant audible improvement when the likes of valves and cables have been cryo'd, so perhaps a reason has been found? In my experience, there is without question an audible benefit. It is *not* being imagined.

Current scientific thinking is only applicable until something better new has been discovered which renders previous thinking obsolete. Perhaps Frozen Solid Audio has made such a discovery that is contrary to your experience so far and also current thinking from a scientific and engineering point of view?

It is possible, as no disrespect Stan, FSA, with far greater resources available, will have carried out more research into this area than you, particularly as it is their niche area of expertise. New discoveries are being made all the time with electronics, as your own DAC upgrades ably demonstrate, so I suspect there may be others occurring in areas which haven't yet come under your radar ;)

I'm sorry, Stan, but all the scientific theories in the world mean jack shit if my ears tell me there is an audible improvement, and undoubtedly to my ears there *is* when DCT is applied to valves and cables. I can't speak for electronic circuitry as I've not tried that yet.

I think you should continue with your own very worthy projects and accept that Mark does things differently, and is also catering for a slightly different sector of the market, instead of attempting to 'disprove' his methodology. I use his modifications in my Sony transport and DAC and, so far, I have not heard anything else (including your DAC, good though it is) that comes near to its performance, which I guess speaks for itself.

From a reference point of view, what you wrote was very interesting to read, though! :)

Marco.

[StanleyB]

I'm sorry, Stan, but all the scientific theories in the world mean jack shit if my ears tell me there is an audible improvement, and undoubtedly to my ears there *is* when DCT is applied to valves and cables.
Hmm.. you probably got a point. I'll get my coat and leave this topic alone.

[Marco]

No worries. You know I value your opinion, so the last thing I want to do is gag you (I'm not), but there comes a point when competing (respected) manufacturers, such as Audiocom and you have to accept that both have different but equally valid ways of doing things in the digital arena and bow out of these sorts of debates gracefully, which you've done - respect :smoking:

Marco.

[StanleyB]

but there comes a point when competing (respected) manufacturers, such as Audiocom and you have to accept that both have different but equally valid ways of doing things in the digital arena and bow out of these sorts of debates gracefully, which you've done
That's a separate issue, but it does highlight the point that traders, designers, and manufacturers should stay away from taking part in any sort of technical discussions. No matter what the likes of us write, it will always been seen by somebody somewhere as a hidden agenda rather than a contribution to the discussion.
So out of fairness to any trader it is best that these discussions take place between people who haven't got a clue what they are writing about.

[Beechwoods]

So out of fairness to any trader it is best that these discussions take place between people who haven't got a clue what they are writing about.

:lol: Quite right too :eyebrows:

[Marco]

So out of fairness to any trader it is best that these discussions take place between people who haven't got a clue what they are writing about.

Haha, are you insinuating something Stanely? :lol:

The answer to your question though is no. We promote free speech on AOS (within the boundaries of our ethos) and this includes our traders engaging in like-minded (or perhaps not so like-minded ;)) dialogue regarding their products and services.

Not enough of this happens on forums, or rather let me rephrase that, not enough of it happens on forums constructively. Our view is that when knowledgeable, informed, people engage in hi-fi debate, onlookers (such as myself and others) gain valuable knowledge which might not otherwise be easily obtained. Furthermore, if the participating traders/manufacturers are respectful of each other's expertise then they too will hopefully learn from each other. This is precisely the environment we want to create.

I don't think either Mark or you are big-headed enough to think that you know all there is to know about digital technology, one is always on a learning curve; therefore it's a win-win scenario all round, providing neither of you, to put it simply, 'diss' the other's equally valid way of doing things.

How does that sound? :)

Marco.

[Primalsea]

Fair play Marco. If you can hear a difference with the DCT cables thats good enough for me and should be enough for anyone else for that matter. I was thining about this earlier today, trying to get my head straight about DB testing.

DB testing has a flaw when it comes to hifi as at this time we can only measure changes subjectively. Rather uncomfortably we are unable to show empirical test data that has consensus with what we here. There also seems to be opinions that become law with little to back them up. How many times have experts come up with so called proved therories of how the world work only for them to be proved wrong later on. Sometimes these are really proved wrong other times they are so called proved wrong with another theory that later is shown not to hold water.

If we are the measuring tools on DB tests we cannot guarentee that our state of mind remains consistant for the whole test. Also the methodology of many DB tests are flawed as they often put pressure on the tester. Hearing is as much to do with what goes on in our heads as it does with whats making the sound.

