| Columns Retired Columns & Blogs |
June 27, 2008 - 3:01am
#1
Bi wiring
| Loudspeakers Amplification Digital Sources | |
Analog Sources Accessories Featured | |
Music Columns Retired Columns | |
Show Reports | |
Features Latest News Community | |
Resources Subscriptions |
© 2024 StereophileAVTech Media Americas Inc., USA
All rights reserved
Your article only attempts to prove that there are no differences "due to a difference in their cable power dissipation behaviours." Other factors, such as magnetic field interaction, are not even considered.
Richard Vandersteen thinks bi-wiring makes a difference, and he doesn't sell wires.
http://www.vandersteen.com/pages/Answr7.htm
http://www.audioholics.com/education/cab...g-you-snake-oil
Don't get bit by the SNAKE.....hahahahahahahaha, this is a very good explanation of BS.
How bout those inaudible resonances? http://www.audioholics.com/education/cables/debunking-the-myth-of-speaker-cable-resonance
Yeah, maybe you need to "break in" that wire.....all the experts tell ya...100 hours....oh yeah, that's funny stuff......is it teh wire 100 then insulation 200? http://www.audioholics.com/education/cables/audio-cable-break-in-science-or-psychological
Is Audioholics all ya got? How 'bout something from The Audio Critic?
http://www.cardas.com/content.php?area=insights&content_id=12&pagestring=Cable+Break-In
O yeah, George sure do have his lines worded like a true salesman. Nice bunch of BS. He aims his speakers at each other too, and plays SURF music for a week, then again, to break them in, what a comedian. I guess the makers of my speaker cable...SondKing, musta perfected insulation and stuff, cus they don't say i should break in teh wires.....maybe George needs to learn form SoundKing, sellers of wires to mortals at mortal prices, $39 100Ft 12 ga. That's why they are soungKING and George is well just George. Wire break in...that's funny stuff, keep on believing in it. And buying magic wires with mystical properties that can't be divulged, or explained, cus' it's just.......MAGIC. I'll stick with teh cheap stuff, made by and sold to mere mortals. The KING knows sound.....Sound KING.....his uncle makes hamburgers.
Sounds like the Sofa King - everything sounds Sofa King good!
Hey, guitar players know cables matter:
http://www.customguitargear.com/zerocap.html
Guitar pickups are an entirely differt load to the pre amp stage of the amplifier, thus ya get's into real electronics, unlike audio output hi level stages of CD players etc...guitar pickups are low level signals, etc, that's why phono cartridges are affected by cable capacitance, but it doesn't need magic, just a spec sheet to see what is optimum for what ever cartridge and input stage of teh pre amp has....just basic electroncis, guitar cables also need to be super robust, they get walked on, really used hard.....unlike home systems that sit there. Then you also eliminate the guitar cable with wireless, and it's all moot anyway
Low-level signals are not affected by capacitance any more than high-level signals. It's the impedances involved that matter, not the signal level.
Bernie Grundman Studios use Cardas cable, even inside the boards and recorders:
http://www.cardas.com/content.php?area=i...Cable+Resonance
By the way, I don't use Cardas. I use MIT.
Bob Ludwig uses Transparent at Gateway Mastering and went to a lot of trouble to do so.
http://transparentcable.com/news/pdf_files/gateway_news.pdf
DUP, "articles" do not affect sound. Articles are read in silence or against background music. Immersion in the music involves neither. Articles prove nothing. Immersion in the music proves everything. Silent words and music are poles apart. Articles prove nothing about what we hear. Or don't hear. Or cannot hear. Or are not interested in hearing.
You always attempt to prove what you cannot hear by referring to somebody else's article. The print media, without verification from the music you hear, can never "prove" anything. Your web-address "proofs" merely take you further away from what you could (or couldn't) hear for yourself when listening to the music.
Why bother?
Repeat. Why bother to endlessly refer us to thousands of printed "proofs"? Printed "proofs" are not music. And music is what we listen to, not READ.
When are you going to get this point?
Answer, to a question thrown into the great idiotic void. Never. Serves me right for even bothering to ask.
