audio2design, thank you for your contribution/concern in the matter. I believe that everything you have brought up has already been addressed. |
vinylshadow, I and one other person are seeking a patent; application is submitted and in process. :)
I suggest you buy them from Audio Sensibility, Anticables, or the like. If you read up on my article and follow ups, I strongly suggest initially to use quality Y cables to "build" your own prior to ordering manufactured. The home built are not as good as manufactured, but still substantially better than single. Some have mixed cables in the self-made sets. Again, disclaimer applies at this point.
If you wanted a company to work with your own selection of cable, you would have to make arrangements.
|
One last point which I do not believe has been emphasized enough is that the longer the interconnects, the lower the characteristic impedance of the cable. Doubling a cable halves the impedance, and I have been avoiding longer cables (i.e. I have only worked with 1m interconnects to date) in doing the Schroeder Method, as I do not wish to encounter a situation where the output of the preamplifier (whether internal to a DAC or dedicated preamp) is not able to drive the amplifier, and potentially incur damage due to the characteristic impedance being too low.
Those with more esoteric designs in DACS, i.e. NOS DACs, and preamps should exercise caution and understand the limitations of their gear, and accept the potential for damage if they proceed. At this point in time caution is still to be exercised as regards types of systems in which this can be done safely.
|
I will share hear what I just posted in the comments section of my article which is linked above.
I wish to add to the body of knowledge about the Schroeder Method, as well as clarify some misinformation that is forming around it. I have found also in experimentation that it is efficacious in additional applications including a digital connection, an XLR connection, and connection between dedicated preamplifier and amplifier(s). The balanced (XLR) connection was the first to be tried, as a natural extension of the original RCA assembly. Next was a twin XLR assembly acting as AES/EBU output from a transport to DAC.
The final iteration relating to preamplifiers and amplifiers must be prefaced with the necessary warnings that caution should be exercised in regard to some amplifiers which are NOT suitable for using the Schroeder Method (double interconnects) as it may cause them to oscillate, making them unstable and damaging them, and or speakers. Again, as always has been said, this is a DO AT YOUR OWN RISK activity. Please consult your equipment manufacturer if you have questions or concerns about the suitability of this activity.
The final iteration was a dedicated preamp to amp setup which worked as splendidly as all the others. I discussed this further in the soon to be published review of the Belles ARIA Preamplifier and Mono Block Amplifiers.
|
jayctoy, yes, the effect is cumulative with successive additions. Agreed; the sense of the music being more lifelike, whether a studio or live recording, is powerful. The characteristics of a particular interconnect's properties is intensified and the entire system is changed profoundly. The experience is much more convincing as to recreation of a real event. |
Wonderful results with AES/EBU to Exogal Comet DAC. Further testing will see if other DACS sound as.good with coax or AES.
|
I certainly would Not recommend using both RCA and XLR simultaneously! |
Ozzy, please pay heed to the recommendations in my article and notes. While it may work, I do not recommend mixing the cables. I'm not saying it won't work, but i am not publically endorsing it. I would think that might be a concern best avoided. |
A couple thoughts interjected...
No one as of yet knows why the Schroeder Method works, least of all me! I claim no pedigree, only curiosity leading to the discovery and implementation. Speculation would be expected until such time as a cable manufacturer would chase down the explanation, if measurable.
Yes, I have done it with both RCA and XLR with analogue signals, as well as AES/EBU (XLR) in one setup from transport to DAC. I also have successfully done one RCA setup of Schroeder Method between preamp and amp. NOTE: ALL PREVIOUS WARNINGS AND CAUTIONS APPLY; this is a "do at your own risk activity". It should be avoided with certain amps, as has been forewarned, as well as some DACs that output from the chip (ie. No opamps) etc. Again, check with your equipment mfg. Or designer as regards safety.
