Doug Schroeder Method, Double ic

herndonb

Doubling up on the wire from amp to speaker made a huge improvement on my system. Perhaps, because the speakers are 4 ohm, but it sounded dramatically better. I was quite certain I wouldn't hear anything, but it was the opposite. TRY IT. :-)
Amazing!

douglas_schroeder

Congratulations to those who have tried and found out. :)  

Thanks to everyone for your help! -:)  

I purchased 2 from Audio Sensibility and love the detail, especially in the midrange. More clarity and solid bass. I'm thinking these are keepers!

Bringing this thread back up as I never seen or heard of it before and just read about the S.M. for the first time when i was looking at the Anticables website and it was mentioned.... I am curious as to the systems of posters who are using this method. Reference? Mid fi?

Is there any chance of damaging very expensive components? Can it overload the circuit or the equipment in let’s say a phono stage to the preamp?
Thank you.

I tried it on my jolida phono stage from my music  hall going to my art audio preamp it works, no damage was done.i also tried if from my Yamaha sacd s1000 going to my viva integrated 300b it works...Read Doug post on this thread , for safe use, or pm Him.very nice guy.

vinylshadow, thanks for asking; this is intended as a premium, HiFi activity. I intend it for use on the best systems available. I believe the Method is beneficial for all systems, but in particular I intend it for high end rigs. 

I have continued to use my method in a variety of systems with no ill effects, and always very nice improvement in sound quality. Recently, I have been reviewing a premium tube output DAC that responds beautifully to the Schroeder Method of IC Placement. 

I have also tried it with yet another set of cables (also under review, and again have success. I have not signed off on use of my method with passively networked cables. I don't much care for them anyway. As prior, until it is demonstrated to be benign to nearly any conceivable system or with particular cables, it is a "do at your own risk" activity. But, again, I have not heard of a single instance of trouble. 

Thanks Doug.
Is this a relatively new method as I don’t think I’ve ever read any cable manufacturer offering their interconnects doubled and soldered into a single connector.

Can expensive interconnects be damaged when disassembling the incorporated connectors and then resoldering 2 cables into a single connector? Is there ANY downside to this method?

How does the changeover work. A person buys their preferred interconnects and ships them off to a person to double them up and put the ends in a connector?
And if I may ask, if this Double IC truly is the bees knees and would make their cables and thus a reference system sound even better, why haven’t cable manufactures hit the ground running with this method....

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. 

Doug. Best of luck with your patent!
Is there a limit on how high the quality or expense the interconnects used are. In other words, is what makes the S.M. special is that you can use 2 sets of less expensive cables to get the sonics of a very expensive cable? As some pairs of interconnects are over $2000! Shoot, even $5000!
I imagine that the best option is to use 2 of the same interconnects, whichever you choose.

I like your idea of using Y cables as it is reversible but if I’m going to try this, I think I might look into a company to solder interconnects into one connector on both ends.

Do you have a recommended RCA plug as some use Keith Eichman’s and some use multi layered gold plated connectors...

Your necessary disclaimer still gets me nervous but do you have a link to any reference system reviews of the S.M.? I’m scouring the interwebs to find them. Thanks.

vinylshadow, succinctly, no limit; my experience is that Schroeder Method works on both economical and high end cables. Note once again, I am not suggesting open trials of passively networked cables such as MIT. I simply do not know the effects, but will not endorse it without support for the idea. 

It does not, in my experience cause cheap cables to leapfrog more expensive ones. Sorry; quality rule still applies. It might even be said that the better/more favored the cable, the more it will benefit from the Method. 

I have only officially recommended homogenous sets, but some are using mixed and with good results. Your call. 

I use, depending upon application, both Audioquest and Audio Sensibility Y cables. I do not like the degradation I have heard in use of splitters for XLR and RCA cables. 

Plugs are all over the place; everyone has a favorite. I assess entire cables, not DIY, so I'm not your authority on naked plugs. 

I believe there are several $20-50K rigs out there using the Schroeder Method. I have found no limits on performance enhancements in use of Schroeder Method of IC Placement associated with the quality of the rig. 

