Bi-wiring: An interesting article regarding speaker cables

vc69

Perhaps we can continue this discussion without a thread closure.

Please read this, then discuss (like gentleman?)

http://www.resolutionmag.com/pdfs/DRAGONS/SPEAKE~1.PDF

vc69

I don't believe I saw anyone mention the specific reasons bi-wiring is favorable. This article explains it quite well.

tonyb

For some reason that link isn't working for me. Care to give a short summation ?

Personally, I've never found I could tell the difference in my system with my ears. Doesn't mean others can't though.

vc69

Hmm... working for me. It's a PDF. I'll try to attach and upload. Really good stuff in the article, whether you are a "cable guy" or not. Explains the reasons why bi-wiring is a good idea.

vc69

How about that, Tony?

BlueFox

Written in 2002. Entire article based on assumptions, no data. Basically, a Roger Russell article. Nothing to discuss in article that hasn't been debunked an infinite number of times in the last decade or so.

vc69

Fox, did you even read the article?
I'm afraid nothing much has changed in the last decade or so, however I would direct your attention to WHY bi-wiring is a good idea, and leave the rest if you disagree.

BlueFox

Of course. Otherwise I would not have commented. Did I miss something?

kevhed72

Summary - The author advocates bi wiring with lawnmower cable over single wiring with audiophile cable. Also, keep your speaker cable runs short as possible.

DarqueKnight

vc69 wrote: »

I don't believe I saw anyone mention the specific reasons bi-wiring is favorable. This article explains it quite well.

I discussed it in the other thread, on page 5, but it got buried in the noise.

BlueFox wrote: »

Written in 2002. Entire article based on assumptions, no data. Basically, a Roger Russell article.

Is that the same Roger Russel who railed against high performance audio cables for decades, but when he wanted to sell $18,000 a pair speakers, he wired them up with "audiophile grade" Cardas wire? Then, when he was called a hypocrite, he said he still doesn't believe in audio grade wire, he just did it because he was trying to sell speakers ... to gullible audiophiles.

vc69

DarqueKnight wrote: »

I discussed it in the other thread, on page 5, but it got buried in the noise.

Missed that somehow.

DarqueKnight wrote: »

Is that the same Roger Russel who railed against high performance audio cables for decades, but when he wanted to sell $18,000 a pair speakers, he wired them up with "audiophile grade" Cardas wire? Then, when he was called a hypocrite, he said he still doesn't believe in audio grade wire, he just did it because he was trying to sell speakers ... to gullible audiophiles.

Not the same guy, hardly the same nonsense.

His position regarding wire is common among many audio engineers, however not one I subscribe to.
The article covered the reasons why bi-wiring is favorable, and what happens between an amp/wire/speakers, in relatively easy to understand terms. I thought that alone was quite useful info for those "reading" and not "participating" in these discussions.

ZLTFUL

I think Ray's reference was meant to be a tongue in cheek response to Bud's assessment of the article.

Unfortunately, I agree with Bud's assessment for the most part.

Speedskater

He could of used a technical editor person. Some things could have been better said. And he got transmission line impedance and end-to-end impedance all mixed up. But the paper is now 13 years old and it is what it is was.