Imho, the Schroeder Method is a system cost saver, not a money waster. Double the price of the materials and 4 splitters is a gift given the result in every instance I have done. Others who have tried thus far seem to agree. I certainly don't mind a perceptual $10K component upgrade for the cost of one more pair of interconnects, or doubled pair. :)
Finally, funny how everyone, even designers find their pet reasons for cable performance. My most consistent benefit in cables across prices and brands has been, aside from conductor material, heavier gauge. Consequently, the idea for the Schroeder Method grew out of many years of pushing heavy gauge cabling in rigs and getting what is to my ears better sound. Ymmv |
Has anyone else taken upon themselves the do at your own risk adventure of the Schroeder Method interconnects? I know of at least one person who was using it since my article first appeared and is pleased.
|
I think I had a memory failure; I seem to recall that I requested the XLR splitters be built by Audioquest rather than select them from the website. Sorry for the misdirection. They are Audioquest and I worked with them to select the particular product (wire) used in making the Y cable pairs.
They are very high quality and I am most pleased with them. I am not sure whether Audioquest would make "reverse" splitters, i.e. 2 to 1.
They do have both 1 to 2 and the 2 to1 cables for RCA. I purchased some of these and plan to utilize them in due time for further testing. |
Highstream, I have some Audioquest XLR splitters (conventional, as sold on their website, not "reverse" splitters). I had to go to a guitar/music center to find the appropriate reverse 2 to 1 XLR splitters. They can also be found on Amazon, but are lower quality.
The outer versus inner designation simply refers to the orientation of the two cables used with the splitters on RCA or XLR only, not with Y cables. I do not concern myself with any kind of "twist" when using the Y cables, only with hard splitter devices. With a hard splitter cables can either be kept parallel, or a half "twist" put in them by moving the outer cable to the inner position and vice versa on one end only.
If you have any qualms about testing, please consult your equipment manufacturers first. This is a do at your own risk activity.
I have not encountered a possibility of using the Schroeder Method to subwoofers, so I cannot advise in regards to that.
If DAC to active speakers would prove to be efficacious, my guess is the result would be brilliant. I would not try it unless conferring with the manufacturer.
|
mmcentyre, thanks for the feedback! I had not heard of the Schroeder Being tried with Duelund ICs adds to the body of knowledge of successful implementation. I have not heard yet of any instance where the result was not deemed a success by the person trying it. Granted, it is early on, but early results are showing great potential for it being a nearly universal aid to improving sound substantially.
It's the "never knew it was available," aspect that is so intriguing. We tend to think we have achieved ultimate performance after a few adjustments, and the truth is we are still quite far from it. It can be difficult to accept that what we have lovingly built can lack in performance. After doing so many improvements to systems I have concluded the range of improvements for audio systems is practically endless.
|
For those new to the thread/discussion of the Schroeder Method I will add to celander's informative post that consideration must be given to the halving of the impedance of the cables. Previously discussion in my original article as well as in threads has pointed out that some components, i.e. DACs which have output directly from the DAC chip, may not be able to drive cables with lower impedance. I have only used 1m length and colander has used 2 foot length. As usual, consulting with your manufacturer about such things as length of the interconnects and typical impedance is important. For instance, a 1m Schroeder Method setup has a source seeing an impedance like a 2m cable. Obviously the longer the interconnect the more potential for an impedance problem for a source's output. Perhaps I am not stating this as elegantly as I could; some here such as Al could confirm or clarify my description. |
I knew we could count on Al for a thorough workup of the technical aspects. Thank you!
|
in_shore, please discuss the Schroeder Method with equipment manufacturers prior to trying. Responses may range from horror to curiosity, from an abject rejection of it as though it could harm the gear, to confidence that the gear will be unaffected. Also, this is a do at your own risk method.
Very likely the Kronon doubled would handily outperform whatever typically configured IC in XLR you would use. The only way to perhaps best it the RCA with Schroeder Method, imo, would be to apply the Schroeder Method to the XLR. But, as I have found in the past, any given RCA cable can best any given XLR cable of a different brand, and vice versa. One simply has to try the configurations to know for sure.
You may not be able to know with certainty that you have the best configuration, but you should be able to make a significant improvement from where you are now, which makes for happiness. |
Four different amplifiers, class AAA, class A, class A/B have been used successfully in my systems with Schroeder Method. Avoiding class D as per warnings about potential amp instability with Schroeder Method. However, it would be interesting to test it with a cheap class D, perhaps a $100 amp if one can be found.
