[seadogs1]

Can someone please explain the advantages or disadvantages of Bi-wiring. Also assuming there are advantages is it better to twist the bi-wired wire or run them separately? Thanks!

[Ethan Winer]

Can someone please explain the advantages or disadvantages of Bi-wiring.

Advantage: Using twice as much wire is equivalent to using one piece of wire twice as thick. With speaker cables thicker is generally better, so in that sense bi-wiring can only help.

Disadvantage: It's more complicated to connect, and more expensive than using a single length of thicker wire which would give identical results.

--Ethan

[rabpaul]

See this: http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/audio/biwire/Page1.html

[Ethan Winer]

See this: http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/audio/biwire/Page1.html

Figure 6 tells all, and Za will be sufficiently low in any competent power amp to negate any effect from bi-wiring, assuming adequately thick speaker wire. The more relevant issue is hearing perception and psychology - why people believe they hear a difference even when it's clear from measuring that there's no difference in the signals at the speaker terminals.

--Ethan

[Philistine]

I've bi-wired B&W speakers and tried bi-wiring Salk speakers - even though I tried to convince myself that their is a difference I didn't hear one.  I can hear differences in IC's and PC's, so believe I'm positively psycho acoustically preconditioned (gullible). So IMHO I see no advantages to bi-wire, only a disadvantage of cost.

As Ethan has posted it reminds me that room treatment is a more cost effective path to take (which I've done), along with possibly bi-amping (which I haven't tried).     

[beat]

Doesnt it all depend on the way the crossover is set up? I thought the deal was to bypass much of the crossover circuitry. I definitely heard a difference in the old english studio monitors I used to have. Never took them apart though so I cant qualify its circuitry.

[Danny Richie]

Doesnt it all depend on the way the crossover is set up? I thought the deal was to bypass much of the crossover circuitry. I definitely heard a difference in the old english studio monitors I used to have. Never took them apart though so I cant qualify its circuitry.

The crossover design really has nothing to do with it. Whether connected at the speaker binding post or at the amp binding post the circuit is still the same. Bi-wiring does not separate anything.

The difference some people hear in regard to bi-wiring has as much to do with the geometry of the wire as anything. A multiple wire design in a spiral, twisted, counter rotated, or braided design with often cancel out noise and can change the inductance and capacitance of the wire which will also change the sound.

However you can get the same result from using the same wire and connecting them to only one binding post.

Or while using the bi-wiring cable just add or take away the jumper used at the binding post when it is not bi-wired and you'll notice no difference whether it is there or not.

Using a different type of wire on one set of drivers verses the other can change or color the sound too. Sometimes this is a negative effect though as dissimilar types of wire can cause a phase shift. 

Heavier gauge wire helps in some applications but not in others. Reduced resistance (heavier gauge or by-wiring) is another factor that contributes to a change in sound that most attribute to bi-wiring.

Typically the change in sound when going to a bi-wire set up is simply the change in resistance, capacitance, and inductance of the wire and not a result of where the connection is made (at the crossover or at the amp).

[jneutron]

Figure 6 tells all, and Za will be sufficiently low in any competent power amp to negate any effect from bi-wiring, assuming adequately thick speaker wire.

He performed the analysis using only a single sine of varying frequency.  That is not the same as multiple frequencies branching at the crossover simultaneously.

The more relevant issue is hearing perception and psychology - why people believe they hear a difference even when it's clear from measuring that there's no difference in the signals at the speaker terminals.

--Ethan

Wrong measurement technique used.  Make it better.

As to perception, we concur.  Many hear differences which are not there or not audible.

Perception and incorrect analysis lead to incorrect conclusions.

Cheers, John

[jneutron]

The crossover design really has nothing to do with it. Whether connected at the speaker binding post or at the amp binding post the circuit is still the same. Bi-wiring does not separate anything.

Um, yes it does.

If the crossover is of a series design, biwiring will do nothing at all other than toss copper into the fray.  A parallel one branches, that is different.

