-
Help with bi-wiring and cable size/quality
I recently picked up some new Infinity Alpha 50's at CC on closeout. They are the first speakers I have ever owned that can be bi-wired so I thought I'd give it a try. I was using Monster Cable 10ga. 10 foot prepacked with gold ends already on for the old speakers. I bought some bulk 14ga. wire from Lowe's and used this to bi-wire my new spkrs. I used the Monsters for the highs and the bulk for the lows. Was this the best route? Is 14ga. adequate or should I stick to the same gauge and brand? Also are there really quality differences among the various manufacturers? What might an expert recommend to do. I'm not opposed to scrapping all the cable and starting over with new. However I was always impressed with the Monsters I have used for awhile now. Is there a better choice that would actually yield some better sound? By the way, I could easily tell the difference in sound after bi-wiring these speakers, but if I could improve on this with a different brand or gauge or whatever, I definitely would. Thank you very much in advance for any advice or comments you may have.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by J*E*Cole
I recently picked up some new Infinity Alpha 50's at CC on closeout. They are the first speakers I have ever owned that can be bi-wired so I thought I'd give it a try. I was using Monster Cable 10ga. 10 foot prepacked with gold ends already on for the old speakers. I bought some bulk 14ga. wire from Lowe's and used this to bi-wire my new spkrs. I used the Monsters for the highs and the bulk for the lows. Was this the best route?
I believe so. the inductance is lower for the larger guage wire, which is more important at high frequenncies. Still, for the average length found in most homes, it probably is not audible either way.
Quote:
Is 14ga. adequate or should I stick to the same gauge and brand?
14AWG is fine.
Quote:
Also are there really quality differences among the various manufacturers?
Probably. Things like how well they bond the insulation to the wire so that water has less of a chance of wicking.(At least for solid wire) How well they drive the plasticizers out of the insulation. Many times this is the cause of green wire.
Stuff like that.
Quote:
What might an expert recommend to do. I'm not opposed to scrapping all the cable and starting over with new. However I was always impressed with the Monsters I have used for awhile now. Is there a better choice that would actually yield some better sound?
Doubt it. But there is no harm in playing around as long as you aren't spending the milk money, right?
-Bruce
-
I have my lower gauged monster for my low's and my higher gauged mosnter for the high's on my infinity il40's for my fronts......
-
The Boston Audio Society did some wire tests c1972 and found that 12 GA zip was best in that it offered the minimum of both inductance and capacitance per foot when compared to either heavier or lighter wire. You might find this article at the BAS site.........?
I do not spend significant bucks on wires.... I attend live recitals and as long as my system continues to match the live recitals I will see no reason to worry about wires except that they are "there" and "functioning".
-
I think the state of the art has moved a bit since 1972
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mash
The Boston Audio Society did some wire tests c1972 and found that 12 GA zip was best in that it offered the minimum of both inductance and capacitance per foot when compared to either heavier or lighter wire. You might find this article at the BAS site.........?
I do not spend significant bucks on wires.... I attend live recitals and as long as my system continues to match the live recitals I will see no reason to worry about wires except that they are "there" and "functioning".
And continues to move. As far as I've heard no system can match a live performance. A close analog is all that we can ever hope for.
-
This is a perfect opportunity for you to experiment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by J*E*Cole
I recently picked up some new Infinity Alpha 50's at CC on closeout. They are the first speakers I have ever owned that can be bi-wired so I thought I'd give it a try. I was using Monster Cable 10ga. 10 foot prepacked with gold ends already on for the old speakers. I bought some bulk 14ga. wire from Lowe's and used this to bi-wire my new spkrs. I used the Monsters for the highs and the bulk for the lows. Was this the best route? Is 14ga. adequate or should I stick to the same gauge and brand? Also are there really quality differences among the various manufacturers? What might an expert recommend to do. I'm not opposed to scrapping all the cable and starting over with new. However I was always impressed with the Monsters I have used for awhile now. Is there a better choice that would actually yield some better sound? By the way, I could easily tell the difference in sound after bi-wiring these speakers, but if I could improve on this with a different brand or gauge or whatever, I definitely would. Thank you very much in advance for any advice or comments you may have.
Try the different wires in different configurations, and see if you can hear a difference. Then try them each singly, and see if that sounds differerent. There are no "rules" as I can see it for your specific configuration. Please write your findings after you've done some tests.
-
Geoffcin: If you wish to think that "the state of the (wire) art has moved since 1972" that is well and fine.... but how about defining what that "state of the (wire) art" really IS for the rest of us? Inquisitive minds want to know.......
2004 Cu used in conductors is the same as 1972 Cu. Ditto Ag and all the rest. The move in generators is to increase power density with better air-cooling technology, better hydrogen-cooling technology, better water-cooling technology, and better insulation technology, i.e. thinner and lighter insulation that can still resist 14,400 volts or whatever voltage the generator is designrd to output. Composites are being adopted to reduce rotational weight and the losses therefrom. But the conductive windings are the same old same old......
And yes, my main rig does reproduce the fine voicing of live instruments one hears at a recital. I would expect nothing less of tubies direct-coupled to Magges.
