[mca]

Has anyone experienced positive benefits from biwiring their speakers? I am thinking of trying this with my Ushers but wanted to get some feedback first. I'm looking to replace my wires anyway, so I thought I might give it a try.

[DVV]

Has anyone experienced positive benefits from biwiring their speakers? I am thinking of trying this with my Ushers but wanted to get some feedback first. I'm looking to replace my wires anyway, so I thought I might give it a try.

There has been much talk about it, but over the last 10 years or so, I have yet to hear any speak sounding better with biwiring, assuming one uses equally good wires all around.

Some manufacturers are so sceptical about it that they don't even include the option.

I cannot think of any technical reason why biwiring should be better than a single wire, assuming that one wire is good enough and thick enough for the given job.

Ask yourself a simple question - who benefits from biwiring? If you should come up with the answer "cable manufacturers", you will know who is the loudest proponent of the concept.

Cheers,
DVV

[nathanm]

Bi-AMPing makes sense, Bi-WIRING makes no sense.  It's two wires which are going to and from the exact same place - they're both in the same circuit.  Logically, you could take any given speaker cable, split the strands apart into ten different bundles and call it Deca-Wiring!  Woo!   If you've got one amp driving one speaker then that's all you get - why would you want to connect it up with more than one cable assembly?  The only reason would be if you're marketing spendy wire and if you can get people to buy one set maybe you can get them to buy two.  

[hmen]

I've seen ads for speakers that say you can bi-wire to "reduce intermodular distortion" . I have no idea what that means. I guess it's possible that on some speakers bi-wiring might be beneficial because of some quirk in the internal circuitry. Sometimes bi-wiring might sound better because the jumpers provided by the manufacturers might not be the best quality and the wires are simply providing a better connection.  There are now companies that sell jumpers to replace the stock jumpers and they claim that improves performance. So there might be cases where bi-wiring might improve performance but when I tried it I didn't see much difference.

[MaxxC]

With my speakers it did make a difference.     Focus Audio FS688 monitors.     Ran them at least 4 different ways.

Bi-wire
cable to tweeter with jumper to mid/bass
cable to midbass with jumper to tweeter
and all of the above configurations with the jumper connected between the (-) grounds only.

The two differences I noticed were more air in the highs and a more coherent balance top to bottom.    It wasn't major but it wasn't subtle either.    

I took the inexpensive way out because I wasn't totally sold on the benefits of bi-wiring so I bought some cables from SignalCable.com.    Ran only $225 for a 18 foot run of shotgun biwire.  

I think bottom line is that some speakers will benefit, some show no difference and some may even have a negative effect.    All depends on the system and listeners preferences.

[DVV]

With my speakers it did make a difference.     Focus Audio FS688 monitors.     Ran them at least 4 different ways.

Bi-wire
cable to tweeter with jumper to mid/bass
cable to midbass with jumper to tweeter
and all of the above configurations with the jumper connected between the (-) grounds only.

The two differences I noticed were more air in the highs and a more coherent balance top to bottom.    It wasn't major but it wasn't subtle either.    

I took the inexpensive way out because I wasn't tota ...

With the jumper connecting the grounds on the speakers, and the cable carrying the ground over there, God alone knows what the resulting circuit was, but I'm inclined to think you had problems with the grounding, or the "minus". There's no telling how this may reflect on any system without trying. Essentially, you had what could well amount to a ground loop.

There's only one case I can think of when biwiring may do a trick or two, and that's when the initial cable is hard pressed to carry all the current demanded. Using a second cable to the tweeter will free the tweeter of any such possible cable problems, and since the tweeter requires relatively little energy, it's not likely to push the cable hard.

Cheers,
DVV

[zybar]

I am bi-wiring with two different cables right now.  I am using Argent Audio's Pursang on the mid/tweeter and Sonoran Desert Plateau for the woofers.

In my system and to my ears, this sounds better than either cable by itself with jumpers.

The Pursang have the best top end I have heard on a cable and they have a natural, effortless sound in the midrange that is perfect for getting everything out of the panels on my RM 40's.

The Sonoran have a bolder, larger, deeper preence than the Pursang on the bottom.  

YMMV.

George

[pjchappy]

By jumpers, do you mean the typical metal thingies supplied, or actual speaker wire jumpers.

If it's the former, I can definitely see how bi-wiring would make a non-subtle difference. . .

p

[zybar]

My jumpers were Argent Audio Pursang.

I have tried other jumpers (from Cardas, AZ, Audience) and liked the Pursang the best.

I never use those crappy jumpers most manufacturers give you.  

With my Silverline Sonata II speakers (list of $6500) you are given these crappy, cheap jumpers - why?  You would think the manufacturers would want their speakers to sound their best....

Heck, Brian didn't even include jumpers with my RM 40's and I didn't mind one bit.

