Bi Wiring

[Davemcc]

Dave- see my response above. The low and high frequencies never recombine, but go to their respective drivers (only) once the crossover is split into two legs by removal of the jumper straps.

Note to all looking at this thread - my first post said ..." bi-wiring CAN make a difference....". I did not say that it always makes a difference. I tried to explain in laymen’s terms why it SHOULD make a difference if done correctly.

I'm an audiophile (or as my wife says, "one of those") since 1961 and I've done it all including a TRI-wired pair of Hyperion 938s. Bi-wiring does work if done correctly.

OK, so the first step to bi-wiring "correctly" is to use a speaker that has a jumper in the crossover, essentially a bi-ampable speaker. What you're saying, as I understand it in layman's terms, is that each speaker's load will determine what signal is allowed to travel through it's associated cable, even though the speaker's output post is trying to send a full range signal down both cables?

But my question would be "If you start with a speaker that is bi-ampable, would it not be better to bi-amp it than bi-wire it?"

Further, as in my case where my speakers are not bi-ampable, there would be absolutely no benefit to bi-wiring?

 

[Seth=L]

That's it; I am going to Seth's house and getting some bi-wire that he keeps hidden in his closet with his blow-up doll and bi-wiring my speakers...

(as Seth=L laughs hysterically) "What the hell?"

 

[Seth=L]

Further, as in my case where my speakers are not bi-ampable, there would be absolutely no benefit to bi-wiring?

I don't think anyone is going to dispute that, that is just crazy.

 

[markw]

I think I've got some bi-wire in the closet.

But it's indicated it'll be coming out of the closet any day now.

 

[russ_l]

What happens inside the reciever/amp where two cables attach to the same post, also, when you attach them to the binding posts in the speakers, rarely more than a few inches apart? Are these not subject to this distortion?

It's true; even when you bi-wire properly with two seperate cables, they are in close proximity, the first and last 2 - 3-inches at both the amp end and the speaker end. BUT, they're not in close proximity for the 4, 8, or 16-feet however long your speaker cables are. Therefore, MOST of the interaction between the two cables is eliminated. The only way to avoid this is to bi-amp ($$$$$).

 

[russ_l]

OK, so the first step to bi-wiring "correctly" is to use a speaker that has a jumper in the crossover, essentially a bi-ampable speaker. What you're saying, as I understand it in layman's terms, is that each speaker's load will determine what signal is allowed to travel through it's associated cable, even though the speaker's output post is trying to send a full range signal down both cables?

But my question would be "If you start with a speaker that is bi-ampable, would it not be better to bi-amp it than bi-wire it?"

Further, as in my case where my speakers are not bi-ampable, there would be absolutely no benefit to bi-wiring?

Dave- yes, bi-amping is better than bi-wiring but has the added cost of a second amplifier. And, if you want to eliminate the crossover in the speaker, a crossover needs to be added between the preamp and amp.

Yes, speakers with one set of terminals can not be bi-wired or bi-amped.

 

[mtrycrafts]

Each cable in a bi-wire setup only carries the frequencies allowed by the (now separated) crossover in the speaker. The low frequency cable sees an inductive load in the crossover only allowing the low frequencies to conduct in that leg; the high frequency cable sees a capacitive load in the crossover only allowing the high frequencies to conduct in that leg.

In other words, the splitting of the crossover (the removal of the jumpers) passively separates the low frequency content from the hight frequency content in the two cables to the speaker.

Well, not totally correct since there is no brick wall cut off in each crossover hence each subsequent octave of frequencies will be attenuated by the amount of the crossover slope and can have plenty of signal transfer.

 

[mtrycrafts]

Note to all looking at this thread - my first post said ..." bi-wiring CAN make a difference....".

Yes, you did. Supplied no empirical evidence, just suppositions that it might be the case.

I'm an audiophile (or as my wife says, "one of those") since 1961 and I've done it all including a TRI-wired pair of Hyperion 938s. Bi-wiring does work if done correctly.

You keep claiming this. It is testable. Prove it please. Oscope pictures, DBT data results. You do have DBT results, don't you? Or, you are trying to convince us by authority???
EVIDENCE speaks volumes. Anecdotes are just that, unreliable.

 

[mtrycrafts]

Again, bi-wiring can work well when done properly.

The pudding is in the proof, isn't it. After all, you claimed audiophile status and most of them cannot demonstrate their claims of audibility through proper bias controlled listening. Can you?

Perhaps if you would have posted some real evidence for audibility you would not have had to use authority to try to convince.

 

[mtrycrafts]

I've never been able to hear any effect from biwiring. .

I have yet to see evidence, credible, unbiased evidence that anyone can hear audible differences due to this wiring method. Lots of claims, zero evidence so far. Maybe Spock can do it, but he has yet to be tested

 

[mtrycrafts]

And, if you want to eliminate the crossover in the speaker, a crossover needs to be added between the preamp and amp.

Yes, and an active crossover is superior from everything I have read.

 

[fmw]

I'm a recovering audiophile. I spent years involved in the flights of fancy produced by hearing what I thought I should hear rather than what I actually could hear. It would pay every audiophile to do some blind testing. It is a real eye opener. It would pay, of course, because it can save soooo much money.

I was cured of audiophilia in a single weekend in which I engaged in self administered blind testing (with the help of my wife.) I sold over $40,000 worth of audio gear over then next few weeks and switched to much, much more modest equipment with which I've been happy ever since. I listen to music now rather than listening to equipment.

That placebo effect can be very convincing. It convinced me for decades. Some audiophiles actually think they can hear power cords or digital interconnects. It is a phenomenon but the cure is actually pretty easy.

