maxima95, well, it's good that you ask rather than ignore the advice. My understanding is that the double IC can potentially cause instability in the operation of a class D amp, causing it to oscillate and potentially cause damage to it. That is why at this time it is not recommended for class D.
Sorry that it is not recommended that you join the party at this time. :(
If someone is hellbent on trying it, I adjure they must speak with their manufacturer first. This is a do at your own risk activity, and from the designers and theorists who are advising me the risk falls squarely more so with class D and with less robust specialty amps. I do not have all the answers to this and only with time and experimentation will much more be known about the parameters of the Schroeder Method.
The caution in regard to class D amps in no way makes the Schroeder Method ineffectual; it's impressive with class A/B amps I have used to date, and with the Benchmark Audio Class AAA amps. The Benchmark DAC3 DX and AHB2 amps in Mono are superlative with Schroeder Method, among the most exquisite sounds I have had in my room to date.
|
stringreen, excellent! Thank you!
|
Ah, very good! I'm glad that the Schroeder Method has passed muster!
Based on the use of the Audio Sensibility Y cables I'm sure the double ICs are gorgeous sounding.
The body of evidence continues to grow...
|
Thanks, stringreen, very kind of you. I will keep that in mind. :)
|
I've got cables incoming too. Not discussing details yet.
Some oldies are incredible with the Landscape rig and Schroeder Method. Phil Collins "In the Air Tonight" and "Another Day In Paradise" with stunning front to back soundstage depth. Etc.
|
stringreen, so now you have three occurrences of the Schroeder Method in your system?
|
alexatpos, thanks for providing the info on the specs. Those look like very fine components with class A tube power; I'm guessing very sweet sound.
One thought that strikes me is what appears to be three outputs, 4,8, 16 Ohm. Are you by chance using the 16 Ohm output with the Schroeder Method cables? I'm wondering if that would introduce the effect you are hearing. Is your system appropriate to try the 4 and 8 Ohm outputs, i.e. speakers appropriate? It would be interesting to see if the output influences the result of the Schroeder Method. Please confer if needed prior to attempting. But, it sounds like you know what you are doing.
Stringreen, by saying phono sounds WAY better than CD, are you suggesting that the CD got worse, or only that the phono is enhanced more greatly? It is hard to understand your comment the way it is worded. I'm asking because alexatpos is using a CD player and is not getting a good result currently. It may be correctable.
|
alexatpos, thank you for relating your experience in regard to Schroeder Method and your system. Every contribution to understanding it is helpful. I wonder if the output of the CD player is a factor in the outcome you experienced. There is a possibility that the capacitance of the doubled interconnects was too high.
One thing that is very helpful in the overall assessment of the doubling of ICs is that it seemed obvious to you that the sound had changed. That in itself is important, because it reinforces the experience of others, that the sound changed noticeably.
It would be helpful to me and the community if you would share the precise make and model of your CD player, Preamp and Amp so that the specifications could be found, and perhaps better understanding of what might be the issue can be discovered.
I wonder if you are using a very low power amp and if that might be a factor in the result. I had discussed use of double ICs with Kevin Hayes of VAC and he said it would present no problem with his amplifiers. But, I hasten to add that the topology of amps, even tube amps, can vary dramatically, so this response certainly cannot be extended to all amplifiers.
Again, if we can see the equipment used that would be very helpful to everyone. |
alexatpos, unless there is a reason to take caution with operating a particular speaker on the other outputs, I make it a point just to see what the resultant sound is like to try speakers on all amp outputs, i.e. 4,8,16 ohm. The results can be surprising, and often I prefer one setting that is not aligned with the minimum impedance of the speaker. You will definitely have a different result with each of the outputs. One might be superior. In many instances speakers that were rated 8 Ohm sound much better to me as the 4 Ohm outputs are used. One simply has to try in order to determine which is holistically superior. My point was that it may help to isolate an influence why the double IC is not to your liking.
Stringreen, if both of the Schroeder Method ICs are similar type, ie. XLR, you could swap the short one with the longer to see if there is an immediate degradation due to the length. Set up the rig and get used to the sound again at baseline. Then swap the two double ICs for comparison. Could be interesting.
|
maplegrovemusic, yes, I would like to review the Vortex. |
What strikes me the most about is not that these changes cover a wide range of attributes or characteristics of sound quality; I find that cables globally influence the system's sound. What amazes me is the degree to which these changes happen with the Schroeder Method. The effect is far beyond what I might have predicted. I thought there might be a deleterious effect, but instead there is a very strong improvement across the board. |
I have been looking to update this thread with recent activity. Steve from Audio Sensibility has been sending me Y cables, both RCA and XLR, for assessment and write up. That is underway. He has also been working on a Schroeder Method double IC with his own particular twist.
