Is SM doable with USB?
Doug Schroeder Method, Double ic
I think this topic deserves its own thread , where use double ic through y adapters , from source to preamp, Can’t connect it from Preamp to Amp...For me the result is huge, I can’t go back to single ic....
582 responses Add your response
Doug, I now have the Schroeder Method on all 3 of my IC connections: Teo GC/ GC II ICs Modwright 5400 to TRL DUDE preamp, same combo ICs Whest .30 RDT SE phono pre to DUDE, and Schroeder Method JW Reference ICs DUDE to Nuforce Ref 9 V3 SE w/ TDSS level 3 upgrades. In all 3 cases, the sound quality improved considerably in all ways with the doubling method. I used the JW on the preamp to amp ICs because I had a chance to hear my system before buying the ICs with another set of Teo’s and the JW’s. The JW’s brought more impact and initial strike to the music--more live, whereas the extra Teo was too much of a good thing in one direction. I have a chance to try this with double Amadi Maddie Signature ICs going from the preamp to the amp, also. Will report back IF this is even better sounding than using the JW’s at that same spot. What if this were even better? I LOVE the sound of my system at this point. I now have Clarity Audio Organic speaker cables and jumpers going to Vapor Audio Joule Black speakers. The analog section is a VERY upgraded Lenco 78, Pete Riggle Woody arm, and Benz Micro Ruby 3 w/ Soundsmith level 3 retip. Bob |
Back to your previous post, Doug, and not to nitpick, but expense and quality don't necessarily go hand in hand. I imagine many if us spent plenty of money on wires....and gear...with sometimes disappointing results. Gabriel Gold and Twisted Pair Designs aren't overly expensive, but of considerable quality in design, construction, components and, most importantly, sonics. I've listened closely to many, many cables and can say that with some degree of confidence. Taking it personally would be too silly for words (ha!) - these are those rare cables that are worth the more than the price of admission for me and worth a listen anyway. That said, I've listened to them in other's systems with variable results - and so it goes! |
Occasionally I am contacted via the message system regarding someone wishing to try Schroeder Method, and they ask about a particular assemblage of gear, whether it will be safe to try. My answer continues to be review the original article (Audio Blast: Schroeder Method of Interconnect Placement at Dagogo.com), the threads here in regard to it, and contact your manufacturer to inquire about whether it is safe. To date I have not heard of any incidents with incompatibility or damage to gear. My best information tells me that this is patently safe, as it would merely half the impedance and double capacitance. The admonition is that this should not be used with very long ICs as it could be a problem for some preamps to drive. I have been told my more than one manufacturer that an IC of about 1m would not present any problem. I typically double up 2m ICs and have used two instances in systems regularly (i.e. between source and integrated DAC, and between integrated DAC and amp(s). I have heard concern regarding use of the Schroeder Method when using an NOS DAC (output driven from a chip) or a Class D amplifier. However, I know that TEO Audio has used a Red Dragon class D amp successfully. I would like to try it with an inexpensive class D sometime. The warnings have largely been theoretical, however, manufacturers have a right to state what would or would not void a warranty. Most gear seems perfectly content with Schroeder Method. I have used Belles, Benchmark, Exogal, First Watt, COS, Redgum Audio, Eastern Electric components all successfully. They all have sounded far superior using Schroeder Method. I am also using another well known amplifier, and a different manufacturer’s preamplifier, currently with Schroeder Method successfully (but they are under review and I do not wish to disclose them at this time). I regularly use Schroeder Method for both RCA and XLR, and both work equally well with it. The body of information seems to be growing that the doubling of ICs is benign to most gear. Every instance that is tried is helpful information to learn about it. I imagine there could be some bizarre combination of gear that might be incompatible, so the warning stands. However, so far, all systems I am aware of that it has been tried have been without harm. |
My ears tell me that cabling matters everywhere. The vast majority of my audio adventure has centered around cabling, because it's easier and cheaper than component swapping and can make as big a difference...of course, finding the right (enough) components first should take precedent. That being said, my system is proof positive that they don't have to be 'perfect' to get to a great space. I generally work from the walls out and start with power cables, then i/c's, then s/c's...then wash, rinse and repeat! Not so much anymore, but that's definitely the way it went... |