The initial concern about suitability of the Method for use between pre/amp has been at least partially addressed. However, until such time as the Schroeder Method is fully vetted and the parameters of use fleshed out this is a do at your own risk activity. See manufacturers if you have concerns about suitability for your gear.
|
jayctoy, I will look forward to hearing about the results. |
Another stunning result for the Schroeder Method. This time using XLR connections to a class A/B amplifier not previously tested, fed by an integrated DAC. The results are overwhelmingly positive. Though I have tried the amplifiers in all possible conventional permutations with this system, keeping the interconnects the same as a baseline, I have not gotten this caliber of sound quality using single ICs. Simply put, in every instance to date the sound quality when using the Schroeder Method is par excellence.
|
I have known for quite some time that connectors play a role in the outcome of the sound, and usually they are detrimental. I will avoid connectors if possible. However, with the Schroeder Method the use of connectors is necessary (unless cables manufactured according to the Schroeder Method can be obtained, as with TEO Audio and one particular model from HAVE Inc.
The outcome of using the twinned interconnects, even when splitters or Y cables are used, supersedes the standard single interconnect. That has been demonstrated informally 8 or 9 times in my system, and with RCA, XLR, and once with an AES/EBU (XLR) digital connection from transport to DAC.
I am comparing some Y cables now, and upon recommendation from Taras at TEO have sourced some from Audio Sensibility. These are quite good and I aim to write up an article about the XLR and RCA Y cables from Audio Sensibility.
I strongly encourage anyone who wishes to try the Schroeder Method (Please do your due diligence regarding it being a do at your own risk method) to try at least a couple different sets of splitters or Y cables to find optimum performance. The time and relatively little money spent will be rewarded well.
|
pixelphoto, thank you for your comments regarding the Schroeder Method. Your post is important for a few reasons; you are not in dog fights here, but are an occasional poster who is not fighting for ground, so to speak. That may help others see that it's not a matter of who can debate the best as to the legitimacy of it. Looking at your system, please do NOT take this the wrong way, you have lovely entry level equipment. You are hearing the improvements clearly on equipment that is not SOTA (state of the art). That is important, because it confirms what I have known for many years. One does not need extreme equipment to hear the benefit of cabling changes. You also have achieved the good result, very clear unequivocal result, with inexpensive ICs. I trust you will hear very distinct differences using a variety of splitters - I do. You said a very important phrase, "I'm glad I kept an open mind." Yes, you have benefitted for having that openness to try something that likely caused a certain amount of doubt. Congratulations on being an explorer and finding something much better. |
tuffy72561, no, at this point I have not yet used the double double versions of TEO Audio cables. There has been some discussion between myself and Taras about sometime soon trying them.
I would expect that the performance of the conjoined cables would be superior to that of the same cables with splitters. While splitters degrade the sound significantly, the Schroeder Method is so beneficial that this overwhelms the use of the splitters. But, take the same cables without the splitters; I'm sure that would be a nice advancement. I know that TEO continues to explore this and wants to do so with several models in their line. Taras may wish to comment.
|
Taras, good comments; you are dead on target with your observations. Yes, there are times when even with single cable comparisons or power cord comparisons I have thought the same; a person who cannot hear the difference must have hearing deficiency. The only person to hear cable changes in my room and conclude not much had changed did in fact have hearing loss due to being a musician in a rock band. Others, including several hard boiled skeptics, admitted that they did hear the differences. What's interesting is that over time they have publicly defaulted back to their public persona of minimizing cables. Is that two-faced? Yes, of course, but I understand how they have a lot invested in their businesses and want to run things status quo versus upset the apple cart. If they built the business on "measurements", then it's a tough customer sell to upset that. I have tried to be conservative in describing the effects of the Schroeder Method, so as to not be discounted as not reputable. Persons that know me and my writing are aware that I have a high threshold for what is considered efficacious in system building. The Schroeder Method easily clears that threshold. It is gratifying to see that a growing number of other audiophiles with various systems and cables are finding the same result. That adds to the tentative conclusion that the benefit is universal (When applied properly and to the proper systems). For decades audiophiles have thought that they had terrific IC connections. Not even close, it seems. It's astounding how much loss was happening between components. It appears no one had a clue how much. Yes, the innate characteristics of the cables used would dictate the result. It's a simple, powerful formula for vast improvement of an audio system. Even the most extreme systems will benefit.
|
jayctoy, congratulations! Very nice, and motivates me to push into manufactured double interconnect products.
