|
Bronze Member Username: BigfanPost Number: 36 Registered: Jan-04 | apologies if this is on the wrong board, but after reading the posts on the cable board i am more confused that before i started. many of those posts refer to technical articles, and many also conflict in opinions. my question is simply: using one receiver, does biwiring the speakers make an audible difference, in practice? has anyone compared the difference to conventional wiring? fyi my equipment will be an nad 773, likely w/monitor audio s8's (front) and other MA silvers to complete the 5.1 system. thanks. |
|
Bronze Member Username: AznbimmerPost Number: 20 Registered: Apr-04 | bigfan, I have asked this question before at the local home theater store. This is the my logic: If the bi wiring is connected to one output of the receiver (say 100 watts) and it is split or biwired ... isn't it still 100 watts just splitted between two connection terminals? So in all actuallity you're splitting the wattage down to 50 watts to drive the woofers and 50 watts to drive the hi's and mid's. Now if you didn't biwire and have a connection brass post between the terminals, the speakers automatically allocate how much wattage to drive each speaker depending on what the signal is. Thus splitting the wattage internally to best drive the speakers. The local guys kept on saying that it would make a big difference... however it would result in buying more speaker wires and such. I don't know much about the physics of it ... wouldn't what I said above make sense?? I would also be greatful if anyone can shed some light on this. I'm actually doing a biamp configuration tonight. I'll post to see if that will make a difference. Thanks |
|
Silver Member Username: Project6Post Number: 578 Registered: Dec-03 | here's some reading material http://2eyespy.tripod.com/myaudioandhometheaterhomepage/id3.html |
|
Unregistered guest | I feel a need to respond to this as I too have spent some time thinking about it. I will be writing about "bi-wiring" and not "bi-amping" which is a very different thing. When a speaker is bi-wired, the bars connecting the tweeter from the mid-bass and bass woofer are removed. This does NOT eliminate the cross-over network. Allow me to clarify using my Studio 60's for reference. Studio 60's have two separate cross-over networks, as do the rest of the Studio series. The signal inputs to these two networks are connected to the binding posts of the speaker. Adding the metal bars to the outside of the speaker links the two inputs together. By removing the metal bars and bi-wiring, the two cross-over networks are now linked at the receiver and not at the binding posts of the speaker. The cross-over networks work exactly as before so there will be no change in frequency response of any driver because of this. Hopefully I have clearly outlined the subtle difference between the two and by now you're asking yourself if there is really any difference at all since all we've done is make the same connection at a different location. The mid and bass woofer will present itself as more of a load to the receiver than the tweeter. This translates into more of the current traveling down the speaker wire is destined for the mid and bass drivers than the tweeter. Current travelling down a wire produces EMI (electro-magnetic interference) which can induce currents in a wire traveling parallel to it. By separating the wires, the EMI produced by the mid and bass current cannot induce a current (noise) in the tweeter driver. This, in my opinion, is the only rational/explaination for bi-wiring; to eliminate the possibilty of interference or "cross-talk" from the mid and bass drivers to the tweeter. An analogy, with an effect on a much, much greater scale I must add, is the reason separates are preferrable to receivers. The more one separates signals, power supplies, wiring, etc., the cleaner the produced signal will be. So, back to the original question of whether it is worth bi-wiring or not? Now that I have, hopefully with some modicom of intelligence, explained the subtle differences, and I need to emphasis subtle, it is up to the individual to decide it's worth. I would suspect, that in a vast majority of cases, assuming that the original wire is of sufficient gauge and quality to handle the current requirements, very few listeners would be able to discern a difference between the two. It is important to note that bi-wiring can never, that I am aware of anyway, make things worse. (A note to H. Tran above, the power required by each driver is dependant on the driver and not whether it is bi-wired. The tweeter will, in most cases, because it is a smaller load, ie., smaller coil and magnet, draw less of the available power than the woofer will.) TC |
|
Bronze Member Username: Black_mathPost Number: 91 Registered: Dec-03 | I think it depends. Some speakers are built to be bi-wired and some manufacturers will reccomend it for their speakers. Some don't. The worst thing about bi-wireable speakers are the cheap jumpers that manufacturers use to connect the terminals on the back of the speaker. I noticed a difference when I switched to bi-wire cables. I imagine I could have made (or bought) a better set of jumpers and used regulat speaker cable with similar results. |
|
Anonymous | just tried bi-wire on my Def Tech 2002TL, well never notice any difference. what I did on just one right speaker: 1. use 15ft Monster Cable Z1 for single wire connection and 2 15ft Monster Cable Z1 for bi-wire, no audible difference. 2. also did compare audible diff between an inwall 50ft. Monster cable 14 gauge and the Z1 but no audible diff. either. |