The idea is to elminate or minimize the electro-magnetic field interactions between the conductors carrying the frequencies that each driver is designed to handle. This should help in reducing phase shifts as the energy is reintroduced back into the conductor out of phase with the original signal while also optimizing the conductor size and geometry to deal with only those frequencies that it is designed to pass, ideally giving a more pure signal transfer.

Some believe that double biwiring further reduces interaction between the conductors, as opposed to the close proximity of internal biwiring.

I personally believe in spending money on a cable that you like as a full range cable first and then consider experimenting with biwiring on a try before you buy basis. I would start with a double run of the exact cable you are using in a full range fashion. The most likely advantage you will hear is in a more authorative bass...whether that outweighs any possible disadvantages from the change in sound will be highly subjective.

I love messing around with cables, but I'm not sold on the notion of biwiring being better by virtue of biwiring. Different, yeah, but better depends on too many other things to simply recommend doubling the budget without doing some comparisons.

As long as you are running another cable to your speakers you might as well hook it up to anotehr second amp, preferably of several hundred watts to make it worthwhile. Why waste that extra length of wire hooking it up to the same amp as the other pair of wires. Bi AMp, Quad amp to really have an advanatge get some aVA Ultra Hybrid Phase inverters to get it all going. Bi Wire is just another spelling for BUY WIRE...might as well use a 2nd amp, at the other end

Leviticus clearly states that Biwiring is an abomination.

You can't refute Leviticus.

Then why are some speakers created biwired in the first place? Did the designer screw up?

Au contraire, mon ami!

In general, they are "capable" of being biwired, but are not hardwired for biwiring.

Biwiring is a choice. They should either stick with mono-wiring or go with it and just admit that what they really want to be is bi-amped.

Biwiring is a cop out.

Here's a discussion which occurred on another forum. It deals with the effects biwiring will have on the speaker, the amplifier, the negative feedback circuit, the ability of the amplifier to deliver current to the loudspeaker drivers and the damping factor of the amplifier/speaker circuit. There are a few other things discussed here but this should give you a good read on biwiring.

http://forum.ecoustics.com/bbs/messages/1/207532.html

.

Heh!

Jan, I had no idea you were that knowledgable. I read the discussion. Good stuff.

They are made for Bi-AMPING, not BUY WIRING. Some are for Tri Amping. But then when you Bi AMP you loose those magic jumpers that purveyors of oil sell, that tell you those bad sounding brass jumpers need to be replaced with these magic better sounder jumpers. So why do oil sellers sell better sounding jumpers if the speakers are meant to be bi amped and REMOVE the magic jumpers. Sounds like someone screwed up? One says magic jumpers sound better than the stock jumpers, but then Bi amping sounds better than magic jumpers so i guess magic jumper mfgs screwed up? Then magic bi wire makers claim BUY wiring is where it's at. Yet Bi amping is the only logical electrically fundementally senseable method.

At least two major producers of high-end loudspeakers have told me that they provide bi-wiring/bi-amping terminals because their dealers and consumers demand them and not because they see any value in their use. Off the record, of course.

Kal

Did they also mention how much control the marketing department has over what they design on the front of the enclosure? There are high end companies and there are hiiiiigh end companies. But, it is difficult for me to imagine any company with 25 or 36 models in their line up isn't being controlled by the marketing people more than the design people. How different can a speaker sound when its response is from 35Hz to 20kHz rather than 37Hz to 20kHz? If it should sound different, is that the speaker line from which you want to buy product?

Small companies such as Thiel can hold onto what the designer believes is true. However, if a company is to grow, it usually requires marketing. Once the marketing department outnumbers the engineering department, there will be trouble.

.

The benefit of bi-wiring (damping of EMF) depends on the amplifier.
High current amps will be more effective in extracting sonic benefit from bi-wiring, and probably only with signals that contain significant low frequency content, and/or with speakers that have very low impedance in the bass region.

Using a powered subwoofer and electronic crossover probably mitigates most of the need for bi-wiring, since the LR speakers will not be driven as hard at low frequencies, (generally speaking, lower excursions = less EMF) and will therefore present less back voltage into the crossover network.
Especially if the subwoofer crossover significantly reduces the demand for current in a particularly low impedance range in the main speakers.
This makes a lot of sense for typical midrange HT receivers with small power supplies and current limiting circuits.

Bi-wiring is essentially a tweak in an otherwise well designed system.
It's always "electrically better" than a single run of wire connected to one end of a passive crossover network, but the benefit would hardly be significant if the system is plagued with other more basic sonic problems, such as audible cabinet resonances, or underdamped (boomy) woofer alignment, etc...