Bi-wiring may or may not work. If it works, you will hear it. If it does not, you won't. I have heard positive differences, in favor of bi-wiring, and no differences, depending on my set-ups. If you hear no differences, nothing has been proved. If you hear positive differences, then you ought to bi-wire. I have never heard of negative differences -- i.e., bi-wiring sounding worse than single wiring. Graphs, written protests, and pseudo-scientific narratives mean nothing in this debate. Nothing. You either hear it or you don't. If you don't, you saved yourself a few bucks. If you do, then you will have to spend a few more bucks to get what you want to hear.
DUP, only an idiot would quote print to prove sound. Please, please, do not label yourself as an idiot...
Happy tunes.
This pretty much sums up everything in audio.
They also cleaned up stuff, connections, they said stuff was completly "rebuilt", the improved sound wasn't affected by any of that, just those new cables? I'm sure if they had rebuilt the stuff, cleaned up replaced broken cables, stuff with dirty connections, and used all generic high quality wire from Belden, Alpha, or several other mfgs, Hosa, Mogami, the results would have been an improved system, Rebuilding the active components, certainly had an effect. The way a Neutrik connector fits, and mates together, compared to some Chinese swag connector, also has an effect, that's just cus' you are replacing defective, parts with functional ones. With a system that elaborate, a bunch of ill fitting, corroded, dirty connections would certainly add up in teh chain.....defective parts will always cause issues, that can't be cured by magic, just fix the issues.
So things in print have nothing to do with what we hear? Stereophile, TAS, Pro Sound News, Pro Audio Review, Live Sound International all need to stop printing, cus of what you said...it all means nothing, printing information about what we hear, or don't hear, or think we hear, or wanna hear. That also means that talking about what is printed is not allowed, cus how can you talk about something that is printed, since only reading teh print will you understand the printed word, talking bout it is like reading about something in audio. And ya certainly better not write about video, then talk about what you wrote aabout what you seen, cus then if you think about what you seen, and wrote, you have commited 3 crimes...thinking, reading, talking. You must be a MONKEY!!!! See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil....hi ya doing Ba Ba Booey
"So things in print have nothing to do with what we hear?" I didn't say that, DUP. I said print doesn't prove what we ought to hear. Big difference. If you don't know the difference, you can neither read, hear, nor prove anything.
The most important reasons I read Stereophile have nothing to do with proofs. The most important reasons I read, and subsequently pay no attention to, your web-address "proofs," have everything to do with pseudo-proofs . When you run out of logic and conviction, you always refer to some web-site as printed proof that you are somehow right about what we hear or ought to hear.
When Stereophile (I won't dignify the other rags you mention with a rebuttal) writes, I get an invitation to listen for myself. Always. No exception. When you write (and ALWAYS refer to some ultimate external validation as proof that you are "right"), there is no invitation to listen. Just your desperate insistence that I MUST regard your print-referral as some absolute authority.
If I disagree with a Stereophile writer (which occasionally happens, but only after I listen to the premises of the review), it is time well spent, because the trip to the listening room is always enlightening. The time wasted reading your empty "proof" sources could have been better spent listening at random.
You consistently write (and refer to what somebody else writes) about what you cannot hear. Stereophile writers consistently write about what they can hear. If you do not know the difference between the two, forever hold your peace.
Yes, writing matters in terms of referrals to listening. Unfortunately, you neither write nor refer -- you merely negate. A pox on you.
So if all teh Stereophile reviews merely point you in a direction that you should make your own assumptions about what you hear and don't hear...cus' they have developed no end result after listening and playing with a piece of gear.....it's then just a commercial for the product disguised as some kind of either subjective (basically BS oppions) or objective (measured, tested science). So every review comes to no conclusion? But i thought these are experienced listeners, who one who is not experienced in listening, would value their conclusions after they play with some stuff. You mean I should ignore what they say, since they all say, just go listen for yourself? Well, I should save my subscrition money, I don't need that, it's pointless, ain't it? If every review ends in vauge, mindless whatevers, what kind of a test is that? It's like reading advertising. I'll then just read pro magazines, where they come to a conclusion, that it's either well suited for the job, or not.
So you are saying if your oppionon is supported by written stuff from elsewhere, it's invalid? Hmmmmm, do you know how much science is based on previous work of otehr's who use writings of otehrs to move on. The legal system is all based on prvious cases to support the current case. Maybe.....you have poor conphrehension? And thus choose to ignore things in writing.
