It all depends on your speakers. I've bi-wired with good results, no difference and bad results. If your speakers offer the facility then I would certainly try it. Use the same type of cable when experimenting with either single runs or bi-wiring or you won't know if it's the cable or the bi-wiring that's made the difference! I've found that when bi-wiring has made a positive difference, the bass extends deeper and becomes punchier and also the treble seems airier. As I said though, it all depends. With some speakers it made absolutely no difference.
dsw
Unregistered guest
Posted on
FYI, the Dampening factor of your amp will diminish as your load impedance is lowered. If you have more than one sub, and plan to parallel the the subs together in order to operate bi-wire, you have, in effect, lowered the dampening factor of your amp, which can result in a looser sounding bass. Whether or not it is noticable, is another thing.
A good 90% of my listening is music. I am pushing a pair of DM604's with an NAD C272. I will have my local shop build me some bi-wire cables so I can decide if I like or dislike. If it "extends the bass" then maybe I won't like it but who knows until I try??? I think the bass is perfect on this setup as it is.
Yes, best to give it a try mate. It's a relatively cheap upgrade if it works for you. Bung your bi-wire runs of cable on ebay if you don't like the sound.
DSW, How is the impedance load lowered when bi-wiring? Bi-wire capable speakers are already connected using jumpers in parallel, when they come from the factory. When bi-wiring, all you are doing is removing the jumpers and reconnecting the speakers using separate speaker wires from the same output. Bi-amping, on the other hand is different.
My local shop is telling me I would notice better gains by using "networked" speaker cables. Are these cables just "changing" the sound or are they truly producing a better connection to "produce a cleaner signal"? I wish I knew more about what is happening on those.
If you are bi-wiring by connecting to the same amp channel there is no benefit, unless you are using very long speaker runs with very thin wire. Just get 12-14 gauge wire and you will be good to go.
Since most speakers are designed with passive crossovers, bi-wiring ends up being a waste of money--but it is very beneficial to the dealer and manufacturer.
The simple explanation for why the advantages of bi-wiring are pretty much nonexistent is that most people only have speakers built for bi-wiring, while their amplification is not. By using the same amplifier channel for both sets of bi-wire cables (both sets are connected to the same binding posts on the amplifier or receiver), the same electrical path is being used for both sets of terminals on each speaker, thus negating any advantages of bi-wiring. All the power has to go through the passive crossover anyway, whether with standard, bi, or tri-wiring.
From an electrical perspective (and that is the only perspective the drivers care about), this is NO different than running one speaker cable to the speaker, and bridging the two sets of terminals together with the bar or plate.
If you notice, most bi-wireable speakers have plates, rods, or wires connecting the speaker connections anyway. This should tip you off on the BS of bi-wiring. The speaker manufacturers do this because they need the power to pass through the passive crossover for the drivers to operate properly.
By using the same amplifier channel (and terminals) for each set of bi-wire terminals on your speakers, you would be bridging the two sets of terminals together with your amplifier (since they share the same connection point on the amplifier). The only advantage in most setups (only speakers built for bi-wiring) for bi-wiring would be using twice as much physical wire (two separate runs to each speaker, thus making the wire act as if it is thicker. However, if you are already using a fairly low gauge speaker cable, such as 10-14 gauge there is nothing to be gained by "doubling-up" unless you have 100 foot runs at 4 ohms-or 200 foot runs at 8 ohms, which is certainly a rarity, unless your home theatre is the size of an auditorium. The added expense of running twice as much speaker cable for a an inaudible difference doesn't make too much sense.
Bi-wiring only makes sense when it is used in conjunction with bi-amping (running more than one amplifier channel per speaker). In order to bi-amp correctly, an external active crossover between the preamplifier and each amplifier channel will be needed (so that only the high-frequency or the low-frequency parts of the signal will be amplified), and the internal crossovers inside the speakers will need to be disconnected (so that each amplifier will go directly to the corresponding speaker driver, i.e. the woofer for low frequency and the tweeter for high-frequency). I personally don't know of many people who will go to these extremes to take advantage of the benefits of bi-wiring, so bi-wiring just ends up getting WAY more attention than it should. And if the speaker is designed to operate properly in passive crossover, why mess with it.
Bi and tri-wiring makes good sense when you have a speaker system designed around active crossovers. These are often the best speakers and are ideal for DIY-ers. Go to the Siegfried Linkwitz site (famous for the Linkwitz-Riley crossover)for some great active crossover designs.
I bet Kegger could do this and build Linkwitz's great Orion speaker. The parts are expensive--about $3,000 for the ultra high quality drivers, active crossovers, EQ's, and amplifiers for each driver--plus the various other parts. It costs about $6K a pair if they build it.
I had the luck of hearing a pair a couple of weeks ago and it blew me away. For those that value time and phase coherence it has those too, as you set the delays with his supplied software on the active crossovers to each driver to arrive at "you" and most everyone else simultaneously. But the active crossovers allow you to perfectly set the great VIFA and SEAS drivers optimally.
Damn, I may have to sell my PSB Stratus Gold i's--this experience spoiled me. It might be as good (or even better) than the no longer made Waveform Mach 17.
My NAD C272 amp has hook-ups (8 total) for bi-wiring. But I am becoming skeptical to the need for bi-wiring, especially considering I'd need to bi-amp/active crossover to gain the benefits. And I really don't think I want to dig into these beautiful 604's to disconnect the passive cross over. Thanks much for your input I think it has helped me make my life easier on this issue. As to the "networked" speaker cables, is there any validity to these?
Most Speaker manufacturer have very low quality rods/jumpers connecting the terminals which can make a difference. IMHO these should be tossed (or saved for when you sell your speakers) immediately and replaces with jumpers made from speaker wire or a bi-wire set of speaker wires.
The best advise is to do what your speaker manufacturer reccomends.
I agree with Ben on this one. I've replaced the gold plated jumpers on all my Mission speakers (except centre) with some jumpers made from speaker wire and the results are definately worthwhile IME. I'm getting no harshness now or at least very little (a problem that's been discussed before with NAD/Mission). A nice tweek and a whole lot more cost effective than bi-wiring.
My experience has been that higher order crossover speakers (like 12db/oct or higher) benefit greatly from bi-wiring. First order x-overs dont. Could be the crossover itself, or less phase shift from the bi wiring. Has to have something to do with mid-to high frequency phase shift. Better to just purchase first order x-over speakers. They get you closer to the artists intent and the musical truth.