The most heated debate in audio...
- Thread starter ohbythebay
- Start date
BobM
New member
Maybe the degree of difference has something to do with the impedance of the speaker? Or perhaps the sensitivity of the speaker.
I know for sure that bi-wiring did not only audibly improve the sound of my 83db inefficient 3 ohm Apogee Duetta Sig's, but it's damn near essential to make them sound their best. Perhaps it's just the added gauge summing the 2 together to deliver the extra power they need?
I know for sure that bi-wiring did not only audibly improve the sound of my 83db inefficient 3 ohm Apogee Duetta Sig's, but it's damn near essential to make them sound their best. Perhaps it's just the added gauge summing the 2 together to deliver the extra power they need?
the professor
Well-known member
BobM
New member
Using a McCormack DNA500, throwing about 1000watts peak into that load (actually, I doubt I could suck enough juice out of the wall to actually get 1000 watts from the amp). It sure does have control of them though.
ohbythebay
New member
- Thread Author
- #25
This is what I have heard also...well..not heard, but READ....LOL
ohbythebay
New member
- Thread Author
- #26
I don't think its the efficiency (again what I have read) so much as the efficiency of the crossover. The "supposed" signal generated by the woofer movement causes noise that can be picked up in the higher signals however; I KNOW I am not explaining this right now has it been proven as detrimental.
I think the Professor summed it up..in some cases it works, in others, not so much...LOL
dlb2
New member
You'll never know unless you try... :evil:
NorthStar
New member
And bi-amping and tri-amping and active crossovers and active loudspeakers? 
ohbythebay
New member
- Thread Author
- #30
My speakers are not active. They always stay in the same place yet, they never gain any weight. 
NorthStar
New member
I prefer active over passive (3D glasses). 
The concept of bi-wire began in the good ole days when there weren't "speaker cables". We just had "hookup wire" which was lamp cord wire which was stranded copper with PVC insulation in 18 to 14 gauge sizes. Very modest by today's standards for speaker cabling.
Simply increasing the aggregate conductor cross-sectional area between an amplifier and speaker will reduce the impedance which will improve the power transfer function. That means it will likely sound better not the least reason being that it will be louder. Decreased impedance also improves the amps dampening and control of the speakers drivers.
One method to increase conductor cross section is to simply increase the size of the wire for example from 14 gauge to 10 gauge wire. Another method would be to run two sets of hookup wire to the speaker. Two runs of 14 gauge wire is equivalent to a 11 gauge wire in cross-sectional area.
If the speaker has a single binding post, you simply wrap the two wires around the lug. Some speaker manufacturers, who were savy listeners, started installing dual lugs or binding posts in their speakers and found that separating the cross-over (high and low) and dedicating a single run of wire for each also improved the sound. That was when lamp cord cost pennies per foot. Now we have speaker cables that cost more than the speakers and in some cases more than luxury cars. There are some that actually have some technological advancement over simple lamp cord but that is hotly debated. In any case we have a vast variety of wire and cabling now and cross-sectional area is not a issue given that many have an aggregate gauge size larger than your arm.
So, my opinion now, multiple runs of speaker wiring no longer has the clear advantage that it once did. Furthermore, the ability to use different wire gauge, geometry and metal types can significantly alter the sonic balance of a speaker that is bi or tri wired. I know some manufacturers (Wilson comes to mind) that want to ensure that balance between woofer, midrange and tweeter is controlled by the speaker's cross-over and not multiple runs of unknown speaker wire.
The simple fact is that some speakers can be bi and tri wired and some cannot. So there are practical questions that need to be answered if you happen to have a speaker that is bi or tri wired. Should you use single speaker cables and use jumpers? Should you run multiple runs of speaker wire or buy a cable that is built as a bi-wire design? If the cable is a bi-wire, is it a "true bi-wire" and what does that even mean? In my own systems, whenever I have a question about speaker setup or configuration, I always get the opinion about such things from the individual speaker manufacturer. They usually (sometimes not) know what works best for their speaker.
If you do chose to bi-wire a speaker these are some general guidelines that I follow:
1) The two runs of wire should be separate through the entirety of the length of the cable. This means that the high/mid and the low conductor should each be separate starting at the amplifier speaker terminals.
2) The high/mid and the low conductor should be the same size in gauge and of the same geometry and conductor type. Identical.
3) The conductors should be the same length.
4) The positive and negative conductors should be the same size - not different as is done in some designs.
BTW, a bi-wire speaker cable does not split the frequencies - the cross-over in the speaker does that. The full spectrum of frequencies is present at both the high/mid and the low terminals.
Caelin Gabriel
President
Shunyata Research
Simply increasing the aggregate conductor cross-sectional area between an amplifier and speaker will reduce the impedance which will improve the power transfer function. That means it will likely sound better not the least reason being that it will be louder. Decreased impedance also improves the amps dampening and control of the speakers drivers.
One method to increase conductor cross section is to simply increase the size of the wire for example from 14 gauge to 10 gauge wire. Another method would be to run two sets of hookup wire to the speaker. Two runs of 14 gauge wire is equivalent to a 11 gauge wire in cross-sectional area.
