| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#1
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Cryogenics
A few months ago, both ScottW and Howard chided me for remarking that
a pair of headphones I had for review, the ALOAudio Grado SR225s, had cryogenically-treated, cotton-insulated cable. Of course Howard dismissed such a product without hearing it, as he always does. My comments, however, weren't in favor of cryogenics, just to state that I heard an improvement over the stock phones. This could have been due to the cotton insulation, the oxygen-free copper, or the custom- made rosewood ear cups. I didn't know just how much the cryogenics had to do with the improvement I heard without taking it out of the equation. Scott and Howard jumped in, saying that cryogenics was a crock. But then I read something that intrigued me. Cryogenically-treated precision drill bits last up to four times as long as untreated bits. Obviously cryogenics does something to change the composition of the metal. Why, therefore, is it ludicrous to believe that cryogenics could make a sonic difference? Of course, feel free to refrain from participating in this conversation if a) you've never compared a cryogenically-treated cable with an untreated one, or b) you can't offer a scientific explanation to support your answer. In other words, random cries of "Snake Oil!" will be met with disdain. Boon |
|
#2
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Cryogenics
On 17 Feb, 17:08, wrote:
A few months ago, both ScottW and Howard chided me for remarking that a pair of headphones I had for review, the ALOAudio Grado SR225s, had cryogenically-treated, cotton-insulated cable. *Of course Howard dismissed such a product without hearing it, as he always does. *My comments, however, weren't in favor of cryogenics, just to state that I heard an improvement over the stock phones. *This could have been due to the cotton insulation, the oxygen-free copper, or the custom- made rosewood ear cups. I didn't know just how much the cryogenics had to do with the improvement I heard without taking it out of the equation. Scott and Howard jumped in, saying that cryogenics was a crock. *But then I read something that intrigued me. Cryogenically-treated precision drill bits last up to four times as long as untreated bits. Obviously cryogenics does something to change the composition of the metal. *Why, therefore, is it ludicrous to believe that cryogenics could make a sonic difference? Of course, feel free to refrain from participating in this conversation if a) you've never compared a cryogenically-treated cable with an untreated one, or b) you can't offer a scientific explanation to support your answer. *In other words, random cries of "Snake Oil!" will be met with disdain. Now I get it. Arny's special brand of religious hypocricy is fueled by special cyrogenic 'floobydust'. |
|
#3
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Cryogenics
Marc said: [snip] then I read something that intrigued me. Cryogenically-treated precision drill bits last up to four times as long as untreated bits. Obviously cryogenics does something to change the composition of the metal. Why, therefore, is it ludicrous to believe that cryogenics could make a sonic difference? Almost all technological breakthroughs are serendipitous, including tempering of metal. The science guys didn't figure out why tempering made metals stronger until they had the instruments to detect molecular- scale changes. So my question would be whether treating copper with an ultra-cold bath rearranges the molecules to allow for a difference in the electrical properties. (At this point, the Krooborg will assert complete knowledge of the subject of cryo-metallurgy, having "been there done, that" in 1983.) |
|
#4
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Cryogenics
wrote in message
A few months ago, both ScottW and Howard chided me for remarking that a pair of headphones I had for review, the ALOAudio Grado SR225s, had cryogenically-treated, cotton-insulated cable. So Marc, in the interest of science, you obtained a stock pair of Grado SR 225, and did a thorough technical and listening-based analysis of both, and compared them in a bias-controlled listening test. I didn't think so! :-( Of course Howard dismissed such a product without hearing it, as he always does. Even as a librarian, Howard knew the difference between hype and technology. My comments, however, weren't in favor of cryogenics, just to state that I heard an improvement over the stock phones. How do you know that is true? How do you know that the cryogenic-cable Grado SR 225 sounded different from from one with the standard cable? Where's the science? Where are the carefully-done listening tests? This could have been due to the cotton insulation, the oxygen-free copper, or the custom- made rosewood ear cups. None are likely to make a big audible difference, but of the bunch the rosewood ear cups have the greatest potential. Anything that interacts that closely with the driver has at least a snowball's chance in Orange County of having an audible effect. Of course that presumes that the stock ear cup is a resonant POS. I didn't know just how much the cryogenics had to do with the improvement I heard without taking it out of the equation. Scott and Howard jumped in, saying that cryogenics was a crock. But then I read something that intrigued me. Cryogenically-treated