Biwiring

[JOSE]

Hi.
Please I Need To Know If I Can Biwire My Processor Sony Str-k740p (80w X 5) With The Frontals Infinity Beta50 Or It Is Dangerous For The Processor Or Maybe Dangerous For The Speakers.
Thanks A Lot

 

[Nick250]

Hi.
Please I Need To Know If I Can Biwire My Processor Sony Str-k740p (80w X 5) With The Frontals Infinity Beta50 Or It Is Dangerous For The Processor Or Maybe Dangerous For The Speakers.
Thanks A Lot

If your Infinity speakers have two sets of speaker connections then you can biwire. That being said I am of the opinion that biwireing will not improve or alter the sound coming out of your speakers so you may want to give this a second thought. No harm in trying it though.

 

[JOSE]

Thanks Nick, I Understand About Quality Noise In Biwiring, But I Read It Improves Power For Highs And Mids And Bass Due This Kind Of Connection. I Am Only A Beginner In Audio.
Thanks For Your Answer.
Regards.

 

[kay]

All you're doing with bi-wiring is effectively making the cable twice as thick, so you're reducing resistance a tiny bit. That resistance is really tiny compared to the speaker's own resistance so you're not really making a huge difference.

The dual binding posts on speakers are meant for bi-amping where you use four amps instead of two to drive two speakers - one amp for "left" highs, one amp for "left" lows, one amp for "right" highs and one amp for "right" lows. This gives you more headroom compared to using just one amp per speaker, thus noticeably improving sound quality.

If you really want to make a difference, get some decent banana plugs for your cables. The connection point is where the most quality is lost due to oxydation or not good enough contact with the binding posts, etc.

 

[Nick250]

Thanks Nick, I Understand About Quality Noise In Biwiring, But I Read It Improves Power For Highs And Mids And Bass Due This Kind Of Connection. I Am Only A Beginner In Audio.
Thanks For Your Answer.
Regards.

Like I said try it you want. My contention is that any differency you might hear is placebo. You are not taxing the capabilities of your current speaker wire as it is if you are using 14 or 12 guage. Your speakers are all ready getting the full signal. There is nothing to improve upon if you get my drift. As a newbie to audio you will find there is a whole lot of nonsense in audio and bi wiring is on the nonsense list.

 

[mtrycrafts]

But I Read It Improves Power For Highs And Mids And Bass Due This Kind Of Connection. I Am Only A Beginner In Audio.
Thanks For Your Answer.
Regards.

No, it doesn't do this at all, it cannot as you still must connect to the same amp terminal even if your speaker has two or three sets of binding posts and the level of these signals are predetermined.

 

[Buckle-meister]

I had heard that the advantage of biwiring lay in the seporation of lower frequencies 'swamping' upper frequencies (passing through a single cable).

Of course, this, as with other information I have been told in the past, could be absolute rubbish (feel free to step in and educate me anyone!). Still, speaker manufacturers must install them for some reason. They cant simply be there as a selling point...can they? And even if they come into their own for biamping rather than biwiring, why are they not therefore called biamping rather than biwiring terminals?

Regards

 

[Resident Loser]

As I see it...

...you can take one pair of wires and connect it directly to the crossover OR you take one pair and wire it to the lo-freq binding posts then take another pair and wire it to the hi-freq connectors...soooo...you are taking the little jumper out of the circuit and substituting an entire length of wire. What this does is slightly change the resistance in the loop and add some capacitance to the circuit...in one case, the wiring between segments of the crossover is somewhat isolated(in the loudspeaker enclosure). The other scheme, in addition to the changes previously mentioned, exposes that second length of wiring to potential RFI/EMI sources. Your choice...

The multiple jumpered connectors were intended for bi-amping...the cheesy way to do it is simply wire one pair of connectors to one amp that handles the lows and a second that handles the highs...that has become bi-amping.

The correct way to bi-amp requires an electronic crossover which separates the frequency bands BEFORE amplification takes place. Each band is then sent to separate amps(or channels within the amp) and the off to the speakers...the crossovers within the loudspeakers should be bypassed, I'm not certain that they absolutely have to be, but at this point they are redundant, so pulling all those extra coils, caps and resistors out of the signal path couldn't hurt. But I digress...

After a while, the concept of the inferior bi-amping method sort of lost favor to simply bi-wiring...much like SUVs and $5 cups of decaf-mocha-latte, the public dictated what they wanted and the manufacturers gleefully complied...so, even brands who might have at one time ignored the "bi-wiring phenomenon" were market-driven to provide terminals for "bi-wiring" simply the more recognizable and "hot" jargon du jour...

jimHJJ(...and the wiring companies laughed all the way to the bank...the end!...)