If the speaker has a single binding post, you simply wrap the two wires around the lug. Some speaker manufacturers, who were savy listeners, started installing dual lugs or binding posts in their speakers and found that separating the cross-over (high and low) and dedicating a single run of wire for each also improved the sound. That was when lamp cord cost pennies per foot. Now we have speaker cables that cost more than the speakers and in some cases more than luxury cars. There are some that actually have some technological advancement over simple lamp cord but that is hotly debated. In any case we have a vast variety of wire and cabling now and cross-sectional area is not a issue given that many have an aggregate gauge size larger than your arm.
So, my opinion now, multiple runs of speaker wiring no longer has the clear advantage that it once did. Furthermore, the ability to use different wire gauge, geometry and metal types can significantly alter the sonic balance of a speaker that is bi or tri wired. I know some manufacturers (Wilson comes to mind) that want to ensure that balance between woofer, midrange and tweeter is controlled by the speaker's cross-over and not multiple runs of unknown speaker wire.
The simple fact is that some speakers can be bi and tri wired and some cannot. So there are practical questions that need to be answered if you happen to have a speaker that is bi or tri wired. Should you use single speaker cables and use jumpers? Should you run multiple runs of speaker wire or buy a cable that is built as a bi-wire design? If the cable is a bi-wire, is it a "true bi-wire" and what does that even mean? In my own systems, whenever I have a question about speaker setup or configuration, I always get the opinion about such things from the individual speaker manufacturer. They usually (sometimes not) know what works best for their speaker.
If you do chose to bi-wire a speaker these are some general guidelines that I follow:
1) The two runs of wire should be separate through the entirety of the length of the cable. This means that the high/mid and the low conductor should each be separate starting at the amplifier speaker terminals.
2) The high/mid and the low conductor should be the same size in gauge and of the same geometry and conductor type. Identical.
3) The conductors should be the same length.
4) The positive and negative conductors should be the same size - not different as is done in some designs.
BTW, a bi-wire speaker cable does not split the frequencies - the cross-over in the speaker does that. The full spectrum of frequencies is present at both the high/mid and the low terminals.
Caelin Gabriel
President
Shunyata Research
ohbythebay
New member
- Thread Author
- #33
Thank you Caelin...That was one of the more articulate yet; easy to understand answers I have seen. Also, you confirm what I thought in that the each wire to each binding post should be separate - that is it will take 4 wires (2 sets of 2 at the amp end and 4 at 4 speaker binding posts) rather than 2 wires that split to 4 at the end. So each wire is carrying a signal not sharing and then splitting at the speaker.
Again my thanks
Again my thanks
socfan12
Active member
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2013
- Messages
- 3,579
Caelin, thank you for this great explanation.:scholar: I had always thought the perceived benefit was the splitting of the frequency extremes, but that always left my head scratching:doubtful: Now I realize it is the lowering of the cable impedance and the increasing of the power transfer is the desired effect. Very interesting. Thank you, again.
ohbythebay
New member
- Thread Author
- #35
Caelin,
explain something for me. How is diagram one any better than diagram 2 ? Diagram 2 is how many BI-WIRE cables are sold. If I used 4 separate wires per speaker, they are still all going to carry the same signal yes ? So it would be irrelevant to have to separate all 4 wires Or is the driver draw what dictates the path of least resistance so to speak ? Just not clear...Thanks
explain something for me. How is diagram one any better than diagram 2 ? Diagram 2 is how many BI-WIRE cables are sold. If I used 4 separate wires per speaker, they are still all going to carry the same signal yes ? So it would be irrelevant to have to separate all 4 wires Or is the driver draw what dictates the path of least resistance so to speak ? Just not clear...Thanks
There are theoretical advantages and disadvantanges for each. To keep the wires together would reduce the tendency of the two wire sets to pickup RFI and present it at the speaker as a distortion of the signal. Not tremendously likely unless the speaker cables are very long.
Even though the signal at the speaker terminal is the same for both sets of wires, the current through the HI set is predominating in high frequencies determined by the cross-over in the speaker. And the LO set will predominate in low frequency current flow.
Since current in a conductor induces a magnetic field around it that induces a corresponding and opposing current flow in conductors that parallel it - there may be a advantage to slightly separating the two sets of wires. Also not a huge effect but it could be audible especially in the case of low efficency speakers that are powered by a high current amp. This would be so since the current would be higher and the corresponding magnetic field larger.
In a modern high-end cable I prefer to control these issues within the geometry of a single cable but every design choice is a compromise and trade-off.
Caelin Gabriel
President
Shunyata Research
MDP
Behavior Moderator (be nice police!)
Thanks Caelin for that detailed explanation !
NorthStar
New member
Good day Caelin,
1. Wow, what to do what to do now, according to what you just said above?
Here's what I do right now: I'm using one run of KimberKable 8TC to bi-wire my center speaker channel (with two sets of binding posts). At the amp's end I use only one set of binding post. I split 5 wires going to the woofer/mid's section and the remaining 3 wires to the tweeter section.
