advertisement


Bi-wiring is nonsense (isn't it?)

MikeMA

MikeMA

pfm Member
I hesitate to post this, I really do, but Mrs J has gone to some fancy yoga meditation session , I’m home alone, it’s a wet Sunday down here, and I’m having fun playing with my hi-fi and listening to the Traveling Wilburys LOUD.

I’ve just swapped out my usual van den Hull MC CS 122 speaker cables for some Supra Rondo 4 x 2.5 bi-wired jobbies between the DA30 and a pair of HLP3-ES2s. Now, I’m a rational person, I have a reasonable understanding of basic electronics, and I know it’s not supposed to make any difference ( how can it?) but I’ve convinced myself the bass is tighter and the whole system just sounds more open:eek:

...........I'll get my coat!:)
 
Biwiring shouldn't make any difference unless you are using a wire that is way too thin or has high capacitance/inductance. Some amps require a specific amount of capacitance in the speaker wire to stabilise the output stage, so in these cases a significant difference can exist.
 
When i had Linn Kabers there were significant improvements going from single to bi to tri wiring the latter sounding the best (more tight ,controlled ,open)
However with using Shahinians (single wire) they sound far better than kabers ever did in their presentation
Guess alot depends on the speaker and the amp(although Naim do not recommend bi /tri -i had no problems for over a decade)
 
sq225917 said:
Biwiring shouldn't make any difference unless you are using a wire that is way too thin or has high capacitance/inductance. Some amps require a specific amount of capacitance in the speaker wire to stabilise the output stage, so in these cases a significant difference can exist.
Click to expand...

Pretty much my understanding.

Both sets of cables are chunky, definitely not too thin. I've no means of measuring the capacitance/inductance, but the the construction is conventional so I wouldn't expect anything out of the ordinary. The amp is valve 30watt Class A.

Funilly enough I bought the Supra a couple of years ago to try with a pair of bi-wirable Spendor SE6s. I couldn't hear any difference.
 
domfjbrown said:
Making and breaking connections might have cleaned up the contacts on speakers/amp???
Click to expand...

Absolutely. It could just be lower resistance, or even my imagination!

I shall leave the Supra in place for a while and see if Mrs J hears any difference without prompting from me!
 
Jadisman,

Leave the new cables in place for two weeks and then switch back to your old ones. That gives you enough time to clear out any preconceptions. (This also works well when differences are minimal and a clear preference isn't found.)

Ultimately, keep the one that sounds best to you and eBay the other pair. Job done.

regards,

dave
 
JADISMAN said:
Both sets of cables are chunky, definitely not too thin. I've no means of measuring the capacitance/inductance, but the the construction is conventional so I wouldn't expect anything out of the ordinary. The amp is valve 30watt Class A.
Click to expand...

Supra usually have slightly raised capacitance, so if using with a valve power amp with transformer outputs it can interact with the output inductance of the transformers. This will be at HF, but bass notes have HF content.

Also, if the VDH is of the spaced conductor NACA type as many are, this has higher than usual inductance.

Unlikely to be audible though. Only a blind A/B will put the matter to rest for you.
FWIW a cable with high-ish capacitance can benefit some valve amplifiers as it flattens the top end.
 
avole said:
@Dave Yes, and that'll give the new cables time to burn in.
Click to expand...

LOL...I'm not one for cable "burn in." I suspect any differences attributed to "burn in" are loose-fitting connectors finding their natural "lay" after stiff cables relax for several days improving the quality of the electrical connection.

Wouldn't bet my life on any of this however;-)
 
It is also my understanding that some speakers are designed with biwiring in mind, whereas others, while still offering the option to biwire are not.

My Von Schweikert VR-4 Gen II speakers for example are designed to be biwired, and clearly sound better that way.
 
roscoeiii said:
It is also my understanding that some speakers are designed with biwiring in mind, whereas others, while still offering the option to biwire are not.
My Von Schweikert VR-4 Gen II speakers for example are designed to be biwired, and clearly sound better that way.
Click to expand...

Thats an interesting proposition. I thought you just split the cross-overs for simple bi-wiring. I believe Alan Shaw thought it was fashion driven nonsense, and provided the facility on Harbeths purely for marketing purposes. He has since dropped it from later models, hence the HLP3-ES2s are bi-wirable, while the later HLP3-ESRs are not. But, fashion or not, I thought I could hear a difference. With Spendor SE6s I couldn't.

Robert said:
Anyone who understands Ohm's Law ;)
Click to expand...

Point taken, but I'd have said the same about bi-wiring:)
 
The VDH cable is a spaced shotgun so will be relatively high in inductance. None of his cables have ever been electrically benign they all add some flavour.
 
I found a difference with Spendor S6E, but as mentioned it could easily have been the new copper (old ends cut off) and new solder and new plugs.
 
Tried it on and off for years. Never heard it make a blind bit of difference.

The biggest difference IMHO is getting rid of any cheap brass Biwire links on speakers and using short runs of decent cable instead. Other than that, I leave it single wired and now always will.

My mate has some marantz reference kit into triwireable ultra sensitive klipsh speakers. Bi or tri wiring these also made bugger all difference.

Money better spent elsewhere really.

Ditto for passive vertical biamping, which is the single greatest waste of money I've ever heard of.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top