After an earlier thread where the topic of cryogenically treating CD's and other items was examined somewhat, a link to an online company offering cryogenic services for a variety of items was given: www.cryotweaks.com Two things stood out for me, perhaps they won't for you: 1) the nice little picture of that reminded me of tectonic plate movement wherebye the crystals of the wire moved together after cryrognically being treated and the claim on the website. Now I can see how the overall structure of the cable would shrink as the temperature is lowered. Most items do contract when cooled. As to whether this state of contraction remains after warming back up to room temperature...well that's another thing. 2) the website under the pre and post pictures INITIALLY said the following: a)Untreated wire. Note the gaps in the crystalline structure. b)Treated wire. Smaller gaps = less resistance and a quieter cable. it now says the following: a)Untreated wire (Illustration). Note the gaps in the crystalline structure. b)Treated wire (Illustration). Smaller gaps = a "quieter" cable. While I can't say with 100% certainty, prior to that particular change I had sent off an email to them. My original inquiry and a portion of their reply along with a followup email by myself (no reply to that) follows. Thanks for the references, although most of the dates don't correspond to the Volume Numbers and regretfully many of the publications are out of print. I'm a little confused, since your web page makes the following comments: Untreated wire. Note the gaps in the crystalline structure. and then... Treated wire. Smaller gaps = less resistance and a quieter cable. Those pictures are artists renderings I take it, yes? So I would take it that since you seem to be specializing somewhat in audio tweaks, and your web page has made certain claims 1: cryotreatment of audio wires (and I assume their subsequent return to ambient temperatures) results in a tighter packing of crystals (wouldn't that imply the wire shrinks?) 2: cryotreatment result in less resistance and quieter cables. Could you tell me specifically if you've done this work yourself and confirmed through either electron micrographs or x-ray diffraction patterns that the crystals are now packed tighter by taking wire from room temperature to whatever temperature you take it to? And also you claim less resistance. How much less? ----- Original Message ----- From: "M Garner" To: ******* Sent: Monday, June 03, 2002 7:23 PM Subject: Re: Contact form for CryoTweaks.com > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: ******* > To: > Sent: Saturday, June 01, 2002 4:45 PM > Subject: Contact form for CryoTweaks.com > > > what are the changes in the resistance that you've found after cryogenic treatment. also may i have the scanning electron micrographs that indicate the changes in the surface structure of the metal after treatment? also what sort of controlled tests has cryotweaks performed that indicate a statistical valid result that treatment results in both an audible improvement? Thanks! > > > > Thank you for your inquiry, although I do not have time to go into the empirical data, I have compiled a list of supporting reference material that you can research in your own time. > In my opinion however, the best test instruments are your ears. Charts and graphs are nice supporting material, may provide visual and mental exercise > and stimulation, but I do not believe the existing methods of data collection and analysis quantify completely an individual's experience of listening to music. I could go on, but I do not wish to get in to a lengthy debate. > > > Below is the reference material: > > Hi-Fi News in July 2001 (http://www.enjoythemusic.com/hfnrr/0701/) > > Advances in Cryogenic Engineering Vol 04 Timmerhaus, K.D. 1958 > Advances in Cryogenic Engineering Vol 06 Timmerhaus, K.D. 1961 > Advances in Cryogenic Engineering Vol 09 Timmerhaus, K.D. 1964 > Advances in Cryogenic Engineering Vol 10 Timmerhaus, K.D. 1964 > Advances in Cryogenic Engineering Vol 11 Timmerhaus, K.D. 1966 > Advances in Cryogenic Engineering Vol 12 Timmerhaus, K.D. 1966 > Advances in Cryogenic Engineering Vol 13 Timmerhaus, K.D. 1967 > Advances in Cryogenic Engineering Vol 14 Timmerhaus, K.D. 1968 > Advances in Cryogenic Engineering Vol 15 Timmerhaus, K.D. 1970 > Advances in Cryogenic Engineering Vol 16 Timmerhaus, K.D. 1970 > Advances In Cryogenic Engineering Vol 17 Timmerhaus, K.D. 1971 > Advances in Cryogenic Engineering Vol 18 Timmerhaus, K.D. 1972 > Advances in Cryogenic Engineering Vol 19 Timmerhaus, K.D. 1974 > Advances in Cryogenic Engineering Vol 20 Timmerhaus, K.D. 1975 a longer list follows and was snipped by myself. The webpage changed after my email. Now I thought it reasonable to ask them about their claims. The implication they made was that if you give us your wire, we'll send it back to you and it'll have less resistance and the crystalline packing will be tighter. They dodged my question. To me that suggests they have never performed the tests to substantiate their claims. Moreover, the lack of being able to cite a specific reference to substantiate their claim suggests that such data may not exist at all. Now I did check out their references and found virtually all out of print and some were incorrectly cited with respect to the dates. Some would say this is just a mistake. To me this is somebody just pulling doing a cut and paste, possibly off of Kimber's website. A pity that a place would cite scientific papers submitted in scientific proceedings and then juxtapose it with a laudatory review by some audio publication. Anyways, I personally don't plan on sending anything to them. As to what anyone else does, well, its your money.