|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
24.21.8.3
In Reply to: RE: Where to Custom Cryo in 2014 ???? posted by alan m. kafton on September 16, 2014 at 16:56:19
Thanks, Alan.
So if I'm understanding you correctly, Cryo Interational's art of a "soak" is to "allow" the materials to reside in the gaseous exchange" which to me sounds an awful lot like a typcial vapor (gas) cryo'ing treatment. Whereas immersion is supposedly a complete "soak" of the liquid (not the gas).
From what I was told, and if I recall correctly, a gas or vapor treatment cannot take object to LN's full boiling point where the supposed magic occurs. Hence, the half-baked cookie analogy for the vapor or gas treatment.
Actually, the lowest point or boiling point is supposedly -320.4 but we're picking knits here.
Now I'm completely out of my league when it comes to many things including cryogenic treatments, superior and inferior processes, LN boiling points, etc, and I've already shared with you more than I know.
All I can say that for 10 years I've had maybe 50 or 60 cables vapor cryo'ed and mostly double-vapor-cryo'ed (which was superior to the single-vapor-treatment) and every time realized significant gains. However, last fall when I had several sets of ic's and sc's cryo'ed via full immersion, the sonic gains were substantially more musical than any of my vapor treated versions.
When I inquired about a double-immersion for even greater gains, I was told it was pointless because the magical number is -320.4 to maximize the alteration of the metal and that is why I was able to experience greater gains from a 2nd vapor-treatment (a bit better than half-baked?). whereas a 2nd immersion-treatment simply adds no more value.
Anyway, thanks for the clarification.
Follow Ups:
Stehno....if you contact Charles at Cryogenics International directly, he can explain the soak in plain language better than I.
His treatment is not "typical" nor is it the commercial-grade vapor injection to which you refer. Vapor injection reaches around -295F, -300F at best. Charles methodology reaches the boil-off point of -320F (I rounded from -320.4) via his custom computer-controlled profiles and maintains that deep temperature (the 'soak') for periods beyond 24 hours, usually more with more overall weight and material density.
I've performed many double treatments for more than a decade, finding that the 2nd treatment offers an even quieter noise floor and more "musical information" with cabling, AC connectors & duplexes, and circuitry. However, there is no price break for the 2nd treatment.
Regarding double treatments via immersion, I too was told (perhaps 15 years ago) that a 2nd treatment is not worth the time and money. I don't know, as I've never had that experience. But I do know that there is further compaction with a 2nd treatment (further displacement of gaseous pockets and impurities)....perhaps that is why I've always heard a noticeable sonic improvement. It offers an even "straighter signal path", which is another analogy I like to use.
Thanks for sharing, Alan.
Yes, it does seem that Cryo Intern'l may have a method of driving temps down to LN2 boiling point via the vapor / gas methodology. I'm guessing that's the main thing.
However, knowing what little I think I know now between the 2 methods, I'd definitely prefer to stick with the total immersion method for 2 reasons:
1. Like an over without convection or say a hot air furnace, it's entirely possible and probable that the thermostat may register the desired temperature, but only at that one point in space while the temp throughout the remainder of space can fluctuate greatly and thus compromise the treatment. Hence, it would seem that complete immersion eliminates this as a potential problem.
2. The fact that you admit to receiving extra gains from a 2nd vapor / gas treatment (like I have in time past) it would also seem to be an admission that the product in question is not reaching the LN2's boiling poiont at least in spots. And since you also have been told that a 2nd immersion treatment is unnecessary, that also would seem to substantiate my specualation that even though Cryo Int'l may perform a superior vapar / gas treatment to other vapor treatments, it sounds as though it still may be inferior to the complete immersion treatment.
Now I have no dog in this fight and I suspect neither do you. But if you're convinced of cryo-treating being a necessity for high-end audio and it seems as though you are, why not send a favorite pair of your ic's and sc's to Jena Labs for the full monty to see for yourself what if any added benefits may be had.
If per chance the Cryo Intn'l method is slightly inferior and you try the full immersion treatment, besides the added detail and overall musicality, there is yet another characteristic that develops that is not only undeniable but also pretty incredible.
BTW, last year I discovered that if has a pair of ic's cryo'ed via immersion (and perhaps vapor too) but not a pair of sc's or vice versa, the untreated pair will act as a very serious performance bottleneck for the cryo'ed pair of cables so that sonic gains appear minimal. At least it was in my case as I was swapping around a few of my newly cryo'ed ic's during their burn in process while the sc's still hadn't reached maturity.
Anyway, it made sense to me but I had no idea just how significant a bottleneck the untreated pair would create.
Yes, it does seem that Cryo Intern'l may have a method of driving temps down to LN2 boiling point via the vapor / gas methodology. I'm guessing that's the main thing.
No....not "may have a method". They DO have a method, and it's been in place for over 20 years. It's completely computer-controlled and sensitive to temp down to 1/4 of a degree.
However, knowing what little I think I know now between the 2 methods, I'd definitely prefer to stick with the total immersion method for 2 reasons:
As you wish....clearly you've been convinced by Jena Labs.
1. Like an over without convection or say a hot air furnace, it's entirely possible and probable that the thermostat may register the desired temperature, but only at that one point in space while the temp throughout the remainder of space can fluctuate greatly and thus compromise the treatment.
NO again....there is a temperature probe at the very bottom of the chamber giving immediate readings to the control panel. I've seen all this in action. There is NO fluctuation as you suggest, and NO compromise in temperature.
Hence, it would seem that complete immersion eliminates this as a potential problem.