precision drill bits last up to four times as long as untreated bits. Obviously cryogenics does something to change the composition of the metal. Why, therefore, is it ludicrous to believe that cryogenics could make a sonic difference? It's ludicrous because you're talking about the passage of electricity through a good electrical conductor (copper), not the life of a cutting tool. There is some science behind thermal treatments of metal cutting tools. There is some science behind thermal treatments for the resonant components of musical instruments. However Marc, as usual you don't have your facts right. It turns out that the scientifically-proven benefit of cryogenic treatment of drill bits is about 1/4, not 4 times. http://www.nitrofreeze.com/cryo_twist_drills.html The rest is hype and anecdote. But getting back to cryogenically-treated headphone cables, they can't and won't make a sonic difference because from an electrical standpoint, they are vastly overbuilt. Their resistance, inductance and capacitance is even less important than it is for speaker cables. The fact of the matter is that the most relevant characteristic of headphone cables is not how they sound, but how they last. Finally Marc, didn't you know that for consumer listening, headphones are fantastically passe . In 2008. it is all about IEMs, Marc, or don't you know? ;-) |
|
#5
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Cryogenics
On 17 Feb, 19:49, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
wrote in message A few months ago, both ScottW and Howard chided me for remarking that a pair of headphones I had for review, the ALOAudio Grado SR225s, had cryogenically-treated, cotton-insulated cable. So Marc, in the interest of science, you obtained a stock pair of Grado SR 225, and did a thorough technical and listening-based analysis of both, and compared them in a bias-controlled listening test. I didn't think so! :-( He was busy talking to Jesus, arranging for him to be his Savior. Much more imporrant than bias coontrolled tests. *Of course Howard dismissed such a product without hearing it, as he always does. Even as a librarian, Howard knew the difference between hype and technology. too bad you don't. You believe in the parting of the Red Sea, for example. How do you *know that is true? How do you know that the cryogenic-cable Grado SR 225 sounded different from from one with the standard cable? Where's the science? Where are the carefully-done listening tests? Jeeeee-zus! do you hear me? can you help me answer this one? want to talk to me tonight? It's ludicrous because you're talking about the passage of electricity through a good electrical conductor (copper), not the life of a cutting tool. *There is some science behind thermal treatments of metal cutting tools. There is some science behind thermal treatments for the resonant components of musical instruments. Your favorite Bible stories are ludicrous. Your belief in God is just as ludicrous. Jesus is your Savior? PROVE IT! |
|
#6
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Cryogenics
On Feb 17, 5:39�pm, "Soundhaspriority" wrote:
wrote in message ... A few months ago, both ScottW and Howard chided me for remarking that a pair of headphones I had for review, the ALOAudio Grado SR225s, had cryogenically-treated, cotton-insulated cable. �Of course Howard dismissed such a product without hearing it, as he always does. �My comments, however, weren't in favor of cryogenics, just to state that I heard an improvement over the stock phones. �This could have been due to the cotton insulation, the oxygen-free copper, or the custom- made rosewood ear cups. I didn't know just how much the cryogenics had to do with the improvement I heard without taking it out of the equation. Scott and Howard jumped in, saying that cryogenics was a crock. �But then I read something that intrigued me. Cryogenically-treated precision drill bits last up to four times as long as untreated bits. Obviously cryogenics does something to change the composition of the metal. �Why, therefore, is it ludicrous to believe that cryogenics could make a sonic difference? Seehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryogenic_hardening The drill bits harden because impurities precipitate out, causing an inhomogenous structure. There is no entry on cryogenics applied to copper. If the copper were pure, there would be no impurities to precipitate out. I think it's probably the earcups. Plastic is a lousy material for speaker cabinets. It sounds reasonable to me that the same lousiness would apply to speakers of small scale, ie., earphones. Bob Morein (310) 237-6511 I just recently compared two Grado GS1000s...my stock pair and a pair with the Stefan AudioArts Equinox cabling. The differences between those two cans were much more subtle, with the modded pair sounding smoother in the highs and less fatiguing overall. The Stefan AudioArts, BTW, are not cryogenically treated, and both pairs of 'phones have wooden earcups.. So I am inclined to think that the wooden cups on the 225s are making the biggest amount of difference. I'd still like to break it down and hear for myself, though. BTW, my Rudistor headphone amplifier has two identical jacks, which makes these kind of comaprisons a breeze to do. Boon |
|
#7
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Cryogenics
|
|
#8
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Cryogenics
"Bob Woodward" "Bob wrote in message