The difference some people hear in regard to bi-wiring has as much to do with the geometry of the wire as anything. A multiple wire design in a spiral, twisted, counter rotated, or braided design with often cancel out noise and can change the inductance and capacitance of the wire which will also change the sound.

Now waitttaminute...

You are saying that there are indeed audible differences in speaker cables based on L and C, which has never been shown via DBT testing to be a valid assumption (far as I read anyway), but that there are no differences attributed to biwiring...which people say also has not been shown to be audible.. 

hmmmm.

However you can get the same result from using the same wire and connecting them to only one binding post.

You are correct in that L and C will be different by doing that.

Or while using the bi-wiring cable just add or take away the jumper used at the binding post when it is not bi-wired and you'll notice no difference whether it is there or not.

Of course they will.  Unfortunately, how would one distinguish between wishful thinking and reality?

Using a different type of wire on one set of drivers verses the other can change or color the sound too. Sometimes this is a negative effect though as dissimilar types of wire can cause a phase shift. 

So waitttaminute...now biwiring works, but only because of the type of wire...I'm getting confused..

Heavier gauge wire helps in some applications but not in others. Reduced resistance (heavier gauge or by-wiring) is another factor that contributes to a change in sound that most attribute to bi-wiring.

Typically the change in sound when going to a bi-wire set up is simply the change in resistance, capacitance, and inductance of the wire and not a result of where the connection is made (at the crossover or at the amp).

mmmmm...maybe.....maybe not..  You've presented no technical argument in support of that assertion.
Cheers, John

[Danny Richie]

If the crossover is of a series design, biwiring will do nothing at all other than toss copper into the fray.  A parallel one branches, that is different.

Yes, that is correct. A series crossover will not allow bi-wiring. I have designed plenty of series crossovers myself. That is a given. But speakers using those networks won't have dual binding post on them either so they weren't in consideration.

You are saying that there are indeed audible differences in speaker cables based on L and C, which has never been shown via DBT testing to be a valid assumption (far as I read anyway), but that there are no differences attributed to biwiring...which people say also has not been shown to be audible.. 

Yes, changes in LCR as well as many other things all make audible differences.

I am also saying that the changes people note when going to a bi-wired cable are a result of many other things least of which has anything to do with whether the cables are connected at the crossover or at the amp.

Of course they will.  Unfortunately, how would one distinguish between wishful thinking and reality?

Oh yea? How will dropping a factor supplied jumper back across the binding post have any effect or Change LCR when using a bi-wired cable?

Don't get me started on double blind testing. I have been there and done that, and it can be skewed to give results either way. I've done it.

You've presented no technical argument in support of that assertion.

Need I?

What I stated is well known by the industry. And common sense should tell you that changes in LCR can have an audible effect.

[jneutron]

A series crossover will not allow bi-wiring. I have designed plenty of series crossovers myself. That is a given. But speakers using those networks won't have dual binding post on them either so they weren't in consideration.

Ah ok, we agree..  There was however, no exclusion clause in your statement, it was all encompassing (but obviously wasn't meant to be).

Yes, changes in LCR as well as many other things all make audible differences.

You are in disagreement with many on that point.  Most say "zip" wire is all one needs, and as long as guage is large enough, wires are indistinguishable.

I am also saying that the changes people note when going to a bi-wired cable are a result of many other things least of which has anything to do with whether the cables are connected at the crossover or at the amp.

Well again, you've actually not established that fact.  It is an opinion. (yes, I know it is shared by most, but it remains an opinion that has simply not been proven incorrect, but yet assumed correct.) ...buuut, then again, paralleling a pair of zips will typically halve the inductance (as long as they are at least 5 spacing distances apart, the dipole magnetic field will be ~1/5th the level at the pair, reducing coupling), and you state that changing L can change sound.

Oh yea? How will dropping a factor supplied jumper back across the binding post have any effect or Change LCR when using a bi-wired cable?

Don't get me started on double blind testing. I have been there and done that, and it can be skewed to give results either way. I've done it.

