Freezing CDs?

I remember it well Brother the birth of the idea being around that number in years, lets raise a glass in tribute to the reign of unorthodox thought . But what am i waffling about, shouldn't we have listened to the doom sayers and slaves of the ministry years ago, i'm sure they were talking of an end to life as we know it , that in the least, we would be taken to the workcamp by our repressive Orwellian party devotees if even we thought of, dare i say it... Freezing our CD's,
"Viva la Revolucion "

 

Work camp or salt digging in siberia at the very least....one of the two






AS you say....to unorthodox thought



:beer:

praise be.....


I thoiught James had been sainted for a moment.

I was quite worried.

 

Hi, Folks,

I've been thinking about this. As I stated in an earlier post, I tried this back in the '90s, heard no difference, could not think of a rational reason why I should hear a difference, so promptly filed the notion under "stuff & nonsense" & didn't think about it at all until this thread reared it's head.

Then I started to read some pretty well informed responses regarding the differing physical properties of the constituent materials of CDs. What struck me was that given the differing co-efficients of linear expansion of the various constituents, subjecting CDs to extremes of temperature could conceivably have at least 2 effects:

a) Cause dishing as the acrylic & aluminium layers contract/expand more than the polycarbonate layers.

b) Cause the raised sections of the aluminium which effectively form the bits to deform as the aluminium expands/contracts more than the polycarbonate matrix in which it is embedded.

Both of these changes, if permanent, should make the CD marginally more difficult to read than an untreated CD.

But, if the above does happen, the adverse effects must be negligeable, as I certainly cannot hear any difference.

So, the only mechanism of change I can rationally come up with would have a detrimental effect. The fact that it doesn't means that the error correcting algorithms, primitive as they are, must be coping with any changes.

So, having thought about this whole thing, I'm afraid it's going back in the “stuff & nonsense†folder.

Regards,

Chris

 

Haven't tried this myself and probably won't, but i do remember having a BMX bike with plastic "Skyway" wheels when i was a kid. I managed to buckle one of them pretty bad and a friend told me i should put it in a chest freezer to straighten it out, which it did.
Not sure what plastic they were made from though..don't think it was acrylic.

 

I'd be interested to see if a difference is so apparent on Gold layer'd CD's after freezing, in the early days of CD some manufactures questioned the longevity and error rate (still do) of aluminium , obviously the deterioration issue for the lower cost pressings was of no concern to the large profit based labels.

around this time a article appeared in 'New Scientist' and Which Compact Disc, it said...

"the problem arises over long term stability of the aluminium reflective layer that carries the digital information. Reflectivity can be altered by oxidation or other chemical change, resulting in increased error rate or failure to track correctly, this has been attributed to printing inks attacking the aluminium's protective lacquer layer, or to the failure to exclude oxygen or moisture during manufacture".

There is *Change*... . but it isn't possible that in freezing there is *Change* ?

 

In the same way that it's possible there's a Morris Minor orbiting Saturn.

 

If we accept that some people can hear a difference, when playing back a cd that has been placed into a domestic freezer, then, rather than just deciding they are deluded could we not look for another explanation for the perceived improvement ?
I was wondering if freezing the disc could dissipate any electrostatic charge the disc may carry. Is it possible that an electrostatic charge could influence the sound quality of a cd ? Perhaps some players are more sensitive to the phenomenon than others, this is certainly the accepted case with vibration and RFI.

I look forward to some input from a passing fount of knowledge or more likely a load of insults from some of the more belligerent and antagonistic posters.

 

They can hear a difference for the same reason they hear a difference after using Reveal, or a Nespa, or any of those other pieces of bullshit.

They hear it because they want/expect to hear it.

If that wasn't the case then they could hear it blind. 'Oh but double blind tests don't work' etc etc. Bullshit.

Well i took a Db test and proved I can hear inverted absolute phase on samples from Diana Krall, so let's have it boys put your money where your mouth is.

 

"They hear it because they want/expect to hear it."



..around around...around we go.....



Sometimes, possibly but not always.

 

Now you're just being silly. Everyone knows it's a 'Countryman'.

 

How does putting something in a freezer dissipate any electrostatic charge?

Look up "deluded" in a dictionary. The explanation you seek is expectation bias.

 

So I am under the impression that a re-mastered CD sounds different to an old copy.

Under scrutiny measurement shows that the data is not identical, the re-master has higher levels etc.


Who has two identical copies of a CD, both with the same press codes or whatever they are called? And what measured differences have been documented and noted which confirm the differences heard between the frozen and non adjusted copy?

Or are people just listening to a CD, then freezing it, and a couple of days later listening again and re-evaluating the CD?

Anyone tried slowly heating a CD to just before melting point, then gently allowing it to return to room temerature?

What about submitting it to very bright light, then leaving it in the dark for 30 hours?

 

Now this aint in anyway saying that freezing yer discs is a good idea.
Freezing in a normal atmosphere (ie not a dry atmosphere) helps to codense moisture on the surfce of an object. Moisture helps to disipate static charge.

 

"And what measured differences have been documented and noted which confirm the differences heard between the frozen and non adjusted copy"

Speaking from a personal pov only , I am not in the position of buying expensive laboratory/acoustic measuring equipment.

I shouln' t imagine anyone esle is, either, especially not currently.


"S"....the ideas youi suggest....

1) heating up I suspect would be potentially damaging to the cd so would personally not...

2) leaving in the sun......I supect most cds are left in the cd......and are designed to be ocassionally

3) leaving in the dark.......they are mostly anyway aren't they?




I'm not especially a supporter of the freezing cd idea but again I put the points for consideration....

1) if some one has tried and (feel they have) got results of it I am happy to listen....

because (crucially, I think, to this arguement...)

2) (AFAIK) the cd was never designed to be frozen!

I am astonished that people are so sure of what happens physically to the disc under such abnormal conditions (although there is clearly not consistant agreement) .....when how can anyone actually KNOW .......for sure!


I don't know, I doubt if the Queen knows....and for that matter I doubt if the guy who invented the cd knows....

Why should he?

 

this is just getting fecking barmy now...

 

Either the data changes or it doesn't. If the data changes - no thanks, if it doesn't - why bother?

 

Hallelujah...and



What else is there to say, really?

 

Well.....ok

Maybe there ARE changes...........and not necessarily disadvantageous ones!?

WHy must the change be a negative one?

 

It's overwhelmingly likely that no changes occur. If there was an opportunity to randomly alter the original data on my CDs, I wouldn't take it.

 

You may well be right.

I can't begin to guess at the changes that might or might not be occuring.

I agree with you, random would seem to be the most likely result.

We don't know though.