Jump to content

I hate to say it, but this is a bi wiring story.


Recommended Posts



This was about biwiring and now its about 685 speakers and equalisation.

- try biwiring, then try shotgun with positive to bass and negative to treble, and some decent jumper wire. Pick which you prefer. I went the latter.

- regarding the 685s, a 6 db bump should be noticable, assuming your hearing ( ears ) or your room doesnt have a 6 db suck out. I have 705s and they are not perfect either. If you can fix colouration with eq then go for it . Also, B&Ws like power. Try something with double the power. Mind you, my 804s sound just fine as surrounds powered by a Japanese Denon 4310. Stereo is different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whether the Mid/tweater are connected to the bass driver at the speaker or at the amplifier....they are electrically connected and any back EMF will still affect the other driver. Bi amping, however is a completely different thing. Or that's how I see it:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Have been playing around on this today. As background I have two Classe CAM-600 mono blocks driving B&W 802D2, with a high end LP12 as source.

Tried Chord Oddessy bi-wired with 2 cables, vs Chord Signature single wire. Signature is a much better cable, but the bi-wiring delivers a richer & fuller experience. My wife said that she felt the single wire sounded hollower as well.

So bi-wiring for me with my system.

Cheers,

Steve

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites



I triwire my Vaf I93's, but have two mono amps for bass and two mono amps for the mid/tweeters.

 

I use 1m long Vaf manufactured cables, but run 3 gauges, thick for bass, medium for mids and thin for treble.

 

Have tried numerous hi end single cables, but none seem to be overall as good to my old ears.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lol I have since complied :) I did put the jumpers back in and single wired them for the last hour and concentrated on one piece of music. The Mahler finale. There is definitely a reduction in dynamics and soundstage with single wired setup. One big change when bi wired, the sound seems to be coming from all around the speakers, behind, in between above and beside them. Even when I look directly at a speaker it's hard to localise it. Single wired it was easy to spot. Isn't the former what we are supposed to strive for? The speakers should 'disappear'?

I don't understand the crapping of the jumpers that come with the speakers. Why the manufacturers put the jumpers in if they are so horrible? At the end wouldn't they want their products to sound good?

Don't get me wrong I am not saying jumpers are good or not but I am confused why would a speaker company put out speakers for thousands even tens of thousands of dollars supplying them with crap jumpers?!?

If replacing the jumpers with speaker cable improves the sound why wouldn't they do it? Can experienced people elaborate on this a bit?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've tried both and prefer biwiring. It seems to put more sparkle in the highs and tighten the bass up imo. I think the type of speaker cable can make a difference too. I sware by my diy RG213U cables...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have never found any difference when bi-wiring, but what genuinely does make a difference for the better ( IMO ), is good quality, but not crazy expensive, jumper leads. If you ditch the usual brass plates that most speaker makers use, you can get a tangible improvement for about $30 a set made up with spades or bananas, or even less if you just use some inexpensive and very short lengths of speaker cable for the bridging.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...


14 minutes ago, okitoki said:

digging up an old thread, but checking when people say bi-wiring is this what they mean?

 

biwire.jpg


This would make zero difference if links were in or removed as it is still only coming from one channel per speaker.
The links only need to be removed for passive or active bi-amping

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Volunteer
1 minute ago, bunno77 said:


This would make zero difference if links were in or removed as it is still only coming from one channel per speaker.
The links only need to be removed for passive or active bi-amping

 

Not everyone would agree with you. Pretty much everyone who bi-wires for example. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK... here is a weird one... 

 

Is it possible to run it as a series speaker wiring?

 

So.... Output[+] -> LF[+]

then FL[-] -> HF[+]

then HF[-] -> Output[-]

 

just curious, as this is stiring up some car stereo memories from days (years) back :D 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bunno77 said:


This would make zero difference if links were in or removed as it is still only coming from one channel per speaker.
The links only need to be removed for passive or active bi-amping

Well, a lot of people also say passive bi-amping is worthless and only way to get improvement/good result is active bi-amping, go figure.

I once tried passive bi-amping with a A/V receiver Yammy 3020 on my front speakers and haven't noticed any improvement and gave up.

But know running my fronts for 2CH listening thru my monoblocks via bi-wiring, why? Cause it looks cool:P

 

Edited by ufo
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



This would make zero difference if links were in or removed as it is still only coming from one channel per speaker.

The links only need to be removed for passive or active bi-amping

...ain't biwiring unless the links are removed.

If the links are there it is effectively "shot-gunned".

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well, a lot of people also say passive bi-amping is worthless and only way to get improvement/good result is active bi-amping.
 


I agree with this entirely.
But still if attempting passive you need to remove the links.

-Peach Audio Balanced Isolation Power Supply, Uptone LPS-1, Sonore Microrendu, Geek Pulse S Infinity, McIntosh MA2275, Paradigm 30th Anniversary Tributes, SVS SB13 Ultra
-Cambridge 752BD Oppomod PSU, Halcro MC50, Sonos ZP90 (Cullen Mod), Cyenne Audio CY-3100 DAC , Denon AVR4520, Aaron ATS-5, Aaron CC-250, Epos Epic 5, Cambridge Audio Azur 551R V2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, bunno77 said:

 


I agree with this entirely.
But still if attempting passive you need to remove the links.

-Peach Audio Balanced Isolation Power Supply, Uptone LPS-1, Sonore Microrendu, Geek Pulse S Infinity, McIntosh MA2275, Paradigm 30th Anniversary Tributes, SVS SB13 Ultra
-Cambridge 752BD Oppomod PSU, Halcro MC50, Sonos ZP90 (Cullen Mod), Cyenne Audio CY-3100 DAC , Denon AVR4520, Aaron ATS-5, Aaron CC-250, Epos Epic 5, Cambridge Audio Azur 551R V2
 

 

U r right there, even for bi-wiring, u gotta remove the links.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Well I've joined the bi-wire club with my Legend Kurre 8 standmount speakers. Which of course are designed for this purpose. But that didn't stop me resisting for a long time. I even swapped a few emails with Dr Crawford to tell him he was wrong!! hehe....

 

Actually, I went to and fro between single- and bi-wiring for quite a few months. A less-than-satisfactory digital front end wasn't helping my judgment, but once I got this sorted the benefits with the Kurres bi-wired were not subtle. I listen to a variety of music, including classical symphonies, and I can echo (no pun intended) the observations of the OP almost word for word.

 

(I'm using Atlas Hyper 3.0 cable for the woofers and Hyper 2.0 for tweeters).

 

If you're reading this Rod, my apologies!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...
To Top