Currently comparing another set of cables' ICs in both RCA and XLR. So far only the RCA tried, but easily passed my Law of Efficacy in regard to Schroeder Method. This setup is from integrated DAC to amps. Both the integrated DAC and amps allow for XLR, so that is next. I anticipate likewise superb results.
This is gaining momentum due to real world applicability. This could become one of the more interesting phenomena to appear in recent years regarding cables.
For those who jump to the end of discussions and do not wish to read previous posts, I repeat the "do at your own risk" nature of the Schroeder Method, and ask that you discuss with your equipment manufacturer. Please do your due diligence.
|
I did one setup with transport (AES/EBU) to DAC and thought it was quite splendid. That's not to say it would be so in every case, but it was a good start. I simply have too many other permutations to put down before expanding in other directions.
|
pixelphoto, you're welcome! This is great anecdotal evidence coming in regarding the Schroeder Method. I am told the double cables conjoined versus with splitter are quite a bit better, and this is another instance of it.
Yeah, this is just good 'ol great fun and discovery.
|
jayctoy, so you are saying that the combination of two different TEO cables in Schroeder Method was not good? I'm trying to understand your comments. This would be the first instance of someone I know who tried using two different cables together in Schroeder Method, and the first time someone said it was not good.
Please confirm whether I understand this correctly.
|
jayctoy, thank you for your thoughtful replies and the effort to make the Schroeder Method more visible; I think it helped greatly to introduce it to audiophiles at large. It would make sense that some combinations (not yet recommended) of blended cables in Schroeder Method might be unsatisfactory to the ears. I have done approximately 9 systems of various config. (RCA, XLR, integrated DAC to amps, preamp to amps, etc.) and am overjoyed at the consistent, powerfully beneficial results. This is one of the more enjoyable periods of being an audiophile over the past 30+ years. I am beginning to experience the realization of sound quality/experiences I dreamed of but was not sure could ever be realized. The Benchmark Media DAC3 and AHB2 Amps in Mono are stunningly beautiful in this setup. The Class AAA amplifier technology is breathtakingly beautiful with Schroeder Method. It maximizes the technology Benchmark made in collaboration with THX. The sound is far superior to any rig I established while reviewing them for Dagogo.com. Single IC does not tap into the reservoir of sound quality of these components. (I suspect that to be true universally with any appropriate (note again the "do at your own risk" environment) components, but much more have to be tried to make a general statement of it.) The Schroeder Method is big, much bigger than I had thought. I think I still don't have a handle on how big it can get. |
mr_m, I don't take your comment with offense. No, it does not look like rocket science, but it sure sounds like it was developed with rocket science! :)
|
I have not advocated mixing brands/models of cables, though I'm sure it would be fascinating to try. I would think the results might be unpredictable, good or bad. All iterations of the Schroeder Method I have done with two identical cables have been successful, extremely positive. That seems to be fairly consistent in trails among interested parties so far.
As regards where precisely to place the doubled cables, I have encountered distinctly different reactions, advice and warnings. Some such as Taras of TEO Audio are cautionary, while other designers are dismissive of any real world danger. Two very well know designers who know their stuff, let's say, downplayed the danger of placing Schroeder Method ICs (presuming of identical cables, not mixed) and said there should be no problem.
Who should a person believe? It seems there is much more not known than known with certainty, even among those who know theory thoroughly. So, I'm not about to eliminate the "do at your own risk" disclaimer.
At the same time, David Belles, who I discussed this with in depth while in the Belles Audio ARIA Preamp and Mono Amp review, was quite comfortable with granting permission to try it with his components. I thank him for his contribution to understanding and the go ahead to try between the ARIA preamp and Mono amps! The result? Splendid! Wonderful! Powerful changes along the same lines as when using integrated preamps to amps.
Am I saying it's all good, ok to do this in every pre/amp combo? NO
Am I saying it's free and clear, that the ARIA gear is good to go with Schroeder Method for any conceivable combo of ICs? NO
I'm saying I had one outstanding result so far between pre/amp. The result was good enough that I won't stop there; I'll be testing it some more. I'm not recommending people ignore the advice to discuss with their manufacturer/designer and simply slap together whatever gear with the doubled ICs. I would rather err on the side of caution than foolishness. But, there's no way I'm letting this lie; it's WAY too powerful to ignore.
