hooking up bi-wire speakers to suround channels

mtrycrafts

mtrycrafts

Seriously, I have no life.
kmckenn said:
PREFACE: The following comments are on real-life experience ONLY,
kmckenn said:
Welcome:D

My real life experience of placing a steel pipe in a bucket of water is that the water bends it. I can see it happen right in front of my eyes. And, the air, straightens it to its original shape.
I have seen real life experience of people talking with psychics.
The moral of these is that real life experience can be unreliable and meaningless.


and we are not talking hair-splitting differences, we are talking about IN YOUR FACE differences.

More reason then that a bias controlled comparison would confirm your findings, no?

Get some high-grade interconnects (I use the old MIT MI-500 Spectrals) and by all means BI-WIRE (if not BI-AMP (w/2 B&K amps, using Zone2 outputs)) the Vandersteens, and get some GOOD Speaker Cables (I am using the MIT AVt2's $400 retail, I paid $200/pr)... Audioquest makes a lot of VERY GOOD cable solutions.

What will these expensive cables accomplish that a $30 cable will not?
What does buy-wiring accomplish besides doubling your cable expenses?


If you can't get yourself to take this BLIND LEAP OF FAITH,

That is the whole problem here. That is what it takes and a very big mistake to do so.
 

kmckenn

Audiophyte
First Off: mtrycrafts said: "What will these expensive cables accomplish that a $30 cable will not?" Surely you didn't pay #30.00 for "ZIPCORD" from Lowes, right? you didn't, did you? OH, but surely you must have, your statement clearly implies that "more expensive" cables will not out perform cheaper ones... Do tell, what exactly will your $30.00 cables accomplish that $5 cable will not? Romex, Barbwire, Mechanics Wire, to name a few will conduct current/signal, and can all surely do the job for less than the INSANE $30 you apparently would spend!

Let's see if I can explain this acceptably. I come from a very deep background of RACING. In that world, tweaks are life too, and its very well accepted that it is much easier to find something that does not work, than it is to find something that does. One way we'd put it is, you have to go thru 99 things that don't work, to find the one that does. Unfortunately, that makes MOST wandering endlessly looking for something they will never find. That makes most of us, looking for the infinitely small things, and wondering if THAT is "IT". But, if/when you do have something tangible that does work, and works in an IN YOUR FACE sort of way, it makes an absolute and perfect reference point to test other thngs from, and it becomes extremely clear when you found something that louses it up.

I told you there was much more than what was posted. I will give you a snippet of one part of it. Back in '88 when I got the Vandersteen's, I also purchased Audioquest Brown speaker cable, with the Vandersteens being built to be bi-wire, I bought enough to make 2 pairs, and each cable was 15' long. Over the years, after I had finally settled on speaker placement, I'd always wanted to prune the length of the cables. Leaving out a big part of the story, and trying to get to the meat of the matter, these cables were used the new B&K amp and sounded GREAT, however... the leads to the left speakers needed reterminated. I used this as an oppotuity to also and finally shorten the leads. I took one of the 15' leads, and cut it in half. The Audioquest Brown cable has 6 leads per cable, 3 red, 3 black, spiraling under the outer sheath, red, black, red, black, red, black... I thought I'd be smart and use one red/black pair for the mid/tweeter, and the other 2 pairs for the bass, effectively STILL biwiring, but within the same cable. I used Audioquest compression spades for the amp, and banana's for the speaker ends. The RESULTS???? HORRID! I may as well have been listening to a transitor radio! I transfered the 2 pairs used on the bass to the tweeter/mid, left the 1 pair that was used for the tweeter/mid dangling in mid air, and then added on a pair of the 15 footers to the bass. It sound GREAT again! I then went off to our local HIGH END *MUSIC* Store, guitars, PA amps, etc. NOT High End Audio, and asked the 30 year owner of the store for the BEST banana connectors he had. He spent 15 min telling me how great these gold plated connectors were, I bought'm. I took the 2nd (of 4 total) 15 foot speaker cable, cut it in half, and ran the set screw as hard as possible against the bare leads, then complimented the connection with a good, hot, fully saturated solder. Then being so proud of the very sexy NEW banana plugs that I so meticulously terminated my speaker wire with, I decided to use that pair on the tweeter/mid, and move the audioquest terminated pair to the bass. The RESULTS???? HORRID!!!! Now at that point I was legitimately bi-wired and confused as H! I swapped the pairs from tweeter/mid and bass. The RESULTS???? I sounded GREAT!!!!! So, now you have 2 pairs of IDENTICAL speaker cable (off of the same spool, same date, in service the same time, on the same speakers, amps, you name it) with only the speaker cable termination being the ONLY difference, and the audible difference is mind blowing.

