Biwiring
 

"Ian Molton" wrote in message

On Fri, 12 Dec 2003 09:11:18 -0000
"RJH" wrote:

bi-wiring "reduces or
eliminates any problem caused by the bass drivers feeding any signal
back to the amplifier. This signal intermodulates and spoils the
sound quality of the midrange and treble". Er, what?!

Well, of course, using seperate feeds from seperate amps can
eliminate the possibility of a ****ty amp with high impedance outputs
or an inadequate PSU which fouls up the bass fouling up the treble...

Of course, if you dont have a ****ty amp, then its bull**** ;-)

If you have a modern amp, avoid tubes and ultimate cheap drek solid state,
you don't have this problem.

Biwiring
 

"MrBitsy" wrote in message

Ian Molton wrote:
On Fri, 12 Dec 2003 09:11:18 -0000
"RJH" wrote:

bi-wiring "reduces or
eliminates any problem caused by the bass drivers feeding any signal
back to the amplifier. This signal intermodulates and spoils the
sound quality of the midrange and treble". Er, what?!

Well, of course, using seperate feeds from seperate amps can
eliminate the possibility of a ****ty amp with high impedance outputs
or an inadequate PSU which fouls up the bass fouling up the treble...

Of course, if you dont have a ****ty amp, then its bull**** ;-)

I have a Roksan Kandy amp and Quad 11L speakers. Both of them
recommend biwiring - why if you say its rubbish. Why is it rubbish.

Biwiring electrically accomplishes so little that it is rubbish. If you want
to use two pairs of wire for each speaker, you'd electrically be better off
by connecting them at both ends.

As far as I know, neither company produces speaker cable so why
bother if they don't gain?

They are trying not to raise a ruckus with their clients who are true
believers.

Not suggesting your wrong but the logic does seem to be 'logical'!

If copper wire were significantly nonlinear, then biwiring would help. But
copper wire is fantastically linear, so biwring can't help.

Biwiring
 

"MrBitsy" wrote in message

Ian Molton wrote:
On Fri, 12 Dec 2003 09:11:18 -0000
"RJH" wrote:

bi-wiring "reduces or
eliminates any problem caused by the bass drivers feeding any signal
back to the amplifier. This signal intermodulates and spoils the
sound quality of the midrange and treble". Er, what?!

Well, of course, using seperate feeds from seperate amps can
eliminate the possibility of a ****ty amp with high impedance outputs
or an inadequate PSU which fouls up the bass fouling up the treble...

Of course, if you dont have a ****ty amp, then its bull**** ;-)

I have a Roksan Kandy amp and Quad 11L speakers. Both of them
recommend biwiring - why if you say its rubbish. Why is it rubbish.

Biwiring electrically accomplishes so little that it is rubbish. If you want
to use two pairs of wire for each speaker, you'd electrically be better off
by connecting them at both ends.

As far as I know, neither company produces speaker cable so why
bother if they don't gain?

They are trying not to raise a ruckus with their clients who are true
believers.

Not suggesting your wrong but the logic does seem to be 'logical'!

If copper wire were significantly nonlinear, then biwiring would help. But
copper wire is fantastically linear, so biwring can't help.

Biwiring
 

"Ian Molton" wrote in message

On Fri, 12 Dec 2003 14:23:22 -0000
"MrBitsy" wrote:

I have a Roksan Kandy amp and Quad 11L speakers. Both of them
recommend biwiring - why if you say its rubbish. Why is it rubbish.

As far as I know, neither company produces speaker cable so why
bother if they don't gain?

Not suggesting your wrong but the logic does seem to be 'logical'!

This should sort the logic aspect:

Highstreet retailers sell speaker cables, its VERY profitable.

High street retailers like it when companies recommend bi-wiring as a
result

Therefore they buy and recommend people to buy gear that requires
bi-wiring.

Thus if Quad didnt recommend it, they would lose out as high street
sellers wouldnt recommend their gear.

since bi-wiring wont Decrease sound quality, why NOT recommend it?

John Dunlavy mentioned this exact situation. His retailers were used to
pushing expensive speaker cables. Speaker cables branded by the speaker
manufacturer is probably the ultimate in cross-marketing. So, he conjured up
some cables that as you suggest, did no harm. He made zero claims for
audibility, but did mention their electrical properties, which were really
pretty good.

Biwiring
 

"Ian Molton" wrote in message

On Fri, 12 Dec 2003 14:23:22 -0000
"MrBitsy" wrote:

I have a Roksan Kandy amp and Quad 11L speakers. Both of them
recommend biwiring - why if you say its rubbish. Why is it rubbish.

