Why "Cryo" anything?

Bob P. - what does one thing have to do with the other? That's like saying people who think tube amps sound better than solid state amps believe that turntables sound better than CD players. A straw dog argument if ever there was one. You'll have to come up with something better than that!

This thread is hilarious. The naysayers don't trust their ears! And, it seems that they won't even try to listen. Success of every audio product I know of is dependent upon anecdotal evidence. No matter what the gizzmos that measure things say, if it doesn't sound good people won't buy it. In this case, especially considering that free offers were made, all one would need do is listen and then decide for themselves. The kind of fear to not try something is evidence of a problem other than audio. Whoever made mention of selecting a television based on picture quality hit the nail right on the head. Eyes are wonderful measuring devices and so are our ears. End the end the question becomes are we listening or bench testing.

.
I just had a sophisticated audiophile friend visiting from Colorado who I had listen to 2 CDR’s (both copies of the same music mix), one cryoed and the other not.
.
I did not tell him which CD was treated, which not and nor that either of the CD’s were cryoed. He easily picked the cryoed CD as his clear favorite of the 2 CD's. This makes close to 25 people who have easily been able to hear the improvement derived from Cryo treating CD’s.
.
This makes it still 100 % of the time that audiophiles can hear the difference between a cryoed and non-cryoed CD and all clearly preferred the Cryoed CD.
.
Who gives a flying rat's ass whether there is a scientific logic to why this works. If it works it works. If people can always hear it, then they can hear it. It just works and it is obvious to anyone who has sat down and made the listening comparison.
.
If you have not tried listening to cryoed vs non-cryoed materials, then you really have no place being a naysayer unless you just choose to be illogical.
.

Cello, the best test of hypothesis' is when the candidates do not know that they are under test and in the case of audiophiles, it is best to NOT use "sophisticated" listeners. Note that I said that the candidates are under test, not the device, for you are really testing if the candidates can hear a difference, since you are so sure that there is a difference . If the candidates had shown no difference in hearing the cds it is the candidates that failed the test, since your affirmation is that there is a difference.
See the problem here with using "sophisticated" listeners to validate your assertion?

Geoffkait, if you are one who thinks that the direction of a fuse in the AC mains line makes a difference to the sound in an amp, then of course you will think that cyroing electronics and cds will make a difference and probably you will hear a difference also.

Bob P.

Lugnut, I bench test using my ears or is it I listen by bench testing, but ultimately I bench test using my eyes - I have to look at the results. Also, remember the expression "the hand is quicker than the eye". It is easy to fool the eyes, after all it is done all the time in cinema by fooling the eye into seeing a continuous picture by showing 32 pictures every second. I doubt that showing 64 pictures a second would make the image "better". However, maybe cyroing the film might make a difference!
Bob P.