The one safest connection for Schroeder Method seems to be ahead of preamp. But, I have done many connections now with integrated DACs with preamp function out to amps. So, obviously pre/amp is not blowing up gear, at least not in about 10 instances I have tried.
Most recent is between Benchmark DAC3 DX and AHB2 Amps. (NOTE, this is NOT endorsement by Benchmark!). Oh, my, is this an amazing result with the Schroeder Method! Riveting performance way beyond single ICs. |
BTW, David Belles I think would have been Ok with introducing the Schroeder Method discussion into the review of the ARIA components. It was in a word glorious. But, I chose not to detract from the focus on this components.
You can bet I'm using Schroeder Method with his gear ongoing in reviews. Incredible sound over single ICs. |
Correction to my post above, which I noticed absentmindedly referred to "integrated preamps". The quote is, "At the same time, David Belles, who I discussed this with in depth while in the Belles Audio ARIA Preamp and Mono Amp review, was quite comfortable with granting permission to try it with his components. I thank him for his contribution to understanding and the go ahead to try between the ARIA preamp and Mono amps! The result? Splendid! Wonderful! Powerful changes along the same lines as when using integrated preamps to amps."
I was typing quickly and intended to refer to integrated DACs using Schroeder Method to amps. I suppose one could refer to "integrated preamps" as a preamp with a DAC, but that is not intuitive. |
I believe the Schroeder Method has the potential to be disruptive in several respects, including the scenario stringreen has suggested. That scenario I would not think a suitable template to suggest that any cheap cables in Schroeder Method could best any expensive IC in single configuration.
I theorize that when both cables, low end and high end, in their respective sets were configured in Schroeder Method the high end cable's superior performance would reassert itself. Only comparisons would answer the question with some certainty.
At the moment I have been focused more on the breadth of applicability rather than comparisons to ascertain relative thresholds of performance between inexpensive ICs and expensive ICs. It may be years before such things are known with a high degree of certainty. Typically one does not have multiple sets of cheap and expensive ICs sitting around ready for such comparisons.
At this time I have reason to believe that the Schroeder Method is a case of a rising tide lifting all boats. :)
|
jayctoy, you may be the first person to substantiate an improvement with the splitters in use over a manufactured double IC. That is not surprising to me at all. The quality/characteristics of the cabling is fundamental to the outcome. I would expect that in any given comparison a set of finer ICs, even though using the splitters, could outperform any given cable manufactured according to Schroeder Method. Simply eliminating the splitter would in no way assure that in all circumstances/cables a superior outcome would be achieved. That is one reason I did not bother to order the HAVE Inc. double Interconnects. I have my eyes set on a cable that should be superior. While a doubled IC as per Schroeder Method manufactured should be obviously better than the same with splitters, I am not interested in stopping there, but will push on toward far superior performance. I am always about maximizing performance, not simply improving it incrementally. That being said, I understand completely why persons with a degree of skepticism would not want to invest much to test it out. It's a cost of working out improvements to systems to end up with cables that were proof of concept, but now are leftovers. Most audiophiles are not willing to make such sacrifices, and thus they don't get the improvements. The irony is that the improvements of Schroeder Method are easily on the order of components costing far more, but due to being chintzy and doubt many will not benefit. So be it. :) |
aolmrd1241, yes it is a most interesting thread, especially when the result is heard! The Schroeder Method became VERY interesting when it worked superbly well the first time I tried it! It continues to gather momentum among those who are trying it. (Please note all the caveats and warnings with certain systems). You would do well to refer to my original article at Dagogo.com; I believe it is linked here in this thread.
In regards to a preamp having no room, I have yet to find a component where I could not affix the Audioquest splitters for the purposes of the Schroeder Method. I may have to orient them differently, i.e. with the cables approaching the post from the side or top, but I can get it done.