George

[warnerwh]

Got a great deal on two 28 foot lengths of DH labs speaker cable of which I only needed two 8 foot lengths. I'm not a cable person but this stuff has a good air tight seal and is silver plated. Anyway I biwired as I had the wire. Didn't notice much difference. One night took out the extra wire and just ran a jumper on my VMPS Supertowers and was going to sell the extra set. A few days later I was listening and noticed a congestion in the upper mids/treble. Then it dawned on me that I had removed the extra speaker cable, so it stays in now.  Maybe it was my subconscious working as I'd forgotten about removing the extra cabling, I don't know, but I'd swear there's an audible difference.  Who knows, maybe it was just moving the wire around a bit.  Best thing to do is try it yourself over a period of time. The difference was subtle but worthwhile.

[brj]

So has anyone done any tests comparing the use of 2 separate wires vs. 1 wire with twice the cross-sectional area?  I'm wondering if it is simply the extra metal available for signal transmission that is the real difference.

[DVV]

So has anyone done any tests comparing the use of 2 separate wires vs. 1 wire with twice the cross-sectional area?  I'm wondering if it is simply the extra metal available for signal transmission that is the real difference.

I did, a few years ago, when I had several loudspeakers at home for testing. I didn't trust only my own on such a test, I wanted my findings to stand or fall with other speakers, unknown to me.

I used van den Hul cables, from standard fare to fairly exotic, compared that to AudioQuest cables, and compared both to high quality wire (since Serbia has Europe's largest copper mine on its territory, you can imagine how wide a choice I had).

After about two weeks of experimenting, I could not name one instance when biwiring helped any, assuming only I used decent cross sections (i.e. with enough metal to carry the required signal properly). And since I am professionally a doubting Thomas, instead of the supplied connectors for the binding posts, I used the same cable to link the two in all instances, just to be on the safe side.

Still nothing, nada. No difference I could mention.

Cheers,
DVV

[brj]

I did, a few years ago, when I had several loudspeakers at home for testing.

Thanks for the info, DVV!  Just for the sake of completeness, can you list any of the speakers and components you tested with?

After about two weeks of experimenting, I could not name one instance when biwiring helped any, assuming only I used decent cross sections (i.e. with enough metal to carry the required signal properly).

Can you define what you determined "decent" to be, and did it vary with the driver type (woofer, mid, tweeter, etc.)?

Thanks!

[DVV]

I did, a few years ago, when I had several loudspeakers at home for testing.

Thanks for the info, DVV!  Just for the sake of completeness, can you list any of the speakers and components you tested with?

JMLab/Focal, Bowers&Wilkins, B&M Acoustics, Infinity, JBL and AR speakers, of various sizes, quality and prices. It was a group test I was doing, that's why I had them all at hand.

JMLab/Focal make their own drivers, so do B&W, so does AR, but JBL, Infinity and B&M Acoustics all use drivers originating from Son Audax, itself a part of the Harman International emire (as are JBL and Infinity).

As for the cabling, I used many flavors of van den Hul, some AudioQuest, Jamo and garden variety power cables. Cross section ranged from 2.5 sq.mm to 5.5 sq.mm; 5.5 sq.mm are two parallel runs of 256 strands each, and it's capable of passing along at least 200 amperes of current. To the best of my knowledge, no amp made in the world today can deliver anywhere near that kind of current.

In everyday life, that's the cable I have on every speaker; its official van den Hul designation is 352 Hybrid. It uses OFC copper, which is silver plated, and mixed with carbon fibres (hence "hybrid"). I have yet to hear a better cable which costs less than 30 times its price for a 5-6% improvements (the last was made by Kimber, but cost like 50 times the price).

After about two weeks of experimenting, I could not name one instance when biwiring helped any, assuming only I used decent cross sections (i.e. with enough metal to carry the required signal properly).

Can you define what you determined "decent" to be, and did it vary with the driver type (woofer, mid, tweeter, etc.)?

Thanks![/quote]

Well, to be blunt, I could not notice ANY difference that I could swear was really there and not in my head. None whatsoever. And I use a variety of amps: Karan Acoustics KA-i180 (2x180/250W into 8/4 ohms), Harman/Kardon 680 (2x85/130W into 8/4 ohms), Harman/Kardon 6550 (2x50/70W into 8/4 ohms, but SEPP) and Yamaha's AX-592 (2x100W into 8 ohms). Plus my own designs, but since these are not available commercially, so nobody but me can compare them to anything, I tend to leave them out and use them for my own reference only.

All of them except the Karan have been pushed quite a bit more into pure class A; for those interested, there's a text I wrote some years ago on the topic on the TNT site (http://www.tnt-audio.com ). I still get regular mail on the topic. Must have hit a nerve.