As far as I know, neither company produces speaker cable so why
bother if they don't gain?

Not suggesting your wrong but the logic does seem to be 'logical'!

This should sort the logic aspect:

Highstreet retailers sell speaker cables, its VERY profitable.

High street retailers like it when companies recommend bi-wiring as a
result

Therefore they buy and recommend people to buy gear that requires
bi-wiring.

Thus if Quad didnt recommend it, they would lose out as high street
sellers wouldnt recommend their gear.

since bi-wiring wont Decrease sound quality, why NOT recommend it?

John Dunlavy mentioned this exact situation. His retailers were used to
pushing expensive speaker cables. Speaker cables branded by the speaker
manufacturer is probably the ultimate in cross-marketing. So, he conjured up
some cables that as you suggest, did no harm. He made zero claims for
audibility, but did mention their electrical properties, which were really
pretty good.

Biwiring
 

"Ian Molton" wrote in message

On Fri, 12 Dec 2003 18:02:06 +0000 (UTC)
(Stewart Pinkerton) wrote:

since bi-wiring wont DEcrease sound quality, why NOT recommend it?

Excellent synopsis! :-)

My pleasure :-)

The practical downside to biwiring is that it can train people to *hear*
differences that aren't there. Once you get people to listen errrrrr
creatively, there's a ready market for green CD pens, magic oils, fancy
interconnects, the whole nasty ball of gelled snake oil.

Biwiring
 

"Ian Molton" wrote in message

On Fri, 12 Dec 2003 18:02:06 +0000 (UTC)
(Stewart Pinkerton) wrote:

since bi-wiring wont DEcrease sound quality, why NOT recommend it?

Excellent synopsis! :-)

My pleasure :-)

The practical downside to biwiring is that it can train people to *hear*
differences that aren't there. Once you get people to listen errrrrr
creatively, there's a ready market for green CD pens, magic oils, fancy
interconnects, the whole nasty ball of gelled snake oil.

Biwiring
 

"Nick Gorham" wrote in message

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 17:01:09 -0000, "RJH"
wrote:


Well, thanks for all the opinions. I can't really argue with the
technical knowledge you all have, and I looked at Jim Lesurf's (I
think) page a while back and that seemed to say 'no measurable
difference'. I've given it a go with some old qed 79 strand biwire
stuff I happen to have, and I'm afraid I think it sounds a bit
better, particularly extremes - bass and treble.


Interesting, since it's only around the crossover that biwiring has
even the slightest theoretical advantage.


I can't convince myself that this may (or may not) make a difference,
but one point is that while both wires see the same voltage, the cable
to the treble posts are only carrying the current produced by the
treble part of the signal.

However, since copper wire is highly linear, there are few if any
consequences - nothing audible as long as either cable is itself a competent
piece of work.

Biwiring
 

"Nick Gorham" wrote in message

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 17:01:09 -0000, "RJH"
wrote:


Well, thanks for all the opinions. I can't really argue with the
technical knowledge you all have, and I looked at Jim Lesurf's (I
think) page a while back and that seemed to say 'no measurable
difference'. I've given it a go with some old qed 79 strand biwire
stuff I happen to have, and I'm afraid I think it sounds a bit
better, particularly extremes - bass and treble.


Interesting, since it's only around the crossover that biwiring has
even the slightest theoretical advantage.


I can't convince myself that this may (or may not) make a difference,
but one point is that while both wires see the same voltage, the cable
to the treble posts are only carrying the current produced by the
treble part of the signal.

However, since copper wire is highly linear, there are few if any
consequences - nothing audible as long as either cable is itself a competent
piece of work.

Biwiring
 

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 13:41:43 +0000, Nick Gorham
wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 17:01:09 -0000, "RJH"
wrote:


Well, thanks for all the opinions. I can't really argue with the technical
knowledge you all have, and I looked at Jim Lesurf's (I think) page a while
back and that seemed to say 'no measureable difference'. I've given it a go
with some old qed 79 strand biwire stuff I happen to have, and I'm afraid I
think it sounds a bit better, particularly extremes - bass and treble.


Interesting, since it's only around the crossover that biwiring has
even the slightest theoretical advantage.

I can't convince myself that this may (or may not) make a difference,
but one point is that while both wires see the same voltage, the cable
to the treble posts are only carrying the current produced by the treble
part of the signal.

And this has relevance, how? Ordinary wire is known to be linear to
better than -140dB, so there's absolutely no question of any
intermodulation distortion being caused by the bass and treble
currents sharing the same wire.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering