![]() |
Speaker Wire advise pls
"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message ... In article om, wrote: Laurence Payne wrote: On Sat, 16 Sep 2006 23:10:04 GMT, Uncopyrightable wrote: ok, i don't get it.. I get the bit about use cheap cables, you all say the same, what I don't get is how companies can get away with selling £40.00+++ pm cable, when you all reckon go cheap. If I go cheap is it better to bi-wire? most of the on-line reviews I have read say bi-wiring is the best way to go, I am now very confuzzed. I quite agree. How DO they get away with it? No, you don't need to bi-wire. Period. They get away with it because cables can sound different. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioM.../lscables.html http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioM...kracables.html 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 Having read Jim's files with which I have no arguement, there is another reason for having a very low cable resistance. When drive ceases to a loudspeaker cone that is not in its rest position (we're talking here about LF drivers) its suspension tries to put it back to the rest position. Inevitably it will overshoot a little and pass the rest position, so it will oscillate slightly but in reducing amounts until it stops. During this time the coil is moving in a magnetic field and so the loudspeaker becomes a generator. There are two basic reasons that an audio amp has a low output impedence: one is to follow the time-honoured engineering principle that the source is low impedence driving a high impedence load; the second is that the amp 'sees' the energy generated by the loudspeaker as it settles and must dissipate it and in this instance the amp output impedence is the load. The lower the amp output impedence the greater the load it will place on the loudspeaker generator and so the quicker that generator will die. If you now put cables of significant resistance in series between the amp and the loudspeaker-generator the load imposed on the generator will be reduced and it will take longer to come to rest. The effect of this is quite audible - the bass tends to sound indistinct and a tad unreal - 'flappy' or 'flabby' are the usual words. It is thus fairly safe to say that the larger the loudspeaker cone and the louder you want to play it, the thicker the cables should be. Incidently the ratio of the amp output design load - typically 8R - to the amp output impedence is known as the damping factor. It is normal to expect a damping factor of at the very least 40 (indicating an amp output impedence of 0.2R) and more usually 60-80. It can be argued that going much above this will cause other undesirable effects as reduction of the output impedence of the amp is often achieved by use of negative feedback in the amp design which can itself cause audible artifacts. -- Woody harrogate3 at ntlworld dot com |
Speaker Wire advise pls
Wally wrote: Eeyore wrote: How do you know which is 'better' though. The bi-wire or the single wire ? It's only a presumption on the part of believers in bi-wiring based on junk science reasoning that their method is the 'correct' one ! I'm aware of that. I was assuming that, if there is a change, then it's a change which brings a technical improvement, in the same way that having lower resistance cables brings an improvement in technical terms. There is a very definite interaction between speaker impedance ( which varies over the audio band ) and cable resistance that affects the frequency response. The effect is quite small but readily measurable. The effect is *always* reduced ( i.e. made better ) by using a larger gauge of wire. The effect of bi-wiring in comparison isn't so straightforward but will always be inferior to using those same 2 wires in parallel. Graham |
Speaker Wire advise pls
harrogate3 wrote: It can be argued that going much above this will cause other undesirable effects as reduction of the output impedence of the amp is often achieved by use of negative feedback in the amp design which can itself cause audible artifacts. How does negative feedback cause these 'audible artifacts' ? It's yet another one of those silly myths based on more junk science ! Graham |
Speaker Wire advise pls
"harrogate3" If you now put cables of significant resistance in series between the amp and the loudspeaker-generator the load imposed on the generator will be reduced and it will take longer to come to rest. The effect of this is quite audible - the bass tends to sound indistinct and a tad unreal - 'flappy' or 'flabby' are the usual words. It is thus fairly safe to say that the larger the loudspeaker cone and the louder you want to play it, the thicker the cables should be. ** What ******** - amplifier damping does not relate to cone size or playing level. It relates only to the DC resistance of the speaker in use. The FACT is that connecting cable resistance has barely ANY effect on speaker damping - since it is in SERIES with the resistance of the voice coil of the speaker. The resistance of typical bass speakers is 7 ohms - which INCREASES at high power levels to possibly 12 ohms or more !! This increase has the SAME EFFECT on damping as using speaker cables with ** 5 ohms ** resistance !! Purely due to the temperature coefficient of resistance of copper wire. Not a single thing you can do about that, short of going to planar or full range electrostatic designs. Incidently the ratio of the amp output design load - typically 8R - to the amp output impedence is known as the damping factor. ** But has NOTHING to do with **electrical damping** as experienced by a woofer. Because its own *temperature dependant* resistance IS the DOMINANT factor in the damping equation. ( Snip even more and worse drivel that must have come from some crackpot's web site or audiophool rag.) ........ Phil |