wrote: A few months ago, both ScottW and Howard chided me for remarking that a pair of headphones I had for review, the ALOAudio Grado SR225s, had cryogenically-treated, cotton-insulated cable. Why does this abracadabra almost exclusively show up in the playback-chain. That is, at the consumers end. Because charlatans always go where the fools with lots of money are. While even the finest recordings you are playing have passed through a multiple of apparatus / circuits / interlinks ( that they call cables ) connectors / ordinary op-amps and electrolytic capacitors. None of them treated. Few if any of the components and wires in the recording chain are anything but off-the-shelf, commercial grade parts. How, do you think, can a cryo cotton cable bring the reproduced sound closer to the original ? Suspension of masking? Start listening to music ! Agreed. Audiophilia is not about listening to music. Music is simply a means to an end for them. |
|
#9
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Cryogenics
On Feb 18, 12:15�am, Bob Woodward "Bob wrote:
wrote: A few months ago, both ScottW and Howard chided me for remarking that a pair of headphones I had for review, the ALOAudio Grado SR225s, had cryogenically-treated, cotton-insulated cable. � Why does this abracadabra almost exclusively show up in the playback-chain. That is, at the consumers end. While even the finest recordings you are playing have passed through a multiple of apparatus / circuits / interlinks ( that they call cables ) connectors / ordinary op-amps and electrolytic capacitors. None of them treated. How, do you think, can a cryo cotton cable bring the reproduced sound closer to the original ? Start listening to music ! Robert Who has changed from Audiophile to Melomane long ago. Your statement presupposes two things that aren't necessarily true. One thing is that the exact chain of technologies that produced the sound need to be present to replay it. The second is that "closer to the original" is the ultimate objective. If you're truly a "melomane," then you'd get that in a second. I've never said that cryogenically-treated cables are more accurate. If I had, then your comments may apply. Boon |
|
#11
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Cryogenics
wrote in message
On Feb 18, 12:15?am, Bob Woodward "Bob wrote: wrote: A few months ago, both ScottW and Howard chided me for remarking that a pair of headphones I had for review, the ALOAudio Grado SR225s, had cryogenically-treated, cotton-insulated cable. ? Why does this abracadabra almost exclusively show up in the playback-chain. That is, at the consumers end. While even the finest recordings you are playing have passed through a multiple of apparatus / circuits / interlinks ( that they call cables ) connectors / ordinary op-amps and electrolytic capacitors. None of them treated. How, do you think, can a cryo cotton cable bring the reproduced sound closer to the original ? Start listening to music ! Robert Who has changed from Audiophile to Melomane long ago. Your statement presupposes two things that aren't necessarily true. One thing is that the exact chain of technologies that produced the sound need to be present to replay it. That's never true, because record chains and playback chains are inherently different. Record chains include microphones, mic preamps, mixers, etc. None of which need or generally ever apply to playback. This is a falsism, the opposite of a truism. More significantly, the OP never said that the exact chain for recording has to be used for playback. He said something different - and that as a rule, none of the floobydust that some ignorant audiophiles affect, is usually present in professional recording systems. While mic preamps need never show up in a playback system, the equipment in both recording and playback systems will have a lot of basic component parts in common, such as regular commercial grade resistors and capacitors. Professional recording systems are typically solid state from microphone through the mixing console to the digital recorder. If you find a tube in a professional recording system, it is probably in some legacy microphone. But, more than likely, tubes are nowhere to be found. The second is that "closer to the original" is the ultimate objective. If you're truly a "melomane," then you'd get that in a second. Tha fallacy here is that music needs to be mechanically changed in order to be loved. I've never said that cryogenically-treated cables are more accurate. If I had, then your comments may apply. Don't take credit for that, Marc. You've repeatedly shown yourself incapable of understanding the concept of sonic accuracy. You never said what the cryogenically-treated cables do technically, because you are incapable of coherent technical thoughts. To you, there's no difference between drill bits and headphone wires. |
|
#12
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Cryogenics
On 19 Feb, 07:55, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
Don't take credit for that, Marc. You've repeatedly shown yourself incapable of understanding the concept of sonic accuracy. You never said what the cryogenically-treated cables do technically, because you are incapable of coherent technical thoughts. To you, there's no difference between drill bits and headphone wires. You have never said what Jesus does, technically. How does he turn water into wine? |
Linear Mode