But one good thing about not reading and using it for coming to a conclusion, it should eliminate religion, since fools read the stories and conclued there really is some (George Carlin) invisible man watching, and he needs money all teh time. If people gave up reading those tall tales, the world would be a peaceful place...maybe you are onto something, no READING, no conclusions, just accpet everything as a suggestion, and try it all, but ya better have a lot of money it's gonna get expensive, getting all that stuff and trying it all......at least you will be a expert E-Bay seller, getting rid of it all.
Bob Ludwig woundn't have gone through all of that trouble if he hadn't heard massive difference in initial listening tests.
Yep. That pretty much sums it up.
That's an oversimplification. Whether or not you hear a difference with bi-wiring is not only determined by whether it works or not. For example, having spent large amounts of money on bi-wired cables may predispose some people to hear a difference in their system when bi-wiring may not be helping.
OTOH, if bi-wiring "works," some people may notice no benefit from it because their hearing isn't acute enough to notice the improvement, or rapid A/B comparisons of bi- versus single-wiring are impossible to perform, and some people's auditory memories may not accurately recall the differences from one wiring setup to the other.
Pbarach, "...having spent large amounts of money on bi-wired cables may predispose some people to hear a difference in their system (sic) when bi-wiring may be helping."
Or not. There is also the backlash effect. This "proof" is so vague that it doesn't begin to penetrate the psychology of justifying money spent on system upgrades of any type. Or not. Personally, I would tend to be more strict after spending more money on (supposedly or not) stystem-improving upgrades. If I spend more money, it has to pass muster. More money spent, with me, means more identifiable improvements.
It can go either way. The "halo" effect (i.e., "I bought it and I paid more for it, therefore it has to sound better...") is equally balanced by the "negative" effect (i.e., "I spent more money for this upgrade, and it had damned well better produce, or it is going back..."). I suspect that just as many upgrades, including the bi-wire sorts, have gone back to the store as have been kept to justify the owner's additional costs. Remember, everybody offers return privileges these days.
Personally, I have had positive results with bi-wiring, most of the time. I did reject a couple of bi-wiring options, a few years ago, because I could not hear any differences. When I have heard differences, I have heard better imaging and sound-staging, and more unforced definition -- overall, more transparency. When I haven't heard positive results, the extra pair of wire went right back to the place who sold it to me.
As I said. Just listen, whatever your personal criteria are. If you don't hear it, don't pay for it. If you do, then make the economic decision as to whether or not the improvement is worthwhile in your budget, at the margin.
DUP, I have absolutely no idea what George Carlin and E-Bay have to do with this issue.
Again, Stereophile opens up new worlds, and invites you to explore them on your own, and to measure them against your own audio criteria. No media publication on earth is more liberal (i.e., less dictatorial) than the good folks under JA's purview.
You attempt to shut people down. That is the persona that comes through when you write. "If it isn't Trane, Legacy, Van Alstine, and Rat-Shack, you got screwed -- and I'm here to tell you that if you stray outside my zone, then you have gone too far..." That is your message. That is what you consistently write. Occasionally, you justify this microscopic little space by suggesting that you are the Catcher in the Rye -- after all, if we venture outside YOUR pathetic little space, we are automatically deluded and we deserve to get screwed out of our cash.
Disabuse yourself of that notion. Repeat. Stereophile open, DUP shut.
Over the years, as a teacher, I learned that many students preferred small rooms. More security. Less responsibility. Less intellectual and emotional risk. On the other hand, other students always wanted larger rooms to wander in, a larger universe. That was my job. Open the doors, instead of closing them.
DUP, I know you, even though I have never met you. You are the insecure little twit on the back row who just wants to stay in his own little cubicle. I doubt if you will comprehend this. But that is the persona you project. "Come, everyone, suffocate with me -- I need the company."
Someone recently remarked that the Legacy Whispers "looked like coffins." How appropriate. Now, they sound better than that...but not so much better as you might think.
E-Bay...because if you keep buying "upgrades" that don't work, ya sell em'.
George Carlin cus' if you recall his routine on religion, and beleiving in things that are tall stories and make beleive, things that don't exist, like the invisible man that knows all, sees all, and loves you, but will send you somewhere to burn,. but he loves you.
Same thing about absurd audio beleifs, based on imaginary made up nonsense.
Some of my favorite things are coffin like.
Herman Munster drove a hot rod hearse,with a coffin in it. Dracula slept in a coffin,and sooner or later, everyone visits their own. COFFINS, it such a mass apeal product...what's your favorite coffin material, wood or stainless steel? Or baltic plywood so it sounds better as it decays away into worm food. Whispers actually look more like a Wurlitzer jukebox, with it's flowing curves, unboxed look, with it's marvelous wood finish. My twit world is actually quite un boxed and open....it's just that having so much knowledge, and logic, the BS sensors are very acute, and my large scientific, technical, advanced training (GED) allows me the abilty to say it like it is. Sometimes I used to sit in the front seat, just to annoy the teacher, and challenge them on what they tried to force me to accept as gospel or true.....like Christopher Columbus discovering America......come on, we all know that ain't true, it was the weapons of mass destrution of the 1400's!!!!! Olaf and Sven where already here, building towns in MN and Wisconsin
Massive?
I need to calibrate my hyperbole.
Can you describe the difference in sound between MP3 and SACD?
How about playing an LP at 45 RPM.
If you use up "massive" for the difference between bi-wiring and single wiring, what vocabulary do you use for other differences?
Stupendous, grandiose,stupifying...noooo, just STUPID!! hahahaha, that is a good catch, seeing how the words are thrown around, that every tiny ittsy bittsy thing is MASSIVE in improvments. The only thing truly MASSIVE is teh BS. He needed to redo his studio, he called a distributor of wires, they said, hey, we got some of this stuff, ya want it for free, if we can throw you name out in some ads, it's yours. So the studio saved a few hundred bucks in wires.......now that's MASSIVE. They replaced the screw holding on teh wall outlet...the MASIVE improvement in "air" 3 "dimensional imaging", the entire studio became like a cathedral of sound, who wouldn't now want to replace the screw holding on their AC outlet wall plates. It mighta' been a FK-KU-KU-FA-FU-FA-FA-FOOYEY brand.
When you win $20 on a pick 6 lottery, do you tell everyone the MASSIVE winning you had.......what a ma rooooooon.
Buddha-
My comment was meant about the difference between cheap cable and great cable. Not just about biwire vs. single wire. Admittedly it's a bit off topic.
It still ain't MASSIVE.....on thing massive is the BS. What is a "cheap" cable, anyway, you mean one that is defective, bad connections, crappy soler, that's not cheap, that's junk, nobody I know uses that crap. Really good cable entails what? Hard use ratings, from UL? Do you know what all that is about? What insualtion ratings are on teh good cables vesus teh cheap cables? What envioroment ratings on good versus bad? See, if you deal with cablin gin teh real world, there aer specs and issues that ratings and codes mean. Thus you can in fact have a cheap cable that don't meet specs, or useage ratings, in whcih case you might go to the more expensive cable, that meets the specs for the use....
But back to the original issue, what is a cheap versus great cable. Great meaning better BS quotient? Or when ya add magic gizmos and things like a battery outside and tell the gullible it sounds better with this battery hangin ghere..... Please explain cheap versus great. I've had good luck with good wires, priced for mortals, but I guess it wouldn't meet your GRREAT specs, whatever that is in your imagination. Please explain. Nuetrik makes great connectors, they hold up to heavy use, plug unplug drag on teh floors, wrap up and throw around day after day...that's called quality stuff designed for a function.....whereas some Chinese no name swag, the cases are out of round, don't meet industry specs on sies to mate up with other conenctors, that's junk, but a GREAT speaker wire, tell me, what is it? One that keeps working day after day, rolled up, thrown into a case, un rolled used again....the insulation holds up, is rated for the use etc.
DUP, you failed to respond to the question about why Bob Ludwig would go to the troble of installing it if it didn't work.
How would he know it didn't work, if it wasn't installed, you mean he heard wires, somewhere else, and decided that it would be a MASSIVE improvement in his stuff? How can that be, when all this talk of synergy, blah blah blah, this wire for this amp etc. I'm sure the wires "worked" as in...yup, we have signal here, better connection than those old corroded wires that where changed out, that had worn out ill fitting contacts. So yes, I gues they do work. It also doesn't mention what stuff was changed out as far as components, I don't think they would go through all this labor and just change wires, I bet they did some equipment updates also, which would change things MASSIVLY, if they had some old obsolete, worn out stuff. We don't have the complete picture here....let's see or hear a recording he made on teh old stuff versus now using the new "wires" will it be a better recording, they don't mention that do they, at least I didn't see that written, ooops, written don't mean nutin' ya gots to listen, let's all go there and listen, but first ya gotta put all the old stuff back in so we can compare. What's better than MASSIVE......
