Cryogenic Treatment

[thegarehanman]

Ok, most of the people that are carrying on this thread already know about superconductors. We don't need some copy/pasted material from wikipedia. We're talking pickups operating at room temerature and I hardly doubt anyone's going to be producing high-temperature superconductor magnet wire in the near future, at least not at prices that are feasible for pickups. Oh, nevermind, this is like arguing with a mindless search engine.

I'd love to hear more thoughts from our resident material scientist; he may be able to answer some of the questions some of us have posed that flickoflash can evidently not answer.

[flickoflash]

First off my pickups prototypes have nothing to do with Cryogenic Treatment nor anyway a PAF clone & are not for sale or market & are just that in the prototype stage. The post about pickups I included about Voodoo's is from their site I linked below that thread & i have no idea how they sound but have heard nothing but positive things. Cryogenic Treatment other then strings is new to me & i was passing on the info as i was finding it cause I do see a potential such as fret wire & maybe hardware .Cryogenic Treatment does work with plastic cause its not a rapid temperature change such as freeze drying. How I believe it works is at that low of temperature the structure slowly compresses upon itself & the structure align themselves in a more compressed pattern thus not micro gaps. How it may work with pickups i believe is it lowers the resistance , I do know in the super conductor research one is a fast monorail riding above the rail by magnetic energy so it must increase the magnetic field. With all these metal experts here i am using a titanium tail piece & a Abr-1 bridge made of aircraft grade aluminium with titanium saddles & using 2" stainless steel posts ( sure you will have a field day over what a idiot i am using these)

[mpeg2]

I'd love to hear more thoughts from our resident material scientist; he may be able to answer some of the questions some of us have posed that flickoflash can evidently not answer.

I just looked back at some of the earlier posts - one from flickoflash caught my eye:

"Seems you didn't read the tech sheets on how it is done . First the temperatures are dropped to -300 which realigns the molecular structure & then it Is Heat treated after to lock it in."

From basic principles - especially for Face Centered Cubic metals like Copper, the statement above is purely backwards. Generally speaking, changes in a crystal structure are very temperature dependant, happening faster at higher temperatures (especially for FCC metals). This means that changes will happen faster at room temperature than they will at -300. Since (if I recall correctly), the kinetics are quite slow on this kind of thing until you reach a significant fraction of the melting point (expressed in degrees Kelvin) - for Cu, grain growth (which is the primary thing that would affect conductivity for relatively pure Cu) is very slow (almost non-existent) at room temperature. At cryo temperatures, it would be exponentially less.

For most changes in metals - you heat the metal to make the change happen and then cool it to lock it in.

Once again - Steels are a different category because of the mobility of carbon in the iron matrix. Cryo could certainly harden steels, but hardness isn't much of a consideration for most parts of an electric guitar (except maybe the trem).

Rich

P.S. Its kind of fun talking about this stuff again. I left materials a while back & moved to digital television (I'm currently immersed in making DTV work)...

[flickoflash]

Hmmm, I see issues on both sides of the fence here.

Flick, I think your issue is the 'way' you posted it, the way you 'couched' the conversation to begin with, it was more like a proclamation, which instantly puts other people on the defensive, which it certainly did.

Say you had couched it more as a question, like...'I was reading about this, it seems interesting, what input do you guys have, do you think it may be a viable avenue of research or not?

That opens up a potentially fruitful, positive conversation much easier than your approach would, your approach had a lot of (I surmised) ego built into it, which, as I said, sets everyone else up to prove you wrong, which they are trying to do.

...But I'll agree with you, some folks are a little too quick to jump on the 'voodoo BS' wagon where there might be something interesting going on...but in this age, everyone is trying to outgun everyone else to make a buck, so if you are going to present someone with new info, especially that even remotely sounds like voodoo BS, then you should be prepared for folks to attack it, it would be ridiculous for you to presume that everyone would just jump on your bandwagon instantly, that is a bit silly to be so presumptous.

Any breakthrough is always precursed with naysayers until the point has past hard and cold muster, that's just a fact of scientific life. If you're going to do research and be inventive, you naturally have to expect people to doubt you until you have proved your point beyond a shadow of a doubt, it's just a natural part of the process.

Scientific fact can be proved true, but you are dealing with humans also, social creatures at heart, so you have to be able to deliver the facts with some social 'grease' as well.