This may be true, Kal, but how many times have you followed manufacturers' recommendations to the letter on speaker placement, cabling, and matching electronics when doing your reviews? From what I can glean, speaker manufacturers don't always understand the best ways to get the best sound from their products, since I often read reviews that describe the reviewers' going blatantly against different manufacturers' recommendations once they leave the room. Sort of like asking a poet for a gloss on his own poem.

I have not one millionth your technical expertise, nor Jan's, but I listen well, and I can tell you that bi-wiring has always improved the sounds of the various systems I have owned. I don't care why it happens or why it shouldn't happen -- I'm interested only in the end result. I always hear improvements in micro-dynamics and spatial cues -- the subtleties. I sometimes hear improvements in bass definition and midrange transparency. The most dramatic improvements came with the Dynaudio Evidence speakers I owned for awhile, and the Mirage M1-si's I had a few years back. This suggests that results vary with different component combinations. My current system, here in my apartment, is based on the Triangle Volante speaker systems, with Musical Fidelity separates driving them. Since I bought my speaker cables (Audio Quest Argent) awhile ago, and found them as good as anything else I had heard at any cost, I use them with my current system. They are rigged for double-biwiring at the speaker end, with single terminations at the amplifier end. I am aware that the Triangle designer doesn't believe biwiring will improve his speakers' sound characteristics. Still, I have stuck with what sounds good to me, and I can be quite demanding. Perhaps I shall try single terminations with jumpers (nice fancy gold-plated ones came with the speakers) someday, but I'm reluctant to change what has worked for me in the past. I am contemplating replacing the big Dynaudios I sold with the Triangle Magellans in my larger quarters at the house, and perhaps at that time, if I do indeed go in that direction, I'll experiment with the single-termination option.

I think it is very easy for technically competent listeners to get somewhat carried away with theory and even draw false conclusions about the realities of the listening room. I have heard many, many set-ups that "should" sound better than the one I currently enjoy, for technical reasons, but simply do not when put to the test. That's all I have to go on. I just want to get as close as I can to experiencing the sound I remember from frequent visits to the concert hall, and my experience tells me that creating this illusion has little to do with numbers and graphs. Best wishes, Clifton

Quote:
This may be true, Kal, but how many times have you followed manufacturers' recommendations to the letter on speaker placement, cabling, and matching electronics when doing your reviews? From what I can glean, speaker manufacturers don't always understand the best ways to get the best sound from their products, since I often read reviews that describe the reviewers' going blatantly against different manufacturers' recommendations once they leave the room. Sort of like asking a poet for a gloss on his own poem.

Granted. OTOH, you might certainly pay attention to his gloss, even if you chose not to accept it.

Quote:
I think it is very easy for technically competent listeners to get somewhat carried away with theory and even draw false conclusions about the realities of the listening room. I have heard many, many set-ups that "should" sound better than the one I currently enjoy, for technical reasons, but simply do not when put to the test. That's all I have to go on. I just want to get as close as I can to experiencing the sound I remember from frequent visits to the concert hall, and my experience tells me that creating this illusion has little to do with numbers and graphs.

No argument. I find no downsides to bi-wiring except cost and clutter and, since neither of those bother me much, I do bi-wire my main speakers. That said, I have never convinced myself of its value.

Kal

This suggests that results vary with different component combinations. My current system, here in my apartment, is based on the Triangle Volante speaker systems, with Musical Fidelity separates driving them. Since I bought my speaker cables (Audio Quest Argent) awhile ago, and found them as good as anything else I had heard at any cost, I use them with my current system. They are rigged for double-biwiring at the speaker end, 9apps download with single terminations at the amplifier end. I am aware that the Triangle designer doesn't believe biwiring will improve his speakers' sound characteristics. Still, I have stuck with what sounds good to me, and I can be quite demanding.

Verna9991255 wrote: This suggests that results vary with different component combinations.

Perhaps. It also suggests that perceptions vary with different user biases. :-)

Next logical (for me) question...

Bi-wire = 2x wire cost, so what happens if that double/extra cost is spent for a single “better” quality wire?
What would be considered more appealing?

Well, I did not read ALL of everybody’s post, but I agree that bi-wiring is always preferred over single wire with jumper cables. Sounds much better to me, tighter bass, clearer vocals, brings more out of your music. Not all of us can afford another amp to set up a bi-amping system, which is even better. Once you find your cables, some offer bi-wire terminations. I have Analysis Plus Black Oval 9s, which are a double run cable from each amp channel. My KEFs have never sounded better. The bass has exploded w those cables. Have fun!