-
Yawn...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mash
Geoffcin: If you wish to think that "the state of the (wire) art has moved since 1972" that is well and fine.... but how about defining what that "state of the (wire) art" really IS for the rest of us? Inquisitive minds want to know.......
2004 Cu used in conductors is the same as 1972 Cu. Ditto Ag and all the rest. The move in generators is to increase power density with better air-cooling technology, better hydrogen-cooling technology, better water-cooling technology, and better insulation technology, i.e. thinner and lighter insulation that can still resist 14,400 volts or whatever voltage the generator is designrd to output. Composites are being adopted to reduce rotational weight and the losses therefrom. But the conductive windings are the same old same old......
And yes, my main rig does reproduce the fine voicing of live instruments one hears at a recital. I would expect nothing less of tubies direct-coupled to Magges.
So far as the state of the art in wire tech. I would advise you to try some different wires before making any preconceived judgments. Of course if your system is so perfect that any change would be degradation then I can see why this advise doesn't make sence to you.
-
And about here, the record gets stuck...
...the record gets stuck...the record gets stuck...
Hearing a "difference" is merely that...a difference. Any number of things can cause a perceived difference...whether or not something is "better" than something else, falls into the category of opinion and is therefor anecdotal in nature; it then becomes subject to any multitude of biases.
To the original poster: by all means, "audition" any number of wiring configurations...go the DIY route if you are of a mind to...just keep in mind what I have already stated...
jimHJJ(...anybody have a zip-loc to put these worms in...)
-
I confess I don't fully get it when we say "perceived differences." I mean I know the meaning of perceived and I know what difference means, but you don't bi-wire just for the sake of difference, at least I didn', it must be a positive difference. I guess I tried it to gauge any difference, and then found out what it accomplished for me. That is, more defined bass with better extension, mids that I never knew were there before, and highs that are vivid, crisp, and complementary. Of course the soundstage was improved and a better overall accuracy was attained. I can't even imagine any scenario when bi-wiring would not make a positive difference, whether perceived or not. If you're not perceiving this positive difference, then you just don't have the ear. Same goes for the old speaker wire gauge argument. Of course copper is better than aluminum, and of couse thicker copper is better than thinner, and purer, thicker copper is better yet. Then there are silver and gold of course, but the point is the differences are real and positive in almost every situation and if not perceived, then the capability to perceive is simply absent.
-
I'm somewhat confused on bi-wiring . . . and I'm not trying to sound too skeptical . . . I'm just wondering if the additional cost of bi-wiring is worth it.
In "non-bi-wired mode" the signal from the amp goes to one set of terminals on the speaker which is connected to the other set of terminals with the jumpers. So in this case, both speaker terminals are getting the signal from the amp . . . correct?
In "bi-wired mode", instead of utilizing the jumpers, they are removed and the signal is supplied to the speaker terminals directly with speaker wire . . . correct?
Now WHY would bi-wiring make such a difference when the speaker is receiving the same signal? Is there something I am missing or is is simply based on the theory that the speaker wire will provide a better signal path than with the jumpers engaged? Is the crossover utilized in a different fashion when bi-wired?
-
Here's how the theory goes;
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cougar Guy
I'm somewhat confused on bi-wiring . . . and I'm not trying to sound too skeptical . . . I'm just wondering if the additional cost of bi-wiring is worth it.
In "non-bi-wired mode" the signal from the amp goes to one set of terminals on the speaker which is connected to the other set of terminals with the jumpers. So in this case, both speaker terminals are getting the signal from the amp . . . correct?
In "bi-wired mode", instead of utilizing the jumpers, they are removed and the signal is supplied to the speaker terminals directly with speaker wire . . . correct?
Now WHY would bi-wiring make such a difference when the speaker is receiving the same signal? Is there something I am missing or is is simply based on the theory that the speaker wire will provide a better signal path than with the jumpers engaged? Is the crossover utilized in a different fashion when bi-wired?
Speakers with multiple drivers have a shared crossover that all of the amps signal comes into. The problems that BI-wiring is supposed to address is that most speakers are not just passive motors, but produce current that is shunted back to the amp. This current can be quite powerful, and it runs back into the crossover supposedly affecting the other driver(s) with crosstalk. By BI-wiring the speakers the woofers energy is shunted directly back to the amp, bypassing the crossover, and not affecting the other drivers.
-
That's as good a simple explanation I've seen on the subject, Geoffcin...good job at dumbing it down for us peons..
The questions I've always had are: How do you measure crosstalk? And if woofer cross talk sends woofer frequencies to the tweeter, which is largely incapable of reproducing these frequencies anyway, what difference does it make? If the crosstalk goes back through the crossover, isn't it again filtered out? If the woofer sends back current to the amp in biring, wouldn't crosstalk occur at the amp point, instead of at the crossover?
I bi-wire out of fear I'm missing out on something...I honestly can't hear a difference, and given my cable mess, I'm thinking of ditching some un-needed wires.
