Speaker Wire advise pls
 

Andy Hewitt wrote:
Yup, I know all that too. However, what astonished me was the nature of
the responses. Ok, so I spouted on about a practice you no longer
believe in, but it was not always so, biwiring is something that *was*
regularly recommended by many as a good thing. I just missed the bit
where it became a *bad* thing.

This is utter nonsense. Nobody with even a modest grasp of the
technical basics has ever recommended biwiring in the sense of the
extra cost being justified in terms of audible improvements. However,
the audiophile industry has heavily promoted biwiring and biwiring is
well received by audiophiles. As far as I am aware, nobody has said it
is a bad thing just that it is not cost effective and the claims of
significant improvements made for it by the audiophile industry and
believers are largely false.

If somebody had just started off with - 'look Andy, this isn't the case
any more because of xxxx reason', instead of all the smart arse stuff,
perhaps this thread wouldn't have got out of hand. At no time was it
really obvious that anybody else knew what they were talking about
either - certainly not to professional level.

Where does professional come into it? The discussion is at the level of
school levels physics.

Mixing studios have different priorities though,

Indeed. They are professionals and generally have the motivation to get
educated about the equipment they are purchasing and using to earn
their living. This is an environment in which much of the nonsense
promoted by the audiophile industry does not survive. (Although there
are exceptions as some of the posts to this newsgroup reveal.)

Speaker Wire advise pls
 

In article , APR
wrote:

"Andy Hewitt" wrote in message
news:1hlu2a1.1hpys29194viy3N%wildrover.andy@google mail.com...
Eeyore wrote:

Andy, there has been much research into the effects of bi-wiring of
speakers on sound reproduction, and you must understand the movement of
electrons in a conductor to fully comprehend what is going on and why
these effects influence the sound.

When you bi-wire you MUST use a thicker wire for the low frequency
driver then is used for the high frequency. The low frequency electrons
are the bigger, beefier (more muscled) electrons, that is why they are
the low frequency electrons, and they give you the more solid bass we
are all chasing. The high frequency electrons are the more delicate
electrons, smaller in size and faster moving. It is therefore worthwile
to size the wire to the fhysical characteristics of the electrons and
thus seperate them so there is no degrading interaction between them.

I aways thought that the Japanese had smaller electrons. Does this mean
they can also hear higher frequencies? :-)

[snip]

Hope this has helped. Best Regards.

I can see that you are trying desperately to keep a straight face, and I
claim my ten pounds for spotting this. ;-

Alternatively, send your explanation to one of the mags. If they publish
your theories you might get a lot more than 10 quid for them. :-)

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

Speaker Wire advise pls
 

On 18 Sep 2006 02:52:14 -0700, "andy" wrote:

This is utter nonsense. Nobody with even a modest grasp of the
technical basics has ever recommended biwiring in the sense of the
extra cost being justified in terms of audible improvements. However,
the audiophile industry has heavily promoted biwiring and biwiring is
well received by audiophiles. As far as I am aware, nobody has said it
is a bad thing just that it is not cost effective and the claims of
significant improvements made for it by the audiophile industry and
believers are largely false.

You're hedging. OK, it's not a Bad Thing. It makes no discernable
difference, it does no harm. But what's all this "not cost-effective"
and "largely false" business? Are you suggesting it DOES make a
discernable difference? What's a lightweight cable run for the hf
side cost anyway? Is it worth it?

Speaker Wire advise pls
 

Andy Hewitt wrote:

Yup, that makes sense, although it does seem to make a difference for
some.

One wonders what difference it actually makes, or whether any of those who
say it makes a difference know which set up they're listening to (rather
than an unsighted comparison).


No, you haven't. By splitting them, you've got a single run's worth
going to each 8ohm driver. Assume each run is 1ohm - you've got 1ohm
between amp and each driver. If you put straps on the speakers and
leave the cables in place, you have two 1ohm resistors in parallel,
giving 0.5ohms. If you're going to have two runs of cable to each
speaker, it may well be the case that shorting at both ends is
better than bi-wiring.

