Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 54
  1. #26
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Saint James, NY
    Posts
    232
    Quote Originally Posted by bigfanga
    I'm interested in hearing your impressions of your new Quads, BB. I've had mine for a week and a half now and I absolutely love them.
    Even though it's been torture I have held off on connecting them as I'm waiting for some high quality banana plugs I ordered on-line to connect the new Quads.I thought it would make for a nice professional looking installation(especially bi-wired) even though I honestly don't know if there are any pros or cons sound wise to this style of connection.They're the locking style which I think makes some sense as to the integrity of the connection.I'm sure based on my experiences here there will be plenty of people who will say this is also a complete waste of money but that's OK.I'm thrilled to hear you love your 22L's so far.I believe these speakers have a significant burn-in time so it should only get better.I'm also torn on the spike set-up for mine.I have hardwood floors and they give you these nice spike feet to protect the floor.I'm just not sure if I like the look of the speaker so far off the floor.They did think of everything as the speaker base also has nice self-stick black pads on them making the spikes unnecessary.I think I may cut about a 1/2" off the spikes to slightly lower the speakers and then retain the ability to make up for any floor uneveness with the threaded spike set-up.These are truly beautiful looking speakers as I love their compact footprint and overall dimensions.What finish did you go with?Continue to enjoy them and I will certainly post after giving them a demo.

  2. #27
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    17
    Mine are birdseye maple also.The finish is absolutely stunning and makes the speakers look much more expensive than they really are.

    I got mine used and the prev. owner said that they were just barely broken in so they sounded great right out of the box. I got them because I wanted a silk dome tweeter in my rather live, acoustically speaking, room. After a week of experimentig with positioning and calibration, I have finally gotten them set up right.

    This may interest you, I also wanted a nice professional set of bi-wires so I ordered a set of AQ GBC bi-wires from HCM Audio. I don't know if they improve the sound or not, but they do make for a nice set of wires and they were a nice bargain to boot.

    Enjoy.

  3. #28
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by Mark_IDT
    Bi-wiring does absolutly nothing except make you buy more monster wire. The two sets of wires are coming out of the 1 set of outs they share on the back of your amp so there is no seperation of signal. The ohm load and watts the amp will put out don't change. On the other hand bi-amping can be beneficial but the result is still marginal. IMO the only significant benefit from bi-amping is if the two amps have gain controls and there for you could say turn up the volume on just the woofers alone. Usually bi-amping is done with speakers that have a need for active crossovers (crossovers that aren't built into the speakers but rather a seperate piece of equipment) this way they can send two seperate signals one to the woofers and one to the midrange and tweeter. These two signals are clipped by the active crossovers say sending only 80hz and below to the woofers then 80hz and up to the mid/highs. Most speakers have passive crossovers built in so when you send them a full range signal they process it and send the frequencies where they are needed. With out crossovers your woofers would tweet and your tweeters woof. Your speakers like mine have passive crossovers so they only benefit we can get that is really noticeable is seperate volume control from lows to mid/highs. This is how I have my studio 100s right now sence I don't have a sub. I took a 5ch surround amp and run it 5ch stereo same signal to all 5 channels. Then I have the main outs going to my woofers and the satelite channels going to the mid/highs center isn't used. This way I can go and set the main channels to +10db and thus have more bass presence. I have these towers in a medium sized bedroom so there not in the best place to produce bass where I listen. Also I'm so close to them if the highs were at the same volume they over power the bass and it seems lacking. This is how they will stay until I get a sub then they will go back to full range and I'll eventually get an integrated amp. For your setup however keep them running full range you have no need to bi-amp the mains or all 7 speakers for that matter. You would need at least a 7ch power amp or better two and a 7.1 pre amp then scrap the reciever you have.
    i disagree on the bi-wire part....When you bi-wire you seperate the signal from the highs and lows, you seperate the signal over one cable.....the woofers take up most of an amps power....so to seperate the signal, you dont have as much interference going through 1 cable.....you seperate the signal into 2 paths....highs and lows...everybody knows woofers and bass drain amps way before the mids and highs do, so why wouldn't it make sense to seperate the signal and route the path of the signal where it should be.....bi-amping is absolutly a better route to go(as i did) but sometimes the funds are not readily up front to invest in , let alone 1 amp , but 2.....but imo bi-wiring does have its benefits