Possibly, but it depends on the amount of materials being treated (the Jena Labs chamber is not large) and the densities....there are thousands of variables here. More importantly, some materials are fine with deep immersion, others could not survive the thermal shock of the direct immersion. That is why Jena Labs does not treat all their materials with deep immersion. Most, perhaps....but not all.
2. The fact that you admit to receiving extra gains from a 2nd vapor / gas treatment (like I have in time past) it would also seem to be an admission that the product in question is not reaching the LN2's boiling poiont at least in spots.
Again, asked and answered. Each treatment by Cryo International reaches the boil-off point of -320.4F, each and every time. You are presuming that a deep immersion treatment is PERFECT, and been told that a 2nd treatment is not necessary (by Jena Labs). I was told the same over 15 years ago. It's their opinion. No one person is the sole repository of cryogenic knowledge.
There are other deep immersion facilities (such as in Texas and Canada).
Moray James (who posts here from time-to-time) is an expert in deep immersion. Perhaps you could ask him for a second opinion.
And since you also have been told that a 2nd immersion treatment is unnecessary, that also would seem to substantiate my specualation that even though Cryo Int'l may perform a superior vapar / gas treatment to other vapor treatments, it sounds as though it still may be inferior to the complete immersion treatment.
Again, Cryo International is NOT using a vapor treatment....the actual LN2 is being distributed into the chamber, and allowed to collect at/near the bottom of the chamber. This is vastly different than commercial "vapor injection".
Secondly, you are presuming that it's inferior to "complete immersion", likely based on what you were told by Jena Labs. You don't know for certain.
Now I have no dog in this fight and I suspect neither do you.
I only wish to learn facts, not guesses or theories, and what I speak of comes from over 17 years of direct experience with cryogenic treatment, including that from Jena Labs. They do a very nice job, and have a proven protocol. But theirs is not the only deep cryogenic treatment available.
But if you're convinced of cryo-treating being a necessity for high-end audio and it seems as though you are, why not send a favorite pair of your ic's and sc's to Jena Labs for the full monty to see for yourself what if any added benefits may be had.
Not going to happen, as it's impractical at the very least. I have various parts and circuit boards going into cryo treatment on a weekly basis, and Cryogenics International is both completely professional and performs their treatments like clockwork (every weekend). Jena Labs does frequent treatments during the year, but not necessarily every week. That and the fact that shipping back and forth to Oregon would add a great amount of cost.
If per chance the Cryo Intn'l method is slightly inferior
It's not, and I beg you to stop using this inference. It's inaccurate on its face, unproven, and driven by the opinion of a competitor known for sharp and disdainful opinions....you are obviously quite influenced by it. The Jena Labs treatment is proven, and Cryogenics International's treatment is proven as well. They both reach the boil-off point of -320.4F, and are complete in their procedures....let's leave it at that.
Alan, I mentioned in my previous response with regard to the full-immersion method, "besides the added detail and overall musicality, there is yet another characteristic that develops that is not only undeniable but also pretty incredible."
Since you are experienced with the varied cryo'ing methodologies, if you can describe for me what this very audible, undeniable, and welcomed characteristic is, I might be apt to continue our dialogue.
Otherwise, I think there's enough here to leave things as-is for others to now be better informed about cryo vendors and their varied cryo'ing methodologies.
.
Not a problem, Alan.
But if you had firsthand experience with both vapor and full-immersion cryo-treated products, then you should also have firsthand knowledge of the undeniable sonic differences between the two methods.
In other words, no guessing or conjecture necessary.
Cryogenics International does NOT use a "vapor" method. They perform a vastly superior deep cryogenic process to vapor injection. Please disuse this terminology, as it is at best incomplete on your part, and at worst incorrect. Continuing to do so in this case only promulgates misinformation.
Secondly, I do have "firsthand knowledge" between vapor injection and full-immersion treated products, and I would categorically state that, for audio products such as cabling, wiring and AC parts, full-immersion is superior to vapor injection treatment. But the caveat again is that not all materials survive the thermal shock of full immersion. Big caveat. There is more to that process than meets the eye....it's very technical. Materials problems are rarely the case with treatment from Cryogenics International (excepting silicon and a few adhesives).
I choose to do business with Cryogenics International because of their high professionalism, complete reliability, weekly service, the fact that their processing is computer-profiled at the boil-off point of LN2 (-320F rounded), and that their soak is programmed for periods usually beyond 24 hours, far more than many other facilities....that's where the rubber meets the road.
Alan, you're not being honest with yourself.
In this case, if it's not immersion, that only leaves one other option, vapor. Now Cryo Intn'l may indeed have a patented superior version of the vapor treatment, but again, if it's not immersion, it's still vapor, no matter how you slice it.
Perhaps this explains your inability to identify or label the one undeniable charactertistic that only cryo immersion can supposedly provide and for which I experienced.
I have no doubt Cryo Int'l is a superior company that treats its customers with the utmost professionalism, etc. But that's not the issue.
But that's ok. No harm no foul.
Jeff;
Did you get your wire and recepticles treated? You did not ask but another treatment for wire is getting it Quantum Tunneled by Synergistic Research. In fact I feel the excellence I hear in my horn system is the fact that the mid range horn diaphragm has been cryo'ed and then Quantum Tunneled.
Will you be at RMAF this year?
David Pritchard
David, who's Jeff?
Thanks for sharing the Quantum Tunneling. Sounds like a sophisticated and superior burn-in process to maximize a cable's performance (what I could tell).
I exhibited at RMAF several years ago and if per chance your question was directed toward me, no I will not be exhibiting at RMAF.
-John
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: