Bi-Wiring, what exactly is it doing?

skrol

I did this with the Belden 10 awg 2 conductor 5T00UP. Perhaps I should do it with a much smaller wire diameter.

PSpice indicates the difference becomes more significant with longer length of cable (>30'). The difference in the reactive elements of the cable start to show at higher frequencies (>10K). The capacitance and inductance are still very small. Perhaps it would impact the harmonics.

The low frequencies do not look to be impacted.

CoolJazz

kevintomb wrote: »

If you look at it with nodal analysis, there is no difference, other than all losses of cable insertion are halved.

For a simulation to start to be accurate, it'd have to include the less than perfect source and the fact that you're driving motors which generate both directions.

CJ

skrol

kevintomb wrote: »

show previous quotes

skrol wrote: »

This is basically what you are doing circuit wise when you bi-wire vs single.

Results likely depend on things cable lengths, speaker impedance (high drivers and low drivers), amplifier impedance and damping factor to name a few (placebo and psycho stuff aside). Perhaps you would get the same results by going with a heavier AWG? Try it and see what I like is my plan.

Same result as Cutting the speaker cable length by half.

If you look at it with nodal analysis, there is no difference, other than all losses of cable insertion are halved.

Not exactly. With Bi-wiring you are not doubling the copper paths to the entire speaker. You still have the same amount of copper going to the woofer as with a single pair, though minus the load of the tweeter. If you tied the pairs together at both ends, you are correct. Depending on your cable length and wire gauge, this might be a better way to go.

For example, if you are running 30 feet of 16 awg cable to a pair of LSi15, one likely benefit from doubling the copper paths rather than bi-wiring.

CoolJazz

xcapri79 wrote: »

Is that what you do - copy and paste? You can speak for yourself.

Nope. I do this and know the results. Not just rip it off the web somewhere and set back with the smug approach that all others are clueless and you're the only smart one.

CJ

erniejade

http://vandersteen.com/support/faqs


Anyone take a look at Vandersteen site on it?


Q What is bi-wiring and what are the advantages?
A
Bi-wiring uses two separate sets of speaker cables to connect a single pair of loudspeakers to an amplifier. Coupled with a crossover designed specifically for bi-wiring, it offers many of the advantages of bi-amplifying the speakers with two separate amplifiers without the cost and complexity of two amplifiers.

We began experimenting with bi-wiring back in the early '80s, an era when horizontal bi-amplification was considered the ultimate way to drive quality loudspeakers. (Horizontal bi-amplification used one amplifier to drive the low-frequency section of a speaker and a second amplifier to drive the high-frequency section.) We noted that speakers sounded better when bi-amplified by two amplifiers than when driven by a single amplifier. Surprisingly, this superior performance was evident even when the speakers were bi-amplified by two identical amplifiers at a low volume level and the amplifiers were each driven full-range without an electronic crossover. We initially believed that the double power supplies and other components of two amplifiers were responsible for the improvement, however building amplifiers with twice the power supply and doubling-up on other critical components failed to provide the bi-amplification benefit.

So we looked at the speaker wires. With two amplifiers, bi-amplification used two sets of speaker cables so we experimented with doubling-up the speaker wires and with larger wire. Neither duplicated the bi-amplification improvements. Then we considered that in a bi-amplified system, one set of wires carries the low-frequencies and the other set of wires carries the high-frequencies. We modified a speaker's crossovers to accept two sets of cables and present different load characteristics to each set so that the low-frequencies would be carried by one set of wires and the high-frequencies by the other set of wires. Finally we heard the sonic improvements of bi-amplification with a single amplifier.

Additional experiments with a Hall Effect probe revealed that high-current bass frequencies created a measurable field around the wires that expanded and collapsed with the signal. We believe that this dynamic field modulates the smaller signals, especially the very low level treble frequencies. With the high-current signal (Bass) separated from the low-current signal (Treble) this small signal modulation was eliminated as long as the cables were separated by at least an inch or two. (To keep the treble cable out of the field surrounding the bass cable.)

The crossovers in Vandersteen bi-wirable speakers are engineered with completely separate high-pass and low-pass sections. The bass inputs pass low-frequencies to the woofers, but become more and more resistive at higher frequencies. The treble inputs pass high-frequencies to the midrange and tweeter, but become more and more resistive at low-frequencies. The output from the amplifier always takes the path of least resistance so deep bass frequencies go to the bass input (Low impedance at low-frequencies) rather than to the treble inputs (High impedance at low frequencies). For the same reason, treble frequencies go to the treble input (Low impedance at high-frequencies) rather than to the bass inputs (High impedance at high-frequencies). At the actual crossover frequency, the output from the amplifier would be divided equally between the two inputs as they would both have the same impedance at that frequency. Because of the different reflected impedances of the cables, the crossover between the woofer and midrange actually occurs at the wire ends where they connect to the amplifier.

The benefits of bi-wiring are most obvious in the midrange and treble. The low-current signal to the midrange and tweeter drivers does not have to travel on the same wire as the high-current woofer signal. The field fluctuations and signal regeneration of the high-current low-frequencies are prevented from distorting or masking the low-current high-frequencies. The back EMF (Electro-Mechanical Force) from the large woofer cannot affect the small-signal upper frequencies since they do not share the same wires.

The effects of bi-wiring are not subtle. The improvements are large enough that a bi-wire set of moderately priced cable will usually sound better than a single run of more expensive cable.

All the cables in a bi-wire set must be the same. There is often great temptation to use a wire known for good bass response on the woofer inputs and a different wire known for good treble response on the midrange/tweeter inputs. This will cause the different sonic characteristics of the two wires in the middle frequencies to interfere with the proper blending of the woofer and midrange driver through the crossover point. The consistency of the sound will be severely affected as the different sounding woofer and midrange drivers conflict with each other in the frequency range where our ears are most sensitive to sonic anomalies. The disappointing result is a vague image, a lack of transparency through the midrange and lower treble and a loss of detail and clarity.

Some of the benefits of bi-wiring are from the physical separation of the high-current bass and low-current midrange/tweeter wires. So-called bi-wire cables that combine the wires in one sheath do not offer the full advantages of true bi-wiring although they may be an excellent choice for mono-wiring the speakers.

The cables should all be the same length. This is not due to the time that the signal takes to travel through a cable, but rather that two different lengths of the same cable will sound different. If the cables connecting one speaker are a different length than the cables connecting the other speaker, the resulting difference in sound between the two speakers will compromise the imaging and coherence of the system. If different lengths of cable are used for the bass and midrange/tweeter inputs of the speakers, the effects will be similar to those experienced when using two different cables as described above.

Since short runs of speaker cable sound better than long runs, consider placing your electronics between the speakers rather than off to one side. If for convenience or aesthetic considerations, the electronics must be located a considerable distance from the speakers, it is usually preferable to place the amplifier between the speakers and use long interconnect cables and short speaker wire.

vmaxer

@erniejade, you know d a m n well that x is an electrical enjeeere and knows way more than they do.

vmaxer

Found X on the net, no doubt, he is a scientist.

erniejade

Careful @vmaxer showing your age with Elly May LOL

vmaxer

kevintomb wrote: »

^^^""The benefits of bi-wiring are most obvious in the midrange and treble. The low-current signal to the midrange and tweeter drivers does not have to travel on the same wire as the high-current woofer signal.""


But this is wrong. The entire signal will be carried on BOTH wires. They made an elemental mistake.

The entire spectrum is carried on both wires, when bi-wiring, and filtered AT the crossover.

How they made such a simple mistake, calls into question the entire article.

if they meant to say "Bi-Amping" true.

Well we have yet a nother skientest.

CoolJazz

Kevin,

They made no mistake. If the conductor is carrying little to no current then they refer to it as not traveling on the wire. Surely this is clear knowing something of how it works and is wired. Richard Vandersteen is as real as they come. Regarded as one of the best dollar wise buys out there.

CJ

CoolJazz

CoolJazz wrote: »

show previous quotes

xcapri79 wrote: »

Is that what you do - copy and paste? You can speak for yourself.

Nope. I do this and know the results. Not just rip it off the web somewhere and set back with the smug approach that all others are clueless and you're the only smart one.

CJ

In a quick post I wasn't nearly clear enough.

I do wiring in hostile environments and have to make it work. As opposed to using web based, often repeated but still incorrect knowledge.

CJ

F1nut

Coupled with a crossover designed specifically for bi-wiring

That comment smells funny. Any speaker that has two sets of binding posts can be bi-wired or bi-amped.

ukcolin99

Zero wrote: »

cbridle - All you wanted was a simple answer to a reasonably simple question. I bet you didn't expect pages worth of discourse! Ah well.. Such is the way of hi-fi forums...

If you haven't seen it already, one of the more thorough answers to your question can be found within the first couple paragraphs of Darueknights response. Scroll up a half-dozen posts and you'll see it.

The big question is, when you bi-wire a pair of bi-wire capable loudspeakers, will you hear a difference? Unfortunately, there is no blanket answer that can be given. There are numerous factors that'll play into whether or not you'll notice any changes. For what it's worth, my experiences have been a mixed bag. On some speakers, I admit that I couldn't any differences. On others however, the differences I heard were immediate and obvious. Try it out, and report what your experiences are!

Thank you Zero, 'appreciate and generally understand DarqueKnight's post. Have enjoyed reading every post, so far 6 pages worth, instigated by my innocent (ignorant) question. A lot of passion & a lot of p**p is my takeaway. Going to add some shelves to my U-Line rack this weekend, good excuse to disconnect & reconnect everything and audition some wiring options. Thanks to everyone for your input.

DarqueKnight

WilliamM2 wrote: »

show previous quotes

PSOVLSK wrote: »

My question to the cable naysayers: Do you really think there could be a multi-million dollar industry that's been around for years if their products didn't work? Seriously??? Multiple companies can sell products that do absolutely nothing and somehow they stay in business?

I have lots of other very simple questions, but I'll start here.

Seriously? Apparently you haven't heard of homeopathy, a 7 billion dollar a year industry. Magnet therapy alone accounts for over 1.5 billion. People believe all kinds of nonsense.

http://nationalpainreport.com/study-finds-copper-magnetic-therapy-waste-money-8821693.html

An even better example is the diamond engagement ring industry.

DarqueKnight

kevintomb wrote: »

The entire spectrum is carried on both wires, when bi-wiring, and filtered AT the crossover.

How they made such a simple mistake, calls into question the entire article.

The entire frequency spectrum is offered to both wire pairs, but different signals are carried on the two branches due to the different complex loads.

The amp essentially sees two sets of speakers rather than one.

An electrical source can offer the same signal to two or more different circuits. The signal that is carried down the wire depends on the load at the other end.

Consider a fire hydrant with two outlets offering the same water pressure and water volume to two equal size fire hoses. If you put a very large nozzle on one hose and a very small nozzle on the other hose, you will measure very different flow rates through each hose ... even though the hydrant is offering an equal amount of water and an equal amount of water pressure to each hose.

kevintomb wrote: »

They are trying to say that simply using 2 wires (bi-wiring) separates the bass and treble signals, but I think anyone versed in electronics, realizes that is a mistake.

I am versed in electronics and my understanding is not that they are saying the mere use of two sets of wires separates frequency components, it is the use of two different loads on two sets of wires that results in each wire set having different signal characteristics. Since the reactive components at the end of each circuit branch are different, the signal carried on each branch will be different.

Wire can only attenuate, it cannot perform filtering functions. However, things like ferrite impregnated cable jackets and noise-cancelling wire twist geometries can filter some types of noise.

PSOVLSK

xcapri79 wrote: »

For me, a computerized oscilloscope is more precise measuring device.
I listen to music for enjoyment and I measure using instrumentation for scientific analysis.
The ear and brain are not nearly as reliable as an instrument. I certainly do not have magic years, especially at my age >50.

But it's your brain and your ears. You'd rather believe what a test tells you instead of listening and deciding for yourself what you like?

I know you won't answer this, but what IC's and speaker cables do you use?

F1nut

So, when you're doing say, 40 knots in your fan boat, heading straight for a giant cyprus, make sure you rely on your navigation instruments and not your senses.

WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

Just effing PERFECT!!!

gp4jesus

Bunch of pluses to DK & Zman! You wrote what I was thinking but couldn't figure out how to say!

cbridle wrote: »

Going to add some shelves to my U-Line rack this weekend, good excuse to disconnect & reconnect everything and audition some wiring options. Thanks to everyone for your input.

To Cbridle:Remember to dust! Enjoy!

tonyb

Keiko wrote: »

show previous quotes

xcapri79 wrote: »

The ear and brain are typically not nearly as reliable as good instrumentation is.

So, when you're doing say, 40 knots in your fan boat, heading straight for a giant cyprus, make sure you rely on your navigation instruments and not your senses.

You do come up with a good one every so often Mikey. LMAO !!!

The mistake being made here is that instruments/measurements are meant only as part of a guideline to the decision making process. If all the instruments and measurements dictated xyz speaker will sound good and you get it home and it sounds like garbage.....do you keep said speaker ?

No science, instrumentation, measurements, has any meaning unless it sounds good to you in your room with your ears. Which is WHY we encourage people to pay less attention to those aspects and just do some experimenting yourself. Everyone has different preferences in their audio, is it a stretch to believe some will prefer one cable over another, one speaker over another ?

After all, isn't the be all end all how something sounds to you, in your system ? Regardless of brand names, science, measurements, or price paid ? Of course it is, so these petty arguments mean diddly squat in reality.

tonyb

LOL....well, it is our senses, our each individual senses that perceives audio in different ways. No science, no measurements will substitute for an individuals perception of things.

Sure, use them as a tool, part of your knowledge base for your decision making process, but they are not the last word nor should they ever be. Those that have moved up the ladder in audio know this, those stuck in the mud of measurements have not.

skrol

nbrowser wrote: »

Ripped off from Guns N Roses..

What we've got here is failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach...
So, you get what we had here last week, which is the way he wants it!
Well, he gets it!
N' I don't like it any more than you men.

... who ripped it off from the 1967 film "Cool Hand Luke".

Great movie btw!

dromunds

Beauty is in the ear of the beerholder

SCompRacer

I've known some women that were bi-wired too....

vc69

SCompRacer wrote: »

I've known some women that were bi-wired too....

perhaps my favorite kind

DarqueKnight

xcapri79 wrote: »

The ear and brain are typically not nearly as reliable as good instrumentation is.
I certainly do not have magic years, especially at my age >50.

Good instrumentation typically does not take into account the peculiarities of the ear's non-linear hearing response.

A speaker with ruler flat response might sound like crap, even in a perfectly treated room because the ear does not have ruler flat response. It is more sensitive to some frequencies than to others.

A speaker with nulls and peaks at certain points might sound great if the nulls and peaks occur at places where human hearing response is less sensitive.

ZLTFUL wrote: »

You do realize that some of arguably the best tweeters on earth (beryllium) look like utter shite on paper right? Most of their graphs show them dropping like a stone and yet brands like Magico, Focal, et al use them in their top of the line speakers. Why would that be? Oh yeah...because they sound good.

People overlook the fact that a thoughtful and skillful audio designer approaches design from a wholistic viewpoint. A shortcoming in one area may be compensated for in another aspect of the design.

For example, some people look at the slew rate specs for Pass Labs amps and assume that they must sound "slow" (diminished transient response) due to the lower than average slew rate. Nelson Pass explains that the slew rate requirement is cut in half by other design aspects:

"Of course we agree that if we want a fast circuit whose distortion remains low at high frequencies we need to toss current into the Gates. I don't place as much emphasis on this as you do, but I address it by running more current through the Vas. In the X600.5 the symmetric voltage gain stage will peak out at about 100 mA. We also take advantage of balanced output stages (halving the slew requirement), and last but not least, we bias the amplifiers high."

My Adcom GFA-5500 amps ($1200) have much better overall measured specs than my Pass Labs X600.5 monoblocks ($22,000), but the X600.5s sound worlds better. It is fairly easy to make an amplifier with cheap parts that measure well yet have less than stellar sound performance.

tonyb

As usual, DK makes excellent points.

X,
If your hearing is compromised due to age....as you claim, then would it not be logical to assume measurements no matter how good would not then be heard by you ? So why chase them ?

We keep saying it, but it doesn't sink in. We all hear differently. We all will have different preferences. Those 2 things alone make science/measurements not totally obsolete, but down a few notches on the totem pole of importance. Sound....because this is audio right ?, should be number one on that totem pole of importance.

Ray makes a good example with the Adcom and Pass amps. Heaven knows also, we've all heard gear made with not so great parts too that sounded better than it had a right to. The audio industry calls those pieces "Giant Killers" or "Bang for your Buck".

The whole reason we have such a variety in audio gear, or any consumer products, is because they have to sell to such a variety of perceptions/preferences and a vast degree of abilities in both audio and visual. 2 people looking at a painting will walk away with 2 different perceptions of that painting. Can science dictate what that painting really means ? No, but it can be used to make sure it's authentic.

Science is a tool, measurements are a tool, but the tool belt holds more than just those 2 tools.

vc69

x has a hammer, so everything looks like a nail to him. That's ok I reckon, but you need more than just a hammer to build a home.

DarqueKnight

vc69 wrote: »

That's ok I reckon, but you need more than just a hammer to build a home.

Not if you are building a "house of cards".

BlueFox

While measurements are nice to have as a reference point, they really are not very useful for explaining why gear, and cables, can sound different with similar measurements. The point is we do not know everything that happens at the atomic level, and have no idea how to measure what we do not yet know. The whole 'flat world' mindset that assumes our current level of knowledge explains everything is just ridiculous.

SCompRacer

Here you go. Dana Cable video...offered in bi-wire. Basically, claims speaker cables can affect damping factor in negative ways. Their design, high OFC copper, braided large gauge sizing. Some folks at AC claim they make a difference. Mild to wild pricing. 21 day trial, details here.

http://www.gingkoaudio.com/hometrial.html

I've seen braided diy designs. Prefer OFC copper myself. I'd like to hear more from the techies.

https://youtu.be/9AKTDn1hp2I