Now look, you obviously don't buy off on cable sounding different, or you'd not have commented like you did. but I am here to tell you, it does NOT take much of a system to hear the difference. Back in '88 when I bought my MIT MI-500 interconnects I used to have my buddies (skeptics, like you) come out, and even bring their own interconnects. I stood behind the rack, and swapped out interconnects, each and everyone of them swore I Was throwing switches on the back of the equipment somehow... it was that dramatic. Well... having had that experience, I knew that audible differences were in what seems to be minor things, but NOW I had heard an EXTREME difference in CONNECTORS. I was not going to spend the next 5 years of my life auditioning CONNECTORS, so I had no choice but to recontact my High End Audio store of the late 80's, and ASK for their advice. After a long song and dance they told me they were clearing out a lot of the high-end audio stuff and offered me the INSANE priced speaker cables for 1/2 price. I took them only on the condition that if I'd rather hang myself with them than listen to them, that they'd come back, CLEARANCE price or not, they agreed. I can only tell you what I HEAR, with not one sheard of WHY, but the image, the detail, the DELICACY of this system as it is now is AWESOME!!!

So, you go and tell me all you like, that this that and the other can make no difference, and argue THEORY all you want, cause obviously you have not HEARD it, and its FICTION to you. I have HEARD it, its as REAL as this oversized posting I am about to make. If you want to be forever stuck as one of the masses in search of the holy grail that can't find it, FINE! I have offered a real life experince that is almost, (well, acutally, to me it is...) incomprehendible.

My system happens to be performing at a incomprehendible level, where it will be VERY EASY to tell if I have made an component MISTAKE. YOU obviously don't have yours working that well.... So continue your hunt BLINDFOLDED, and ignore the people COAXING you down the right path, its your choice.

have FUN!
 
Last edited:
mtrycrafts

mtrycrafts

Seriously, I have no life.
Interesting. Don't answer the question, ask another question.

kmckenn said:
First Off: mtrycrafts said: "What will these expensive cables accomplish that a $30 cable will not?"

Brilliant, that was indeed my question. I am searching for the answers though.

Do tell, what exactly will your $30.00 cables accomplish that $5 cable will not?

Perhaps that $30 cable looks better? Feels better? I prefer the makers name over another brand name? All valid reasons for a preference, right? But, you didn't state a preference, right? Specific claims, unsupported at that.


Romex, Barbwire, Mechanics Wire, to name a few will conduct current/signal, and can all surely do the job for less than the INSANE $30 you apparently would spend!

Can it conduct the signals needed? If it can, that those are worthy to consider, indeed. And, the signal transmission will be just fine and dandy. But, maybe, other reasons dictates the purchase of the $30 cable???

Let's see if I can explain this acceptably.

Let us hope so.:D

I come from a very deep background of RACING.

Irrelevant.

But, if/when you do have something tangible that does work, and works in an IN YOUR FACE sort of way, it makes an absolute and perfect reference point to test other thngs from, and it becomes extremely clear when you found something that louses it up.

Oh, but when something works, you can measure that different performance, no??? In an unbiased manner, right???

I told you there was much more than what was posted. I will give you a snippet of one part of it. Back in '88 when I got the Vandersteen's, I also purchased Audioquest Brown speaker cable, with the Vandersteens being built to be bi-wire, I bought enough to make 2 pairs, and each cable was 15' long. Over the years, after I had finally settled on speaker placement, I'd always wanted to prune the length of the cables. Leaving out a big part of the story, and trying to get to the meat of the matter, these cables were used the new B&K amp and sounded GREAT, however... the leads to the left speakers needed reterminated. I used this as an oppotuity to also and finally shorten the leads. I took one of the 15' leads, and cut it in half. The Audioquest Brown cable has 6 leads per cable, 3 red, 3 black, spiraling under the outer sheath, red, black, red, black, red, black... I thought I'd be smart and use one red/black pair for the mid/tweeter, and the other 2 pairs for the bass, effectively STILL biwiring, but within the same cable. I used Audioquest compression spades for the amp, and banana's for the speaker ends. The RESULTS???? HORRID! I may as well have been listening to a transitor radio! I transfered the 2 pairs used on the bass to the tweeter/mid, left the 1 pair that was used for the tweeter/mid dangling in mid air, and then added on a pair of the 15 footers to the bass. It sound GREAT again! I then went off to our local HIGH END *MUSIC* Store, guitars, PA amps, etc. NOT High End Audio, and asked the 30 year owner of the store for the BEST banana connectors he had. He spent 15 min telling me how great these gold plated connectors were, I bought'm. I took the 2nd (of 4 total) 15 foot speaker cable, cut it in half, and ran the set screw as hard as possible against the bare leads, then complimented the connection with a good, hot, fully saturated solder. Then being so proud of the very sexy NEW banana plugs that I so meticulously terminated my speaker wire with, I decided to use that pair on the tweeter/mid, and move the audioquest terminated pair to the bass. The RESULTS???? HORRID!!!! Now at that point I was legitimately bi-wired and confused as H! I swapped the pairs from tweeter/mid and bass. The RESULTS???? I sounded GREAT!!!!! So, now you have 2 pairs of IDENTICAL speaker cable (off of the same spool, same date, in service the same time, on the same speakers, amps, you name it) with only the speaker cable termination being the ONLY difference, and the audible difference is mind blowing.

