The Science of Cables

But it would have been sufficient, one imagines. 

Just an update on my barb cabling. Don’t evaluate it immediately, it sounds much better after a break in period of at least two weeks. Also, finally located our cat Boots who has been missing for a three days caught up in the wire. Not sure whether to remove him or not since there is a noticeable improvement in imaging and soundstage.

Regarding something that actually has potential to benefit audiophiles' systems, last night I disassembled the digital source, as I am sending back the SONORE Signature Rendu SE for an upgrade, and I reverted back to my MF transport feeding the Exogal Comet DAC and Ion Power DAC combo. I will be reporting on the upgrades to the Signature Rendu SE and Exogal Ion Powerdac's HyperDrive upgrade in due time at Dagogo.com 

The pertinence of this post is that I once again used the Schroeder Method of Interconnect Placement with the transport's AES/EBU output. It is superlative, definitively high quality as a link. I did two different cables in this configuration, the much less expensive Audio Sensibility manufactured Schroeder Method XLR 1M with their least expensive IC cable. It was very good, well worth pursuing by budget oriented audiophiles. 

Then, I went to the assembled Clarity Cable Organic IC put together with Audio Sensibility's silver XLR Y Cables prepared for Schroeder Method. WOW! I am stunned and VERY happy with that outcome! I have never heard any Redbook source, even $10K players using single ICs, in my room with close to this erudition (I presume similar benefits could be obtained by those with high end players)! The Kingsound King III electrostatic speakers sound wonderfully pure, coherent (they are what I described in the review as Line Source ESL; multiple ESL drive units stacked), and now with the Ion with HyperDrive phenomenally powerful in the low end. Assessed by distinct, separate comparisons from the cable changes. 

Imo the digital application of Schroeder Method with digital source in the two instances I have tried is a rousing success. AES/EBU with this unit is very sensitive to such cable changes. I do not wish to overly boast of this, but it is becoming clearer to me that this has the potential to revolutionize passive system setups. In the end active systems may sound flat out worse than passive speakers with Schroeder Method cabling. I would expect our skeptics to mock that assessment, but if they actually ever tried things they would find out.

My wording on he last paragraph is vague; I have used two digital sources, CD transport and file playback. The AES/EBU is an analogue output. I have done double ICs on source to preamp, source to integrated DAC, and preamp to amp. I had previously tried the MF transport's SPDIF output with Schroeder Method successfully as well.

@douglas_schroeder Ok, so I am confused by these two posts. It might be a benefit to re-post these posts in the Shroeder Method thread: https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/doug-schroeder-method-double-ic

But back to my confusion. In the first paragraph of your first post, you mention the set-up: "I reverted back to my MF transport feeding the Exogal Comet DAC and Ion Power DAC combo." From this description, I gather the transport is only sending digital data as an output signal. And from this statement from your second paragraph, "I once again used the Schroeder Method of Interconnect Placement with the transport’s AES/EBU output," I gather you are using an SM digital AES/EBU interconnect cable between the transport and the Exogal DAC. And in the final paragraph of your first post, you mention that "AES/EBU with this unit is very sensitive to such cable changes." What is "this unit," the transport or the DAC?

But then in your second post above, you clarify the SM IC is being used in the following manner: "AES/EBU is an analogue output." So my confusion is whether you are promoting the SM AES/EBU XLR IC, originally intended as a digital cable, as an analog cable.