You seem to be discussing current, not voltage,
Part 2?
Yes, discussing current, not voltage because on the voltage side is it obvious that it will be the same, the amps will amplify the same full bandwidth signal.
yet all your frame grabs are oddly taken from my first video which discussed voltage. Why didn't you address whatever objections you (may) have with my claims regrading current from my video which addressed current
Because I have very little reason to object your follow up videos as you did address current, whereas Pt1, if someone only read that one, then one might think the bandwidth in both pairs of wires would have the same bandwidth content since you proved it with measurements, even included the FFT diagram iirc. But the FFTs would have shown a different story if you were to measure the current signal waveforms instead of voltage.
It's hard to make these sorts of videos so they are both easy to understand by a broad YouTube audience (many of whom have never examined a single electrical block diagram in their life), yet also 100% technically spot on without using shortcuts and simplified language/concepts such as the often cited (yet imperfect) hydraulic analogy. I apologize if I at points made some mistakes and, for example, used the term "signal" whereas I more precisely should have clarified if I was meant voltage, current, or both.
I did appreciate that fact, it was a high quality presentation, unlike many of the YT videos nowadays, that's the main reason why I really wanted to contact you about it in the past, but I didn't prefer to post on AVSF that much. I much prefer Audioholics because I admire Gene, an EE, and also Audiosciencereview.com as I also admire Amir thought the two don't seem to always see eye to eye, one of my regret, but...
Measured as these following proper analogous points (I more clearly diagram below, taken from part 2), rather than the bogus/invalid comparison points of x vs. Y (which marketers misdirect us to with their clever trick), they are the same.
In any event, which of these 6 proclamations I make in it (at 9m30s), if any, do you claim I am incorrect about?
Sure, point by point as below:
No issues at all with above.
Or is your position perhaps that in this following proclamation regarding current (from Pt. 2, 9m04s) I am incorrect?
You've got this right, that's exactly my point, that the above was
technically incorrect. I highlight "technically" because for non EEs and/or someone who has some EE knowledge, it wouldn't matter, but still worth "correcting" (hope you don't mind using this term) as it might misled those reader as I mentioned before, if left uncorrected. Your "...the current measurements will be nearly exactly the same......assuming a sufficiently thick gauge....." implied that you did not address the FFT part, if you did you would have click that, because the FFT would be different, so even the magnitude could be very different depending on the music signal used.
For clarify, let me emphasized that I do understand in term of the currents (magnitude and freq spectrum) in T and W would be the same in both biwire and single wire secenrios, no arguments there, but keep in mind the believers (the technically knowledgeable ones such as the reputable speaker manufacturers clealy understand that too) never claimed currents in T and W would be different in either cases, it is so obvious, the HPF and LPF are still going to be the same in both cases. All the believers claim are the potential benefits of separating the current paths for the HPF and LPF between the amp output terminals and the speaker input terminals. I think on this specific point, you and I agreed, manufacturers, such as Paradign, Q-Accoustics, Polk audio tened to exaggerate to the nth degree.
Again, my "objection" is as I explained in my previous couple of posts, that the clamp on ammeter will register different currents in terms of magnitude that can be seen easily by using something like a pink noise, music could be used too but it might be hard to see depending on the music contents used.
Likewise, if you use an analyzer to compare the current contents, you will see the totally different FFTs between Y and Z.
Again, the quick takeaway is, when you probe X, Y, or Z with a voltmeter you are compare the voltages that would of course be the same, because the loads presented would be the voltmeter's very high input impedance, at last 1 M-ohm right?
I absolutely understand, and really appreciate of your presentations, and so far this particular one is the only one I wanted to counter a couple of minor technical points, and I hope to see more of such high quality presentations, not only by you, but also by others who would base their presentations on objective engineering facts than internet hearsay hyperbole.
I apologize if I at points made some mistakes and, for example, used the term "signal" whereas I more precisely should have clarified if I was meant voltage, current, or both.
You don't owe anyone apology at all! I appreciate your openness. I think we need more people like you, who is not shy to (so I think) to post useful info, debunk myth, and if challenged on correctness, just discuss, agreed, disagreed with whoever counter any specific points, and then move on.
By the way, as you mentioned the biwire, biamp, active/passive is a highly controversial topic on forums, and in the past I have valued a few contributors on the very topic, all from the old days:
To Bi-Wire or Not | Audioholics Home Theater Forums
Bi-amping vs Bi-wiring: What's the Difference and is it Audible?
The other one you might have come across as he posted on AVSF before two, is jneutron.
jneutron might have been the only one who did try to quantify some of the claimed benefits, with math, as far as I could tell, he is a physicist, whereas Gene, and Russ_I are obviously EEs.
Bi-Wiring A Loudspeaker: Does it Make a Difference?
Then there is the always there as unnamed heroes, on the Rod Elliot's ESP site:
BiAmp (Bi-Amplification - Not Quite Magic, But Close) - Part 1
To conclude this technical exchange, I would just regurgitate some of the things said:
- Passive biamp has theoretical benefits but most likely no audible benefits except in some specific use cases.
- Biwire has much less theoretical benefits of passive biamp, but it does allow the LF and HF to reach the speakers LF, HF filters thereby reducing any the potential, though insignificant effects due to the LF/HF currents interacting with each other as explained in one of the link (the St. Andrew university one) article above.
- Active biamp, if done well, should have the most benefits vs the other two methods, audibly better or not would be a different story, and most likely would depend on individual use cases/applications.
Lastly, to the OP, sorry I derailed your thread, just didn't want to miss the opportunity to have a discussion with
@m. zillch , one of my favorite poster who I know wouldn't mind to discuss such matters that involve EE principles vs internet hearsay/misconceptions with someone who also has a decent EE background.