I have the Benchmark AHB2 and DAC3 and came across this IC method on the Benchmark AHB2 Impressions thread.  So I just ordered a set of balanced XLR Y-cables and IC's from Bluejeans Cables, as an experiment.  The Y-cables and IC's will all be 1 footers to keep the loom of spaghetti under control.  I went from a star quad cable to a lower capacitance Van Damme and immediately noticed a change in the sound that I liked so I am curious to see how the Schroeder Method works in my setup.

Are you saying the Y cables are going to be the same length as the ICs, at 1'? That would be a rather odd implementation of the Schroeder Method, with the Y cables the same length as the ICs. In almost every implementation I have done/seen, the ICs are much longer than the Y cables. 

Frankly, I'm not sure you will gain great benefit if you end up with two pair of ICs totalling 3'; the Y cables contributing 2', and the ICs themselves at 1' long. I really cannot tell you the outcome of that, as it is fairly the reverse of the intent of the Schroeder Method as implemented. I hope it works, but I would not be surprised if it did not work well. The idea is to maximize the contribution/length of the ICs versus the Y cables. 

OR, are you saying the entire doubled IC cable will be 1' long? Then you would have two Y cables at about 6", and the twin ICs at 6". 

Hello,

The minimum Y is 1’ at Blue Jeans so that means 2’ of Y and in order to minimize capacitance, I ordered 1’ IC’s. So the total length of my cable is 3’.  But the split happens at the Neutrik connector so while it is physically part of the Y assembly, it is just 2 cables coming from that connector, if that makes sense.

So you are saying this is not a good configuration. If not, I can still cancel my order.

Thank you for responding.

Full public disclosure more than a year ago means no patent potential though it could be tough to create a defensible patent for parallel wires.

I am relying upon the opinion of the IP Attorney i am partnering with for the patent.  :)

Adurerca, 
I have not seen anyone in the audio industry or community warn of capacitance issues at even 1m lengths,  even with a pair of Schroeder Method sets in a system. I have used two pair of 2m Schroeder Method ICs in systems on a regular basis, both XLR and RCA.

Imo, longer ICs and shorter Y cables would be better.  But, only direct comparison would tell. If Blue Jeans won't make shorter Y cables, get 2 foot ICs from Blue Jeans, and y cables from Audio Sensibility - unless you must have L/R leads so long.

Disclaimer: I have reviewed Audio Sensibility Y Cables for Dagogo.com 

Well then I hope you IP attorney is providing you good advice and/or you are being completely un front with him/her.   From what I have read you have provided full and public disclosure for your idea. It is readily evident and documented in these forums. It is "enabling", i.e. you have provided more than sufficient information for someone to replicate what you did.


In most of the world, there is no grace period. If you publicly disclose your idea, that is it, it is prior art (even if your own), and you can't get a patent. In the U.S., there is a 1 year grace period.


Many cables are already multiple parallel cables, so again, difficult to create a defensible patent around the concept. It is your money, which I am sure the patent attorney is quite happy to take. Patent attorneys write patents. You pay extra for patent searches.

audio2design, thank you for your contribution/concern in the matter. I believe that everything you have brought up has already been addressed. 

I bought a Marantz sacd  sa 10 player , I felt that it’s fleshing out a lot of music more than an ic can accommodate, I have feeling the double will be a good option, I will need a balance configurations, Iam not sure if that’s posible .Right now I have the 4 ft rca double ic , I will try to connect it see what will happen . Doug any input here?

jayctoy, not sure what you mean by "fleshing out more than an IC can accommodate"? I have found NO limit to what cables can reveal as components and systems are built. Why would you think you know the limits of the system? Your comment doesn't make sense to me. I would guess that if you tried the Schroeder Method you would find a lot more of what can be fleshed out, and that is not even close to the limit. Dozens more changes and improvements can be had with almost any system. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding your comment, but I don't think you have come anywhere near the limits of what a cable can transmit. 

Yes, balanced is possible; I have done so many times. I prefer to use my method with either RCA or XLR. 