I haven't read the whole thread through, but just to add my 2 cents... I have Harbeth Super HL5s, which have bi-wire terminals, but the designer Alan Shaw actually DISCOURAGES bi-wiring the Harbeth speakers! He makes no qualms about having the bi-wiring terminations done outside of factory, through 3rd party, and admits that the bi-wiring came about because of a certain fad, especially in the US, and he also had to follow some of that protocol & demand for bi-wiring. In the Harbeth forum, there are many posts which report that despite the bi-wirability (totally made this word up?) the Harbeths sound much better single-wired. I believe Alan Shaw said "bugger off" and went back to single-wire terminals & killed the bi-wire function altogether for the flagship 40.1 Monitors (which I'm dying to hear.) I wouldn't be surprised if all future Harbeths have just 2 terminals. If I'm not mistaken, Spendor is going the same route?
Still, I don't think there's one correct method (as in other audio matters) in wiring the speakers. Some like Coke, still others like Pepsi.
The designer (and manufacturer, back when he did both jobs) of Triangle speakers felt the same way. He made his own speaker cables, too. I tried them with the Magellans. Some of the time, they sounded similar enough to my bi-wire Audio Quests that any differences were insignificant. Yet, at the margin, with a lot of my software (usually LP's), the Audio Quests were noticeably more transparent, with wider, deeper, and taller sound soundstages. I suspect (but do not know for sure) that this has something to do with noise suppression and "masking" with CD's. Overall, I prefer the bi-wired Audio Quests. I have heard the top 3 models of the Harbeth speakers (in terms of price), and I love them for their neutrality and imaging. I heard them bi-wired and single-wired in different showrooms. I couldn't tell any differences. I prefer my Triangles because they carry the memory of the live event more naturally, and (to me) they are more dynamic (I suspect they are easier to drive).
I have no idea how to correlate all these data. I don't really care, although sane, unbiased discussions are always interesting. Ultimately, I must trust my own listening experiences. I can't hear with anyone else's ears, because I am stuck with the two I have attached to the sides of my own head. I cannot process what I hear with anyone else's brain, or anyone else's memories of the live concert experience, because I am stuck with my own mental apparatuses.
I have learned to be independent and rely on my own listening experiences. Every time, in the past, I have tried to adhere to the dicta of others, I have ended up dissatisfied. That is why, in spite of my occasional chippiness, I have never TOLD anyone, on this site or elsewhere, that he or she OUGHT to choose any one component or system over others. Evangelical insistence that one is wasting money on supposedly better cables, preamps, or room treatments (i.e., "I'm telling you this for your own good") always turns me off, and THEN I get chippy. Listen for yourselves. Report your experience. If you like what you hear, then buy it. But never accept or reject audio improvements just because somebody who yells louder than you do insists on it -- even if such brow beating is supposedly "for your own good," it usually isn't.
Happy tunes, all.
You still haven't addressed the question.
Bob Ludwig, who can pick and choose to his liking, and whose livelihood and reputation is based on doing the best job possible, chooses to bi-wire.
He has no agenda other than getting the best result possible.
Are you saying he is wrong?
He's a deluded recording engineer?
All it really comes down to.. is that once again, DUP is down to being complete and total dickhead.
And once again, he completely stalls this forum to a total standstill when it comes to attracting the very readers and people that stereophile addresses.
And it finally, IMHO, comes to the point of banning him. Completely.
As he just won't learn,and shows no signs of ever learning a goddamn thing.
Here we go again. Just when you thought it was safe to go back into the water...
Buddha, you hit it on the nose.
"...you still haven't addressed the question."
Never ask DUP to "address the question."
Alex, I assume your trope about sharks swimming randomly in the "water" of our discourse -- sometimes it is "safe" to dive in, while other times it is not -- includes the DUP-shark as well as those who condemn him. Okay. He is your buddy. You love his underdog status. He protects all of us audio fools from wasting money on upgrades he cannot or will not hear. He is Robin Hood, The Catcher in the Rye, and Ralph Nader, all bundled up into one heroic audio-rebel figure.
