Bi wiring - Why does it work?

[lordmortlock]

I'm on thin ice here I know and I certainly don't want to kick off another slagging match but I just don't get the science behind it and I'm genuinely keen to understand the benefit.

Surely if one is running two cables to two speaker terminals with jumper plates/cables to the other two the connection is exactly the same as running four cables to the four speaker terminals without the plates?

Surely...?

 

[Anonymous]

There's a storm coming...

 

[Anonymous]

Electrically speaking it is the same....

 

[nads]

Does it work?

It is all in the listeners ears.

the only difference i heard was the same as when i used a cable with the same cross section.

I now use an even "fatter" cable and Bi-amp.

 

[sthomas048]

Well i think its an interesting question. I also hope it doesnt result in a bout of fisticufts ! I have my B&Ws bi-wired btw. You have a point about this, the way you put it it does seem there isnt a lot of difference in bi-wiring and jumper plates etc; I wait with baited breath (fish for lunch) for the response.

 

[Anonymous]

Seriously though, anyone with their head screwed on straight will tell you that to all intents and purposes it may or may not "work" - depending on your components / speakers / cables / room acoustics / ears / willingness to believe (delete as appropriate). It's probably something to do with impedance (yawn) or other stuff beyond the ken of us mortals. The best thing to do is to give it a try and see if it 'works' for you. It did for me.

I think.

 

[Anonymous]

Someone at Linn told me it was basically because it gives more 'bandwidth' for the signals to travel down (we were talking about just bi-wiring with only one set of outputs on the amp).

I tried it with my nad/B&W set up and heard no difference. Stil kept it that way though as i'd cut my cablee in half and i may as well use them.

 

[Anonymous]

tractorboy:
There's a storm coming...

Works for me - end of! Try for yourself.

 

[Anonymous]

Round and round she goes, where she stops, nobody knows..................

 

[lordmortlock]

tractorboy:
The best thing to do is to give it a try and see if it 'works' for you. It did for me.

I think.

Heh!

 

[lordmortlock]

fast eddie:Someone at Linn told me it was basically because it gives more 'bandwidth' for the signals to travel down (we were talking about just bi-wiring with only one set of outputs on the amp).

That almost sounds feasible!

 

[Anonymous]

Graham_Thomas:Works for me - end of! Try for yourself.

Well it doesn't work for me so you MUST be wrong.

 

[Anonymous]

my old M71i's sound much better biwired,more open soundstage much better treble! when we moved it around I singlewired it as a way of purswading the wife to let me upgrade,she is weakening slowly!!! although back to biwire now.

 

[Anonymous]

‚

 

[William Boyd]

I am confused as to why the bi-wired leads I got with my Cyrus amp have 4 plugs at the speaker end but only 2 plugs at the amp end. The amp itself has 4 terminals per side and I'm guessing that each of the 2 positive and 2 negative terminals (per side) actually originates from a single line - in which case, if it's equally effective to use 2 terminals (rather than 4) at the amp end then wouldn't it make more sense to split the cable as close as possible to the speaker rather than running the signal down a split cable (what with the risk of interference and capacitance and all those sort of known unknowns). In any case, I got quite a lot of satisfaction in sticking the 4 plugs into the speakers - so money well spent.

 

[Dan Turner]

There are 2 main aspects to bi-wiring which scientifically may help to explain why it works. Before I delve in to that, let me just say that I am unconvinced by bi-wiring and found that a single run of better quality cable was better. Bi-amping on the other hand made a massive difference for me.

The physics are a little rusty but here goes:

The key properties that speaker cables generally require is high capacitance and inductance and low resistance. Different amp and speaker combinations will respond differently to different variations of these properties, but generally speaking that's what the objective is. So from a simple perspective of doubling the amount of conductive material if you bi-wire, you alter these properties: it reduces resistance and think it will increase capacitance. That sounds right.

The main point of bi-wiring is to separate the conductors connected to the High (HF) and low (LF) frequency speaker drivers. Given that the same signal is being sent down each conductor it seems dubious that this would actually bring any benefit other than the above increase in conductor cross section, however because of the characteristics of electrical inductance only the HF signals travel along the HF conductors and ditto for the LF signals/conductors. This is because an electrical signal from amp to speaker is basically the flow of electrons from the negative terminal on the amp through the speaker to the positive terminal on the amp. In a bi-wirable speaker, with the terminal links removed, the cross over is split into two sections - one connected between the HF terminals and the HF driver which filters out all signals at frequencies lower than the HF driver can reproduce, and one connected between the LF terminals and the LF driver which filters out all the frequencies higher than the LF driver can reproduce. These filters in the path of the electrical circuit prevent the flow of electrons outside of the intended frequency range from completing the circuit, and hence only electrons at the frequencies that can complete the circuit flow along the cables.