budburma, that is a most lovely description of the benefits of Schroeder Method; thank you! :) I am elated that people are benefitting from the Method. You are testimony to the fact that it does not require an outlandish system, nor expensive cabling to obtain the benefit. (That being said, I have found correlation between the quality of the IC used in doubling and the quality of the end result, as would be expected.) What's really shocking about the Method is that for decades everyone has been captive to a method that is simply impoverished. Single IC imo is pretty poor, now that it becomes clear that there is a vastly superior alternative. The difference is anything but subtle, and shows how critical cabling is for systems. I think this would be the ultimate convincing proof of the importance of cables, if hobbyists would bother to try it. That is especially so since theorists disdain it, as though nothing good could come out of it. That makes the Schroeder Method all the sweeter as a victory for obtaining superior sound. :) I also have shown quite convincingly that the notion of certain supposedly superior designs in components which are thought to be insensitive to cables is erroneous. Repeatedly we have digital fans declaring that products like the Benchmark DACs, etc. are not influenced much/at all by cables. That has not been my experience. Even the Exogal Comet, which is supposed to be completely immune to such things because the proprietary signal processing makes a new waveform is very influenced by the ICs. From the source I swap between the Audio Sensibility Schroeder Method ICs and the double ICs I have built with the Audio Sensibility Y Cables and the Clarity Cable Organic ICs - and the difference is obvious, like changing the dimming settings on lights in the room. BTW, Blessed Father's Day! |
Several years ago I sold off my big rig and downsized because of shifting financial sands. My system is still beyond what a "normal" person might consider reasonable, but here, among my peeps, you know what I mean. I've felt a little put off by it's sound, but have really learned to sit with it instead of obsessing over the next improvement and stop listening so much to the equipment instead of the music. It was a strange moment to have obvious defiicits in sound point out that I had forgot to relax and enjoy the tunes! SO, the Schroeder method was doubly (triply?) welcomed by ratcheting way up the sound of my system, satisfying my tweaky pull and really making listening to the tunes through this system insanely fun and deeply satisfying. It took a while for the Audio Sensibility Impact SE's and the cables to settle in, but now the soundstage, imaging, detail and (most importantly for me) round, involving presence is SO improved that I can't wait to get home and listen and I don't feel like I've sold myself short with my 'downsize'. I guess I'm grateful that I had to downsize to get back to the tunes and the Schroeder method came to my attention when I could settle into it...and for the method itself, of course. It's an odd impetus to feel like analysis of a new tweak is more like pulling out the red pen and looking for what might not be working or what could be better rather than what's improved. That's never my intention, but often where I end up. The improvements with this tweak are not subtle and range from the describable to the ineffable where words fail and only emotion from an experience, identified and shared by others, can "descibe" it. Thanks, Doug, you (and this) rock. FWIW: Audio Sensibility Impact SE's w/ Gabriel Gold Rapture r 's CD/DAC ( Cary 306/200) to Integrated (VPI 299D) w/ Twisted Pair Designs Ascents Phono Pre (AES PH-1 modded to DJH) to Integrated An aside - Art Almstead has been an OEM cable maker over his garage for many cable companies for inexpensive to very expensive boutique partners and hand makes Twisted Pair cables that are really remarkable in that disappearing, no signal loss or sonic signature way - not too pricey and....welllll...awesome! http://www.twisted-pair-design.com/ |
Just a little update only Teo audio double/double XLR Schroeder set up. First is these cables just keep getting better with run time. I have a Dspeaker X4 and was actually running double conversion as i preferred the sound signature of my Benchmark Dac. Decided to use the Teo double/double from the X4 right to my Benchmark amps. All i can say is the Dac3 is going up for sale. The Teo cables and Schroeder method are truly next level. I am still amazed in the difference they make. Like i said before it is truly like a component change and need to be heard to be believed. Thank you again Doug for posting this and Taras and Ken of Teo audio for designing the best cables i have ever experienced! Saving up for the speaker cables next! |
I purchased a pair of Teo GC's double/double inXLR for my Benchmark Dac/Amps. I am speechless at the level of improvement! Honestly is like i changed the front end, amps or speakers. Huge improvement bottom to top, piano, horns, violins , drums and voices are way more like live music. The width of stage improvement is next level! I could keep going but one must try the Teo liquid cables and Dougs method of doubling interconnects. Thank you to Doug for bringing this to light and thank you to Taras and Ken of Teo audio for the incredible cables and service! |
A white paper describing our technology and approach is now on our website, linked from the home page and relevant product pages. It is 17 pages long but is written to be easy enough to read and understand by most people. http://exogal.com/images/PDFs/EXOGAL_DAC_and_PowerDAC_White_Paper.pdf Brian Walsh |
Markhh2, in answer to your first question, yes. I think that sort of result would be typical of Schroeder Method ICs. You will want to read my just published Audio Blast regarding the HyperDrive upgrade for EXOGAL Ion at Dagogo.com There is a LOT more where the Comet came from. Much more than you think possible. |
Budburmas post bring up a question I have. I have maxed out my wire budget on a pair of Wireworld Equinox Silver Eclipses’ (MSRP $700). Is the suggestion that a pair of “lesser” $300 ICs plus splitter a “better sounding” solution? As as an aside, Doug, I’ve stumbled on an excellent sounding system that’s been inspired by your write up of the Exogal comet. Home-brewed Roon Server, USB to an Exogal Comet, Singled ended IC’s to a pair of Quicksilver Mid Monos driving a pair of Audio Note AN E’s. I was planning on building a Raspberry Pi ROON Endpoint, but I’ve decided to wait until I can hear the Exogal Vortex. I’m hoping there’s one in your review queue. |