Well, yes, although that's no more or less 'scientific' than the rest
of the theory,

What are you talking about? That's Ohm's Law and is about as scientific as
it gets. You ain't got 'thicker wire' while you're bi-wired.


I'll just end up with 10mm/sq of cable to each speaker.
Again, something that'll make insignificant difference ;-)

People need to do the calcs that start with amp power and speaker impedance,
and work how much current they're actually shoving down the wire.


--
Wally
www.wally.myby.co.uk
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.

Speaker Wire advise pls
 

In article 1hlu6qe.1rrs4gz1d6ve35N%wildrover.andy@googlemail .com, Andy
Hewitt wrote:
Wally wrote:

[Snipped Text]

Now who do I listen to? A few prominent UK publications, or some
geezers off the newsgroup that just insult me for regurgitating the
information.

Your argument is predicated on an appeal to authority, and your
terminology ('prominent', 'geezers') substantiates this. The fact that
a few prominent UK publications have something to say about something
doesn't make it true.

I didn't say it was, but nobody else, apart from you, has actually
offered any evidence in return - other than '********' and 'bull****'.
They're certainly not terms I can remember using in Physics.

Did you cover linear superposition, and Ohms Law? They are almost all you
need to spot that what you read in the magazines was probably rubbish.

[snip]

The basic tenet of all this bi-wiring stuff, fancy cables and all the
rest is that it's all based on physics somewhere along the line. The
problem is, the physics it's based on is often plain false,
misapplied, or of such minimal effect as to be completely
disregradable.

Indeed, and I agree. However, there is science to suggest that the
effect does happen, but as you say, to what extent, and is it worth
consideration?

What "effect" and "physics" are you referring to? So far as I know, the
physics involved indicates that bi-wiring has an effect in domestic
situations which is between 'irrelevant' and 'nil'.

http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/...ire/Page1.html

All you have to do is use sensible cables in the first place.

http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioM.../lscables.html



Do you have any knowledge of physics or electricity?

Yes. But this is essentially nothing to do with science. This is to do
with what a listener prefers to hear.

What if the biwiring produces no audible effects?


If we applied strict physics to a Hi-Fi, then all the equipment would
sound the same anyway.

Wrong. If we use an understanding of physics and engineering we can help
determine when some equipment *can* be expected to sound different to other
equipment. Understanding the physics does not magically make everything
sound the same.

In most cases components are made to have a 'sound' by each
manufacturer. This colouration of the audio signal is what we all try to
correct using daft ideas like spending £500 on interconnects, biwiring
and sticking our Hi-Fi onto concrete mounts.

Sorry, are you talking about physics or about the technobabble in a lot of
the adverts and reviews?

There is no doubt that my system sounds extremely good in its current
configuration. I have yet to try it without biwiring the speakers, but
I'm tempted to do so now. However, there won't be anything scientific
about it, as it'll be my own personal preference that decides whether
one is better than the other or not.

Indeed. Your decision may actually have nothing to do with the actual
sound, nor with biwiring as such. That is your choice.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

Speaker Wire advise pls
 

In article , Eeyore
wrote:


Andy Hewitt wrote:

Wally wrote:

The basic tenet of all this bi-wiring stuff, fancy cables and all
the rest is that it's all based on physics somewhere along the line.
The problem is, the physics it's based on is often plain false,
misapplied, or of such minimal effect as to be completely
disregradable.

Indeed, and I agree. However, there is science to suggest that the
effect does happen, but as you say, to what extent, and is it worth
consideration?

What you should consider is *what effect* rather than simply accept what
advertisers tell you to believe.

Since a length of cable and a louspeaker load form a complex electrical
filter to a small degree, it's inevitable that changing the cable will
'sound different' if only because the frequency response will differ
slightly.

