Cables used were Verastarr Signature X2 and a pair of CH Acoustics X20 Anniversary Edition.
@ douglas_schroeder
Thanks for sharing this discovery, it definitely aids in bringing the listener closer to the recorded event!
Based upon the positive attributes of the Schroeder Method, I can't imagine the increase in performance one could get by eliminating the adapters/1 pair of RCA's and having the manufacturer combine the cables together if the AWG size is compatible with the RCA termination.
It is quite an experience to first hear what the Schroeder Method can do for SQ in your system. I doubt many will want to go back to single interconnect runs after trying it! Its been a few months since I first tried the Schroeder Method in my system, but from what I remember everything just got a LOT better. Deeper and wider soundstage, much more detailed and more meat on the bones of instruments and vocals....everthing seems so much more THREE DIMENSIONAL. Two Teo Ultras run with this method, I heard through the grapevine, definitely better a single Teo Kronon in SQ and I don't doubt that.
I took my former Teo GC over to a fellow Audiogoner friend's house to try in his system and within about 20 minutes his system went from being a little thin sounding, compared to my system, to full and beautiful. He was absolutely giddy and said this was the absolute best thing he had ever done to his system. Needless to say, he was glad that I had talked him into buying the 4 RCA splitters for this demonstrstion. He also bougt my GC on the spot. I think the Schroeder Method with the GCs in his system even had more impact than with the Ultras in mine. The sound improvement to me was as if he had changed out and upgraded at least a few components in his system. My gut tells me the sweet spot, best performance ratio for the dollar, may very be 2 GC IIs run with the Schroeder Method.
I sure hope Doug gets some kind of credit and/or compensation for this find. He already was my favorite reviewer before this recommendation.......Thanks again Doug!!
@tuffy72561 great minds think alike. I ordered a second 1M-run of GC2’s from Teo this past week for doing the Schroeder Method between one of my source components and my Pre.
A partial explanation of what you are looking for: We (the world) went to fiber optic as the ’carrier’ so to speak, is capable of much higher levels of signal carrying than ’wire’..... Multiplexing, and so on.
In glass fiber, it is still a metal, but it is an amorphous metal.... and the signal applied is slightly different, even though it is considered technically the same. Both electromagnetic, in this case, light.... not ’electricity’.
In the case of the liquid metal, we’ve stepped beyond the amorphous aspect, to full liquid. We are apparently, at the least, well beyond the signal carrying capacity of solidus ’wire’, thus we can (in a proper design), apparently... easily achieve GHz ranges in signal transmission.
With commensurate levels of potential multiplexing (akin to the optical scenario), with low to no interference issues. Thus those rich harmonics of the signal, all in proper context. Without the falsified emphasis in them (distortion/phase smear), which wire will -- and does have.
Hence the impression of some, "darker, but incredibly rich".
Wig, tuffy +2, Thanks Doug, I decided to just pick up the aq adapters at Music Direct , since I have the Teo GC and Ultra...my initial impression is it will be hard to go back to single ic...Soundstage got bigger, musically effortless, more black background and 3D. Sound is more fuller...
This is what I found out , As good as my other system, I felt the it sound a bit flat after I listened to my system with Double ic, well another $57 and maybe good decent ic will do, to have Double ic on this second system...
And the other folks having wild fun with the Schroeder Method.
If I can interject with a few words of caution. The basic concept behind the Schroeder Method opens up the potential for some quite amazing improvements in interconnect performance ( the Bob Smith comment that celander referenced up-thread does a very good job explaining how/why the performance improvements ). And while this is quite exciting we have to keep in mind a few things. First this is a new application which has not been thoroughly explored, and as an example we have seen ( and heard from clients about ) issues with mis-matched cables. These issues include oscillations/feed-back loops that could prove harmful to equipment and the fact that careful matching of cables produces the best sonic results ( and here we are referring to both cable type and length ).
So by all means dive into this, but with whatever combination you are experimenting with please start in a relatively safe part of your system ( up-stream from your pre-amp as opposed to down-stream from your pre-amp ).
I have positive results to report here as my good friend Bon ( @jayctoy ) and others have already reported with this shotgun IC tweak .....Bottom line, the tweak will stay in my system!
I first tried the tweak with dual GCs, and the results were decent and acceptable, but later I tried shotgunning with an Ultra and a GC, and the results were stunningly better, IMO.