 

[mtrycrafts]

I'm a recovering audiophile. I spent years involved in the flights of fancy produced by hearing what I thought I should hear rather than what I actually could hear. It would pay every audiophile to do some blind testing. It is a real eye opener. It would pay, of course, because it can save soooo much money.

I was cured of audiophilia in a single weekend in which I engaged in self administered blind testing (with the help of my wife.) I sold over $40,000 worth of audio gear over then next few weeks and switched to much, much more modest equipment with which I've been happy ever since. I listen to music now rather than listening to equipment.

That placebo effect can be very convincing. It convinced me for decades. Some audiophiles actually think they can hear power cords or digital interconnects. It is a phenomenon but the cure is actually pretty easy.

Thanks for this confession I bet it was hard at first to admit that perception may not be reality
How did you learn or be convinced to do some of the blind testing?

 

[Davemcc]

The only way to avoid this is to bi-amp ($$$$$).

I don't think it's expensive to bi-amp. Even my modest Denon has a few ways to bi-amp, whether by the front A-B speaker selector or assigning the surround rear to bi-amp through either the speaker output posts or the preout RCA connections. There are even modestly priced speakers that come with bi-ampable connections.

Once one acquires the speakers that can be bi-amped with most, if not all, mid-fi receivers, it seems like bi-wiring would be irrelevant.

 

[Dolby CP-200]

Yes, and an active crossover is superior from everything I have read.

Lower lows and higher highs is what is achievable with the affordable Behringer DCX2496 far less distortion is heard where passive crossover networks tend to fail in this matter. Active is the way to go if only I had done this five years ago ten years instead of wasting my time with passive.

 

[fmw]

Thanks for this confession I bet it was hard at first to admit that perception may not be reality
How did you learn or be convinced to do some of the blind testing?

No, I've never had a problem dealing with my strengths and weaknesses. We're all human.

One day I was talking to an audio dealer friend about power cords. He explained why a power cord couldn't be audible. I wondered why so many audio reviewers were able to hear them. I wondered if their ears were actually golden. You know the answer to that.

He loaned me a few from a drawer of cables to try and explained how to do a blind test. He also included about 15 pairs of interconnects and some speaker wires ranging in price from nearly nothing to 4 figures. I took everything home and listened to the same content having my wife change the cables for each round. She made a note of which cable she used for each segment and I made notes on what I heard. I didn't hear much besides the reference recording. I heard one of the 15 cables (an interconnect) which, as it turned out, had enough impedance to act as a tone control. It was one of the 4 figure ones - obviously incompetently designed. Naturally, I couldn't hear the power cords or the speaker cables.

In a fit of axiety, I had my hearing tested and it was reported to me to be normal for a person of my age.

The conclusion was obvious. What I had been reading from an entire industry was just nonsense - flights of fancy - faith. It is easy to get involved in it. Now that I've recovered, I enjoy listening to recorded music a lot more.

You can imagine the look on my face when the salesman tried to sell me a $200 HDMI cable to go with my new flat screen TV. He came close to losing the TV sale.

 

[zhimbo]

"How did you learn or be convinced to do some of the blind testing?"

You know, one thing I've never quite understood is the hostility towards blind testing. But I suppose it stems from the reasoning "I believe X, blind testing says not-X, therefore either I'm wrong or blind testing is." And if you're heavily invested in being right, you'll do whatever mental gymnastics necessary to believe something's wrong with blind testing.

 

[fmw]

"How did you learn or be convinced to do some of the blind testing?"

You know, one thing I've never quite understood is the hostility towards blind testing. But I suppose it stems from the reasoning "I believe X, blind testing says not-X, therefore either I'm wrong or blind testing is." And if you're heavily invested in being right, you'll do whatever mental gymnastics necessary to believe something's wrong with blind testing.

It is a matter of ego. Some people simply can't get past it. If people spend $15,000 for an amplifier or $1,000 for a cable because they like it, want it and can afford it then that's fine. The problems arise when they try to justify it. It isn't justifiable. Audiophiles just need to learn that buying a military wired 100 lb. class A amplifier is just plain cool. Whether it improves the sound in the system is another matter and not important in the overall scheme of things. The emphasis in audiophilia has always been on justification (fidelity) when it should be on enjoyment. It is often about what others think rather than what the individual thinks. It is a hobby, after all. No problem there.

I'm an amateur pianist and I can really appreciate what someone like Oscar Peterson could do with a piano keyboard. I listen in amazement every time I play one of his recordings. I don't care if I listen on an MP3 player with ear buds or a car radio. His skill and technique are awesome at any level of fidelity. Listening to the music, I think, trumps listening to the equipment in the long run. More important than listening tests - whether blind or subjective.

 

[mtrycrafts]

I'm an amateur pianist and I can really appreciate what someone like Oscar Peterson could do with a piano keyboard. e.

I think you will enjoy this then even though it is about violins.

http://agnews.tamu.edu/dailynews/stories/BICH/Sep2203a.htm

 

[Seth=L]

I'm a recovering audiophile. I spent years involved in the flights of fancy produced by hearing what I thought I should hear rather than what I actually could hear. It would pay every audiophile to do some blind testing. It is a real eye opener. It would pay, of course, because it can save soooo much money.

I was cured of audiophilia in a single weekend in which I engaged in self administered blind testing (with the help of my wife.) I sold over $40,000 worth of audio gear over then next few weeks and switched to much, much more modest equipment with which I've been happy ever since. I listen to music now rather than listening to equipment.

That placebo effect can be very convincing. It convinced me for decades. Some audiophiles actually think they can hear power cords or digital interconnects. It is a phenomenon but the cure is actually pretty easy.

There is no shame in this, Denial would be shameful, this is something to be pround of.