The Great Cryo'd Outlet Test


Some have wondered about the Cryo'd outlet test that this skeptic has agreed to do, thanks to the generous loan of an outlet by another member. The situation is that the outlet, and its non-cryo'd twin have been breaking in for several weeks and I think we can agree they are ready for evaluation. Performing the tests will involve littering the room with various amps and speakers with the associated wires strung around, so, and I am sure you understand, I need to wait for a free day when my dear wife is elsewhere occupied.
A report will be made.
eldartford
Stheno,

Thanks. You have a cool set up going on yourself. I'm envious of your AC installation. I'll get around to upgradeing mine someday. Real life is lurking. Let's see, do I replace the 50+ year old steel windows and my lame 200K+ miles rust bucket, or.....?

Ed,

Science is quite often "crap". Setting up a good sounding system is an "art", and as an "artist" I question your technique.

Have fun with your "test".
I tried a cryo'd HBL8300 (Porter Port) and a normal 8300 in my system, first with the EMC-1 UP and then on my Aleph P. Couldn't hear a difference. I then simnplified to just using the EMC-1 alone, fed DIRECTLY to Senn HD600 cans through the RCA outs via adaptors (surprisingly nice match, yet a bit loud), and STILL couldn't hear a difference. Thought I'd at least catch some difference in the top octave somewhere, but nope.
All circuits are discrete 83803EST dedicated lines, 35' long, via my PCKs. Again, my mind's open to cryo's possible effects, but I remain believing that it's the possible reduction of dielectric effects of the INSULATORS consequent to cryo-ing their adjacent conductors that yiels a possible improvement. Yet for some insulators (especially Teflon), there are better ways to accomplish this "curing", but my intent isn't to bend the thread here.
El, I too would REALLY simplify the test systems, to the point of allowing at least 48 hours gravitational settling and isothermality before swapping the test objects. Using cans directly from a source might at least reduce other variables in the chain, too. Bigger problem is going to be the implementation of at least single-blind methodology, preferably in the dark, unless you can recruit your wife with a bribe of some sort...and how to categorize your results, and their interpretation. (PS Jewelry usually works with Ellen!) Have fun.
Maxgain...I wonder why you think that being a scientist prevents one from being an artist? I consider myself an artist who likes to eat. Also, remember that an artist must be first a technician. How many fine paintings have been lost because the canvas was improperly prepared or the paint was inferior quality.

Subaruguru...Glad you agree with my thought that a simple system would be the best test.

I agree that "double-blind" would be good... too good, I fear, for some "believers". However, as stated previously, I am doing this experiment for myself, not to convince others, and I will try hard not to fool myself (which can be a problem, but I know that).

One idea that might interest people is to ship the electrical box that I put together with the cryo'd and non-cryo'd outlets around the group of interested people, and have everyone vote as to which outlet (labeled "A" and "B") is the cryo'd one. I don't think there is any way to tell them apart by looking, and at the moment only I know which is which. After everyone votes I will let the cat out of the bag.

Comments?