I should also add that I support the wide bandwidth school; this is to say that if my audio circuit doesn't hit 1 MHz, it's junked promptly. My line level electronics hit 10 MHz, and if I continue to do this, sooner or later I'll get into the FM range. But seriously, I'm talking about INTERNAL response, I always add an input filter to make sure that the electronics are always faster than the fastest signel that can get into them, thus practically eliminating TIM, TID and SID. What's left over is of purely academic value. But this can (unfortunately not always) really open up the sound, make it easy and flowing rather than struggling along in a congested manner. Consequently, I'm very likely to hear what there is to hear.

There was nothing to hear with biwiring that was different to using single quality cabling. And although I just turned 51, I can hear 18 kHz ten out of ten times. While the powered JBL subwoofer makes sure I get to hear what goes on below 50 Hz.

Before you ask - yes, I tend to be meticulous in tests, that's what I'm paid to do (however with different technologies, PCs mostly), and I spare no costs to create a level playing field for one and all. My room is at 24 deg. centigrade, 40% humidity 365 days a year. Power is strictly controlled.

Cheers,
DVV

[Dan Driscoll]

I have Vandersteen speakers and Richard Vandersteen recommends bi-wiring them. I have tried them single and bi-wired, but can't hear a difference.

[DVV]

The one thing I've never seen explained anywhere is WHY should biwiring make a difference?

As I said before, if one is using a weedy little cable, there could be problems with current delivery, also in case the cable has an odd set of electrical properties. In such a case, adding a second cable dedicated for the tweeter, which uses far less energy than the mid, let alone a mid/bass driver, could make a positive difference.

In all other cases, the amp will see two parallel sets of cables. This will add up their capacitance, and no matter how good the cables may be (i.e. with a small capacitance each), the end result may very likely produce a DETERIORATION of sound by surpressing the treble range.

Next comes the inductance - each and every piece of wiring ever made by God or man has an inductance. This also adds up.

The only thing that decreases is the impedance. This in itself is good.

But put it all together, and you will see a modified response curve, one way or another. I honestly don't see how this can be good. Here we go, knocking ourselves out to make it as linear as possible, and then we muck up at the very last stop.

So who gains? Well, the cable manufacturers obviously, because they stand to sell double the cabling if everyone goes that way. The problem was, in my view, that the speaker manufacturers, scared silly to rock the boat, jumped on the bandwagon rather then question this highly questionable practice. Why? Because they used the opportunity to add a second pair of binding posts, which cost them all of $1 extra and hike the prices by an extra $10, because hey, you can biwire baby.

In all truth, this does have a good side to it, because it also enables you to biamp, which is a different matter altogether and makes a hell of a lot of sense if done reasonably well.

Cheers,
DVV

[zybar]

Unless it is all in my head (who can say?)...here is my theory:

The bi-wire works in my system because I am using two different cables who each have their own strengths and weaknesses.  By putting each in a position that maximizes the positive and minimizes the negative I feel that I am getting better performance than a single cable has brought me so far.

Kind of simple, but who says it has to be complex?

George

[brj]

DVV, thanks for the detailed response, and I applaud the rigor with which you perform your tests.  I don't suppose they were double blind tests too?

I'm used to looking at bandwidth in a high performance computing environment, but I'm not very familiar with it in an audio cabling sense.  Do you have any good links to pass along?

Thanks again!

[DVV]

DVV, thanks for the detailed response, and I applaud the rigor with which you perform your tests.  I don't suppose they were double blind tests too?

No, they weren't. Not in the usual sense, no panel. Just me and my son, who does all random switching behind my back.

While at first glance panels may appear to be very objective, in real life, they are pain to organize. The problem is that panels don't really tell you much if done in the usual manner, with 4-5 guys listening. Everybody has their own taste, so you end up with totally opposing comments, totally in line with the old adage that one man's meat is another man's poison.

To become objective, panels need at least 10 people, pereferably 14 or 15. Then you can have a statistically valid panel.

I'm used to looking at bandwidth in a high performance computing environment, but I'm not very familiar with it in an audio cabling sense.  Do you have any good links to pass along?

Thanks again!

Unfortunately, I don't. But I am thinking about a test related to bandwidth in cables - Dan Banquer and I were discussing it in general, and it occurred to me that I have never seen that particular item quoted in any cable. Since they are by their very nature RLC components, there's no way under the sun that they can perform the same. Now, there's something to think about.

Cheers,
DVV

[MaxxC]

Had some errors in my post

Should be:

tried

(1)Bi-wire.
(2)traditional cable to tweeter and jumpers.
(3)nontraditional cable to midbass and jumpers (Tony Kalb Audio in Florida wires his FS688's in this manner.
(4)configuartion 2&3 with negative jumpers connected.

I suppose the configuration with the negative jumpers connected is what you are questioning.

Actually this is a method on the Cable Asylum by John Risch.     One of several methods.    This one provides a unified ground.       You can do a word search and find out more.

Why it worked I don't know.    Kind of suprised me like when I changed the power cable on my CD player and noticed major improvements.      Miles of dirty power lines and a few feet of cable at the end makes a major improvent.    Go figure?

Best Wishes