Doug Schroeder Method, Double ic

After several weeks of listening to SM double ICs from cdp to pre amp I have replaced the Kimber KCAG with 2 sets of Mark Levinson Red Rose silver custom ICs.  I like pure Litz construction especially using the Schroeder concept--new wire has many strands of pure silver Litz.  Very, very positive initial  results over the Kimber.  Will age for a week or two--let this board know after.  Oh, blew my power supply in my Marchand crossover so SM can be extended rather directly to amps.  I am a 15 foot pair short so I will let you know.

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. 

What are some of the biggest improvements some of you folks are experiencing with this method?

@ douglas_schroeder

Interesting regarding your use with the Hosa XLR's. It surprises me given they apparently use high purity copper and the actual connectors look like Neutrik brand. Oh well bad call on my part. The cost really starts ramping up with Audio Sensibility's system unfortunately. It appears Pangea has a modestly priced set of connectors (RCA) to implement parallel runs, as well as their own interconnects. I don't have any experience with their audio cables but do have one of their power chords which seems fine. Having owned and bought into hideously expensive cables in the past to the point of embarrasment its not likely I would ever repeat. At one point in my audio-foolish behavior I had more money sunk into cables than most people have in their entire two channel systems reading this thread. Never again. 

Since those days I have made dozens of interconnects (not scientifically based) of my own design, all of them outperforming expensive cables. At some point along the way it finally sunk in that the vast majority of cables are nothing more than tone controls, and people use them to make up for some other anomaly (sound defect) in their systems. How else can you explain the vast amount of used cables on the market for sale on places like Audiogon. 

Regarding the science of cables, if left up to me all cable manufacturers would be required to not only test and measure all of the necessary parameters but to also publish those specs in conjunction with their wild ads and claims. Perhaps many of you are aware of the extreme extent that Belden went into while developing their Iconoclast Cables. Its doubtful any other company has put so much science, technology and research into their cables. I don't have any experience with them directly, but have read all of the white papers and data that went into these cables. This is not to say they couldn't be improved by parallel runs however. While not cheap, they also are far from being anywhere near the most expensive cables on the market either. 

Bob Smiths comments in your original article kept to the science which is important while trying to explain why there is such a difference in parallel runs. I found this appealing and compelling.

Has anyone tried the SM with RCA or XLR between preamp and a 1200AS Class D amp?

Thanks.

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. 

Gerry, how are your HAVE custom built IC's working out for you? Post your thoughts....

Thank you Doug.

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. 

Maxima95....my system is fully balanced XLR....totally  interconnect Schroeder wired and love the way it sounds.

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. 

Thank you Doug. Gonna need to give it a go eventually! Anyone doing Canare cable in an XLR version?

I got positive feedback from A’gon member ger1823 who ordered a few sets of Canare dual assemblies from HAVE Inc. per the “Celander Specification” with the best Canare RCA connectors HAVE stocks. I encouraged him to post his findings here on this thread. 

I am using an Audio Sensibility SM Impact SE between DAC and preamp and a Canare SM DA 202 AESEBU between CD transport and DAC.   I prefer this combination to single runs.

I find that the single AESEBU and analog XLR cables sound somewhat anemic in comparison, not as full bodied or dimensional.

I have a  Canare SM L-4E5C STAR QUAD, but am skittish about  using it between a 1200AS amp and the preamp.

Will this method work between a DAC and the Line Magnetic 508IA integrated tube amplifier?

For those who have experienced improvements by doubling up, what was the gauge of the original single interconnect in your situation?

celander, did he mention if they do an xlr version. I will need to look them up and give them a call.

I double up 16 gauge conductors on my SM ICs and the results are stunning.  To me the sheer ease and control of the music hits me first.  Then comes the wonderful full bodied and expansive sound  resulting from this method of building ICs. 

I now offer this SM method IC as a regular offering in my line. I do not use sound degrading Y connectors, but wire two individual ICs within one jacket.  Best way to do it by a wide margin. 

Listening right now to a newly built double run for a customer and just love the impact, control, exceptional ease and double portion of meat on the bones body and weight. 

Thanks Doug! 

flat4: HAVE built a digital (110 ohm) Canare Dual Assembly (SM) with XLR connectors for me. Pretty sure they can do the same with audio cables terminated with XLR connectors.

@grannyring: What brand do you use for RCA connectors for the SM assemblies?

Grannyring,  Are those listening notes before or after burn in?

Great question. Two new ICs. One standard and one double both with KLEI Absolute Harmony plugs which are the best sounding rca plugs I have used.

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. 

@douglas_schroeder:

Sounds like we need a SM IC “shootout” using only integrated SM parallel assemblies.

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.

@douglas_schroeder Do you know if this method would work with ICs connecting a DAC to a tube integrated amp?

Also clarification on how to implement it, it's simply soldering two sets of interconnects to the same terminal on the connectors correct?

Thanks in advance.

 Celander Doug is from Wisconsin , we are from Illinois , we live close to Him, I would like to attend the shootout..,

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.  :)

Indeed! I referenced “we” in the editorial sense as meaning “YOU, DS.”  Lol

DS: I pm’ed you. 

Douglas, you mention owners of NOS DACs needing to take caution when employing the SM, why? Are you referring specifically to those DACs which take the output directly from the chip with no buffer?

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. 

@douglas_schroeder Thanks for the reply. Do you know if the popular R2R DACs from Denafrips (Terminator, Venus) are compatible with this method?

My Theta DSPro Basic 3A R2R DAC has no issues with SM IC’s. 

Doug thank you for the clarification, I misread it, thank you for the welcome invitation as well, I know if ever I will visit you and listen to your system , I will learn a lot, 

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

Goodness gracious, you forgot High Water Sound !? Audio Show Rule #1, always visit Jeff, the sound will be fabulous and the tune-age exquisite.

+1  Jeffrey's room would be at the top of my list, were I attending.

@taras22  if you don't mind, can you reach out to me via PM on your thoughts about the latest Horning Hybrid Eufrodite speakers that he will be demoing? I'm assuming you will be attending. Thanks.

Davidten are you able to attend Axpona this year...?

I'm going, first time.

ozzy

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

^^^Doug tested an SM AES/EBU digital cable and recommends it!

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? 

I will have an Exogal Comet Plus DAC in the system on Sunday. Feeding it will be my Jay’s Audio CDT2 MK2 transport. I have a few AES/EBU digital cables to sample, including an SM assembly. Should be interesting. 

celander - Which SM AES cable are you going to listen to?

I look forward to your findings.

Doug - Then (1) Audio Sensibility double XLR cable used as an AES cable worked well with the Comet DAC?  Since I have a set of them  (Audio Sensibility Impact SE double XLR),  I had been wondering about trying one for AES duty.

The only thing stopping me was the length - not long enough.

Maxima95 in answer to your first question, yes.

I have moved a lot of gear/systems in order to use too short cables for comparison. :) 

I'm using Doug's method....gave up silver (expensive) cables ...his sound better in my system to me.  (all Ayre/Vandersteen system)

maxima95, I have a Dual Canare StarQuad digital IC with Neutrik XLR connectors.