The Science of Cables

Nope! Plenty much happy with the cables I have and have no desire to double the capacitance on my system......Jim

Not picking on you in general, just stating that cable makers, who would have us believe that their incredible $k per ft cable is the ultimate, now concede they sound even better if you double them.

I have no bias against cable makers, in general, but I do, at times, have a problem with their greed and looseness with the truth.......Jim

One real positive of the doubling up of cables is.. the person suggesting it is NOT making money off it, Usually the folks who are trying to get rich off anyone, make money. Clearly this guy is just writing he found it to be of value to himself, and others have tried it and also found it to be of value. Beyond that, there is no marketing of anything. No sales. One could double up old spare cables one already owned.  
So to me, the only sort of attack is the general attack of the claim that some cables sound better. And thus this idea must also be a rip off (somehow? to the guy complaining) since it too is claiming the cables sound better doing this doubling up.   
For me to try it would cost me $51.80 to buy 4 'F ' AQ dual RCA  Since I have piles of spare cables. I could try it with one of my spare preamps.. 
And actually the whining against it has made me think to try it..So thanks to jhills, one more potential user of the method may exist.

Jim, Thank you for your thoughtful, cordial reply.

Elizabeth, yeah, the cost to play is pretty prohibitive. Kills.  You would think I was asking people too try a $5K cartridge. 

Which brings up this question: What is the substantive difference scientifically/analytically between analogue, in the industry and among users, and cables? I see vanishingly little difference. Which would make analogue lovers who mock cables huge hypocrites. It would also open up all the same sweeping criticisms of the industry and users that are applied to cables. I am very close to making that a proclamation, but I leave it open at this point for input.  

Call me a very serious analogue skeptic, but not absolutist yet. If anyone can demonstrate objectively how analogue is applied and assessed in systems differently (I mean differences with significance, not passing differences) then I will be open to reconsideration.  :) 

I have a digital source; I do not use analogue. However, be careful how you reply, for if you as a cable skeptic would condemn my habitus, then you condemn yourself if you eschew aftermarket cables. 

Perhaps this has all been hashed out for aeons over in the analogue forum. I don't know, I have plenty to do elsewhere. If this is a perennial debate in the vinyl world feel free to enlighten me.

Am I radically off-base, or do I have a point?   :)

And a pair of SM dual Canare StarQuad assemblies at ~$150 breaks so many banks for audiophiles, too! Too much to risk, eh? You. Have. No. Idea. What. You’re. Missing.

People with less system building experience simply don't have a frame of reference that allows envisioning better, and are suspicious of claims to that effect. One has to be willing to test their suspicions. Those who do, discover.

I understand skepticism. Many years ago I was a cable skeptic.  It's one reason why I am willing to try what no one else will. 

Do we have any skeptics willing to try Schroeder Method, given due diligence re: compatibility?