An interesting story, anecdote. Not evidence of anything.

Now look, you obviously don't buy off on cable sounding different,

Actually, some cables have been shown to make audible differences, so there you go.

or you'd not have commented like you did.

No, you made a testable claim, no evidence presented.


but I am here to tell you, it does NOT take much of a system to hear the difference.

And I should believe this because you said so? Your background in racing? Certainly not evidence based, sorry.

Back in '88 when I bought my MIT MI-500 interconnects I used to have my buddies (skeptics, like you) come out, and even bring their own interconnects. I stood behind the rack, and swapped out interconnects, each and everyone of them swore I Was throwing switches on the back of the equipment somehow... it was that dramatic.


This is your evidence? Not convincing.


Well... having had that experience, I knew that audible differences were in what seems to be minor things,

Oh, but you have no idea how reliable that experience was, none.


So, you go and tell me all you like, that this that and the other can make no difference,

No, I am telling you nothing. I ask for evidence that it makes an audible difference. You offer stories.

and argue THEORY all you want, cause obviously you have not HEARD it, and its FICTION to you.

Actually, I base it on real evidence. After all, a theory is supported by evidence, or it would not be a theory just plain suppositions and guessing.


I have HEARD it,

That is the claim. Now the proof.

its as REAL as this oversized posting I am about to make.

That is what we are trying to establish, isn't it?

I have offered a real life experince that is almost, (well, acutally, to me it is...) incomprehendible.

You offered a story of perceptions you had over time. We are trying to establish its reliability.

I have first real life first hand experience with water bending steel pipes when placed in a bucket of water and the air will straighten it out. Others have such real life experience with psychics, being abducted by aliens, holistic healing, etc.

My system happens to be performing at a incomprehendible level, where it will be VERY EASY to tell if I have made an component MISTAKE.

that is another claim, so far not proven.

YOU obviously don't have yours working that well...

I may not even have a system outside of 2 boomboxes. But, it is irrelevant here as you are the one making claims, if I remember correctly???


have FUN!

Lots, thanks.:D
 

kmckenn

Audiophyte
PROOF? In this medium? Do tell, what constitues "PROOF" to you in a matter such as this?

I'll offer 2 methods of "proof", send reasonable compensation to me for the 2 pairs of Audioquest speaker cables with differing terminations on each pair, OR by all means stop by my house, letting your own ears and JAW thundering on the floor be your "PROOF"... Otherwise, since the bottom line to home sound/audio is listening impression that cannot be completely quanitified by measuments, and posting being a matter of WORDS, my WORD is all you will get.

If I told you that I have personally collected all the gold I can handle, from the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, and told you the EXACT location of it, you'd ask for proof.... and to that I say, suit yourself, you're ANALytical/doubtng ways are not MY problem.

As far as I can see, you are not the poster who asked the question that I answered and are nothing but some self-chest-pounding Forum troll, I'd also be willing to bet you don't have the/a Denon A/V Receiver and/or Vandersteen speakers... In other words, this has not one thing to do with you, other than you taking an oppotunity to show people you don't have a life.
 
Last edited:
mtrycrafts

mtrycrafts

Seriously, I have no life.
kmckenn said:
PROOF? In this medium? Do tell, what constitues "PROOF" to you in a matter such as this?
kmckenn said:
Can I presume that your post under Peng's post, tried to respond to my last post to you?
Prof is statistically significant results under a DBT protocol listening test. Such that you can correctly guess 15 of 20 attempts. So far, no one has been able to. No reason to believe you are the ONE. Oh, this is not a self administered test.

Otherwise, since the bottom line to home sound/audio is listening impression that cannot be completely quanitified by measuments, and posting being a matter of WORDS, my WORD is all you will get.