On the other hand it would be interesting to do some DB tests that do not impose pressure on the tester and that could be carried out over a period of time so that an average could be established. As DCT cables give a clear result they would seem a good test candidate.

I'm not rying to disprove or rubish anything I just find it interesting if a way of testing could be established that would shut the cynics up.

[Beechwoods]

If we are the measuring tools on DB tests we cannot guarentee that our state of mind remains consistant for the whole test. Also the methodology of many DB tests are flawed as they often put pressure on the tester. Hearing is as much to do with what goes on in our heads as it does with whats making the sound.

On the other hand it would be interesting to do some DB tests that do not impose pressure on the tester and that could be carried out over a period of time so that an average could be established. As DCT cables give a clear result they would seem a good test candidate.

My own experience at Hi-Fi shows has been shocking from a state of mind perspective. Often very poor listening conditions, music you're unfamiliar with and a salesman breathing down your neck. Group listening always conditions a certain response as well. I'm talking about hearing subtleties not blindingly obvious differences. Then there's the problem that differences are often 'improvements' in one direction, like noise floor, while negative in others - transparency or whatever. It's often extremely difficult to reach an empirical truth.

[Covenant]

Ive just picked up on this thread which is really interesting to me being one of the many 'havent a clue-ers'.
I have to totally agree with Marco's points-two developers trading points of view can only be a good thing. Both parties are obviously wary-they have spent many years going down a route based on sound empirical evidence. To be told there may be another way of doing things takes some adjusting to and all credit to both parties for the level of discussion.
A practical suggestion-Stan why not send Audiocom an old dac (maybe with a damaged case) for Cryo treatment? Maybe you could exchange ideas by PM and use us cannon fodder to evaluate?

And if you dont send me a 7510+ I will tell all the other forums you heat treat your equipment :lol:

[Filterlab]

Have a read about the Townsend DCT cables. (http://www.townshendaudio.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=29&Itemid=83) Townsend have been cryogenically treating their cables (and winning numerous awards) for years.

[Filterlab]

This article (http://www.frozensolid.co.uk/science.htm) may be of interest too.

[Marco]

A practical suggestion-Stan why not send Audiocom an old dac (maybe with a damaged case) for Cryo treatment? Maybe you could exchange ideas by PM and use us cannon fodder to evaluate?

And if you dont send me a 7510+ I will tell all the other forums you heat treat your equipment :lol:

I like it! :)


Ive just picked up on this thread which is really interesting to me being one of the many 'havent a clue-ers'.
I have to totally agree with Marco's points-two developers trading points of view can only be a good thing. Both parties are obviously wary-they have spent many years going down a route based on sound empirical evidence. To be told there may be another way of doing things takes some adjusting to and all credit to both parties for the level of discussion.


It shows that both are intelligent, open-minded, people and confident in their products. I can't stand manufacturers who think they know it all and have an 'it's either my way or the highway' type of mentality. I know a few just like that and they'll won't get far with that attitude! You need to respect someone else's way of doing things is as valid as yours and *always* be willing to learn.

Interesting links, Rob.

Marco.

[Audiocom AV]

Have a read about the Townsend DCT cables. (http://www.townshendaudio.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=29&Itemid=83) Townsend have been cryogenically treating their cables (and winning numerous awards) for years.

Hello Rob

A good link. You can add to this Black Rhodium, the Kimber Select,
http://www.russandrews.com/product.asp?lookup=1&region=UK&currency=GBP&pf_id=2131&customer_id=PAA1263123708514UQKLXGUUITPTROVG

Russ Andrews gives his viewpoint on DCT here;
http://www.russandrews.com/popindex.asp?lookup=1&region=UK&currency=GBP&article_id=dctinfo&customer_id=PAA1263123708514UQKLXGUUITPTROVG

We have also explored the use of DCT on Compact Disc's and Super Audio CD's, the improvements are similar to that of cables.

Best Wishes
Mark

[Filterlab]

Cheers Mark, interesting stuff indeed. :)

[Togil]

According to Martin Colloms in HiFi Critic, a fairly large scale double-blind comparison of treated and un-treated Black Rhodium came out slightly in favour of the untreated cables.

[Marco]

Well, Hans, if Martin Colloms and his band of merry men have proclaimed it a no-goer then I guess that's it - subject closed ;)

Marco.