So there it is, but ultimately the science is nothing without the end result. From personal experience better quality single wire cables are the better option, but bi-amping (i.e. an extension of the above principle where the frequency split is taken right back to the point where the signals leave the pre-amp) is where it's really at.

 

[SteveR750]

Dan Turner:
There are 2 main aspects to bi-wiring which scientifically may help to explain why it works. Before I delve in to that, let me just say that I am unconvinced by bi-wiring and found that a single run of better quality cable was better. Bi-amping on the other hand made a massive difference for me.

The physics are a little rusty but here goes:

The key properties that speaker cables generally require is high capacitance and inductance and low resistance. Different amp and speaker combinations will respond differently to different variations of these properties, but generally speaking that's what the objective is. So from a simple perspective of doubling the amount of conductive material if you bi-wire, you alter these properties: it reduces resistance and think it will increase capacitance. That sounds right.

The main point of bi-wiring is to separate the conductors connected to the High (HF) and low (LF) frequency speaker drivers. Given that the same signal is being sent down each conductor it seems dubious that this would actually bring any benefit other than the above increase in conductor cross section, however because of the characteristics of electrical inductance only the HF signals travel along the HF conductors and ditto for the LF signals/conductors. This is because an electrical signal from amp to speaker is basically the flow of electrons from the negative terminal on the amp through the speaker to the positive terminal on the amp. In a bi-wirable speaker, with the terminal links removed, the cross over is split into two sections - one connected between the HF terminals and the HF driver which filters out all signals at frequencies lower than the HF driver can reproduce, and one connected between the LF terminals and the LF driver which filters out all the frequencies higher than the LF driver can reproduce. These filters in the path of the electrical circuit prevent the flow of electrons outside of the intended frequency range from completing the circuit, and hence only electrons at the frequencies that can complete the circuit flow along the cables.

So there it is, but ultimately the science is nothing without the end result. From personal experience better quality single wire cables are the better option, but bi-amping (i.e. an extension of the above principle where the frequency split is taken right back to the point where the signals leave the pre-amp) is where it's really at.

Why?

and how does a single conductor that is to all intents and purposes have a signifcant capacitance or inductance? A capacitor has to have some form of dielectric gap (i.e. wont conduct DC its simply a charging "plate" ) and and inductor will resist higher frequency AC i.e. has least resistance in DC, but requires a conductor to be woukd spirally around some form of core (usually iron). I cant see how a speaker cable can posses a highre capacitance or inductance relative to simple resistance!

 

[aliEnRIK]

It seems (As usual) we have 2 camps of thought. Those who truly believe they cant possibly make a difference due to their experiences in everything electrical, and those (Like me) that HAVE heard differences in biwiring.

WHY? I agree with Dans account above in that HF and LF are split even if BOTH are amplified by the same amplifier

Personally speaking from experience the reason I KNOW biwiring makes a difference is because I originally used some cheap cable to wire my kenwood 3020 SE amp to my Mission 780 SE speakers (Everything were 'Special Editions' back then wernt they

)

Having read about this 'bi wiring' malarky I decided to chop the cable in 2 and biwire (Reason being I was thinking of upgrading the cable and wanted to know if it truly WAS worth biwiring). Well I remember being STAGGERED by the difference. Everything just sounded so much better. Bass was deeper, there was a LOT more detail etc. Now its possible that it was simply because I wasnt using enough 'cross section' cable anyways as like I said ~ they were 'cheap sh*t' cables'.

Fast forward to when I upgraded my hifi and I sold my kenwood and missions (And my marantz cd player ~ I wonder if he realises how much of a bargain he got there) to a mate. I wired it up differently for him (More out of curiosity for myself rather than helping him at all). Originally I had 2 into 4. But THIS time I wired HF and LF into speaker selection A and B on the amp (4 into 4). The difference again was another jump in quality. Not as big a leap as the first time but CERTAINLY audible.

So back on track. WHY does it work? I really dont know but possibly because there isnt enough 'cross section' with some of the single runs. But id also say that the electrons do somehow split into the HF and LF halves somehow. Further to that, ive personally found its better if you try to keep the wires seperate. So as said above, seperate outputs (speakers A and B) for HF and LF. OR ~ say power the HF using bananas and the LFs using spades to prevent any crossover in the actual wires.

Yes ~ clearly the SAME amp is splitting said signal. But it was clearly an audible difference so to me bi-wiring certainly makes a difference. Any electrician or suchlike telling me otherwise wasnt there when I did my tests which 'im' very happy with.