 

[Buckle-meister]

Summary

The correct way to bi-amp requires an electronic crossover which separates the frequency bands BEFORE amplification takes place. Each band is then sent to separate amps(or channels within the amp) and the off to the speakers...the crossovers within the loudspeakers should be bypassed, I'm not certain that they absolutely have to be, but at this point they are redundant, so pulling all those extra coils, caps and resistors out of the signal path couldn't hurt.

So then, ignoring interference, are we able to definitively say that:

1. Biwiring has no measured change on the quality of sound as opposed to using a single cable-run?

2. Biamping does have a measured change in the quality of sound, with the least to best method being:

a)Using two power amps (because seporate boxes per channel are better than a combined box for all channels)
b)Using four mono blocks (because all frequencies are sent out of the preamp to the mono blocks)
c)Using a preamp with an electronic crossover circuit in it (thereby increasing headroom?) with, presumably, four mono blocks

Regards

 

[Resident Loser]

Umm, err...no...

Biwiring has no measured change on the quality of sound as opposed to using a single cable-run?

A bit of apples and oranges here...bi-wiring will result in slight measurable changes electrically...there really is no way to measure "quality" of sound...some folks perceive a difference, some don't...some say improvement; others say difference is simply difference....additionally, there are psychological factors involved and endless arguments surrounding many audio issues.

Biamping does have a measured change in the quality of sound

True bi-amping(or tri-amping) results in what is known as the "division of labor"...if the signal is separated into specific frequency bands prior to the final amplification stage, each amplifier has a smaller slice to deal with therefore should be able to handle things with greater efficiency...an amplifier with less output can be used for the high freqs as they require less power to be reproduced. The low-end requires more air to be moved and that requires more power...the issues involved are lessening various forms of distortions which may result as a single amplifier and it's power supply tries to deal with the entire waveform...dual-mono designs attempt to ameliorate L&R channel interactions in similar fashion.

Perhaps a better example are multi-channel units...say a piece is rated @100Wpc...now the question is: Is that with all channels driven? Is it rated 20Hk-20kHz or simply @1kHz? Most are not rated for full output across the entire spectrum simply because there is rarely the requirement to do so in real-world situations...if you tried to max out all channels simultaneously, most power supplies couldn't handle the load...a thermal cut-off would probably activate due to the heat generated and the 15amp AC fuse/breaker might even trip...there's math that can show this, but, off the top of me head, much more than 2+2=4 isn't my strong suit...suffice it to say individual amps, whether mono-blocks or dual-mono designs will fare better...of course your fuses may blow, but that's OK as you'll probably be bleeding from your ears and lying in a heap by that time.

Quality, again, isn't measureable HOWEVER, there should be a noticeable difference which some will find an improvement, yet others will not.

...with the least to best method being:

a)Using two power amps (because seporate boxes per channel are better than a combined box for all channels)
b)Using four mono blocks (because all frequencies are sent out of the preamp to the mono blocks)
c)Using a preamp with an electronic crossover circuit in it (thereby increasing headroom?) with, presumably, four mono blocks

a) OK OR two dual-mono amps could be used in any configuration...

b) OK Theoretically "better", perhaps measureably...qualitatively???

c) Actually, an electronic crossover is a separate outboard unit, so it's pre to Xover to conventional stereo amp, dual-monos or mono blocks...whatever you can afford, have room and the required AC circuits for...

jimHJJ(...good luck and good listening...)

 

[Buckle-meister]

True bi-amping(or tri-amping) results in what is known as the "division of labor"...if the signal is separated into specific frequency bands prior to the final amplification stage, each amplifier has a smaller slice to deal with therefore should be able to handle things with greater efficiency

Is it truly only for greater efficiency? Doesn't more power figure at all? As an example, after listening to various amps of different power ratings, I could clearly differentiate between the sound from one amp and another; the additional 'tighter' sound that resulted from the more powerfull amp was as a result of its having a real 'grip' on the music, especially the bass.

The low-end requires more air to be moved and that requires more power.

This is what I was referring to when I wrote about biwiring. Say we played a delicate chime simultaneously with a deep rumble through a loudspeaker. In this theoretical scenario, we would have a strong current mixed in with a delicate one (assuming we use a sigle cable-run). Is there truly no detrimental interaction going on? i.e. the strong current swamping the delicate?

c) Actually, an electronic crossover is a separate outboard unit

Oops!!!