Meanwhile, I have used the double IC on a very heavy hitter speaker system with outstanding, nay, spectacular success. I will say this; it was paired with the previously mentioned Benchmark AHB2 amplifier, and the result is glorious. Other amps tested to follow.
The outcome of all this is so far beyond expectations. I'm still looking for input from another manufacturer to see how far I can take this. This is no minor improvement, this is an ultra-efficacious method.
(For those just joining, please see the discussion on appropriate systems for use with Schroeder Method. Do not presume any and all rigs are appropriate. At this point there is in place a caution regarding class D amps. That may change in the future, but not at this point. This is a do at your own risk activity.)
|
My responses from manufacturers, designers, etc. in regards to the suitability of trying, and the efficaciousness of Schroeder Method has covered the full spectrum. Some laugh it off, while others discuss potential issues that they feel the Schroeder Method should be avoided. Yet others find it fascinating and say they will try. Some feel it's benign in terms of what equipment it could be used with, and the most recent tech with a background in electrical systems said it will always improve a system. He feels I stumbled on to one of the few absolute ways to improve signal transfer. That's not an official go ahead to try with class D amp! |
Let's bring this back to the foreground. I'm not surprised that it is sitting quietly now; there are enough cautions that many will not try it. I suspect that only the most adventurous have done the Schroeder Method. I also suspect there are others who have tried and not reported back yet. Meanwhile, the results have gone from wonderful to astounding. I just put together a Schroeder Method XLR with Clarity Cables Organic ICs and I'm astonished at the result. I'm building better and better systems with it and there seems to be no limit in sight for improvement of the sound.
|
Very nice feedback, especially from our "skeptic's skeptic"! Kudos for trying! Yours is the kind of response that should get people thinking. I presume your friends found it worthwhile. "Vast improvement" is an accurate description, not exaggeration.
Elizabeth, I have changed resistors and caps on the PureAudioProject Trio15 Horn 1 Speaker with nice results, as well as the "internal wiring". So, I'm not surprised that there is a difference in doubling resistors.
maplegrovemusic, if you have not read my article on Schroeder Method at Dagogo.com, and associated discussion, you should. At this time there are certain precautions in place to prevent potential problems with unknowns, i.e. not at this time recommended for class D amps. Do not go blindly into a "do at your own risk" activity. To do XLR Schroeder Method you need standard Y cables to double the cables, then a pair of what I call "reducing Y cables" that are double female to single male. Most that are found commonly are garbage, and sound accordingly. Audio Sensibility (under review) has the normal Y cables for XLR, but has added the reducing Y cables for XLR due to Schroeder Method.
|
I have used the Exogal Comet alone with Schroeder Method several times, and in fact now it is in a system that has blown out of the water the previous conclusion of what that DAC can do. Some radical results happening lately.
I have not tried doubling the umbilical between the Comet and Ion. Most definitely I would have to talk to Exogal first to see what they thought of it. I like the idea of extreme improvements, but I also like the idea of not blowing up stuff.
|
david_ten, yes, that would be fascinating, as the combo is superb even without the Schroeder Method. With it, I presume the results could be very disturbing for some extreme equipment manufacturers.
I will contact Exogal about this.
|
As per conversation between Jeff Haagnestad of Exogal and myself he is strongly against doubling the umbilical between the Exogal products. He went into several technical reasons why it would not be good, and so I will not recommend it. I do not typically dismiss manufacturers' recommendations on such things. I have been using the Comet alone with the Schroeder method ICs into various amps with terrific success. I am currently running sonicTransporter i7 and Signature Rendu SE into Comet and direct to various amps. Superb! (These have been reviewed for Dagogo.com) |
I will add that I do not find your result surprising, as you have made an extreme double IC. Schroeder Method seems to be efficacious with all ICs, regardless of quality, but the pedigree of the IC makes a pronounced difference in the rend result. Think of it as leveraging the quality/character of a single IC. I do not find the fundamental characteristics of ICs to skew toward an entirely different set of characteristics when doubled, but rather to be vastly intensified.
|
dgarretson, thank you for putting the faith in me to try it. I'm glad that you are finding it worthwhile. |
maplegrovemusic, Schroeder Method allows for a limitless number of separate interconnects conjoined. I have not tried a triple. Theoretically� one might cobble together piggy-backed splitters or Y cables; I'm not suggesting you do this. A reminder that this is a do at your own risk activity.
|
celander, no, you are not missing anything. You said, "But I’m less certain that a SM assembly having a mixed set of IC’s would be terribly revealing as to which IC was responsible for the effect in SQ. " It won't. He's just having fun. Mixing cables is fun because the results are fairly unpredictable, but it does not allow for an efficient way to propel the system toward a given set of sound attributes.