We all know better. He is an insecure prick. No, I do not think he should be banned. Let him blather. After all, nobody is going to lock him up at Attica or send him to Gitmo. This is, after all, an audio forum. Fools are free to be, er, fools. So let him blather, lather up, and foam. His personae are all negative, and you can neither prove nor refute a negative. If he is your hero, sent from audio heaven to save us all from our delusions, just recognize the ragged cape and the tongue-tied sputter.
DUP knows how to spell "the." Ever think about that? He wants love. He wants to be the lovable fool who speaks cosmic truths in homespun. Let him go on doing so. We need the humor, in a dark world growing darker by the minute.
I know you love his system, Alex. Good for you. Music is music, wherever you find it. BUT. Don't imply that WE are the sharks, just because we object to DUP's belligerence. Some folks don't enjoy being insulted. Respect them, too, before you define the pool and the sharks.
It is always safe to swim in this pool. Stephen has made it so. But don't make DUP some kind of victim. He doesn't deserve the status.
After all, he may be merely stupid. Or, he may be crafty with an agenda. Who knows? He is what his writing portrays him to be.
Meanwhile, listen, tell us what you like, and abandon the bad metaphors.
Yes, I am saying he is not completly up front about why he has that particular wire, good fincial deal on it, needs to fix stuff that is worn, broken, so this particular company filled the bid, got the order...and they probably had a marketing deal, can we use your name in ads? Since his name is known, it's worth advertising. Do you actually think that some Belden, Alpha wire, or several other makes of wire, and other brands of quality stuff couldn't have filled the order? These wires, had all the special magic? Wires are easy to spec out, and then go get prices, for teh exact products needed for the job..a pro studio ain't gonna be playing with mystical BS issues that can't be measured.
No TALKIN'!!!!! You know you do have the IGNORE function, use it then.....eeeeeeessssshhhhhhhhh. You had to put YOUR 2 cents in didn't you. And go put on a Burka, no TALKING
WOW, that's some prose there Cliffy........such word crafting such such, I'm speechless.....for a change. I like your writing, THERE, now what do you do?
Actually guys, you can't satisfy your sense of integrity by allowing an entire country to burn down..as you refuse to imprison or shove a given arsonist into a boat - and out to sea.
Sooner or later you come to that line. If the arsonist, however nice that arsonist may be..if they refuse to stop burning things down, sooner or later you have to do the right thing. Then it comes to the point where you realize that delaying in that action - becomes the crime...and the sooner you realize that...the better.
Think about that for a bit. Hhmm. Integrity vs the country burned down. Makes yer choice.
Kinda like what you have here.
A forum razed to the ground..or get rid of the problem.
Make your choice. Once you realize the truth in that, there is zero loss in integrity or character.
KBK, I empathize. I really do. Nobody sends as much flak to the dupster as I do.
Still, arson is a bad covering metaphor, for poor DUP. He has no fuel under his wick. Just a bunch of tattered, badly homogenized cliches, and a few net-sources to validate his (ahem), "authority" in such matters. When push comes to shove, DUP always shoves in the direction of what somebody ELSE thought up.
Hell, a good arsonist at least invents his own combustibles.
I say he is annoying, but essentially harmless. When cornered, it's always somebody else's website -- "See! See! There's your proof! Somebody else agrees with me!" And then you enter the endless loop. "If I can't hear it and a graph can't measure it, then it doesn't exist."
Of course, DUP has a bad 30 large invested in his own audio follies. Not exactly an insignificant amount of change, during hard times. Folks tend to forget this, as he tells us all that big money is poorly spent on audio hokum. Yeah, DUP. Right.
If anyone fails to notice this basic flaw in DUP's rhetorical flailings, he or she deserves the bad-cult status. So, let him rant. Eventually, he'll hoist himself on his own petard. Or not. Whatever.
Who you calling a PETARD? And what is it anyway....at GED class's they never used such hoity toity wurds.
"...and what is it, anyway...?" Check out Hamlet. No, not the infant son of Babe. No, not any particular small village. The one written by Shakespeare. I would give you the act and scene, but like any teacher worth his salt, I will assign you to read the whole thing. Test next Tuesday.
Ay! Baboso!