Bi-Wiring, yes, again.

My new speakers arrive tomorrow, and they can be bi-wired. So I guess I'll get to try it then. I'll probably just set these up as Bi-amped and live with it like that for a bit.

 

If your equipment is set up for it and it is of a high enough quality to warrant no reason why not to try. Some people hear a benefit others don't, it really depends on what you hear and like. In your case, should you, it is hard to say with no equipment listed.

 

I am sad to see this marketing drivel again in another thread when I adequately explained a year ago they are presenting BS for the BS-able.

Here's the link:
Bi-wiring Speakers: An exploration of the benefits -

Of course there are different currents flowing in each wire of bi-wire. We already measure that - the sound coming out of the speakers is generated by exactly that current. You know what they measured here? Exactly what you would measure if you measured the currents inside the speaker, right at the input to a single crossover. And then compared that to the total current flowing out of the amp. The conclusion: crossovers work to reject out-of-band signals.

Whatever "IMD" they are attempting to display by comparing CD input to amplifier output is products of the amplification chain, likely other distortions or noise. Or even speakers acting as microphones.

But then they also don't understand and introduce flaws. The difference they compare is between parallel wiring with the jumper in place and with the jumper removed. With the jumper in place, though, there is half the resistance to the speaker and each driver. Secondly, they say "with a current probe", but don't describe this. One cannot measure current without altering the circuit - with a shunt resistance inline as a current to voltage converter (or by pulling energy out of the magnetic field of the wires). The effects of this shunt, when similar to the wire resistance, are doubled when you are also halving the wire resistance by paralleling.

Indeed you first ask for what would be an accurate test - differences measured at the driver. I am capable of performing that test, with better accuracy than the <96dB dynamic range Tascam they used. I would first have to construct a bi-wire-able crossover, as all my passive speakers have the factory jumper-eliminator option - crossover wires soldered to the same terminal.

 

That market drivel is the best explanation with test back-up I have seen.

I'm not sure what your point is?
The IMD test is valid, since it's compared to a single cable all 3 include the electronic chain artifacts. It would have been nice to sum the hi and lo vs single cable IMD.

 

Ok. I biwired because I could and felt as if there is a subtle difference in mids.
I bought wire because it was cheap.
I never went back. Well, actually, I went back and forth for 4 weeks and decided I like the biwire. Difference 1.8/10.
The bigger difference I think is bi-amping which I've tried.
In a horizontal biamping, one amp drivers the hi and one the lo. A fuller sound, more mid-depth, some bass strength. 2-3/10.
Vertical bi-amping, one amp driving each speaker with one channel for hi and one for lo proved to work for me. Definitely stronger, tighter bass and more life in the middle and lower hi. 4/10 at least. Even using the passive crossover in the speakers. Active crossovers are better I understand but is more complicated.
As far as cables making a difference, eh.
I put bluejeans Canare 4s11 cables in for the neatness and cool look. I can't say I notice any difference. I a/bd it twice and I'm going to say at my level there was not a difference worth playing with if at all.

 

bluejeans Canare 4S11 with locking banana clips( I do like the locking ones).

 

I got them for this look.