This thread did open with "what if this process was applied to guitar hardware & pickups ?" & then some history on & what Cryogenic Treatment is .. Then the following post set the rest of the bashing mode that continues , I have no ego just passing the info & made no comment on the inherit sustain of anyones pickups Gee guys get real ... jump off the wagon

[thegarehanman]

This thread did open with "what if this process was applied to guitar hardware & pickups ?" & then some history on & what Cryogenic Treatment is .. Then the following post set the rest of the bashing mode that continues , I have no ego just passing the info & made no comment on the inherit sustain of anyones pickups Gee guys get real ... jump off the wagon

So now that you've gotten that out of the way, why not respond to mpeg2's comments? We're still wanting for your opinion on the matter.

[fryovanni]

First off my pickups prototypes have nothing to do with Cryogenic Treatment nor anyway a PAF clone & are not for sale or market & are just that in the prototype stage. The post about pickups I included about Voodoo's is from their site I linked below that thread & i have no idea how they sound but have heard nothing but positive things. Cryogenic Treatment other then strings is new to me & i was passing on the info as i was finding it cause I do see a potential such as fret wire & maybe hardware .Cryogenic Treatment does work with plastic cause its not a rapid temperature change such as freeze drying. How I believe it works is at that low of temperature the structure slowly compresses upon itself & the structure align themselves in a more compressed pattern thus not micro gaps. How it may work with pickups i believe is it lowers the resistance , I do know in the super conductor research one is a fast monorail riding above the rail by magnetic energy so it must increase the magnetic field. With all these metal experts here i am using a titanium tail piece & a Abr-1 bridge made of aircraft grade aluminium with titanium saddles & using 2" stainless steel posts ( sure you will have a field day over what a idiot i am using these)

It is good to see some of your thoughts . I am not about to hammer your choices on hardware. Those are personal choices, and it would be cool to hear your thoughts or theories on choosing that hardware, and what honest changes you have percieved vs the original hardware(assuming they were retro fit). Improved wear resistance is a good concept in fretwire, that would be an interesting avenue to explore(but it may be difficult to honestly tell how well it works till it has been in service for a good period of time). Bridge saddles are another area that could be interesting to look at. Not sure about tuners, but possibly something to it. All this would relate to potential improvements in surface wear, but I am not sure how much improvement would be seen. Keep the discussion on your thoughts and ideas going. Weighing in on this process or even other materials that could achive better performance is what these topics are all about. Nobody is going to have all the answers, but sometimes a sharing of ideas can bring out a new ideas to explore. I don't care so much about bits of info from the web, but like hearing what you think.

Peace,Rich

[thegarehanman]

Rich is right, but it's important to keep in mind that hardening steel is not the only avenue to better hardware. For example, stainless steel fretwire is already on the market and boasts a much longer life span than standard nickel alloy hardware. Also, while saddle wear is an issue, rolling saddles seem to be attacking the source of the problem (friction induced wear) rather than just avoiding the results of the wear by using a harder metal. Just some thoughts.

peace,

russ

Edited August 20, 2007 by thegarehanman

[flickoflash]

First off my pickups prototypes have nothing to do with Cryogenic Treatment nor anyway a PAF clone & are not for sale or market & are just that in the prototype stage. The post about pickups I included about Voodoo's is from their site I linked below that thread & i have no idea how they sound but have heard nothing but positive things. Cryogenic Treatment other then strings is new to me & i was passing on the info as i was finding it cause I do see a potential such as fret wire & maybe hardware .Cryogenic Treatment does work with plastic cause its not a rapid temperature change such as freeze drying. How I believe it works is at that low of temperature the structure slowly compresses upon itself & the structure align themselves in a more compressed pattern thus not micro gaps. How it may work with pickups i believe is it lowers the resistance , I do know in the super conductor research one is a fast monorail riding above the rail by magnetic energy so it must increase the magnetic field. With all these metal experts here i am using a titanium tail piece & a Abr-1 bridge made of aircraft grade aluminium with titanium saddles & using 2" stainless steel posts ( sure you will have a field day over what a idiot i am using these)

It is good to see some of your thoughts . I am not about to hammer your choices on hardware. Those are personal choices, and it would be cool to hear your thoughts or theories on choosing that hardware, and what honest changes you have percieved vs the original hardware(assuming they were retro fit). Improved wear resistance is a good concept in fretwire, that would be an interesting avenue to explore(but it may be difficult to honestly tell how well it works till it has been in service for a good period of time). Bridge saddles are another area that could be interesting to look at. Not sure about tuners, but possibly something to it. All this would relate to potential improvements in surface wear, but I am not sure how much improvement would be seen. Keep the discussion on your thoughts and ideas going. Weighing in on this process or even other materials that could achive better performance is what these topics are all about. Nobody is going to have all the answers, but sometimes a sharing of ideas can bring out a new ideas to explore. I don't care so much about bits of info from the web, but like hearing what you think.