Tonight I am putting in a different set of double ICs, even though the system sounds wonderful. One simply does not know the limits of change with gear on hand until all permutations are tried. I just did a comparison once again between using the software volume control on ROON versus the digital volume control of the Exogal Comet. No comparison; the Comet's vol. control quality destroys that of Roon. Anyone using Roon with the software's vol. control is giving up a LOT of sound quality. The only time I would use it was in a config. with a dedicated DAC direct to amp. And, frankly, putting in a dedicated pramp and another set of Interconnects might still be preferable; that's how poor the Roon software volume control is. |
atmasphere, I'm thinking about what you said, "My surmise about what is happening here is that the connection is what is important- it would be interesting to try just running dual connectors into a single cable (sort of the opposite of a Y adapter) and see what happens."
I'm wondering what you mean. Are you simply suggesting use of Y cables for XLR applications versus splitters? That has already been done, and I have reported on it. I have been using a few different brands of "reducing" Y cable for XLR in order to do Schroeder Method with them. There is a very noticeable difference in sound quality between the Y cables, as there is between splitters and Y cables. The highest quality Y cable I have used to date for splitting and then reducing XLR interconnects is from Audio Sensibility. I just finished a brief review of them which should be published soon. |
shkong78, I am not surprised at your conclusion that it is better than 15 brands and 40 years of trials. Congratulations on trying it! You are demonstrating that Schroeder Method works not simply because of doubling a single brand of cables, but because of the advantage of using parallel interconnects, regardless of the brand/model. It seems to be a sensible tentative conclusion, but will bear further exploration by myself and others. That is valuable information.
Never doubt it can get better. You are not at the pinnacle of your system's capacity. There are always means to improve an audio system, regardless of the pedigree and perceived quality of sound.
You will likely end up with several combinations, and you may like a couple of them equally well. Then you have a nice alternative whenever you wish. :)
|
Yes, the Red Dragon is class D; I reviewed it for Dagogo.com and it sounds like they tried the Double Double with it.
|
shkong78, you are encountering the questions that happen when you upgrade and mix cables; some of the results may sound superior with a part of your collection, and some results may sound relatively inferior. I say "relatively�" because the result is far better than previously with one interconnect. We tend to get increasingly picky, even with fantastic improvements in the system. I know that even when the rig gets an amazing improvement, my ability to nit-pick details if I wish is almost unlimited. :)
I would presume that as is the case with most cable brands, when a person moves up the line in a product the performance will improve. Whether the precise detail of sound quality you wish for will materialize given any particular interconnect, no one can say. It is possible that pairing two of the GC2 or two Kronon would be better than any mixed set. There is no way to know, and no way to predict accurately. One simply must conduct comparisons to know.
|
shkong78, it's obvious you are taking this very seriously, and you will get very serious results, the kind of results that do not come to casual audiophiles. dgarretson, No surprise that the connectors make a big difference. It also makes perfect sense that the line-level EQ would be influenced dramatically by the Schroeder Method. To my ear there is not a tonal shift by moving to dual ICs, but instead a deepening, or intensifying of the tonal character, like a deeper shade of a color of paint. Absolutely it sounds far more real. Of course, the tonality would shift with every different pair of Schroeder Method ICs. I do that consistently in my rig. |
Thomas, I am very happy that you like Schroeder Method; it's quite powerful. You are showing others that a person has to try different things in order to find the best result. That is how I go about tuning systems. When the right combination is found the experience is enthralling. |
rechsm, so you have made a quad version of Schroeder Method IC? Four discrete runs in one plug? Wow! This demonstrates imo unequivocally the importance of the method, and of AWG in the quality.