I could care less if cables are protruding above the component, as the sonic result is what matters. And when this result is heard one quickly forgets about the issue of position of cables. |
Once the potential of Schroeder Method is learned, the initial proper comparison between an identical single versus a double IC becomes expected. The real excitement is comparison beyond, to find the relative strength of the Method in building systems. For instance, I would expect there to be many instances of an IC costing $100 when doubled to outperform a single IC of the same, or other, brand costing $500. If the Schroeder Method was not so effective I would not speculate such, but the result is obviously powerful and begs the question whether it can yield extreme performance with more affordable ICs.
Obviously, that in no way makes the lower line IC a better cable; it's the method that determines the outcome. I would expect that audiophiles who do comparisons between lower line doubled ICs and higher line single ICs will conclude the lower line IC doubled to outperform the higher line single in the majority of cases, i.e. 60% or higher. Even if the performance was seen as comparable, the cost saving would be considerable and the method meritorious. Time will tell if I am correct in this.
Once an audiophile knows how the Schroeder Method is efficacious, I suspect that it won't be long before marching up the ladder in terms of the line of ICs to employ it. This is one reason why splitters are commendable, at least initially until a final determination is made as to what the "last" doubled IC will be. |
celander, yes, there are differences in spacing between L/R outputs on preamps and amps, but I have yet to use one that cannot accommodate the Audioquest RCA Splitters. The splitters are no wider than the standard RCA cable.
If a person has challenges with splitters and spacing, then try a "y" cable instead, which should alleviate the problem and accomplish a similar, though not identical outcome.
|
A person can put together a Schroeder Method set of ICs on the cheap, and they should expect lovely results. However, as with all wiring, better cables will provide superior results. All of the testing I have done so far confirms this. So, if cheap splitters/Y cables are used along with inexpensive/low grade ICs, while there will be a surprising improvement, this in no way suggests that the limit has been reached. I suspect there are some stunning results to be found with superior connectors and cables, or alternatively with manufactured superior cables in Schroeder Method.
There is a LOT of room to roam upward in performance, even after the initial jolt that comes from hearing Schroeder Method the first time. :) |
Yes, that is correct. You will find that precious few XLR makers have the second version, the double female to single male. I found one online that was cheap, but sounds poor, and another that was marginally better for pro sound applications. Neither are acceptable for my purposes. I spent maybe $75 on them total as a cost of testing. Well worth it to establish that the quality of the Y cables are crucial to achieving the best outcome (when Schroeder Method is used with splitters/Y cables).
I was directed to Audio Sensibility and am now testing XLR splitters/rejoiners as indicated above made by that company; so far, superb results. Audio Blast article pertaining to Audio Sensibility specialized products for Schroeder Method underway.
I currently am using the XLR cables under review in Schroeder Method configuration between the Benchmark DAC3 DX and a pair of Benchmark AHB2 Amplifiers in Mono Mode. Rocket ride, baby!
|
stringreen, Steve mentioned your order in an email today. You will be one of the first to get an Audio Sensibility cable with Schroeder Method construction. I will look forward to your impressions.
Mind if I ask what components in your system you will be trying it on? No class D amplification, right?
|
stringreen, you have a beautiful system, kudos.
It is a do at your own risk activity, as I'm sure you are aware. I have had no complications in about ten systems I have set up so far with both RCA and XLR.
|
Ozzy, excellent! I'm glad you like the effect. You are using what seem to be very inexpensive XLR Y cables. The change with superior Y cables is noticeable, and I am told that the difference between an assembled set with splitters/Y cables and a manufactured set is profound. Taras from TEO Audio has said the manufactured double set has another quite discernible level of improvement. |
stringreen, just be sure your equipment is rated to handle an 8 meter run (doubled 4m).
If you are explaining this to a manufacturer, expect there may be mockery. I have found a split approx. 50/50 with manufacturers and designers. Some are very curious and open to helpful discussion, and the other group are derisive and dismissive. It pretty much mirrors the split in the community of hobbyists in regard to such things.
But, derision and dismissive attitude don't determine results. :)
You are making a decision to limit potential damage/fallout, which is how I would proceed as well. If I am going to do experimentation, at least initially I will put up for sacrifice something that is not too expensive. Trust me, it's not easy to place a several thousand dollar amp in a chain with an experimental connection knowing that I may be ponying up serious money for a trial. One way to potentially lessen the fallout should the test go bad was to only hook up one channel. That way if it blew only one channel would be effected and repair costs mitigated, or the unit salvageable versus a write off.