I've always found it odd, too, that exceptional speakers designers such as Krell, Von Schweikert, etc, dismiss bi-wiring as rubbish (or to quote Dan D'Agostino, "B.S.") and don't even offer it in their designs.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by kexodusc
The questions I've always had are: How do you measure crosstalk? And if woofer cross talk sends woofer frequencies to the tweeter, which is largely incapable of reproducing these frequencies anyway, what difference does it make? If the crosstalk goes back through the crossover, isn't it again filtered out? If the woofer sends back current to the amp in biring, wouldn't crosstalk occur at the amp point, instead of at the crossover?
.
It seems that you are assuming 'perfect' crossover implementation, i.e. filters perfectly filters away all unwanted frequencies.
-
Yes, some don't have the option.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kexodusc
That's as good a simple explanation I've seen on the subject, Geoffcin...good job at dumbing it down for us peons..
The questions I've always had are: How do you measure crosstalk? And if woofer cross talk sends woofer frequencies to the tweeter, which is largely incapable of reproducing these frequencies anyway, what difference does it make? If the crosstalk goes back through the crossover, isn't it again filtered out? If the woofer sends back current to the amp in biring, wouldn't crosstalk occur at the amp point, instead of at the crossover?
I bi-wire out of fear I'm missing out on something...I honestly can't hear a difference, and given my cable mess, I'm thinking of ditching some un-needed wires.
I've always found it odd, too, that exceptional speakers designers such as Krell, Von Schweikert, etc, dismiss bi-wiring as rubbish (or to quote Dan D'Agostino, "B.S.") and don't even offer it in their designs.
But, your talking about designers that make some of the best crossovers in the business. VS especially is some king of electical wizard with crossovers, and with Krell, cost is no object. My Gallos are also NOT bi-wireable.
My guess is that higher harmonics from the bass driver can get into the signal and make it through the crossover to the other drivers. At what level it does this I am not sure, but I'm pretty certain that it's measurable.
I don't biwire my speakers, but the maggies don't produce a return signal as they are strictly resistive.
-
True, true...I'm always skeptical when I hear the night and day differences claim, or the "immediately noticeable". I've probably tried this on a dozen models myself with inconclusive results. But then again, with the exception of speakers I own, I didn't have much time to "familiarize" myself with these speakers. So perhaps it just a bit harder to determine if your less familiar?
Can anyone think of any speaker designers/companies that openly endorse bi-wiring, and infact recommend it? The most I've seen is the presence of bi-wiring terminals, and a mention that the option exists...One would think if the speaker manufacturers were confident the design was better with bi-wiring, they'd insist upon it, and remove the jumpers altogether. This would at least give more incentive to use the speakers to their full potential (bi-wiring).
I use banana plugs to bi-wire at the amp end rather than try to cram everything into the little terminal holes...any drawbacks to this?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by J*E*Cole
I confess I don't fully get it when we say "perceived differences." I mean I know the meaning of perceived and I know what difference means, but you don't bi-wire just for the sake of difference, at least I didn', it must be a positive difference. I guess I tried it to gauge any difference, and then found out what it accomplished for me. That is, more defined bass with better extension, mids that I never knew were there before, and highs that are vivid, crisp, and complementary. Of course the soundstage was improved and a better overall accuracy was attained. I can't even imagine any scenario when bi-wiring would not make a positive difference, whether perceived or not. If you're not perceiving this positive difference, then you just don't have the ear. Same goes for the old speaker wire gauge argument. Of course copper is better than aluminum, and of couse thicker copper is better than thinner, and purer, thicker copper is better yet. Then there are silver and gold of course, but the point is the differences are real and positive in almost every situation and if not perceived, then the capability to perceive is simply absent.
Hearing and perception. Perception is not completely passive. Basically, we are built to perceive differences, even when none are really present. It helps us make choices. Woodman talks about Attitudes, Beliefs and Expectations, to which he gives the acronym ABE's, but I think it's deeper than than that. Anyway, most people will perceive differences in an audition even when the equipment has not been changed. So they did not hear a difference but they nevertheless perceived one. When we know what we are listening to, human bias comes into play.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoffcin
And continues to move. As far as I've heard no system can match a live performance. A close analog is all that we can ever hope for.
Sorry, but I have been to live performances that have royally sucked compared to the recoded versions......In all cases I wanted to chock the livin' snot outta the soundman.
-Bruce
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cougar Guy
I'm somewhat confused on bi-wiring . . . and I'm not trying to sound too skeptical . . . I'm just wondering if the additional cost of bi-wiring is worth it.
Then I'll give you my short answer: No.
-Bruce
-
You misunderstood
Quote:
Originally Posted by FLZapped
Sorry, but I have been to live performances that have royally sucked compared to the recoded versions......In all cases I wanted to chock the livin' snot outta the soundman.
-Bruce
By live I meant live acoustic, as in non-amplified. I do agree though that with live amplified performances the soundman can make or break the performance.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoffcin
By live I meant live acoustic, as in non-amplified. I do agree though that with live amplified performances the soundman can make or break the performance.
Ahhhh, okay...and obviously I mean choke.......
sheesh. I need a proof reeder..... ;~)
|