Very nice summary; thanks for sharing this! I am elated that you found the activity worthwhile. I see your system is nice; I'll bet you have obtained a superb level of sound quality.
|
twoleftears, I see you have the Belles ARIA components; very nice! I wrote them up for Dagogo.com recently. They are a wonderfully sensible and good performing series. They sound even better with Schroeder method between the ARIA pre and the ARIA Monos. Also, do not fail to give them a good power cord. They have a lot more to give in sound quality when set up properly. Dave Belles was the first manufacturer to give me permission to hook up preamp and amp(s) in Schroeder Method, and I will always be thankful to him for that. The result was splendid, and showed that Pre to Amp is a highly efficacious connection for Schroeder Method ICs. That setup was proof of method for pre to amp. |
Put up a system using two sets of Schroeder Method ICs with double speaker cables. I LIKE! :) This could become addictive. ;)
|
I am happy to report that the review of the ANTICABLES Reference series products is now published at dagogo.com See also the manufacturer's comments at the end of the article. Pertinent here is the fact that Paul Speltz is now offering ANTICABLES ICs with Schroeder Method design. :) I did a lot of informal testing of Schroeder Method with ANTICABLES, and it was efficacious in every instance - as has been the case with every cable used so far; also used has been TEO Audio, Clarity Cable and Audio Sensibility. |
I tried the Schroeder Method once with XLR cables acting as AES/EBU between a Musical Fidelity transport and a DAC. It was very good. It certainly did not seem to exhibit any issues due to doubling the IC. The sound quality was holistically superior to a single IC of same brand, even though the Y cables (not Audio Sensibility) were poorer quality.
|
As I have double Schroeder Method running currently, I will be swapping their positions to see the effect. Swapping single ICs is efficacious, readily heard in a good rig, so I would expect the same with double IC.
shkong78, I thought you had used two sets of Schroeder Method ICs in your rig. Not sure if you swapped out their position, but you may want to consider it. Frankly, you would have to rebuild all the trials you did with double and triple again in the new positions. The results will vary for each one of those. Perhaps you already went through this, but most audiophiles miss this. Whereas most audiophiles are too lazy, or don't see the potential, you would see the potential and likely would have the zeal to try. :)
I recommend trying all compatible cables in all positions, even power cords. It's more work, but imo the only way to find the best expression of a system. :)
|
It has been some time since we had an update. Has anyone new tried Schroeder Method. I'm especially curious if skeptics have tried it and been won over by it. |
piouser, nice to have you on board on the thread, and nice to hear from someone who was motivated to try Schroeder Method. Looking forward to the discussion. :) |
To clarify, I have not been promoting mixing of the cables involved in Schroeder Method. It has been done a few times by enthusiasts, but I have not done so - yet. I plan on doing so, but I suspect that the results are unpredictable. In my experience when one uses four cables of the same type the expected outcome is a more enhanced, better form of the cable's character. But, mixing the ICs will result in an unpredictable outcome. Thus far it seems the result has always been far superior to a single IC, but random in terms of the change as compared to single ICs.
I would have to catalogue the changes heard with particular mixed sets to know how to employ them with purpose. Otherwise it is a for fun activity.
|
I am very pleased with the continued success of Schroeder Method (And why wouldn't I be pleased, if I say so myself!) in systems that I am assembling. One terrific outcome is the Small Green Computer sonicTransporter i7 4T AP with the SONORE Signature Rendu SE; Exogal Comet DAC - the Schroeder Method cables employed in this setup are here, between this integrated DAC (NOTE: for this setup you MUST have an integrated DAC with preamp/volume control function!) and they are Clarity Cable Organic XLR using the Audio Sensibility XLR Y-Cables; Benchmark AHB2 Amplifiers in Mono mode; TEO Audio Reference Liquid Speaker Cable doubled up (used precisely parallel) with the LIquid Standard Speaker Cable to the PureAudioProject Trio15 Horn 1 Speakers.
Very, Very pleased with the sonicTransporter and Signature Rendu SE combo as source.
The Comet and AHB2 is a fabulous combo with Schroeder Method and Clarity Cable Organic IC. These products are capable of so much more than even the manufacturers know. If they have never done double IC they likely do not know the capacity of their wares.
This is a stunningly pristine system that has breathtaking sound field depth and nuance. I do not often recommend a complete system, but this is one that an enthusiast could move into a horn hybrid speaker and be assured of a remarkable outcome. Note: I also use the Legacy Audio XTREME XD Subs with this setup, as the open baffle PAP Horn 1 can use a bit of extra LF. I have gotten used to very clean LF at about 16Hz +/-3 dB in reference rigs, so 30 doesn't cut it. YMMV
All these items are reviewed by me at dagogo.com, and none of them performed close to the level they are now with Schroeder Method. In comparison systems set up with single IC are significantly compromised - as are all components with single IC typically.
