Speaker Wiring - Weird Advice??

[avliner]

Hi,

this morning I was clearing up my drawers and found some owner's manual of my JBL speakers (E Series) and out of curiosity I started to quickly read the speaker connections section and found something that makes me wonder why??

At the bi-wiring section, they mention how to do it correctly (not that I'm gonna do that, as it leads to no results whatsoever). Further down, they mention exactly this:

for single - wire connection (normal connection), leave the shorting bars in place and connect only a single set of speaker wires (two conductors) TO THE UPPER TERMINALS.

Upper terminals is for the high freqs., whereas the lower ports apllies to the lower freqs., that's quite logical.

The "unlogical" thing to me is the fact that they DO mention to connect the wires into the UPPER TERMINALS... what's the difference - if any - when you have the jumpers on?? I've always wired my speakers at the LOWER ports, for convenience only and never ever heard (or read) any specific comments on this regard.

It may sound kind of dumb, but I just want to know if there's any specific benefit in doing what JBL recommends in the manual.

Is there any of you guys willing to chime on this particular?

Cheers / Avliner.

 

[majorloser]

There is no difference.

The connecting bars have zero impedance.

 

[markw]

Believe it or not, not everyone is as smart as we are.

We know that it makes no difference but most people, when encountering this, will need to be told which set to use or else they won't feel secure.

Heck, some people feel it's mandatory they bi-wire speakers just because they can be bi-wired.

Actually, some people won't buy speakers unless they can be bi-wired because they are opositive it can make a huge difference.

 

[majorloser]

You mean I'm not supposed to hook the wires up to both positive terminals?

 

[jaxvon]

Funny thing,

Vandersteens (at least the 2CE Sigs) are made so that you have to biwire them or use wire jumpers. I think that this is just to market to the audiophile crowd. Oh well.

 

[Sheep]

Funny thing,

Vandersteens (at least the 2CE Sigs) are made so that you have to biwire them or use wire jumpers. I think that this is just to market to the audiophile crowd. Oh well.

Or the Biamping crowd... hint hint.

SheepStar

 

[avliner]

Hi guys,

that's what I tought, it's only tech BS.
The correct way to properly write their advice should have been:

.. and connect the single speaker wire to either upper or lower ports...

Thanks for the inputs anyway.

Cheers / Avliner.

 

[Haoleb]

Bi-wiring can make a difference, and if you have the extra cable it makes no sense not to do it. Unless you notice a decrease in performance.

for one, you cut the amount of resistance (however negligible) in half. Not to mention that because the woofers generally require more current which results in a stronger magnetic field, you can keep the magnetic field created from the woofer's current away from the tweet/mids cable.

As always if it makes a difference in sound or not is certainly debateable. But dont knock it until youve tried it. And even then, if it doesnt make a difference for you maybe it will for someone else.

 

[mtrycrafts]

Funny thing,

Vandersteens (at least the 2CE Sigs) are made so that you have to biwire them or use wire jumpers. I think that this is just to market to the audiophile crowd. Oh well.

Same reason why John Dunlavy created those expensive audio wires. Some of his customers were asking for them. So, also being a businessman, why not oblige.

 

[Sheep]

Bi-wiring can make a difference, and if you have the extra cable it makes no sense not to do it. Unless you notice a decrease in performance.

for one, you cut the amount of resistance (however negligible) in half. Not to mention that because the woofers generally require more current which results in a stronger magnetic field, you can keep the magnetic field created from the woofer's current away from the tweet/mids cable.

As always if it makes a difference in sound or not is certainly debateable. But dont knock it until youve tried it. And even then, if it doesnt make a difference for you maybe it will for someone else.

Warning, this post (^) contains unhealthy amounts of BS.

SheepStar

 

[PENG]

Warning, this post (^) contains unhealthy amounts of BS.

SheepStar

To say bi-wire yields better sound may be BS, but to say (no one said it, yet....) it does not make any technical, physical, or electrical differences would be wrong. There are no shortage of technical write-up (I mean those who back it up with electrical theory/physics) to show why it is different electrically but I did manage to find one such article that tried to prove the opposite with a bunch of formula that are correct but appeared (to me) to have been wrongly applied.

I know it does make a difference electrically, I could not hear any difference bi-wire or not but it is possible that someone can, just like some people can hear the difference between high end amps that are design to be transparent and amplifier linearly. Sorry to get off the topic, I beat this bi-wire thing to death before but still cannot resist reacting this time. Back to the original question, I agree to everything said so far. Either set of terminals are fine, but make sure the jumpers are tightly screwed down.

 

[shadow]

Warning, this post (^) contains unhealthy amounts of BS.

SheepStar

You are an expert no doubt.
Vandersteen has been designing his speakers with biwire inputs for over twenty years. This is no trendy decision he made to keep up with the latest fad. He uses biwiring in his designs becasue he believes that they sound better this way. He was one of the first designers to do this I believe. Thiel and Wilson both reject biwiring as a useful tool for better sound. I suppose you figure you know more about speaker design than Vandersteen or Thiel. Chiming in with the crowd does not prove that. What are your experience and qualifications on speaker design and engineering?

 

[PENG]

I suppose you figure you know more about speaker design than Vandersteen or Thiel.

May I add B&W to your list.

http://www.bwspeakers.com/index.cfm/fuseaction/local.faq/ObjectID/F5CA2E9F-3D20-11D4-A67F00D0B7473B37

Here's part of their explanation:

Most B&W speakers are provided with two pairs of speaker terminals; this allows you to either bi-wire or bi-amplify them. The aim of both these techniques is not to simply get the customer to spend more on cables and electronics (although no manufacturer objects to this spin off) but to improve the resolution of the speakers.