Oh, but you are mistaken. Your claim is testable, 15 of 20 correct guessing under DBT, level matched condition. Maybe, even Randi will offer you that $1 mil prize. LOL He has taken on audio issues too.
In this matter ones word is not evidence.
 
P

PENG

Audioholic Slumlord
kmckenn said:
As far as I can see, you are not the poster who asked the question that I answered and are nothing but some self-chest-pounding Forum troll, I'd also be willing to bet you don't have the/a Denon A/V Receiver and/or Vandersteen speakers... In other words, this has not one thing to do with you, other than you taking an oppotunity to show people you don't have a life.
I do not always agree with him but I can tell you he is a serious and knowledgeable poster so if you want to keep this debate/discussion alive please do so and have fun doing it.
 

kmckenn

Audiophyte
I have only advocated a known, particular setup, which performs exceedingly well. I have not represented that any one of these elements in this system are the key, only that some blind fool played "Yahtzee" one day....

For what its worth, I have substituted a far superior piece into my system and made it sound like CRAP! Convinced that my Denon 2802 was to low grade (only as a prepro on the frt/main channels), and obsolete, I grabbed a demo Denon 3806, and transfered digi-coax from my disc player and the interconnects to my B&K amp, with the 3806 in PURE DIRECT mode, the 2802 in all it has... "DIRECT" mode... and the difference was like that of a violin and finger nails on a chalk board.... The 3806 did not fair well AT ALL!

I have it for the weekend, and it will *PERK* (get all warm and fuzzy) the entire time.... and I will revisit the test....

The sound is so different, I could do the DBT 100 times, and get it 100 times inside of 2 seconds listening time. (I think .5 is actually reasonable, but I said 2 to give some padding).

Maybe someone else could explain how/why a (or maybe just mine for all I know) 2802 in a role as a pre/pro ONLY on the frt/main channels with my B&K amp, completely, totally, hands down, sounded far far better than a 3806 in the same role.... but I sure can't. Who knows, maybe after its very well WARMED up...
 
mtrycrafts

mtrycrafts

Seriously, I have no life.
kmckenn said:
The sound is so different, I could do the DBT 100 times, and get it 100 times inside of 2 seconds listening time. (I think .5 is actually reasonable, but I said 2 to give some padding).
kmckenn said:
You can repeat a flawed comparison protocol a 100 times and you will get the same flawed and unreliable outcome. In the end, it doesn't confirm your beliefs, only that you keep repeating that same mistakes.
If you want reliable results, you need to call in help who knows all the ins and outs in audio, where your mistakes are and show you how to do a proper levels matched, blind comparison. Short of this, you will keep getting the same unreliable answers.
And no, it cannot be told to you in a few posts.

Maybe someone else could explain how/why a (or maybe just mine for all I know) 2802 in a role as a pre/pro ONLY on the frt/main channels with my B&K amp, completely, totally, hands down, sounded far far better than a 3806 in the same role.... but I sure can't. Who knows, maybe after its very well WARMED up...


Lots of reasons. Not there to see how you did the testing, how it was really hooked up, whether or not levels were matched to a very close tolerance, .1 dB spl, and yes, bias. Sighted comparisons are unreliable, no ifs, ands or buts. Science is our friend, not our enemy, embrace it.
There are some links and papers on the home page here.

Here are some others:


http://www.dself.dsl.pipex.com/ampins/pseudo/subjectv.htm

http://2eyespy.tripod.com/id5.html

http://webpages.charter.net/fryguy/Amp_Sound.pdf

http://www.vxm.com/21R.64.html

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.audio.opinion/msg/b1ffc3ea3ea2ed88

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.audio.opinion/browse_frm/thread/664b8681ab141263/3fd91bcb6a1522a0?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&rnum=1&prev=/groups?q=sunshine+stereo+yamaha+abx+nousaine&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=501fl6%24ac3%40oxy.rust.net&rnum=1#3fd91bcb6a1522a0


http://tom-morrow-land.com/tests/ampchall/index.htm

http://bruce.coppola.name/audio/TenAudioLies.pdf

http://www.psbspeakers.com/audioTopics.php?fpId=4

http://www.crc.ca/en/html/aas/home/evaluation/evaluation#recent_tests

http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volume_11_4/feature-article-blind-test-power-cords-12-2004.html

This is a good starting point. The knowledge base is endless. Which pill you select is your choice.
 
WmAx

WmAx

Audioholic Samurai
kmckenn said:
The sound is so different, I could do the DBT 100 times, and get it 100 times inside of 2 seconds listening time. (I think .5 is actually reasonable, but I said 2 to give some padding).