As long as the user understands the do at your own risk nature of it, a person who successfully utilizes Schroeder Method is all but assured the sense of hearing an entirely different/upgraded system. |
ketchup, I would suspect a lot of the benefit is from heavier AWG. There is no point in denying that is a major contributor to the success of Schroeder Method.
However, the use of a second distinct ground may also play into the change sonically. The method is so fresh that there are more questions unanswered than answered.
While use of a splitter or Y-cable is obviously not advantageous in comparison to a manufactured double cable, the advantage is in potentially mixing ICs of different brand/models to obtain the "flavor" of sound one wishes. Some users have already started to mix and match, and it seems with excellent results.
And, as in speaker cabling, within reason if someone makes a lower AWG speaker cable, that, too can be paired, and what will the result be then? It sounds insane, but that was the thought that crossed my mind why I paired two interconnects in the first place. Knowing what doubting speaker cables does for the sound, I wondered what would happen if two ICs were paired, obviously doubling the conductor material. That is the kind of exploration I love in audio. :) |
routlaw, thanks for your well thought out reply. You seem to be advocating a DIY version of Schroeder Method, which certainly can be done. I was shooting for proof of concept when I used splitters and Y-cables. Also, it’s much less work to assemble them in a moment versus building them with no proof of concept. Ideally the splitters/Y-cables would be optional for variety and potential mixing of cables.
A good reason why a person would pursue the assembled version is that if cables were to be mixed, it would be a lot of hassle to build it and then find out that particular combination was not as perfect as another. Assembling them makes it far easier to compare.
Manufacturers are now making double ICs per Schroeder Method, and they are meeting with acclaim by users.
When I first proposed the idea to cable manufacturers and other designers one of the caveats was concern about use with class D amps in particular. I was simply covering my ass, so to speak, by putting the caveat out there. The concern may be dispensed with eventually, but I was not going to stick my neck out and say, "Hey, everyone! Try this!" and then potentially have someone report a bad outcome. I’m trying to be sensible while exploratory.
BTW, several other designers have said that there should be no problem. There has not been perfect consistency in feedback by the manufacturers and designers who considered it theoretically, so imo caution is not a bad thing. But, I do not know of an instance where there has been a bad outcome, i.e. incompatibility. :)
|
routlaw, yes, I would presume that some companies, perhaps most who would implement Schroeder Method would want a bit cleaner product, and in so doing put both cables into one sheath. But, then again, there's no going back, no switching up when you commit to that. There are two very appealing scenarios; a manufactured, all in one, and a separate, exchangeable setup. It all means lots of fun for the audiophile!
I'm not sure that you saw my comments on use of four different level/brand of Y-cables for XLR, but the Hosa was I believe my first one that I bought just to get the job done. It is awful, horrid sound quality. I will never use it again. It will pass a signal, but the sound will be degraded compared to a fine Y-cable like the Audio Sensibility.
It's hilarious; the Hosa was middle of the pack in a best of Pro XLR cables comparison. If this is what audiophiles are using, they are RUINING their system's sound. The Pig Hog brand was nearly as awful. It's built very tough, so I'm sure that Pros think it's gotta be good, but it was poor in performance. The Audioquest custom was better and the Audio Sensibility is superb, both XLR and RCA. The only way I would use the Hosa and Pig Hog is under duress, only if I had no other choice. They are awful, thin, lacking in frequency extension and finesse. Evidence that pro oriented gear can be dismal.
|
Perhaps I should qualify my description of the poorer XLR connectors; I said that they were lacking in frequency extension. That may not be technically correct, as it would have to be measured. I would have been more accurate to describe it as lacking in dynamic impact, especially in the bass region. I wish to be accurate in my descriptions so as to not disqualify myself as reporting on the comparisons. |
beanstalks, welcome; I see you are new to the site, at least in terms of participating in discussions.
Thank you for what appears to be very positive, unbiased feedback in regards to Schroeder Method. I couldn't remember the details of your first post, so I returned to it; here it is in its entirety to refresh everyone's memory:
"Hello everyone. Tried the basic Schroeder method 3 weeks ago but did not post then because I am the skeptics skeptic. I removed and replaced the cables 3 times because I disbelieved my own ears. I finally invited 3 audiophile friends and did a "blind" test. They were shocked to put it mildly. All three have read this thread as Grannyring surmised and all three doubled up on ICs to pre amp. Since I am bi amping Hi's and Lows thru a Marchand crossover I am trying to solve the mechanics of doing a "Schroeder" to each amp. Thanks Doug--such a vast improvement to an old school system. PS. I am using a TBI sub amp that is class D but only running that off a pre amp with a single rca."