Not if the change is so small as to be inaudible. Nor will it matter if the
change is smaller than, say, the effect of moving your head 10 microns.
There comes a point where a measurable or theoretical difference becomes
irrelevant or undetectable in use.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

Speaker Wire advise pls
 

Wally wrote:

Andy Hewitt wrote:

No, you haven't. By splitting them, you've got a single run's worth
going to each 8ohm driver. Assume each run is 1ohm - you've got 1ohm
between amp and each driver. If you put straps on the speakers and
leave the cables in place, you have two 1ohm resistors in parallel,
giving 0.5ohms. If you're going to have two runs of cable to each
speaker, it may well be the case that shorting at both ends is
better than bi-wiring.

Well, yes, although that's no more or less 'scientific' than the rest
of the theory,

What are you talking about? That's Ohm's Law and is about as scientific as
it gets. You ain't got 'thicker wire' while you're bi-wired.

What's more..... It's trivially simple to analyse the effect using computer
modelling and show exactly what the effect is going to be.

It's very scientific indeed. However the hi-fi rags stopped taking much interest
in real genuine science about 20 yrs ago.

Graham

Speaker Wire advise pls
 

In article om, Andy
Hewitt wrote:
Eeyore wrote:

[Snipped Text]

Indeed, and I agree. However, there is science to suggest that the
effect does happen, but as you say, to what extent, and is it worth
consideration?

What you should consider is *what effect* rather than simply accept
what advertisers tell you to believe.

You're rather incorrectly assuming that I believe advertisers.

Alas, you seemed to believe what you had read in the magazines...


There is additionaly a huge amout of self-deception over what is or
isn't audible no doubt based on these well-distributed myths that the
hi-fi fraternity would have you buy into ( quite literally).

Well, in my case I just bought some rolls of cable from CPC, at a very
good price, and had enough to biwire. The Castles didn't have their
links when I bought them (second hand), so I just biwired them instead.
I didn't spend a great deal of money doing this, or a lot of time
pondering it. The net result, I have a system that sounds good, whether
the biwiring actually makes a difference is irrelevant.

Yes, it may be irrelvant to the sound. But it may have wasted your time and
money, and perpetuated a myth that will mislead others.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

Speaker Wire advise pls
 

"andy" wrote in message
ps.com...
Andy Hewitt wrote:
Yup, I know all that too. However, what astonished me was the nature of
the responses. Ok, so I spouted on about a practice you no longer
believe in, but it was not always so, biwiring is something that *was*
regularly recommended by many as a good thing. I just missed the bit
where it became a *bad* thing.

This is utter nonsense. Nobody with even a modest grasp of the
technical basics has ever recommended biwiring in the sense of the
extra cost being justified in terms of audible improvements. However,
the audiophile industry has heavily promoted biwiring and biwiring is
well received by audiophiles. As far as I am aware, nobody has said it
is a bad thing just that it is not cost effective and the claims of
significant improvements made for it by the audiophile industry and
believers are largely false.



I don't do 'biwiring debates' because my view is simple - I don't believe it
does any good myself, but if anybody wants to do it, can afford to do it and
perceives a benefit then, fine, let them go ahead!! Let them also claim they
perceive the benefit - it does no harm and others can only disagree with
their own findings. Arguing the theory goes nowhere....

What I find strange/amusing is that so many speaker manufacturers a) supply
the necessary terminals and b) state that biwiring is advantageous - they
just telling porkies or do they know summat the 'experts' here don't...??

Note that I do not refer to bi-amping or any reference by the manufacturers
to same....

Speaker Wire advise pls
 

In article om, Andy
Hewitt wrote:
Wally wrote:

[Snipped Text]



I don't believe we can disregard the fact that *in theory* the sound
*could* be affected in such a way.

Indeed. That is why I for one have spent more hours than I probably should
both analysing the physics/engineering claims for such assertions and
experimenting to check them. The result is that they look a lot like
technobabble to me. Consumer audio is riddled with false or misleading
statements about physics, etc. Often made by people who have no
understanding of the topics but present themselves as 'experts'. This is in
the editorial material as well as the adverts.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html