I didn't notice a huge improvement in the air or holographic nature of my soundstage (which was good to begin with), but it did come forward a few feet from my speakers towards me, so I guess that’s a little bit of soundstage extension. The biggest impacts in my system: generally better “detail” across the board (no, my system did NOT become brighter or edgier, but actually appeared a little “meatier”), with an edge going to bass reproduction (tighter, quicker, more fleshed out and tactile) and an overall better “presence” to vocals and instruments. In fact my system sounds a little “faster” now, and the transient response and dynamics really improved a bit in this shotgun configuration. Lastly, the system sounds (I’m only saying “sounds” because the volume knob on my preamp is more or less in the same position as pre-shotgun) more “powerful” with my measly 8wpc 300b-based mono blocks.
After the 9 hour or so session this weekend with the shotgunned Teo cables, I really tried hard to detect if there were any adverse effects / negatives from using the ICs (from my DAC to my preamp) in this way.... I only came up with one.... cost. I really heard / found no sonic deficiencies as compared to my system without shotgunning ICs. I think I was expecting maybe a slight loss in focus, but nope. Imaging is still great.
I did find myself playing tunes quite a bit louder than I normally do on some cuts... a testament to an apparently lower distortion and a blacker presentation afforded by the shotgun IC tweak.
Thanks to Doug Schroeder and Taras for bringing this forth. Well done gents!
I am gratified by the people who are willing to give an ear and try this, albeit watching out for the cautionary comments about the experimental nature of the Schroeder Method at this stage.
I summoned the nerve to put up a few thousand dollars worth of gear to test it out with XLR. It works, and works stunningly! I was concerned about the potential of signals being crossed by the pin configuration of a Y adapter/cable being opposite of the norm. I used a multimeter to test for continuity to ensure the signal was not crossing when going from Y splitter to two XLR interconnects, then back together via a reverse Y cable. It's not the easiest thing in the world to flip the on switches of gear on an experimental rig that you worry could cause one or more components to fail.
The results were as good, perhaps even more astounding with XLR. But, that cannot be said in any way definitively, as this was a different set of electronics and cables. At this point it shows that it's not only good for RCA; it may be a universal improvement. IMHO, this is no small event, but a watershed moment in system configuration. Unless I encounter some failure of a component due to the use of the Schroeder Method, I can't go back to single interconnects. It's just too paltry, too impoverished sounding.
I would like to clarify; I do not consider this a tweak. This is way too powerful, repeatable and in the signal path to be considered a tweak, imo. I see most tweaks as insipid methods, almost inversely insignificant in comparison to the Schroeder Method. I don't believe I am exaggerating - Having put up hundreds of rigs at MSRP up to $100K - to say that this easily has the sonic value of a $25K improvement of components in a rig, and some cases more. I have made dozens of discrete rigs with the Kingsound King III electrostatic speakers and never, ever have they performed as they are today.
The power structure of the system using the Schroeder Method is astonishing. The low end is dramatically improved. I do not see a downside to this in terms of sound. I'm guessing that a small contingent of people who want mushier, more recessed, less distinct sound will object. So be it; have the music your way by using a single IC. Not me; I don't think I'm ever going back.
I hope this sparks a new wave of sound quality in the industry and community. I think this has potential to open a lot of minds that have been closed, and to advance the average guy's rig several levels without decimating the sales of the upper echelon equipment. This has been one of the most amazing months for me as an audiophile. The level of change possible now has brought me closer to realization of my conceptualization of how an audio system should sound than ever before. I am elated that it seems to work with both RCA and XLR; I had no strong reason to doubt that it wouldn't.
Again, please exercise whatever caution and care you need, and if you are in doubt, please discuss with your manufacturer! This is a do at YOUR own risk activity, as I have said several times. My guess is there are people looking at this and scratching their heads, and word will get around. I don't think this is a small deal. Example; the rig I put together to test this is under $10K MSRP and it trashed every other rig regardless of cost that I've used with the King III. (Of course, what might have been the case had those rigs used the Schroeder Method?)
Naysayers, mockers... please, don't even bother. I have zero desire to argue with you about this. I have learned to pay little attention to you over the years, thank God! I never would have done such interesting and efficacious work if I had listened to the hecklers.
We kinda broke our normal protocol and gave it a few listens over the last several days through the burn-in period and the initial impressions are very very positive.
A more thorough comparative listening session tomorrow ( primarily a comparo with a configuration using splitters and our new Ultra Plus...and just for giggles the also new Reference Ne Plus Ultra ) . Will post results of that session shortly after.
Jumping in on this thread a little late . What does the Schroeder method actually do? Lower resistance? I use an all balanced system so I’m intrigued that it works balanced as well. However not to power amps ?
Also has anyone just tried soldering up a shotgun rig like this (even with standard cheaper Mogami type cables ) rather than adaptors ?
Yes, some have some small experience...most have little experience in this.
Wire can have reflections and potential resonances, careful when doing this with wire....., which is why it has been avoided for the past 30-40 years in audio (the audiophile 'high end' years of audio systems) and is considered a no-no across the entire electronic spectrum of systems coupling.
amorphous.. notably less likely to have issue...(amorphous wire is a new thing)
Liquid metal alloy...less likely again than amorphous. (an even newer thing)
(culled from experience at the multi billion dollar ’transmission line concerned’ major telecommunications company ---level of testing)
@tuffy72561 I inserted my recently-obtained second set of Teo Audio GC2’s into my system in parallel with a previous set of GC2’s using 4 prs. of “Monster” Y-splitters (China) between my Oppo DVD player and my Teo Audio Liquid Pre passive preamp.
My preliminary impressions follow. (These preliminary impressions were based on listening to the first four tracks from the second disc of Radiohead’s OKNOTOK double audio CD album tonight —I’m heading out on a week-long holiday tomorrow as I write this. That gives me time to burn in the new set of GC2’s while we are away.)
First, I noticed an apparent increase in background quietness or silence. This is different from a decrease in the apparent noise floor, as the system already had low or non-existent noise. I don’t know how else to characterize this.
Second, I noticed an apparent increase in the overall resolution of the presented sound reproduction. Soundstage space seemed to increase, as well as the reproduced musical content within that space. I heard more musical informationwith the parallel interconnect configuration than before using single interconnects—I said to myself more than a couple times, “where did that (musical info) come from?”, having to repeatedly replay the passage several times to confirm what I heard was actually there.
About the Y-splitters... I am not terribly thrilled with my EBay purchase of “Monster” Y-splitters from China. The Y-splitters’ male connectors are loose and readily rotate on my Oppo’s female outputs. (The Y-splitters’ male connectors are tight on the female inputs of my Liquid Pre, so no problem with that connection.) The Y-splitters‘ female connectors are adequate and tight when coupled to my Teo Audio cable male connectors. I likely could gently crimp the single male connectors on the Y-splitters with some pliers to resolve that looseness, but I wanted to point it out at the outset. I should try Y-splitters from a different source, such as those from Audioquest. (I initially chose the Monster-styled Y-splitter over the Audioquest product due to the Monster product being more compact and having less apparent “wire.”)
What can I say after a week , and the cables settled , music hit all over my senses, like never before, as soon as my adapters arrive , I will try different brand of cables , on my second system...this method works....
Yes, the Schroeder Method works. I was shocked the first time I tried it how much information was revealed to have been blocked/lost by using a single interconnect. There will be those who because of theory disdain, or even outright ridicule the Method. It does seem to fly in the face of theory, however in every implementation of it (Noting the repeated cautions about how to implement it) I have done it is powerfully positive.
This may bring the discussion of the efficacy of cables into new territory.
All I can say is the Schroeder Method really works. Thanks again Doug! To anybody reading this, if you are not totally sarisfied with your system, considering upgrading a component or just looking to tweak your system..... please try this method first before you do anything else. Your jaw might drop upon hearing what your system sounds like with the Schroeder Method!
I almost forgot to thank Taras too, as he mentioned the Schroeder Method to me first just minutes before he introduced me to Doug Schroeder at the AXPONA show. I got lucky, or as Spock would say "random chance seems to have operated in my favor" Lol
I just wanted to add that when this method was first mentioned to me by Taras it had no name. It was just somethi ng Doug had thought about and tried sucessfully.If it wasn't for my trust in both Taras' and Doug's opinions, from prior dealings and recommendations, I probably would have scoffed at this method..... figuring if it is so good why wasn't it already in use throughout audiodom at this point.
Ah. But you can't beat the final thrust and propelled object flying furiously in some direction only to land on someone's nose after applying the Heimlich to some red-faced minion.