Cheers for the comments.

 

[Resident Loser]

If you have the time...

...and inclination, let me refer you to this site:

http://sound.westhost.com/bi-amp.htm

...this will explain things in a far better manner than I can ever hope to, and the site is generally quite informative re: things audio...

This is what I was referring to when I wrote about biwiring. Say we played a delicate chime simultaneously with a deep rumble through a loudspeaker. In this theoretical scenario, we would have a strong current mixed in with a delicate one (assuming we use a sigle cable-run).

Intermodulation distortion is what you are referring to...IMHO, it's the last thing to worry about with external wiring, after all, if wiring IS the culprit, the wiring within each component is a potential trouble site...it's more a case of how the problem is addressed via component design parameters.

I know of one fella' who had a tube(valve) amp built and supplied "audiophile" components AND directional wiring to the builder...unfortunately the builder didn't place the wiring correctly...a fact which remained undiscovered until my friend decided to have a look-see under the hood...I'm not really certain how things worked out...I think the builder balked at re-doing the piece for what he considered a non-issue...of course there are other things like "contractual obligations" that come into play but, right now we're talkin audio, not the law.

jimHJJ(...anywho, check out the site...a great deal of info is contained therein...)

 

[soniceuphoria]

Bi-amping can have distinct advantages in certian situations. When you have a speaker such as a Martin Logan, Magnepan, Carver, or the likes, you can use a good solid state amp to run the bass, and use a good tube amp to run your mids and highs. This will give you the best of both worlds. The open airy highs of the tube and the rock solid bass of solid state. With this said, you can still achieve about the same performance with a powerful amp with the binding posts paralleled together. I have personally tried bi-amping my Carver AL-III's and I actually perferred it jumpered (considering I'm using 10 gauge wire)

It's not the wiring companys but the amp companys that are making out like bandits in the bi-wiring trend.

Happy Listening.
Greg

 

[Resident Loser]

I'm sorry...

It's not the wiring companys but the amp companys that are making out like bandits in the bi-wiring trend.

...I musta' fell asleep. How do you figure THAT?

jimHJJ(...inquiring minds want to know...)

 

[soniceuphoria]

I figured that by considering the fact that instead of 1 2/ch amp to run 2 speakers you are using 2 2ch amps. Thus the amp companies are benefiting more than the wire companys (unless you are one of the gullible audiophiles with more money than brains that uses solid silver speaker wires of course) Happy Listening.
Greg

 

[Resident Loser]

Sorry, I thought it was me...

...what fell asleep...

I figured that by considering the fact that instead of 1 2/ch amp to run 2 speakers you are using 2 2ch amps. Thus the amp companies are benefiting more than the wire companys

You have described the basis for BI-AMPING...bi-wiring, on the other hand, simply uses two lengths of paired wire per channel...

jimHJJ(... so, it musta' been youse who took that snooze...)

 

[soniceuphoria]

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Sorry I ment bi-amping.

Happy Listening.
Greg

 

[mtrycrafts]

... I'm not certain that they absolutely have to be, but at this point they are redundant, so pulling all those extra coils, caps and resistors out of the signal path couldn't hurt. But I digress...

jimHJJ(...and the wiring companies laughed all the way to the bank...the end!...)

If you leave in th epassive components, you are defeating the need for the active crossover and improved performance with that added passive circuits. That is the point of bi amping to minimize passive components and have all active ones only.

 

[mtrycrafts]

I had heard that the advantage of biwiring lay in the seporation of lower frequencies 'swamping' upper frequencies (passing through a single cable).

If this was correct, then the industry would have one cable for every known frequency, an infinite number in essence
So, you heard wrong. Audio is full of voodoo, mythology, bs, urban legends, etc.

Still, speaker manufacturers must install them for some reason. They cant simply be there as a selling point...can they?


Yes, it can and does. They don't want to miss out on the gullible segment of the audiophile community, although there are a few speaker companies who refuse to have bi-wire setup as it is foolish. I used to know one of the companies but no more


And even if they come into their own for biamping rather than biwiring, why are they not therefore called biamping rather than biwiring terminals?

Regards

Because then it would not be as fashionable to have it as it costs a lot more to do than just wires. And, to do a half a...d job with the passive crossovers in there is not worth the effort and cost.

 

[markw]

It seems to me that intermodulation distortion would be more of a problem...

...in the speaker itself, where the cones try to manifest multitudes of different frequencies on one single plane.

...can you say "doppler", kiddies?