Ive also found BI AMPING to be a revelation. Its also funny that the 'nay sayers' dont seem to argue with the biamping said of things and yet theres very little difference to using a single amp in that the signal is originally inside of a single interconnect (One for left and one for right). It goes into the 1st amp which usually powers HF, then using another simple interconnect travels to the second amp which powers LF. But theres no electrical circuit involved to split the signal. Its exactly the same in that HF and LF are split simply by connecting them top the HF and LF lines in on the speakers and just happen to sonically sound better than if they are combined into one (Of course using 2 amps this time, but if the 'nay sayers' were correct then BOTH amps would be amplifying HF AND LF signals and it would barely make any difference to the quality surely)

Just to add ~ it does seem to make a hell of a difference what speakers you use. My mates 'gales' made no difference at all. (Maybe some manufacturers 'cheat' and in fact dont even actually split the signal at the HF and LF inputs on the speaker??). Whatever the reason, 'some' speakers genuinely make no difference.

 

[SteveR750]

I bi-wired my B&W's for years as lke a few eople I cut my cables in half so thought might as well do it, I thought there was perhaps a tiny improvement but could easily have been placebo. The only reason I dont anymore is that I cant actually hear any improvement, and the I cant be bnothered with the hassle of trying to stuff a double thickness cable into the amp speaker connectors (my cables are not terminated, only with a nice oxide layer anyway). My point wasnt whether it wokred or not simply qustioning the science behind the explanation!

 

[lordmortlock]

aliEnRIK:
Ive also found BI AMPING to be a revelation. Its also funny that the 'nay sayers' dont seem to argue with the biamping said of things and yet theres very little difference to using a single amp in that the signal is originally inside of a single interconnect (One for left and one for right). It goes into the 1st amp which usually powers HF, then using another simple interconnect travels to the second amp which powers LF. But theres no electrical circuit involved to split the signal.

I can get my head round this more easily - I understand why it could work. Is there any benefit to an amp to HF and an amp to LF rather than an amp to each speaker?

 

[aliEnRIK]

lordmortlock:aliEnRIK:
Ive also found BI AMPING to be a revelation. Its also funny that the 'nay sayers' dont seem to argue with the biamping said of things and yet theres very little difference to using a single amp in that the signal is originally inside of a single interconnect (One for left and one for right). It goes into the 1st amp which usually powers HF, then using another simple interconnect travels to the second amp which powers LF. But theres no electrical circuit involved to split the signal.

I can get my head round this more easily - I understand why it could work. Is there any benefit to an amp to HF and an amp to LF rather than an amp to each speaker?

Theres a lot more to benefit for LF and HF as opposed to each speaker as the higher and lower frequencies dont mix (Which makes for a much 'cleaner' signal resulting in a more 'hifi' sound). That said, REALLY high end systems quad amp (HF, LF, left and right)

 

[SteveR750]

But surely in both bi wire, bi amp and single modes, it is still the crossover in the speaker that if filtering, not at the amp or source. Therefore, in both bi wire and bi amp, both the LF and HF feeds are exactly the same signal. I can easily understand that bi amping might be beneficial as each driver will have seperate electromechanical characteristics, such as damping factor for example, that when seperated means that each power amp is not influenced by the different load presented by the other driver.

 

[Anonymous]

Its an odd one this...some speaker manufactures recommend bi wiring their speakers others dont even bother to give you the option by only having one set of binding posts on their speakers.

I personally havent found great improvements from bi wireing and the destructions for my rega speakers say its not needed as the crossover doesnt benefit......BUT im not saying bi wiring does nothing, id follow the speaker manufactures recomendation on this one as i think the design of the speakers crossover is an important factor as to weather bi wiring works or not.

long and short....the improvements gained by bi wiring are more down to the crossover than the wire itself

Bi amping on the other hand is a no brainer 😉

 

[6th.replicant]

Sorry, but bi-wire works for me!

My Arcam A70 is bi-wired with the 'SP 1' & 'SP 2' buttons pressed, then QED Original Bi-Wire feeds into bi-wired KEF iQ7SEs. I tried a comparison with conventional QED Silver Anniversary XT (which is meant to be a higher quality cable?), but to my lug 'oles the bi-wire sounded better: the sound has greater 'width' & 'depth'; significantly superior separation; bass is slightly deeper with a more 'velvety' punch; & treble is a tad 'cleaner' but not too bright/metallic.

And I fancy upgrading, when Silver Anniversary XT Bi-wire drops below £9/m or I've a spare £130-ish.

 

[gbhsi1]

Spend money on a really good quality single wire & use jumper cables (not the links).

I have had several bi-wired cables, but I can't beat the single wired QED revelation with Kimber Kable 4TC jumper cables that I use now 🙂