I am the friend tuffy mentioned in his post. We put the second GC in from my MW 5400 to the TRL DUDE after listening to the single GC for a few cuts. It was just plain awesome!!! I bought tuffy's GC on the spot and have loved every minute with THEM since. I bought T Ramey's 0.6 mtr. GC II to go with my 0.6 GC original to use between the Whest 3.0 RDT SE phono pre to the DUDE. Even though they aren't identical cables, there was a similar increase in performance throughout the musical spectrum. tuffy though the change in my system putting in the double GC's over the single was even more dramatic than when he put double Ultras in his vs. single Ultras. Not saying the GC's sounded better overall, just a bigger change with the less expensive ICs. I can't vouch for this as I've never heard tuffy's system. THE END. I'll add my thanks Doug and Taras for talking to Scott and I at Axpona about this amazing improvement. Thanks also to Bob Smith who modded my Nuforce Ref 9 amps and made them SOTA. It's good to be retired and with a very nice system to enjoy the emotional impact of music.
@teo_audio @taras22 Is it possible for you to tell us how you connected the two Jr cables to one connector? I'm curious if one cable is tied to the positive and the other cable to the negative?
You follow the arrow direction and attach 2 left cables to each connector; therefore 2 to right cables to each connector. Then put the connectors in the component just as you would have with just one cable per side. If you are using the Audioquest splitters, you need to smoothly psh them all the way in--they are a very tight fit.
Thanks Bob but I’m talking about the double double jr cables Teo has for sale here. I’m just wondering if they use the negative wire from each cable soldered to the negative on the KLE connector and then the positive wire from each cable soldered to the positive. Or do they just use both wires on one cable for the negative and both wires on the other cable for the positive for each left and right connector. I hope I’m making sense... :)
@t_ramey Good question. I think the answer to your question might depend on whether both signal and ground legs of each cable are composed of the liquid metal fluid.
The publicly available details of their cable configuration is scant at best. The cost of the liquid metal fluid is expensive, so they may use a solid type of wire for the ground leg of their less expensive cables.
@celander Thanks. I'm thinking of making a cheap pair of shotgun cables for a second system so I'm kinda wondering if it matters or not to have the pos/neg wires from the same cable when trying to hook them up to a single connector. It may depend on the geometry of the cable, I'm guessing.
Just to be sure, t_ramey, when you begin cooking up your own designs you are doubly into the "do at your own risk" arena. I doubt TEO wants to be responsible for home made cables and outcomes. I can see perfectly why they would not wish to divulge such information - and no one should be aggrieved because of that.
Sorry that this is so late but we had a new toy to play with and one thing led to another and time flew and here we are. So again, much sorries.
And one more thing, we kinda miscalculated the burn-in time required to get things to be at their best, and that greatly extended the timeline for the test ( we are going to continue the burn-in to see if there is any more settling to be done, and will report back if something changes significantly ).
Soooo.....the line-up for this test was the Double Double, which is basically two GC Jnr assemblies into single plugs ; two sets of a new cable, the Ultra Plus, into Audioquest splitters ; and a set of our new Reference Ne Plus Ultra cables, which are now our flag-ship cables.
The results were quite interesting. The Double Double was pretty darn amazing, especially considering the price. It didn’t beat the Ref but it also didn’t embarrass itself either. The new Ref pretty well carried the field in every parameter, but at 25x the price it should well have ( and yes this left us wondering how good a Ref Double Double could sound like ) but make no mistake about it, it was a good fight. The new Ultra Plus proved to be a very fine cable on its own, but saddled with obvious issues of splitters, brought up the rear, but it was very close to the Double Double ( we had thought the quality of the cable would allow it to beat the Double Double but the elimination of the splitters created a real unfair advantage for the Double Double ).
So there you have it. We are still exploring the limits of this cable style so at present the only cable available in the Double Double line will be the 0.6m length. But as we continue testing we hope to have longer lengths available in the very near future, so stay tuned.
And one last thing. We are also working on developing our own splitters which we hope will provide much better performance than those presently available. Once those are available we will probably replay this test.
@taras22 thanks for this summary. Sooooo...let’s chat pricing. 2x Jr @ 0.6M run is $749; Ultra Plus 0.6M run is $???; and Reference Ne Plus Ultra 0.6M run $???
The typical Y-splitter is wire-based, so it should benefit from a burn-in conditioning using a Cable Cooker. Just daisy chain them together and use an extra conventional interconnect (if needed) to complete the connection between the Cable Cooker’s input and output.
Please remember to heed Teo Audio’s warning about NOT conditioning their interconnects with a Cable Cooker.
Alan Kafton said 2 to 2-1/2 days should be adequate for burning in conventional Y-splitters with his Cable Cooker. After thinking about my last post a bit more, I was incorrect about daisy-chaining Y-splitters without using the full complement of interconnects. One must use a complete set of interconnect cables at all relevant connectors of each Y-splitter to ensure that all of the Y-splitter connections are burned in.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