I am not sure if you are the first person here to try it on SACD. Should be interesting. It's "do at your own risk", which I presume you know if you read this thread. But, I have not heard of a single instance to date of any issues/damage, etc. from it.  The only method that imo can beat the Schroeder Method is to split the signal and run four channels of amps instead of two, but that's a pricey advantage.   

Doug before I bought my Marantz Sacd player , Iam using yamaha sacd s1000 , And Marantz 8005 sacd players still do I have 3 systems .iam very familiar how this two players perform in term of how much they dissect info out of the disc, compare to my SA10 they don’t come close in terms of how good this player dissect music.why I thought double ic is needed using xlr, that’s what I mean.Celander mentioned this double ic starquad from HAVE Inc, which I bought , it’s rca , which is excellent, but now I will need xlr double ic, Now I know it’s possible to have SM in xlr .thanks 

Doug I have been reading this thread, I think Iam the OP on this thread correct? Go check it?

If I memember I have used double ic from tt to phono preamp , sacd players  to preamps , preamps to amps, tubes and ss. Without any problem on my systems.

jayctoy, I was referring to use of Schroeder Method with SACD. I didn't recall anyone discussing that. Perhaps you did along the way, but I may not have realized it, and have not been curating this thread for a long time. I did recall your endorsement, enjoyment of it. So, it was my wonder at the use of SACD, not a thought that you were just getting into the game.  You should find great value in using it with XLR. 

Thanks You for the reply ...

What’s shaking, peeps? Just confirming that the aforementioned patent application is undergoing active examination before the US patent office. 

And audio2design, we filed our provisional application well within the prescribed timeframe for securing a valid patent from a non-provisional application claiming priority to that earlier-filed provisional. 

@jayctoy SM analog IC’s with XLR connectors should be fine with your SACD player. Please report your findings with it!

On a whim I combined A23 ICs with Artisansilvercables pure silver cables via fixed y- adaptors between a Zodiac Platinum DAC and a Wavac EC300b amp. The result was a significant increase in spatial resolution with slightly increased treble. The A23 cables have great resolution with slight treble reticence. The pure silver cables have beautiful colour, especially on strings but with a slight sibilants and strident treble. The combo seems a happy marriage of the virtues while loosing the foibles. I fully endorse the method and will next try it on the Zodiac‘s 10m BNC clock cable

antigrunge2, I appreciate your feedback here! It’s quite a bit of fun to explore different methods, and I am glad that you took the time to do so.

If by your phrase, "Zodiac’s 10m BNC clock cable", you mean a 10m long run of cable, then I suggest you inquire as to what the capacitance of that cable will be, and should discuss with your manufacturer.

In the Iconoclast by Belden and BAV Power Cord review, just published, Galen Gareis, former product design engineer, pointed out to me that one potential concern exists with the Schroeder Method, a potential for certain cables to when paired have excessive capacitance, i.e. like an unfurled capacitor. This is not a danger for the vast majority of cables, but could theoretically be so for certain flat conductor cables, like foils.
I mention this because somewhere there is likely someone with a custom set of foil ICs who might think of doubling them. THAT probably should be avoided. Also, extremely long runs of cable change the impedance, and some esoteric components may not fare well with it. I say this because in all likelihood there are not many/any serious ribbon ICs, because this would also impact the other parameters of L,R,C - and this may be far less than optimum as opposed to more traditional cable types for ICs. 

As I have said all along, repeatedly, this is a do at your own risk activity, and if there is any question of the particular cables, length, type, etc. one needs to check with the manufacturer about it.

Thanks Doug,

I was actually referring to a 20in BNC cable for a 10m clock, will report on that when I obtain the necessary y-adapters

antigrunge2,  LOL, yes, I just noticed this when I saw comments in another thread in regard to 10 MHz clock...  Too funny!  Thanks for the clarification.   :) 

Your input would be appreciated, because to date I do not know of anyone who has tried Schroeder Method with an external clock! 

Short answer: it works. I managed replacing a very expensive Shunyata Sigma clock cable with two middling BNC cables without ANY loss in SQ. (hint: doubling up on the Shunyata for me was a bridge too far...) So pretty good vindication of the method, I guess. The cables were 30in long