Bare Knuckle Pickups Forum
Forum Ringside => Guitars, Amps and Effects => Topic started by: Underground_Player on January 26, 2006, 06:57:51 PM
-
I noticed a company offering cryogenically treated pots a while ago, and now I see Watford Valves are charging extra for the same treatment to valves and claiming the tonal difference is ''astonishing''.
Is there any science behind this? Does it actually make a difference, and if so is it really for the better?
I just get the feeling we'll be looking back on this in 10 years as the equivalent of the brass nut craze of the eighties :roll:
-
Sounds like bollocks and a way to get more money but I'll probably be proven wrong as always :lol:
-
my first reaction when I saw this on a US website a year or so ago was the same - bollocks!
I'll probably try it some day but it's difficult to compare to a non-cryo valve as you need to factor in tolerances between different valves.
:twisted:
-
In high level electronics (i.e. stuff that is military grade) cryogenic treatment is used because it reduced capacitance (sp. ? + I think!) in the cabling, etc (I think it causes all the electrons face in one direction). So theoretically it might have some effect, but I'm not sure that the tonal difference would be outstandingly different.
-
my first reaction when I saw this on a US website a year or so ago was the same - bollocks!
I'll probably try it some day but it's difficult to compare to a non-cryo valve as you need to factor in tolerances between different valves.
:twisted:
That's it, I mean tolerance on one valve to the next can be huge.....I've tweaked up amps before with a box of 30 ECC83s, just picking the best for each slot - they were all the same brand and the difference was huge!
-
I just get the feeling we'll be looking back on this in 10 years as the equivalent of the brass nut craze of the eighties :roll:
I never understood the knock on the brass nut thing. I always thought they sounded great.
-
Wasn't there a crazy a while back for putting CDs in the freezer? It was supposed to make them sound better. With some CDs I'm sure a hammer would have even better results. :)
-
Wasn't there a crazy a while back for putting CDs in the freezer? It was supposed to make them sound better. With some CDs I'm sure a hammer would have even better results. :)
hahaha they should put that on all pop/pop-rock/rap style cd's "Note-for your listening pleasure, please smash cd with hammer before listening"
-
Wasn't there a crazy a while back for putting CDs in the freezer? It was supposed to make them sound better. With some CDs I'm sure a hammer would have even better results. :)
Some people think if you cover them in marker they work better too. :lol:
-
I heard that smothering them in Thousand Isle dressing works wonders.
-
I heard that smothering them in Thousand Isle dressing works wonders.
Wrapping bacon around the valves sounds great aswell. You even get a fully cooked bacon sarnie after a gig! Oh and that sweet sweet bacon smell :P
-
I heard that smothering them in Thousand Isle dressing works wonders.
Reminds me of that episode of "Tomorrow's World" when CDs first came out - they reckoned you could spread peanut butter on them and they'd still work fine after you'd wiped it off. Nutters!
-
Wasn't there a crazy a while back for putting CDs in the freezer? It was supposed to make them sound better.
Radio 1 fell for that and when they played them on air they regularly skipped. Anything that sends the laser off track isn't going to work.
-
Wasn't there a crazy a while back for putting CDs in the freezer? It was supposed to make them sound better.
Radio 1 fell for that and when they played them on air they regularly skipped. Anything that sends the laser off track isn't going to work.
LOL you're kidding right? iiiiiidiots
-
I never understood the knock on the brass nut thing. I always thought they sounded great
I've heard that there was a rumour that they increased sustain - only when loads of guitarists had bought one did people realise that they actually reduced it. That's all from Charles Shar-Murray no less (who unlike me was actually around pre-'86!)....so it must be true :)
Anyway thanks for the replies, all very interesting. I'm off to fry some bacon :wink: