Anyone HEARD the qol 'signal completion' device?

My response is for those who like me saw the ads and curious as to whether or not this is worth trying out. Also kudos to Robert Harley who called it as he heard it knowing there was going to be some controversy to put it milidly.His article convinced me to give it a try.I installed the Qol between my preamp& amps.The first thing I noticed was the increase in volume which makes comparisons problematic because the louder volume source will tend to sound better. The second thing I noticed switching the bypass on or off and adjusting the volume was there were some changes in the sound and soundfield but nothing at that point that would get me to spend my money. After a couple hours, I decided that since it was a new unit, I would give it some time to break in. I shut down my amps & ran music through it for 2 days 24/7 before I sat down for another listening session. Again working with the volume differences, I went back & forth with the bypass switch.Things were getting interesting.The soundstage, width ,depth & height had noticeably increased. The music had an additional richness to it. There was more air around the instruments and overall the sound was simply more natural.Simply miked acoustic music that is well recorded has a live truthfulness to it. I ran it another 24 hours after this session and had friends over. My buddy is a skeptical electric engineer. His wife loves music but thinks we are a little crazy. After 5 minutes she said ," you don't need to tell me when it it is on or off, I can tell instantly. The soundstage is bigger and everything sounds better". My friend the double E took his time but by end of the evening he encouraged me to buy it. I spent a couple more good listening sesions before making up my mind to purchase one.To me it gets me that much closer to the live event. With some recordings you might not notice much of a differenc and with others you will have a smile on your face. I never heard anything I never noticed on a recording before but the presentation was different in a positve way. Background vocals that previously buried in the mix were delightfully involving. The same went for drums and cymbals that sounded much closer to real then before.If you are considering trying a Qol, I encourage you to do so with one caveat and that is if either your speakers, amp or preamp cost less then the Qol I would wait a while because there are a lot of good changes you make make to a system for $4K. For the record my system is not in the $250K I saw in another response but I could buy a new top of the line Corvette with the money I spent on it.

Ron, although people do debate whether the effect is a good or a bad thing, it does seem to be a very noticeable one, certainly when trying at least 2 or 3 recordings. In my system I hear a lot of out of phase ambiance which makes it sound like I am more enveloped in the music. A bit like listening to an out of phase signal whilst still listening to the in phase signal. You can rarely miss that effect. The stage gains about 2 feet in a stage that is otherwise 13ft or so. Again very noticeable. I also find that what people call forward is actually a diminution of depth and an increase in the size of individual instruments. Instruments do sound more illuminated from within (as RH said) but that is at the cost of loss of imaging and positioning accuracy. When I did a simple sweep I got a 2db difference across the spectrum but consistently. In different recordings however I get perceived differences as much as 5db estimated. Results do indeed vary with recordings, quite substantially. The usual reaction of seasoned audiophiles is WOW this sounds better, wow etc etc. After about 3 or 4 tracks people lose that initial enthusiasm and become more critical about the issues I mentioned. I completely understand why people with less resolving systems may not suffer from that and I also understand the enthusiasm given the magnitude of the effect. My system is also not limited by cost (you can see it here on audiogon) so I pretty much know when my neighbor is shaving. In my case, I didnt go further in my auditioning to compare dynamics etc. The loss of imaging is a big deal for me. Plus a pair of Ypsilons just arrived and I am rather spending my time comparing them to my system instead...

In my response yesterday I may have sounded a little elitist when I stated that if you amp. preamp or speakers cost less then the Qol you would be better off spending your money elsewhere. I would like to clarify that. If you have an amp.preamp or speakers that you can sell for say $2K take that money, combine it with the $4K you were going to spend on the Qol & trade up. It is a buyers market & for 4-6K$ you could get some wonderful gear for that kind of money. In the 40+ plus years I have been in this wonderful hobby, I have constantly traded up.Like most of you I am not one of these 1% types that can just go out & purchase whatever I feel like.I trade up when it is an improvement & when I can afford it.With that out of the way, I would like to talk a little more about the Qol.What finally convinced me to purchase it was I spent a couple evenings just simply listening to music I knew very well.I ignored the bypas completely. Sometimes the Qol is not the most accurate sounding piece but most live performances have "errors' as well.What conviced me was the fact that in my system it has a very relaxed believable musicality to it.It gets me a little closer to being there. However one persons wine is another's vinegar. A wine I might call a fruit bomb somebody else might call a hedonostic delight. If you can afford one give the Qol a try and listen for yourself. Just because somebody may have a system that costs more then the average house & does not like it or they don't want to put another "filtering" cable in their system that is their opinion and they are entitled to it.The 30 day trial is very reasonable & will give you ample time to use the best sound testing device you have"your ears".

Dear Mihalis and Lwin, Thank you for your posts. At the suggestion of Pipedream, I installed the QOL after the source whereas before I had it between the pre-amp and amp. That one change has made a great difference in the overall presentation and enjoyment of the music. My amps, preamps are Ypsilon ( very resolving). So, any difference to the sound is very noticable. Yet, this QOL has changed the sound I think for the better. I haven't lost the resolution yet some "presence" is now apparent. Got just over 250hrs of breakin and ordered the Hi-fi supreme fuse. The jury is still out but now leaning slightly on keeping it. Have about 2 1/2 weeks to decide. I agree with both points of view about the merits of resolution and musicality. thanks Ron

I found I like it better after the source as well. Of course those with Integrated amps do not have a choice.