So all 8 wires (twisted together) from the amp, and split just like I described at the speaker's end (the last six inches or so).
The two runs of wires at the speaker's end are one single run (8TC) all the way to the amp. ...So, no separation to speak of.
Any thought? ...General thought.
2. Of course that way I gave the low/mids 5 wires (more gauge) than the tweeter only 3 wires (less gauge).
- Geometry is same and so is conductor type, of course. ...Identical.
Same as number one above, any thought?
3. All good here; same exact length. ...2 meters (roughly six feet).
4. Good here too; same number of wires for the Positive and Negative of each driver section; amp's terminals (+8/-8), and speaker's terminals - lows (+5/-5) & highs (+3/-3).
Hopefully my post is clear enough, and I'm very anxious to read your reply.
Very best regards, and it is a privilege to have you aboard.
<<>> Amp is a SS high current (AB) design (200W+). And the speaker is roughly 89dB efficient (sensitivity at one meter - in-room),
and with a minimum of 2.8Ω impedance @ 200Hz (or below 3Ω between roughly 100Hz and 300Hz).
And the phase is reasonable/coherent throughout most of the midrange (lowest point is @ 70Hz, which is -45°).
One last thing; for multichannel music I sometimes run it full range (-6dB @ 30Hz).
And for movies I send the lows (below 80Hz) to the subs.
Good day Caelin,
1. Wow, what to do what to do now, according to what you just said above?
Here's what I do right now: I'm using one run of KimberKable 8TC to bi-wire my center speaker channel (with two sets of binding posts). At the amp's end I use only one set of binding post. I split 5 wires going to the woofer/mid's section and the remaining 3 wires to the tweeter section.
So all 8 wires (twisted together) from the amp, and split just like I described at the speaker's end (the last six inches or so).
The two runs of wires at the speaker's end are one single run (8TC) all the way to the amp. ...So, no separation to speak of.
Any thought? ...General thought.
2. Of course that way I gave the low/mids 5 wires (more gauge) than the tweeter only 3 wires (less gauge).
- Geometry is same and so is conductor type, of course. ...Identical.
Same as number one above, any thought?
3. All good here; same exact length. ...2 meters (roughly six feet).
4. Good here too; same number of wires for the Positive and Negative of each driver section; amp's terminals (+8/-8), and speaker's terminals - lows (+5/-5) & highs (+3/-3).
Hopefully my post is clear enough, and I'm very anxious to read your reply.
Very best regards, and it is a privilege to have you aboard.
<<>> Amp is a SS high current (AB) design (200W+). And the speaker is roughly 89dB efficient (sensitivity at one meter - in-room),
and with a minimum of 2.8Ω impedance @ 200Hz (or below 3Ω between roughly 100Hz and 300Hz).
And the phase is reasonable/coherent throughout most of the midrange (lowest point is @ 70Hz, which is -45°).
One last thing; for multichannel music I sometimes run it full range (-6dB @ 30Hz).
And for movies I send the lows (below 80Hz) to the subs.
I think what you are doing is very reasonable and logical. If you like the sound you are getting I wouldn't change a thing. The Kimber braided cables are a great design and a great value. Ray Kimber is one of the good guys in the cable business. Thumbs up!
Caelin Gabriel
President
Shunyata Research
NorthStar
New member
Thanks Caelin.
* If I like the sound? Theoretically yes, subjectively it is very hard to compare between bi-amping, bi-wiring, and uno/amping-wiring.
I would need instant switching and that is impossible to do unless having the right tools.
By quick memory? ...Like the time it takes to reset the wiring. ...And replay the same musical passage (lead singer vocals). From my own less than pefect experimentation; I couldn't tell.
<<>> Just one mention here: I'm big on movies - Blu-rays (and music too of course - multichannel as well - SACD), and they are all over the map in their recording attributes; center channel articulation, recording levels, mixes of the music/vocals @ the center and special effects, LFE content, ...
It's like the recording music world; there is no consistency between one studio and another. ...No true standard, but a general rule of preference for the recording engineer.
At the end in high end it is more important to choose properly your material than the gear used to reproduce it. IMHO
Number two would be setting everything right.
* If I like the sound? Theoretically yes, subjectively it is very hard to compare between bi-amping, bi-wiring, and uno/amping-wiring.
I would need instant switching and that is impossible to do unless having the right tools.
By quick memory? ...Like the time it takes to reset the wiring. ...And replay the same musical passage (lead singer vocals). From my own less than pefect experimentation; I couldn't tell.
<<>> Just one mention here: I'm big on movies - Blu-rays (and music too of course - multichannel as well - SACD), and they are all over the map in their recording attributes; center channel articulation, recording levels, mixes of the music/vocals @ the center and special effects, LFE content, ...
It's like the recording music world; there is no consistency between one studio and another. ...No true standard, but a general rule of preference for the recording engineer.
At the end in high end it is more important to choose properly your material than the gear used to reproduce it. IMHO
Number two would be setting everything right.