Peace,Rich

My involvement with Titanium is thru Michael DeTemple & K-T-S Titanium . Pigtail made the bridge & Detemple modified it . KTS customshop made the tailpiece. The longer Stainless steel bridge post came as suggestion from the Gibson customshop builder ( & will add makes a dramatic improvement of tone transfer) I use 4 bridge wheel & TonePro locking stainless steel tailpiece bushings & posts

as you can see I am going for the vintage look but with a more aggressive sound & technology

[fryovanni]

My involvement with Titanium is thru Michael DeTemple & K-T-S Titanium . Pigtail made the bridge & Detemple modified it . KTS customshop made the tailpiece. The longer Stainless steel bridge post came as suggestion from the Gibson customshop builder ( & will add makes a dramatic improvement of tone transfer) I use 4 bridge wheel & TonePro locking stainless steel tailpiece bushings & posts

as you can see I am going for the vintage look but with a more aggressive sound & technology

Sounds like you have pulled out all the stops to limit the bridges unwanted movement. That should help to limit wasted string energy, and improve the coupling to to the body. It sounds like you are happy with the results. I don't know what you mean by "aggressive sound & technology", but as long as you know and that is what you were looking for. I am happy for you .

[thegarehanman]

...( & will add makes a dramatic improvement of tone transfer)...

How many units of tone will be transfered as a result? I believe the metric unit for tone is the voodoo, just for the record.

What would swing a lot of us would be to hear the guitar first with a bridge that has standard studs than hear it with the extended studs. Keep in mind to use the exact same setup and songs in both instances, for the most reliable results.

Oh rich, I'm just having too much fun with this. Could you tell?

But seriously, flick, mind giving us some real-world and objective audio clips to get an idea of the differences?

peace,

russ

Edited August 21, 2007 by thegarehanman

[flickoflash]

...( & will add makes a dramatic improvement of tone transfer)...

How many units of tone will be transfered as a result? I believe the metric unit for tone is the voodoo, just for the record.

What would swing a lot of us would be to hear the guitar first with a bridge that has standard studs than hear it with the extended studs. Keep in mind to use the exact same setup and songs in both instances, for the most reliable results.

Oh rich, I'm just having too much fun with this. Could you tell?

But seriously, flick, mind giving us some real-world and objective audio clips to get an idea of the differences?

peace,

russ

seems your only objective is to ride my ass or be a doubting Thomas you are a engineer student you claim look at a standard post , It's length is not more than one inch with less than half that in the maple top. If you plant a pole in the ground the more it anchored the less likely it can be tilted or lean the rest think anyone can figure out,, also the stainless steel plays its part. The only real world proof i need is for myself just passing the tip don't need to prove anything to anyone really

[thegarehanman]

I don't claim that everything you're doing is in vain, I only wish for you to admit that perhaps, just perhaps these "improvements" will not make the difference in the voice of the guitar that you expect it to do. Or, for that matter, to merely show us evidence otherwise, so that we may say "well that's compelling evidence, perhaps we were wrong after all!"

In response to your analogy: If you plant a standard flagpole in the ground with 20' above the ground and 20' below, and the ground is firm, say clay for argument's sake, the pole will bend at the point that it meets the ground when you try to push it with any appreciable force. Now, replace that pole with one that has 20' above the ground and 30' below. What happens may I ask? Well, it bends at the point that it meets with the ground, just like the previous post.

However, who is to say that we don't want the studs to have some play. Perhaps it's that play(and when I say "play" I mean movement so little that it wouldn't be noticed when trying to wiggle the posts by hand) that might give us a desirable overtone in the instruments voice? Also, there's little accomplished by making the bridge posts longer since force is applied to the bridge almost perpendicular to the top, not parallel to it (the lateral force applied to the top will of course be a function of the break angle at the bridge, and while existent, is still minimal). Instead, you should be making the lip on the bridge studs (the part that sits on the surface of the top) larger and the studs for the tailpiece deeper. Will this improve anything on the instrument? perhaps...likely not, unfortunately. Although again, that would depend largely on what bridges you're comparing it against, as I've seen many stud variations from manufacturer to manufacturer. I think what this truly comes down to is you're a little rattled that people are telling you that you've spent all of this money and perhaps, just perhaps it won't give you all of the improvements that you anticipate. Am I a doubting thomas? Maybe, but I certainly wouldn't be if you'd engage in an intellectual conversation with the rest of us, rather than going on about how all I care to do is discredit your you tube blather.

peace,

russ

Edited August 21, 2007 by thegarehanman

[fryovanni]

...( & will add makes a dramatic improvement of tone transfer)...

