Cryo treated tubes?

[daz]

BS or not? Your experience with them?

[guitician]

I've heard of them, but I get all my tubes out of old amps, so I guess that they are already "treated". But that I mean they have been in the environment since the '50s and have been through lots of temp cycles, which should do the same thing. The science behind chilling them to -250 degrees and changing the sound is anybody guess??

[daz]

The sound is part of it, but isn't it also suppose to improve longevity?

[guitician]

Yeah, but that would take a long time to test to see if it was true.

[g1]

There was a bit of a discussion of this a while back: http://music-electronics-forum.com/t12864/

[JoeM]

The sound is part of it, but isn't it also suppose to improve longevity?

Yes, the longevity of money in your wallet.

[daz]

There was a bit of a discussion of this a while back: http://music-electronics-forum.com/t12864/

Yeah, see, thats what i was hoping would NOT happen. Everyone is skeptical about things like that, but a ton of negative speculation is not just worthless but potentially harmful. I was hoping to hear from people who have tried a regular, then cryo version of a given tube. It's fun to poke fun, but in doing that and being closed minded you never find out the truth which in some cases may be beneficial. As an example, theres at least one thing in regards to guitars, and i won't say what because it'll lead to the same cr@p, that 90% of people say is BS and i have seen the results myself and know it's not. Yes, it may be inaudible to some or most but not to all. I was in the camp that didn't believe too, but i am open minded too having seen too many things like this prove true. When someone i respected greatly as a very obviously knowledgeable guitar tech suggested it does make a difference i began testing it for myself. It did little to nothing much of the time, but with some guitars it made a more than subtle improvement. I'm glad i listened and was open minded enough to try it.

So i really don't wanna deal with speculation because it's futile at best. There has to be some people who have A/B'd this and i was hoping someone who has may chime in or someone with some other evidence thats not 100% speculation. I can speculate too, but what good does it do in determining whether or not it really does make a difference?

[JoeM]

Seriously, there's no way to tell. Most of the Cryo tubes are selected anyway (or should be), so how could you tell if the tubes (presumably) sound better because of the cryo treatment or because they are the better tubes to begin with? Plus, Cryo treatment of current production tubes isnt going to improve them to the level of tubes being made in the heyday, when cathode materials, production methods etc were superior to those produced today. You can Cryo treat all the Sino tubes you want, and they are not going to be RCA Black plates.

[J M Fahey]

Well, as a general rule it´s GOOD to be skeptical about unknown, unproven data, which runs against standard, already proven, existing knowledge.

Call it a principle of economy if you wish.

Doing the opposite would be paralyzing, we couldn´t do even the simplest everyday tasks, which have been done that way for ages (and until now working), because they *might* be wrong after all.

Better carry on and if somebody comes with something new, which runs against the grain, fine, with a very open mind listen to him and let *him* prove it.

So far it goes against standard knowledge and NO proof has been offered, just an untested theory.

[daz]

Well, as a general rule it´s GOOD to be skeptical about unknown, unproven data, which runs against standard, already proven, existing knowledge.

I agree, but not to the point of just writing it off due to speculation alone based on what a person thinks is likely, which is what i see happen all too often. (read:always with rare exception) Just when you think theres almost no reason to believe something is possible, you find something that makes you go "hey, why didn't I think of that?"

[bob p]

There was a big fad with cryogenic treatment of precision match grade target rifle barrels back in the 1990s. Proponents of the treatment methods made all sorts of claims about improved accuracy. 20 years later the fad has come and gone, and the manufacturers of the premium grade match barrels for custom rifles are on the record saying that cryogenic treatment is unnecessary in any properly stress-relieved barrel and that cryogenic treatment is voodoo. The cryogenic fad in the target shooting community lasted as long as the marketing could make it last, until it was finally played out. Now it looks like the guys with the automated cooling tank treatment systems have moved to a different sector in the maketplace.

[Dave H]

BS or not? Your experience with them?

Pure unadulterated BS lubricated with snake oil to make it more easily digestible

[jazbo8]

That would be a big no-no according to this article (even if most of the text is on "tube coolers").

[Diablo]

BS or not? Your experience with them?

My business is metallurgy. There is no reason I could possibly imagine that cryogenic treatment could have ANY benefit on the performance of a vacuum tube. The metals used inside tubes don't go through any special transformation upon cooling and then heating back up in use. The metals certainly weren't chosen by the manufacturer to benefit from a cryo treatment. Some hardenable steel alloys could theoretically benefit from a cryo treatment, but nothing like that exists inside a vacuum tube.

[printer2]

My business is metallurgy. There is no reason I could possibly imagine that cryogenic treatment could have ANY benefit on the performance of a vacuum tube. The metals used inside tubes don't go through any special transformation upon cooling and then heating back up in use. The metals certainly weren't chosen by the manufacturer to benefit from a cryo treatment. Some hardenable steel alloys could theoretically benefit from a cryo treatment, but nothing like that exists inside a vacuum tube.

I'll second that. I used to work in an aerospace test lab, not an expert but I did pick up a few things over the years. We did some liquid nitrogen treatments but the metals involved would not be ones used in a tube. From one site I found selling some snake oil.

Metals respond very well to deep cryogenic process. The reasons are as follows. During the cooling or solidification phase of the manufacturing process, molecules are trapped in a haphazard pattern. This is down to stress caused in the bending and welding of the anode plate material.. This random placement causes obstacles for electrons and when encountered this interference can cause noise, slow down electron flow and sound deteriation affecting the quality of the sound of the vacuum tube. At very cold temperatures (below -312°F), the molecules will align in a more uniform, compact structure through the removal of kinetic energy. When the material is returned to ambient temperature, this new uniform, compact pattern is maintained,

Molecules trapped in a haphazard pattern? Due to the welding and bending of the plate? Obstacles for electrons and slow down electron flow? Oh come on. For those that have not looked at welded steel through a microscope, nice crystalline structure.