You must read more carefully.  I intentionally included perception and the problem with distinguishing expectation bias from actual..Here's the sentences again...""Of course they will.  Unfortunately, how would one distinguish between wishful thinking and reality?""  Note the verbage "wishful thinking".

And again, the LC and R are changed by replacing the jumper.  It will retain the same Effective Dielectric constant, so the LC product will be the same, just on a different point of the LC curve, so the speaker load impedance will hit at a different spot.

You've presented no technical argument in support of that assertion.

Need I?

Yes.  You presented an opinion as fact, of course you must provide support for that opinion.  Would you not expect the same from others who claim biwiring is audible??  What's good for the goose is good for the gander....

What I stated is well known by the industry.

What is believed as "well known" is in fact, not.

Stating "it's obvious", or it's "well known", or "widely acclaimed as true" is exactly what the wire vendors say when selling product using garbage pseudotechnical mumbo jumbo.   Those with actual technical acumen should not use such phrases, but provide factual evidence.

Again, goose and gander.

And common sense should tell you that changes in LCR can have an audible effect.

I have stated such for several years, so we agree on that.  I have further established the rough levels of shift required of ITD and IID to disrupt localization parameters (responsible for soundstage (image) reconstruction)..that would be 2 to 5 uSec interchannel, and roughly .5dB interchannel.

Cheers, John

[Danny Richie]

Yes, changes in LCR as well as many other things all make audible differences.

You are in disagreement with many on that point.  Most say "zip" wire is all one needs, and as long as guage is large enough, wires are indistinguishable.

I don't mind that people disagree with me. Some can say zip cord is just as good as anything. You can say it too if you want. For those that think wire is wire and it has no effect might be interest in some ocean front property in Montana. 

Well again, you've actually not established that fact.  It is an opinion.

Yep, I have been there and done that. It's fact to me. Feel free to disagree. I don't care, and I don't feel the need to prove myself to you either.

You must read more carefully.  I intentionally included perception and the problem with distinguishing expectation bias from actual..Here's the sentences again...""Of course they will.  Unfortunately, how would one distinguish between wishful thinking and reality?""  Note the verbage "wishful thinking".

Ah, you were keying on the expectation of change. Sure you can use that argument.

Think what you want or what you will. I haven't the time or motivation to get into a nay sayer debate.

[jneutron]

Yep, I have been there and done that. It's fact to me. Feel free to disagree. I don't care, and I don't feel the need to prove myself to you either.

So then when you ask others for proof of something, remember what occurred here.  It's a two way street.  Someone asserts a "factiod" and you ask for proof...I did this to you.  "Clamming up" is not a valid debating tactic..


That, and consider the possibility of "devil's advocate". <<<weird icon, doesn't seem to fit the intent...
You are not very adept at playing off a devil's advocate, are you..

Ah, you were keying on the expectation of change. Sure you can use that argument.

No, I was keying on the fact that it can be difficult to distinguish expectation bias from actual.  We are all humans.

Think what you want or what you will. I haven't the time or motivation to get into a nay sayer debate.

Interesting.  But who is the naysayer?  And what is the debate??  I've not called you a naysayer, so what exactly are you saying??

Cheers, John

[*Scotty*]

John, I am having a problem making sense out of your exchange with Danny. Are you saying that you have never heard speaker cable or bi-wired speaker cable make a change in how a system sounds. What is the Devil advocating hear?
Scotty

[jneutron]

John, I am having a problem making sense out of your exchange with Danny. Are you saying that you have never heard speaker cable or bi-wired speaker cable make a change in how a system sounds. What is the Devil advocating hear?
Scotty

Apparently you are not alone.  Danny isn't making sense of it either.

I have derived the mathematical proof that biwiring indeed alters the way the cables dissipate, in direct response to the nodes at the crossover.

It alters the instantaneous dissipation, while retaining the exact same RMS losses.

It may or may not be audible.   It is not visible using an FFT based test instrument, as the dissipation modulation is a net zero integral product that cannot exist on it's own due to half the dissipative loss being negative...