A multi-way speaker contains a crossover network that not only divides the incoming signal into different frequency ranges, appropriate to the working range of each drive unit, but also equalises each driver’s response to be flat (raw driver responses are usually anything but flat).

There are two different basic types of crossover – series and parallel. Series crossovers have each filter section wired in series between the positive and negative input terminals. It is impossible to treat each filter section individually – each interacts with the others – and such crossovers are not suitable for bi-wiring or bi-amping. But by far the most common type is parallel. Here, each driver has its own filter wired between it and the input terminals. If there is only one pair of input terminals, the inputs to all the filters are connected in parallel to that one pair of terminals. If, however, you have more than one pair of terminals, you can completely separate the inputs to each filter. Why on earth would you want to do such a thing?

In the case of bi-wiring, the answer lies in the cable connecting the speaker to the amplifier and the fact that the amplifier is a voltage source but the speaker is a current driven device (force on voice coil = magnet flux density x length of conductor in the magnet gap x current).

Firstly, all cables are a compromise. Some types of construction work better at low frequencies and others at higher frequencies. Providing separate inputs to the speaker allows you to use different cable types, each optimised for the frequency range of use.

"Secondly, consider that the cable has an impedance that causes a voltage drop along its length. Now consider the current flowing along the cable. Assume for the argument that the amplifier delivers a perfect voltage waveform to the cable and the cable itself adds no distortion. However, each driver has a non-linear impedance (for example, the inductance of the voice coil alters depending on its position in the magnet gap) that causes the current to be non-linear. This non-linear current through the impedance of the cable causes the voltage drop along the cable to be non-linear and thus the voltage across the speaker terminals is also non-linear, even though it is linear at the amplifier end.

If we were just concerned with one driver, things would not be too bad. But that non-linear voltage at the speaker terminals may contain harmonics within the frequency range of one of the other drivers and that driver will reproduce them, albeit at low level. If, however, you separate the inputs to each driver filter, each driver’s distortion is kept to itself and the total system distortion goes down. We are talking small changes here, but the resolution of some modern drivers is now so good that small improvements like this are readily detectable by keen listeners.

Many people ask us whether the load on the amplifier is different if you bi-wire. It is not. As far as the amplifier is concerned, it matters not one jot whether you parallel the inputs to the filter sections at the speaker end or the amplifier end of the speaker cable."

As the last paragraph said, the load on the amplifier is not different, but if we are talking about sound quality, then please read the whole article. Again, sorry about getting off the original topic, I just want to make sure people see more than one view point. I am keenly aware that Audiohoics does not believe bi-wiring is any different than using thicker wire. I also firmly disagree with that claim, but only from the engineering stand point. In fact, that's just about the only thing I disagree with Audioholics so far and I hope Gene won't be upset with me.

 

[Sheep]

You know that the same connections used for Buy-wiring, are the exact same as Bi-amping? If you can prove these points (if you can hear it, you can measure it) then by all means, It makes a difference. But I have yet to see these measurements.

What are your experience and qualifications on speaker design and engineering?

Ha, what are yours? What you just said anyone can copy paste. As a matter of fact, it has a similar tone to a Bose supporters post. "What do you know, They're the best, yadda yadda"

BTW, this isn't speaker design, its wiring.

SheepStar

 

[mtrycrafts]

As the last paragraph said, the load on the amplifier is not different, but if we are talking about sound quality, then please read the whole article. .

Then, it can be demonstrate under controlled conditions, no?
Perhaps there are such credible demonstrations someplace in audioland, I wonder? I have yet to stumble on them.

 

[mtrycrafts]

Bi-wiring can make a difference,

Like what?

for one, you cut the amount of resistance (however negligible) in half.

So will a thicker, single run of cable. But, the question then is, will a drop of 50% in resistance audible??? I'd like to see that demonstrated,


Not to mention that because the woofers generally require more current which results in a stronger magnetic field, you can keep the magnetic field created from the woofer's current away from the tweet/mids cable.

What you are claiming then is the IM in the cable caused by the high currents at low frequency will alter the current at the other frequency?
This is testable and measurable. Again, I'd like to see this too and then see if it is audible.

As always if it makes a difference in sound or not is certainly debateable.

Yes, one can debate the flat world too, or ID, but without credible evidence, I don't see it as a debate; and, who is debating it???

 

[mtrycrafts]

Vandersteen has been designing his speakers with biwire inputs for over twenty years.

So, that gives them immunity from market forces and bs???

This is no trendy decision he made to keep up with the latest fad.

No, it has been around for some time. So, that makes it valid, credible, fact based?

He uses biwiring in his designs becasue he believes that they sound better this way.

Believe??? Is that all he has? How about demonstrating it under bias controlled conditions??? Then, he might have a valid reason.


He was one of the first designers to do this I believe. Thiel and Wilson both reject biwiring as a useful tool for better sound.

So, if those two, and other makers rejects it why would Vandersteen be right? After all, he only has a belief in it, not actual knowledge of it.

What are your experience and qualifications on speaker design and engineering?

Irrelevant. Has Vandersteen been able to demonstrate their claim beyond a belief???

 

[Haoleb]

Back to your all too familiar ways are we Mtry? If there was one name i recognized from my past its yours, from AR forums...

I didnt say it make an audible difference. You implied that all on your own.

 

[mtrycrafts]

I didnt say it make an audible difference. You implied that all on your own.

Read your post what you implied and what I posted to you.

 

[Sheep]

Back to your all too familiar ways are we Mtry? If there was one name i recognized from my past its yours, from AR forums...

I didnt say it make an audible difference. You implied that all on your own.

This is the part I don't understand. You take a strong stance on something that doesn't make a difference, yet you back it like it will solve the oil problems.

SheepStar