I hope that our skeptics over on the other thread, "The Science of Cables" see this. As a former cable skeptic I know it takes overwhelming evidence to consider that you just might be wrong. The typical reaction is to argue, argue, argue and rage against the perceived foolishness, ignorance, etc. rather than humbling one's self to simply question the absolute confidence.
As important as your response is in general, and it's very positive, the sentence that really catches my eye is this one: "Oh, blew my power supply in my Marchand crossover so SM can be extended rather directly to amps."
What precisely are you saying in that sentence? By "blew" your PS are you saying you dumped it, or that it died and you are attempting a work around? It sounds like your Marchand died, and you tried going direct to amp with the Schroeder Method. If so, then you are going direct from preamp to amps without the Marchand? I would not be surprised if that resulted in a far cleaner, more captivating result. I have not found Pro-oriented and lower cost crossovers to be good for audio systems holistically. I also have not found active crossovers to inherently outperform traditional pre/amp setups. So much depends upon the gear used and the cabling - especially the cabling, now that Schroeder Method has arrived.
The beauty of a simple system with double IC is potentially breathtaking. The only comparison that comes readily to mind is when the Hubble Space telescope was upgraded and refocused. The depth of field was immediately noticeable and so gratifying. The same thing has happened with double IC in audio systems, the resolution is fantastic, and confirms my assertion that there is no such thing as too much definition/detail in an audio system. With increase in resolution/definition/detail comes a much superior experience. The depth of sound field, and the attendant retrieval of micro-detail is exhilarating. I feel so much more immersed, overwhelmed in the senses than previously. Never knew stereo could be this good.
I would like for you to discuss the physical system change more thoroughly and the sound that you are experiencing.
|
routlaw, and... this means what? You're trying it, or not?
Maxima95,
not much feedback on class D. Only TEO Audio has reported use with Red Dragon S500 Amps. I have gotten very conflicting information in regards to using Schroeder Method with Class D. Everything from it'll blow them up, to it won't hurt them at all.
|
flat4, seeing as how no one else responded to your simple inquiry, though it's been an 18 hour day, I humbly submit that the correct answer is "everything". I haven't found a significant parameter of sound quality that is not enhanced by Schroeder Method. It effects dy�namics, tonality, cleanness/defintiion, soundstage, etc, etc.
The elevated sound quality has now become my new norm. I can't imagine ever going back to single IC preferentially. You won't believe your ears how much more sound quality is innately available that has been squandered by single IC. The industry and hobbyists have been using an insipid method for decades. Pretty sad how compromised sound universally has been considered good. At least I now never have to suffer that in the future with most gear.
|
Stringreen5, lovely system, kudos! It appears you are using a single run of ANTICABLES speaker wire. Please read my recent review of ANTICABLES at Dagogo.com for further insight.
In brief, I strongly recommend that if someone is captivated by these speaker cables, they should double them up. It's all about AWG, and I point out in my review that the higher AWG (less conductor mass) speaker cables are inferior to same cables with lower AWG. You will get a much better sound quality if you simply obtain a second set and run them parallel to the Vandy's.
|
I do not yet have enough brands/examples of RCA or XLR assembled models to do that, but I believe it will happen in due time. I would want no less than four representatives from different companies.
Once I knock out a couple reviews I may focus on that. Any company that wanted to be in on the shootout is welcome to contact me. |
grannyring, it is pretty amazing, isn't it? It's hard for me to think of anything in cable-related system building that has brought this kind of impact over the past 30 years. I have used dozens of sets of cables, have built hundreds of rigs, and I've not encountered anything with an impact like this.
|
divertitit, it worked extremely well for me when using a DAC with the Redgum Audio Articulata Integrated Amplifier (reviewed for Dagogo.com). Please note that at this time it is still considered a "do at your own risk activity, and if you have concerns you should discuss with your component makers.
jayctoy, I do not wish to be rude, but I must clarify; I was not opening up my shootout to the public. I was soliciting interested manufacturers who may want to participate in such a comparison. However, I do know you personally, and you are welcome to visit at some time in the future. :) |
k4rstar, yes, you will want to speak with the manufacturer in order to see if they are comfortable with the implementation of Schroeder Method. When I was conducting the Border Patrol DAC review Gary Dews was not comfortable with implementing the Schroeder Method with that DAC. Other manufacturers might differ. Someday it may be found that the method is universally benign to other gear, but I'm not at the point of stating it yet.
|
