![]() |
Speaker Wire advise pls
Rob wrote:
Andy Hewitt wrote: I just fitted up my Castles to the Yamaha amp with some cable from CPC (aka Farnell), Which Castles have you ? brief review would be appreciated. Sorry, know nothing about them. -- Andy Hewitt http://www.thehewitts.eclipse.co.uk/ http://web.mac.com/andrewhewitt1/ |
Speaker Wire advise pls
On Sun, 17 Sep 2006 21:03:59 +0100,
(Andy Hewitt) wrote: Don Pearce wrote: if you know absolutely nothing (apart from utter ********, that is) about a subject My point exactly. I agree. You isolate a few words in such a way that they contain no point. You claim these to be your point. You declare yourself thus pointless. d -- Pearce Consulting http://www.pearce.uk.com |
Speaker Wire advise pls
Andy Hewitt wrote: Wally wrote: Andy Hewitt wrote: Is your set-up bi-amped? No, although I have wired it to the seperate speaker outlets. I only used this setup because the Castles didn't come with the connection bridges. So, why are you using two runs of cable to each speaker? Not sure I understand your question! Are you testing me, or do you not understand the principle of biwiring? Perhaps you could explain what your understanding is about bi-wiring ? Graham |
Speaker Wire advise pls
Andy Hewitt wrote: 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 Utter drivel. Instead of spouting what you've read from dodgy sources show some real science to back up your claim. Graham |
Speaker Wire advise pls
Andy Hewitt wrote:
Are you talking about back EMF from one driver affecting the signal going to the other driver? (Presumably, that from the bass driver is of greater concern due to it being rather higher power.) Yes, that's exactly it. So, how does a low frequency back EMF affect a high frequency driver that has the low frequencies filtered out? -- Wally www.wally.myby.co.uk Call me a saint, call me a sinner - just don't call me... late for dinner. |
Speaker Wire advise pls
Eeyore wrote:
Andy Hewitt wrote: 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 Utter drivel. Instead of spouting what you've read from dodgy sources show some real science to back up your claim. Graham http://www.whathifi.com/newsMainTemp...ewssectionID=3 http://www.home-cinema-guide.co.uk/biwire4.htm -- Andy Hewitt http://www.thehewitts.eclipse.co.uk/ http://web.mac.com/andrewhewitt1/ |
Speaker Wire advise pls
"Andy Hewitt" ** Insane Groper Alert ! Instead of spouting what you've read from dodgy sources show some real science to back up your claim. http://www.whathifi.com/newsMainTemp...ewssectionID=3 http://www.home-cinema-guide.co.uk/biwire4.htm ** No science in sight there anywhere. Just the same old load of pure unadulterated, snake oil ******** !! ........ Phil |
Speaker Wire advise pls
Phil Allison wrote:
"Andy Hewitt" ** Insane Groper Alert ! Instead of spouting what you've read from dodgy sources show some real science to back up your claim. http://www.whathifi.com/newsMainTemp...ewssectionID=3 http://www.home-cinema-guide.co.uk/biwire4.htm ** No science in sight there anywhere. Just the same old load of pure unadulterated, snake oil ******** !! It's better than any of the insulting retorts I've had my way. I'm just finding it hard to comprehend the nature of the responses in this newsgroup now. Obviously Phil is an Aussie, so I can understand that, but otherwise I'm the only person to have written anything without insult (until now), and in fact have at least provided a source of my comments. 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. You may or may not be right, but right now I don't care if you are. Just about every single reference to biwiring I could find on a Google search suggests you're not. This used to be a group that you could ask for advice, or have a *discussion* about the merits of some of the controversial stuff. Unless I've been naive and missed the fact that it's just occupied by trolls! -- 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... 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. You can imagine what happens when the big burly low frequency electrons bump into the more delicate high frequency electrons, some of them are actually knocked over and may be injured and therefore are knocked out of the sound stream. This will result in a loss of treble and over-emphasis of the bass. It is absolutely necessary to use different sized wire for the low and high frequencies, low frequency being the thicker wire. This gives the big burly low frequency electrons more elbow room as they travel down the wire and results in smoother sound and avoids the harshness that results from "angry electrons". As all the electrons leave the amplifier they are looking for the best path to take. The big burly electrons will take the bigger path naturally, and while some of the smaller electrons may initially go down that path as well they won't a second time. After going through the ruff and tumble with the big electrons they soon learn that if they are to survive they have to use the other wire. This is why the wires MUST be different sizes and the low frequency MUST be the thicker of the two. I cannot emphasise this enough. The result, when implemented properly, will be a significant increase in the energy in the music because all the electrons will be able to perform as necessary for the best sound. There willbe some people here who will ridicule what I have said, however, this will be because they haven't implemented bi-wiring correctly. The ends of the wires leaving the amp must be cut square, and when fitted into any connector must have the cut end facing the electrons, otherwise how can the electrons see which wire is thicker as they approach it. Failure to contend with this simple problem has resulted in many attempts at bi-wiring being unsuccessful at delivering the hoped for results. Hope this has helped. Best Regards. |
Speaker Wire advise pls
Andy Hewitt wrote:
Instead of spouting what you've read from dodgy sources show some real science to back up your claim. http://www.whathifi.com/newsMainTemp...ewssectionID=3 http://www.home-cinema-guide.co.uk/biwire4.htm Seems to me that both of these articles say basically the same thing. From the second... -------------------------- 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. 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. -------------------------- If it's the case that, in a wire, the treble can be overpowered by the bass, then it must be the case that, in a bi-wired setup described as above, this overpowering of the treble is ocurring in the 'hot' side of the cable anyway. And all the way through the signal chain from source to amp output terminals. It's only split down one side of a length of speaker wire, which has a resistance in the order of milliohms, which is part of a circuit which has a nominal load of 8 ohms. I'd have to say that I'm skeptical that such a topographical change would make a noticable differnce to the sound. The question is, however, can the treble be overpowered by the bass in a wire? Of this, I'm very, very doubtful. This idea stems from the thinking behind bi-amping with a crossover before the amps, where the idea is to supply each amp only with its alloted band of frequencies. In so doing, the treble is no longer modulated by the bass (treble peak on top of bass peak equals very big peak, equals clipping), meaning that there's more effective headroom and thus less likelihood of clipping. Unlike amplifiers, I don't believe cables clip the signal or have headroom issues. It would seem, however, that both of the aforelinked articles rest on the presupposition that they do. Which isn't terribly scientific. -- Wally www.wally.myby.co.uk You're unique - just like everybody else. |
All times are GMT. The time now is 06:50 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