Speaker Wire advise pls
Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article 1hlsyi2.x7aw5v11xasq9N%wildrover.andy@googlemail. com, Andy Hewitt wrote: Wally wrote: No, it's nothing to do with resistance, it to do with the fact that each speaker can be moving at different speeds and directions. From this there is a chance that the woofer can send distortion up the cable and interfere with the tweeter frequencies. I don't think you should beleive everything you read in magazines. That particular theory didn't last IIRC. You use a thick cable to the LF to send raw power. The tweeter needs a cleaner signal, so you use a thinner cable for that. By connecting the cables at source, and separating them at the speaker, there is enough time to prevent the interference. Technobbable, I'm afraid. :-) Thanks Jim, for at least offering a polite response. However, we've moved on from here a little ;-) I did actually run a test this morning, but I'm not going to publish my results here. It'll either end up as a 'told you so, you've wasted your money' (which I haven't), or 'load of ******** that you can hear a difference'. So either way, it's a pointless excercise. -- Andy Hewitt http://www.thehewitts.eclipse.co.uk/ http://web.mac.com/andrewhewitt1/ |
Speaker Wire advise pls
In article , harrogate3
wrote: "Jim Lesurf" wrote in message ... http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioM.../lscables.html http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioM...kracables.html Having read Jim's files with which I have no arguement, there is another reason for having a very low cable resistance. When drive ceases to a loudspeaker cone that is not in its rest position (we're talking here about LF drivers) its suspension tries to put it back to the rest position. Inevitably it will overshoot a little and pass the rest position, so it will oscillate slightly but in reducing amounts until it stops. During this time the coil is moving in a magnetic field and so the loudspeaker becomes a generator. That is actually included and implicit in the standard argument based on the input impedance as a function of frequency. It follows from linear superposition and that the pattern in time is directly related to the complex frequency response. There are two basic reasons that an audio amp has a low output impedence: one is to follow the time-honoured engineering principle that the source is low impedence driving a high impedence load; the second is that the amp 'sees' the energy generated by the loudspeaker as it settles and must dissipate it and in this instance the amp output impedence is the load. The lower the amp output impedence the greater the load it will place on the loudspeaker generator and so the quicker that generator will die. There is generally an internal series resistance in the speaker system. This will tend to have a resistance value which is much higher than that of the cable or most amplifiers. Thus the effect on what people call 'damping' is generally dominated by this in practice - unless the cables or amp have 'large' impedances - e.g. of the order of an Ohm or more. If you now put cables of significant resistance in series between the amp and the loudspeaker-generator the load imposed on the generator will be reduced and it will take longer to come to rest. The effect of this is quite audible - the bass tends to sound indistinct and a tad unreal - 'flappy' or 'flabby' are the usual words. It is thus fairly safe to say that the larger the loudspeaker cone and the louder you want to play it, the thicker the cables should be. Incidently the ratio of the amp output design load - typically 8R - to the amp output impedence is known as the damping factor. It is normal to expect a damping factor of at the very least 40 (indicating an amp output impedence of 0.2R) and more usually 60-80. It can be argued that going much above this will cause other undesirable effects as reduction of the output impedence of the amp is often achieved by use of negative feedback in the amp design which can itself cause audible artifacts. "Damping factor" as quoted in amplifier specs is a bit of a misleading term for the reasons given above. In reality, the level of motion damping will tend to be dominated by the internal series resistance of the speaker system itself. IIRC Briggs and others showed this both by theory and by measurement about 45 years ago. 