Maybe someone else could explain how/why a (or maybe just mine for all I know) 2802 in a role as a pre/pro ONLY on the frt/main channels with my B&K amp, completely, totally, hands down, sounded far far better than a 3806 in the same role.... but I sure can't. Who knows, maybe after its very well WARMED up...
Please pay attention to the posts by mtrycrafts. If you follow the links he provided, you will understand his point of view. Human perception is flawed, and if you want to know what real audible differences exist, you must perform a properly controlled test that reduces and/or eliminates the variables that are known to affect human perception(s). Many hobbyists(and professionals) have assumed that human perception was the same as real difference detection, only to find out they were incorrect, even when they thought they heard substantial difference(s) previously. I too, have made the error of believing the human perception system was reliable without control(s). I was wrong, and I have since learned to perform such testing much more carefully, controlling for the factors that can affect perception(s).

-Chris
 

kmckenn

Audiophyte
Actually, I have no interest whatsoever in this conversation. I posted here to let a Denon / Vandersteen guy know what I had run into, and offered some insight... Adding to it, that after subsituting the posters (3806) receiver into my system, it didn't perform as "advertised" by my orginal posting...

So, I'll exit from the shark tank... G'Day ALL!
 
mtrycrafts

mtrycrafts

Seriously, I have no life.
kmckenn said:
Actually, I have no interest whatsoever in this conversation. I posted here to let a Denon / Vandersteen guy know what I had run into, and offered some insight... Adding to it, that after subsituting the posters (3806) receiver into my system, it didn't perform as "advertised" by my orginal posting...

So, I'll exit from the shark tank... G'Day ALL!

I thought you may want to expand your audio knowledge. I thought wrong:eek: Sorry about that.

Enjoy the land of OZ and the Twilight Zone of audioland. Mythology is interesting in books but reality is where we live, I am pretty sure.
 

porziob

Audioholic Intern
Bi wiring

Any advantage to bi wiring (dubious @ best in 2 channel w/ full range spkrs.) are completely negated in rear channels due to the heavily attenuated balance in a proper HT set up.
 
K

Keyser_Soze

Audiophyte
Holy smokes! Very interesting topic. Now lets say I don't want to waste any wire going bi-amp on my Mirage M3's and my Integra 7.8. Can someone tell me how to connect the wires to the 4 posts in the back. Here is my guess. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

Assuming 1 to 4 are the posts.

- Wire from receiver goes to 1 and 2
- A loop from 1 to 3
- A loop from 2 to 4

1 2 3 4
 
jonnythan

jonnythan

Audioholic Ninja
You'd need two wires from the single "left channel" red post on the receiver to each of the two red posts on the left speaker.

Two wires from the single "left channel" black post to each of the black posts on the left speaker.

Same for the right.

Total of eight wires, two from each post on the receiver.
 
K

Keyser_Soze

Audiophyte
Thanks jonnythan, but wouldn't

One wire from the single "left channel" red post on the receiver to one of the two red posts on the left speaker.

and

One wire from the single "left channel" black post to one of the black posts on the left speaker.

and then looping with a short little wire from the red one above to the unconnected red one and same for black.

And then repeat for the right speaker

Wouldn't that be the same except use half the wire.
 

Attachments

jonnythan

jonnythan

Audioholic Ninja
Thanks jonnythan, but wouldn't

One wire from the single "left channel" red post on the receiver to one of the two red posts on the left speaker.

and

One wire from the single "left channel" black post to one of the black posts on the left speaker.

and then looping with a short little wire from the red one above to the unconnected red one and same for black.

And then repeat for the right speaker

Wouldn't that be the same except use half the wire.
Well, yes, it would. It would be exactly the same electrically and would work just fine.

That's how the speakers are normally set up, except instead of wire they usually have a little metal plate connecting the two red posts on the speaker.


The thing is that it's not "bi-wiring" though. "Bi-wiring" means using two wires to go from the receiver to the speaker.

As you've probably figured out, bi-wiring is kinda silly.




edit: I thought your initial post said "bi-wire" not "bi-amp." Sorry. To bi-amp, you need to hook each red/black pair on the speaker to an individual red/black pair on the amp.
 
K

Keyser_Soze

Audiophyte
Thanks again jonnythan. Going to go with the 2 looped wire or your little metal plate suggestion.
 
mtrycrafts

mtrycrafts

Seriously, I have no life.
Thanks again jonnythan. Going to go with the 2 looped wire or your little metal plate suggestion.
Do you not already have a jumper plate between those two terminals? Speakers usually come with them in place and the owner can then use it with one set of wires, or remove the jumper and two runs of wire.
There is a great picture floating around here in one of the posts I think sheep or Seth posted some time back.
 
newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top