How many units of tone will be transfered as a result? I believe the metric unit for tone is the voodoo, just for the record.

What would swing a lot of us would be to hear the guitar first with a bridge that has standard studs than hear it with the extended studs. Keep in mind to use the exact same setup and songs in both instances, for the most reliable results.

Oh rich, I'm just having too much fun with this. Could you tell?

But seriously, flick, mind giving us some real-world and objective audio clips to get an idea of the differences?

peace,

russ

Yes Russ, I got that . I too get a little confused when something; Kills, Doubles,transfers,sucks,expands,pukes, oozes, makes sick, hurts, makes agressive, happy, sad, cheapens, heats up or cools down "Tone". It would be handy if they would let me know if there is a particular tone they are thinking of, or just attenuation of the full bandwidth of human hearing . As long as they understand I am ok with just having no idea what they are saying.

Peace,Rich

Flick,

seems your only objective is to ride my ass or be a doubting Thomas you are a engineer student you claim look at a standard post , It's length is not more than one inch with less than half that in the maple top. If you plant a pole in the ground the more it anchored the less likely it can be tilted or lean the rest think anyone can figure out,, also the stainless steel plays its part. The only real world proof i need is for myself just passing the tip don't need to prove anything to anyone really

Russ is a pretty sharp guy. Even though he is an Engineering student . I think it is a pretty logical assumption you are drawing about improving your anchors, of course it is hard to say how much improvement is really required(so who knows). Maybe it would be better to use a flat bridge so you don't have to worry about placing a bridge or tailpiece on posts, or seperate parts? Who knows they both are used, and people are happy with the performance. Your right though. As long as you are happy with the results you don't have to say anything more.

[marksound]

Maybe this is all over my head, but I don't see the point of this thread. Is it about changing the molecular structure of hardware, and for what purpose? Doesn't using harder metal for hardware generally brighten (some would say "harshen") tone? Is the point of this thread to end up generating orders for a new pickup? Is it about prematurely aging parts? (Curtis Novak says, "Buddy Holly's guitar sounded great brand new, Blackie, and Brownie sounded awesome when they were only 10 years old. If it is true that an "aged magnet" has any real effect on tone, then these same models from the 80's should be sounding pretty good by now.")

I'm so confused. I'm going to bed.

[GregP]

It's about "realigning" the molecules of the various metals used in guitar components. In the case of bridges, tuners, etc, I suppose the benefit, if you were able to do it NASA's way (ie. hard to say if homebrewed "cryogenics" would work) would be harder metal... but, you'd have to be using steel it seems, because other metals don't respond to such temperature changes the same way.

I don't know too many significant guitar parts made from steel. Steel saddles, I guess. Steel baseplates. So, there's room for the theory at least. I wonder, would the chroming or nickel-plating of other components be effed up by all this cryogenic processing?

The other portion of the conversation is about how cryogenic processing, used on a pickup, is purported (by Jans Labs or whatever they're called) to produce "improved tone and more sustain". The more sustain thing is simply unfounded garbage (if the magnetic properties are enhanced, the sustain will be less.... not more.... though the perceived sustain if played through an amp might be different due to the effect of increased output) and the "improved tone" part is the main part of this discussion.

In pursuing the discussion, it has been forwarded that for guitar parts, and particularly magnets in pickups, cryogenic processing will not produce benefits. But people are MORE getting up-in-arms because the original poster seems to keep quoting meaningless information found on the internet (my personal beef being with those Youtube videos that have nothing to do with this conversation except the word "cryogenics" appears in the title) rather than documenting or otherwise "proving" that there is a difference with a series of tests. When logical consistencies are found in the "found science", especially as they pertain to guitar-making, the original poster doesn't seem to have the answers. In recent posts, he's starting to admit that interpreting his "found" information is out of the scope of his abilities. That's a positive step because perhaps instead of making assertions, interesting questions will be raised.

<shrug>

That's my perspective anyhow. I'm starting to lose the story, too.

[marksound]

If all of this is about chasing tone, it's pointless. People have been doing this for at least half the last century and it all comes back to basically the same 3 things: LP vs Strat vs Tele. Every "holy grail" tone has been done on one of those three, and usually one from the mid 50s to mid 60s. Of course, this is all just my opinion so take from it what you will, but I think anything else is pretty much just a bunch of marketing (spelled H-O-O-E-Y).