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 Hewitt" wrote in message news:1hlsyi2.x7aw5v11xasq9N%wildrover.andy@googlem ail.com... No, it's nothing to do with resistance, it to do with the fact that each speaker can be moving at different speeds and directions. They generally are. From this there is a chance that the woofer can send distortion up the cable and interfere with the tweeter frequencies. So Andy, you're kinda weak on the concept of speaker crossovers? You use a thick cable to the LF to send raw power. As if tweeters don't need power? The tweeter needs a cleaner signal, so you use a thinner cable for that. As if thin wire "cleans up" a signal? By connecting the cables at source, and separating them at the speaker, there is enough time to prevent the interference. As if the time it takes a signal to go down a typical speaker wire is somehow audibly significant? On a proper bi-wirable speaker, you actually feed the crossover points separately, so the signals don't actually mix. If you bridge the connections, you turn it into an ordinary speaker. I read an article about this in a pro magazine somewhere, but can't remember the exact details now, but that was the general gist of it. Of course whether you can hear the difference or not is a personal preference. -- Andy Hewitt http://www.thehewitts.eclipse.co.uk/ http://web.mac.com/andrewhewitt1/ |
Speaker Wire advise pls
"Andy Hewitt" wrote in message news:1hlu2a1.1hpys29194viy3N%wildrover.andy@google mail.com... http://www.whathifi.com/newsMainTemp...ewssectionID=3 "but we digress - back to the crossover. One of the problems with a standard crossover is that since one pair of cables carries the signal to and from the amp, bass signals can tend to swamp the more delicate treble stuff, especially in the return (or negative) connection back to the amp." What we see here is drivel swamping out reason. There is no irreversible mixing of signals in a normal pair of copper speaker wires. The crossover will separate the woofer and tweeter signals whether or not each section of the crossover has its own wires going back to the amplifier or not. "By separating the signal all the way back to amplifier's output stage, using two runs of cable or a purpose-made four conductor biwire cable, these effects can be greatly reduced. " There are no such effects to reduce. Here we see classic snake oil - a imagainary non-existent effect is made out of whole cloth, and then a more expensive solution (one that costs real as opposed to imaginary money) is proposed. http://www.home-cinema-guide.co.uk/biwire4.htm "Using two runs of speaker cable allows each crossover to be connected directly to the amplifier's output stage. The full-frequency signal arrives at both crossovers through the red/+ conductor and each is filtered so that the driver receives only the signal it needs. Note that these two sentences correctly admit that the same full-frequency signal arrives at both crossovers, even when bi-wiring is used. " The signals are then passed back to the amp along the corresponding black/- conductors, but because the high and low frequencies have already been separated, each has no affect on the other - the delicate treble is not overpowered by the bass." Note that the previous two sentences contradict this one, as it says that there is no separation of the signals. |
Speaker Wire advise pls
"Andy Hewitt" wrote in message news:1hlu6qe.1rrs4gz1d6ve35N%wildrover.andy@google mail.com... Yes. But this is essentially nothing to do with science. This is to do with what a listener prefers to hear. Is that were so, we would only change the listener's mind, not change the audio system. If we applied strict physics to a Hi-Fi, then all the equipment would sound the same anyway. Simply not so. In most cases components are made to have a 'sound' by each manufacturer. Not so. Almost all manufacturers say that their equipment has low distortion and flat frequency response. That is esentially a claim that their equipment has no sound of its own, but that it is an accurate reproducer. 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. The imperfections in real-world audio gear are pretty well known. No way can a randomly-chosen or even a carefully-chosen set of cables "correct" them. 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. Whatever floats your boat. 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. If all you want to do is psych yourself into thinking that your system sounds better, why not just recite a mantra for several hours? |
Speaker Wire advise pls
"APR" wrote in message ... The only benefit to be seen from bi-wiring is to reduce the resistance of the wire between amp and speakers. Biwiring avoids that benefit by hooking the speaker ends of the wires to different things. Two sets of wire will have lower resistance then one set of wire. Only if you hook them in parallel - IOW parallel them at both ends. As several posters here will state, you can do just as well by strapping two cores of wire together (parallel) to give twice the cross section of wire and thus lower resistance. Actually, paralleling will be better than bi-wiring. This is only relevant if the core of the wire you are using is not of adequate cross section for the power being fed to the speakers. In home hifi, the requirements for copper cross-section are often more dependent on the impedance curve of the speaker than its power requirements. |
All times are GMT. The time now is 03:31 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.0.0
Copyright ©2004-2006 AudioBanter.co.uk