One of the reasons I keep a expensive preamp and amp on hand is to have a "test subject" for whatever is experimental. If an older design which is robust gets taken out, then there is no way I'm going to put a newer design with a potentially less bomb-proof layout to test.
It was a scary moment the first time I did a test of it, not knowing whether I would see a component fail. I still have to calm my nerves when putting up a new rig with it. It's not kid's play when a piece of kit at thousands of dollars is hooked up with an experimental configuration. But, the results were SO profoundly positive that it cannot be ignored, imo. It makes single IC hook up sound paltry, pathetic.
So far, however, with 1m length the Schroeder Method has been very agreeable with all sorts of system connections. Based on the results so far at some point I may be able to call it universally "safe" when enough body of evidence amasses to say that it nearly universally - with appropriate gear - will be safe.
All this caution makes Schroeder Method seem initially like free solo climbing. But, I think more realistically it is akin to climbing with gear, which greatly mitigates risk.
|
Good info; it's always wise to check with manufacturers on such things.
|
stringreen, excellent that they are operationally compatible. I'll look forward to more descriptions as you hear them more. I found that dynamics were among the characteristics that benefitted from the Schroeder Method. Systems seem more vivid, punchy, lively. I also found that the resolution is much better, consequently extending the soundstage dramatically. |
ozzy, I am working with Audio Sensibility to explore Schroeder Method in different permutations, to get a handle on comparative cables, i.e. single vs. Schroeder Method doubled manufactured.
Steve at Audio Sensibility can make up the doubled XLR ICs, even though not on the website. Steve has been testing the Schroeder Method and has been impressed enough to make up cables for me to continue to review and assess. I very much appreciate his involvement, but I am not surprised at all that he is motivated, given the results that happen when doubling interconnects.
|
stringreen, you're welcome! Glad you are having success with the Schroeder Method. It sounds like another happy user. It is a profound change, imo.
I have been very pleased with how it is going in system development. I have not had in instance yet where Schroeder Method failed to vastly improve a rig. It's astonishing how much components are choked - that's about the best word for it, "choked" - via use of single IC. Performance of components is SO much better with double interconnects.
One of the most enjoyable aspects of all this is the seeming irrationality of it. Theory does not dictate such a result, which is why it's so much fun. It seems nonsense, or worse. Yet, there it is! The results are anything but funny. :)
My guess is there are people quietly trying this in the background who have not come forward yet. We have a lot of people intimidated by conventional wisdom, by nearly bully matches on threads, etc. One of the great things about this is that Schroeder Method is pretty cheap to implement if one wishes, and confers a major change even with affordable ICs. It's a win/win in terms of exploration. (As long as one respects the warnings regarding which equipment and systems it is to be avoided.)
Stringreen, if things hold to their pattern in my use, the effect will be additive, and you will have additional improvement with another set of double ICs. Don't think for a moment that it could not get any better. All systems can be improved, usually far beyond our expectation. That it can be done relatively cheaply is a big bonus. You may conclude as I have that the Schroeder Method confers change on a level of component upgrades of several thousand of dollars. I have handled a lot of gear, some expensive, and this is not a "cheap" upgrade sonically. :) |
Has anyone else lurking in the background done the Schroeder Method connections?
I have seen only two mediocre results, and both of those seem to have been associated with headphone amps. I am unsure whether this would play a role in the less than impressive results obtained by others.
I think it is entirely possible that the sound quality of the connection using Schroeder Method is of such high caliber that some headphone amps can't handle it. I wonder if there might be some signal saturation happening with headphone setups.
I would encourage those who have tried it on headphone setups to try another combination using speakers, and see if there is a different result.
|
stringreen, I suspect your impressions are changing as you listen to it.
|
kalali, you should read up on the Schroeder Method to find out, among other things, that it is a "do at your own risk" technique. It is in the experimental stage in terms of finding out the parameters of its use. It is recommended to use four identical ICs, but I believe that member jayctoy has tried combining ICs of different makes. You may wish to talk to him here as well. As far as improvements go, I presume that even when using mismatched pairs of ICs the Schroeder Method would provide potentially superior results over a single IC. Also note that it does not take expensive ICs for it to work. |