Now I'm done.

[MiKro]

If all of this is about chasing tone, it's pointless. People have been doing this for at least half the last century and it all comes back to basically the same 3 things: LP vs Strat vs Tele. Every "holy grail" tone has been done on one of those three, and usually one from the mid 50s to mid 60s. Of course, this is all just my opinion so take from it what you will, but I think anything else is pretty much just a bunch of marketing (spelled H-O-O-E-Y).

Now I'm done.

I think TED focused and used Marksound as his spokes person!!!! LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sorry MS, I just couldn't resist. This whole thing sounds like BS to me as well. I mean really freeze the wart or mole off otherwise who gives a Rats Sh!t?

MK

[fryovanni]

Maybe this is all over my head, but I don't see the point of this thread. Is it about changing the molecular structure of hardware, and for what purpose? Doesn't using harder metal for hardware generally brighten (some would say "harshen") tone? Is the point of this thread to end up generating orders for a new pickup? Is it about prematurely aging parts? (Curtis Novak says, "Buddy Holly's guitar sounded great brand new, Blackie, and Brownie sounded awesome when they were only 10 years old. If it is true that an "aged magnet" has any real effect on tone, then these same models from the 80's should be sounding pretty good by now.")

I'm so confused. I'm going to bed.

Mark, I think it would be reasonable that an aged magnet could affect the pickups output. As permenant magnets age they do lose strength, which should alter things. Potting materials can also be a factor during the aging process. However I am far from a pickup expert. Maybe some of the guys that are building PU's and or have studied them closer could shed more light on this subject. Oh, and I kinda dig 335's, and I don't think of them as H-O-O-E-Y .

Bridge mounting, and the forces that act upon a bridge is an interesting subject. The strings that are creating the forces are even more interesting to me. I believe a close look at break angles and how much force is applied to assist in coupling the string to the saddle could be interesting(if your goal is to find your optimal coupling between the body and string energy). Of course a string pulls and stretches in a longtitudinal mode so there is also that energy that will need to be looked at. Of course when looking at things like break angle you have to account for the effects of any distortion of a string as this can significantly effect the way the string itself will vibrate(a direct effect, as opposed to reflective effect of the body or neck on a strings vibration). I think any conversation about altering the output has to center around and come back to what is this going to do to the string(kinda obvious, but I often get the sense the conversations focus on making the body vibrate more than how the strings vibration will be altered), and then talk about how the pickup will register that string vibration. Often times it also seems that there is an assumption(at least I get this sense) that the more energy you transfer to the body the better the guitar will sound. Why? What frequencies will tend to bleed most? What will this return to the string? What will the phase relationship of the returning energy be to the vibration of the string(is it possible that it will actually have a cancelling effect)? What is the resonant frequency of the body, neck etc... Will this frequency be desirable if it is more pronounced? All these questions are not likely going to be easy to answer(most likely impossible, when you consider wood is so variable, as well as shape and volume of wood we are talking about). Which really brings me back to my initial thought, why do we assume vibrating the body is better? Oh I shure hope nobody says something like the tone is in the wood( stop building electrics and build acoustics if you want to hear the wood vibrating,LOL). All kidding aside though. These questions seem valid, but when the discussion turns to this subject it seems the conversation becomes a bunch of meaningless language(tone this tone that). I ask myself questions like. Would adding 5 degrees of break angle and distortion to a string effect the output more than using a maple body vs a Mahogany body(you pick the shape and volume). I honestly couldn't tell you .

Peace,Rich

[SwedishLuthier]

I think it would be reasonable that an aged magnet could affect the pickups output. As permenant magnets age they do lose strength, which should alter things. Potting materials can also be a factor during the aging process. However I am far from a pickup expert. Maybe some of the guys that are building PU's and or have studied them closer could shed more light on this subject.

About aging pickups

Magnets:

This is a controversial issue, but this is the consensus from a couple of pro pickup winders in another forum. The magnets do lose strength over time. But not as much as most people think. The difference is way bigger when going from ALNICO5 to ALNICO2 compared to when going from new ALNICO5 to old ALNICO5. IMO the reason people think that the magnets are so much affected by age is the fact that in the beginning nor Fender of Gibson specified the grade of ALNICO. So they used everything from ALNICO2 up to ALNICO5. Then some schmuck comes along 30 years later (ok, 50 by now) and measure that A2 magnets pickup and find: “Wohaa, this pickup have much weaker magnetic flux compared to the modern A5 pickups”. And as that old pickup sounded so well (in his opinion) he tried to find ways of “aging” his A5 magnets (=lower the flux) to something similar to what was actually a A2 magnet. The change in ALNICO is documented by manufacturer’s data sheet. The change in magnets over time is really minor.