I personally have heard an effect as a result of a contrived test setup using two sines, believe that it may indeed be an expected result, but it is an "unconfirmed sighting" since there has been no others to have tried it.



The assumption that something is "known in the industry" to be anything, is to assume that it is correct by virtue of nothing other than the weight of opinions.  I do not accept "it is known" or "it is common sense" as proof of an assertion.  I expect proof from either side of the proverbial "fence".

If someone states that "of course, biwiring makes an audible difference, I will ask for proof of that assertion.

AND

If someone states that "of course, biwiring makes NO audible difference, I will, again, ask for proof of that assertion.

Cheers, John

ps..is that the Z pinch picture?

[Danny Richie]

I'm not clamming up. I am just not interested in a debate to no end today.

You want me to back up what I say. Come on over. Let's have a listening party.

But who is the naysayer?  And what is the debate??  I've not called you a naysayer, so what exactly are you saying??

Oh come on man. This debate about cables has been endless. It always turns into an objective verses subjective debate to which there is no end. I am not interested right now.

[jneutron]

I'm not clamming up. I am just not interested in a debate to no end today.

You've asserted that cable LRC can make audible differences, but yet dismiss biwiring. 

A strict analysis of LCR effects shows it to be below the audible "mud".  But yet, some claim it is audible.  I claim what we consider to be below threshold, is not when one considers localization.   So I cannot assert no effect.

You want me to back up what I say. Come on over. Let's have a listening party.

Where you located?  You interested in testing some wires of various L and C with your speakers?  I can make a wire with any L or C I want, within the constraints of LC=1034 times DC, DC being about 2.7...L in nH per foot, C in pf per foot.  And I can make any cable Z I want as well.

Great tools for making and testing cables.  I'll give you the equations if you wish.

Oh come on man. This debate about cables has been endless. It always turns into an objective verses subjective debate to which there is no end. I am not interested right now.

Hmmm...so from your statement, what are you saying?  That I have claimed they don't make a difference, or that I claim they do??

btw, checked your website.  Nice, well done.

You did mention foil inductors as having less skin effect...are you sure about that one? Proximity in the center of the foil bundle causes excess flux and exclusion, starving the center.  This is a typical trap that people fall into, thinking that the foil by design kills skinning.it doesn't. How did you verify that?  I have access to an HP 4284, measures inductance from 20Hz to 100 Khz, might come in handy..

Cheers, John

[*Scotty*]

John, You have a mathematical proof that shows a mechanism by which bi-wiring can have a audible effect on a system and you have heard a difference with a test setup.
On the basis of your experiences I would say that you might agree with others in the industry that bi-wiring maybe audible under some circumstances.
You are right that is a picture of the Sandia Z Accelerator but it didn't shrink satisfactorily.
Scotty
 

[Danny Richie]

A strict analysis of LCR effects shows it to be below the audible "mud".  But yet, some claim it is audible.  I claim what we consider to be below threshold, is not when one considers localization.   So I cannot assert no effect.

If using the same cable and running it both in a bi-wire configuration and using all conductors but not bi-wiring I have not heard a difference "yet".

Where you located?

North Central Texas.

You interested in testing some wires of various L and C with your speakers?

I am an open minded guy and will try just about anything in audio.

Hmmm...so from your statement, what are you saying?  That I have claimed they don't make a difference, or that I claim they do??

In my system just about anything I change makes a difference. It is much harder to find cables that sound alike than to try to find a difference. They all sound different in one way or another to me.

You did mention foil inductors as having less skin effect...are you sure about that one? Proximity in the center of the foil bundle causes excess flux and exclusion, starving the center.  This is a typical trap that people fall into, thinking that the foil by design kills skinning.it doesn't. How did you verify that?

Ask Alpha Core. I think that blurb came from them.

[jneutron]

John, You have a mathematical proof that shows a mechanism by which bi-wiring can have a audible effect on a system and you have heard a difference with a test setup.
On the basis of your experiences I would say that you might agree with others in the industry that bi-wiring maybe audible under some circumstances.
Scotty
 

I cannot discount the possibility.

Cheers, John