Well, there's a bold statement! I can say the the improvement is remarkable in 'realism' for me and in all realms of sonic descriptors and segments. All the qualities I love about the GG Rapture are amplified as if on steroids. It's also true that I was using a $200 IC (used price) which I really liked quite a bit. The SM with 2 of them and the y-splitters is a large step up; it should be acknowledged that it's now almost 3x the price. BUT, it's definitely sounds to be outstripping the law of diminishing returns! |
budburma, congratulations on your success! You have a lot more fun to come. Many permutations and discoveries await you if you desire to explore further. I simply cannot go back to single IC for any appreciable time, as it is paltry. What was considered by the industry to be very good sound (single IC) is now mediocre, imo. |
HA! HAVE is right in my backyard almost. Driven by there and wondered what they were many times.....elephant head and all... I put two pairs of Gabriel Gold Rapture (one 'r' version) on Audio Sensibility Impact SE splitters from my CDP/DAC (Cary 306/200) and tube integrated (VPI 299d) this morning and am slack jawed at the changes. Provocative. Compelling. A surprise birthday party kind of questioning astonishment. I see more silence between images and hear more detail/microdyamics - a LOT more - are what I've first noticed. I'm happy to post more after a bit for all the normal reasons. I'll also say that I was even a little taken aback by the added detail placing emphasis in ways that change the balance in how I heard/listened to some familiar recordings. Kind of disturbing if you like the familiar staying that way...But cool if you're alright with shifting landscapes, changelings and shape shifters. Love a good shape shifting. AND, my curiosity is already piqued over what contribution the y-splitter themselves are making and what the benefits might be of straight up 'double double' construction/design from the originators - some head-to-head with Teo's in-house double double vs. 2 pair w/y-splitters. Anyway, pretty impressive difference right off the starting line. Bound to be fun to see where this sound-track runs and what soundscapes there are along the way. |
I tested another HAVE Inc. custom built DS dual Canare StarQuad integrated assembly (per “Celander Specification”). The integrated assembly is 1-ft length having an RCA male connector at one end and an RCA female connector at the other end. Burned in a set on my cable cooker and tested it with a 1-meter set of Nordost Red Dawn ribbon interconnect cables. Dramatically improved the SQ over the ribbon IC’s alone. Such an integrated SM assembly could provide a “taste” of the improved SQ benefits of a SM assembly for those who own uber-expensive IC’s but don’t want to buy a second, identical set of uber-expensive IC’s (along with 4 external Y-splitters) to test the SM of interconnect placement in their system. |
It's been a while since this thread had a bump, so thanks, celander! Despite my lack of clarity in those two posts, I corrected them with a much more brief, correct discussion of the system chain, and I wish to enthuse about the stunning results obtained by using Schroeder Method on the AES/EBU output of the Musical Fidelity transport directly into the Exogal Comet DAC. One of the curiosities of this comparison between the Audio Sensibility double XLR cable used as AES/EBU and the assembled Clarity Cable pair with Audio Sensibility Y cables is that the sound quality changed rather dramatically between these two. The Exogal Comet is supposed to be signal agnostic as it literally constructs its own waveform, so theoretically if any DAC should have produced an identical result when merely switching cables it would be the Comet. But, that is far from what happened. Far from thinking the Comet did something in error, I think the Comet is the most correct DAC yet to handle the double AES/EBU. I had done this connection with other DACS, but never obtained such a stunning result. It seems the enhanced connection is leveraged by the Comet to create a stellar result. Theoretically with the Comet that shouldn't happen, but it has. I wonder if this is evidence of a signal/waveform change, confirmed by the Comet's rendering it differently between the two cables. In the past I have found that essentially the Comet did nullify format differences with digital sources. So, how to explain the substantial difference in this case with all variables identical except the particular double AES/EBU cable being used? That is most unexpected, but I am grateful for it. This calls for further exploration. But, for now, I'm going to enthuse in the stunning sound quality! The MF M1 CDT transport, which I believe was discontinued, in this configuration with the Exogal Comet DAC and Exogal Ion PowerDAC with HyperDrive upgrade (article coming soon at Dagogo.com) handly outperforms all the disc spinners I ever reviewed, including a few $10K players. But, not having those on hand to assess, who is to say they would not be improved dramatically as well? Anyone else ventured a try with Schroeder Method interconnects? |
Just want to update this thread with a reference to page 15 of the following thread, per Doug Schroeder's two posts from April 25th: https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/the-science-of-cables?page=15 |
Here is my room hit list for Friday morning at AXPONA 2019: 16-Aster: Shelter 384: Schiit 354: Fern & Roby 362: ATC/Lone Mountain Audio 442-444: Glenn Poor/Technics 452: Aesthetix 478: CPT A/V; Emerald Physics 552: Xact Audio 546: Linear Tube Audio 606: Linear Tube Audio 652: CAT 670: Benchmark Media Systems 696: Linear Tube Audio 1429: Sanders Sound Systems 1440: Durand Tonearms & Evolution Acoustics 1480: AGD Productions 8415: Linear Tube Audio 8470: Etymotic Research 9424: Mag-Lev Audio Hope to see some of you in the rooms!Dan |