Potting material:

The potting material in a pickup will definitely age. An old piece of beeswax is much more brittle than a new one. I can also imagine that, if organic material like something you might find in beeswax is added, some micro organisms can eat through the potting material. A potted pickup is said to have a slightly duller/darker/warmer sound compared to an un-potted one. I have not A/B tested potted vs un-potted pickup so I cannot give you a hint of what would happen with a potted pickup if the potting wax was destroyed over time. Having that said: vintage pickups were not potted!

Bobbin material:

The bobbin material can warp and distort from age, but also from high wire tension. How does that affect the tone? I dunno, as it is impossible to do A/B-tests. Try making a brand new bobbin, but twisted/warped, and wind pickup wire on that warped bobbin. Forget it. You might try warping it after you have wound it but I am pretty sure that the effect is pretty minor on the sound. Visually the change is much more prominent, but that’s something completely different.

Wire:

It is possible that the insulation of the wire might change over time. I have no idea of how that would affect the sound, but I’m pretty convinced the change is minor.

Conclusion:

The one factor that we know changes over time in a pickup is magnetic flux. And that change has been proven to be minor by pro winder and data sheets from magnets manufacturer. The other main factors (coil shape, turn count, magnetic field shape and so on) doesn’t change over time.

[fryovanni]

Thanks Peter, I should really get into winding PU's it seems like it would be interesting and fun. I have been focusing what time I can find on acoustics for the past few years. Maybe a little more attension to electrics would be refreshing.

Peace,Rich

[jmrentis]

Have you done any or many archtops type electrics Rich? Maybe you could integrate both aspects of your interest this way. I don't think archtops will allow you to really control the sound like you have in acoustics, but I'm sure it would allow for some control and you can wind some pickups for it and so on. Anyhow, just a thought.

Pickup winding is definitely a cool subject and something I would like to get into eventually. Very interesting thread here with lots of information. The only thing I was going to add, but was eventually said numerous times was how would you know the treatments effects would make it sound *better* and not worse to most people. J

[Mike Sulzer]

OK let's look at this from way back on the first page:

"What does happen when traditional single coils become overwound is response is slowed (because of increased resistance), bass response becomes muddy (because of increased inductance) and lastly highs become thin and bright (because of a decrease in capacitance). All of which are bad in terms of musical tone. It doesn't matter if you are playing 50's country or hard rock, a muddy bass and thin high end does not work."

Since this is pretty critical of what you say, here are my qualifications: I made by first pickup in the 1960s as a teenager. Same with amplifier circuits. I have a Phd in EE from 1979, and have worked as a scientist with high powered radars studying the ionosphere for 30 years.

Overwinding a pickup lowers the resonant frequency and lowers the Q of the resonance, that is, makes the resonance broader. The main sonic effect for me is a loss of high frequencies; you say different, but never mind that is just opinion in any case.

The real problem is that everything you say about the electronics is wrong. Inductance does not muddy the lows. An inductor has an impedance that increases with frequency so it matters more at the higher frequencies. The increase in inductance lowers the resonant frequency and causes a loss in highs. Also, when you wind more wire on a pickup it increases the capacitance, not decreases it. This lowers the resonant frequency somewhat, causing some loss of highs, but it is not a huge effect because most of the capacitance is in the cable to the amp. The main effect of increasing the resistance is to flatten the resonant peak somewhat (although it also causes a small loss in signal level across the band).

So if you do not bother to get the basic engineering right, why would you expect anyone to believe anything else you say?

[Mattia]

J: Archtops, in the true sense of the word, are acoustic guitars, just like flattop steelstrings and classicals. And to me, at least, more daunting to build 'properly'.

[ToneMonkey]

Mike - Your job sounds a bit funky.

What do you think about the cryogenic side of things? Can you shed any light on that?

[Mike Sulzer]

Mike - Your job sounds a bit funky.

What do you think about the cryogenic side of things? Can you shed any light on that?

I am skeptical of any process that claims to be a "miracle cure" for whatever is hurting. As for pickups, if you cool and heat them, I would be more concerned about what has changed in the magnetic material rather than the copper wire.