  4. #29
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by Mark_IDT
    Bi-wiring does absolutly nothing except make you buy more monster wire. The two sets of wires are coming out of the 1 set of outs they share on the back of your amp so there is no seperation of signal. The ohm load and watts the amp will put out don't change. On the other hand bi-amping can be beneficial but the result is still marginal. IMO the only significant benefit from bi-amping is if the two amps have gain controls and there for you could say turn up the volume on just the woofers alone. Usually bi-amping is done with speakers that have a need for active crossovers (crossovers that aren't built into the speakers but rather a seperate piece of equipment) this way they can send two seperate signals one to the woofers and one to the midrange and tweeter. These two signals are clipped by the active crossovers say sending only 80hz and below to the woofers then 80hz and up to the mid/highs. Most speakers have passive crossovers built in so when you send them a full range signal they process it and send the frequencies where they are needed. With out crossovers your woofers would tweet and your tweeters woof. Your speakers like mine have passive crossovers so they only benefit we can get that is really noticeable is seperate volume control from lows to mid/highs. This is how I have my studio 100s right now sence I don't have a sub. I took a 5ch surround amp and run it 5ch stereo same signal to all 5 channels. Then I have the main outs going to my woofers and the satelite channels going to the mid/highs center isn't used. This way I can go and set the main channels to +10db and thus have more bass presence. I have these towers in a medium sized bedroom so there not in the best place to produce bass where I listen. Also I'm so close to them if the highs were at the same volume they over power the bass and it seems lacking. This is how they will stay until I get a sub then they will go back to full range and I'll eventually get an integrated amp. For your setup however keep them running full range you have no need to bi-amp the mains or all 7 speakers for that matter. You would need at least a 7ch power amp or better two and a 7.1 pre amp then scrap the reciever you have.
    i disagree on the bi-wire part....When you bi-wire you seperate the signal from the highs and lows, you seperate the signal over one cable.....the woofers take up most of an amps power....so to seperate the signal, you dont have as much interference going through 1 cable.....you seperate the signal into 2 paths....highs and lows...everybody knows woofers and bass drain amps way before the mids and highs do, so why wouldn't it make sense to seperate the signal and route the path of the signal where it should be.....bi-amping is absolutly a better route to go(as i did) but sometimes the funds are not readily up front to invest in , let alone 1 amp , but 2.....but imo bi-wiring does have its benefits
    Yamaha RX-V2600
    Adcom GFA555 x 2(both in mono)
    Yamaha CD685 cd changer
    Yamaha Dvd c950 dvd changer
    Polk RTi12 mains
    Polk CSi3 center
    Polk psw303
    Polk RTi6 (surround and surround back)
    Acoustic Research 12in 200 watt sub(8 years old and still hits hard)
    WindyWillys cooling fan (works great)
    Mitsubishi 52in big screen

  5. #30
    Forum Regular FLZapped's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    740
    Quote Originally Posted by chaos24
    i disagree on the bi-wire part....When you bi-wire you seperate the signal from the highs and lows, you seperate the signal over one cable.....the woofers take up most of an amps power....so to seperate the signal, you dont have as much interference going through 1 cable.....you seperate the signal into 2 paths....highs and lows...everybody knows woofers and bass drain amps way before the mids and highs do, so why wouldn't it make sense to seperate the signal and route the path of the signal where it should be.....
    But the amp is STILL doing all the work. Having one, two, or 20 wires, won't change that. The purpose of the crossover is to seperate the signals, the wire is just a carrier. Unless you're using 24 AWG wire or something else as equally silly, you aren't going to run into any problems running out of electrons to carry the signal. There is no "interference" within the wire.

    -Bruce
    (didn't I just say this?)

  6. #31
    Sound Fanatic
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    136
    Quote Originally Posted by chaos24
    i disagree on the bi-wire part....When you bi-wire you seperate the signal from the highs and lows, you seperate the signal over one cable.....the woofers take up most of an amps power....so to seperate the signal, you dont have as much interference going through 1 cable.....you seperate the signal into 2 paths....highs and lows...everybody knows woofers and bass drain amps way before the mids and highs do, so why wouldn't it make sense to seperate the signal and route the path of the signal where it should be.....bi-amping is absolutly a better route to go(as i did) but sometimes the funds are not readily up front to invest in , let alone 1 amp , but 2.....but imo bi-wiring does have its benefits
    That's nice that it works out well for all the little engineers wandering around in your head. The reality of this universe; however, is that bi-wiring doesn't separate anything. You can divide the signal over 50 seperate wires but if they're all still connected at the ends, then their ability to transmit the signal remains the same.

  7. #32
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    78
    Ok I think an episode of Mythbusters that deals solely on audio myths needs to be produced. If they could even cover half of the snake oil manufacturers are pushing these days it would be golden. I'm starting a new thread right now for us all to submit topics then we can Email them the link.

  8. #33
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Saint James, NY
    Posts
    232
    Quote Originally Posted by bigfanga
    Mine are birdseye maple also.The finish is absolutely stunning and makes the speakers look much more expensive than they really are.

    I got mine used and the prev. owner said that they were just barely broken in so they sounded great right out of the box. I got them because I wanted a silk dome tweeter in my rather live, acoustically speaking, room. After a week of experimentig with positioning and calibration, I have finally gotten them set up right.

    This may interest you, I also wanted a nice professional set of bi-wires so I ordered a set of AQ GBC bi-wires from HCM Audio. I don't know if they improve the sound or not, but they do make for a nice set of wires and they were a nice bargain to boot.

    Enjoy.
    I was refering to the banana plug style connectors only.I already had Tara Lab Prism bi-wire speaker cables but wanted to add the connectors as a nice installation touch.My 22L's are now hooked up and I'm definitely going through growing pains with them as the sound leaves much to be desired in my room.I did purchase them new so I realize burn-in time will be required to make a final decision on whether or not I like them.I'm just curious how far off the back wall you have your speakers placed.I've heard these speakers can be extremely placement sensitive and haven't really moved mine around that much yet.If placement is my problem I may be sunk because I am limited in this dept as my listening room is also the family den and I can't exactly have these speakers out in the middle of the room and expect them to survive my children(also don't know if I have the patience to slide them way into the room for each listening session only to have to put them back where they were for safe keeping.)I have excellent components and will truly be shocked if things don't sweeten up soon as I had very high hopes for these speakers based on a demo at a friends and the rave reviews these speakers were getting especially at their price point.Something doesn't seem quite right and I have an awful feeling it's more critical than the speakers simply burning in can fix.Of course I wan't to be very wrong.

  9. #34
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    17
    Don't know if this'll help but here goes:

    1. I found that mine needed to be toed in a little more than I expected for them to sound right. Try this first.

    2. I've read various reviews that state that the 22's need anywhere from 100 to 200 hrs of burn in. Claims are that the kevlar drivers are the reason but it seems to me that if any part of a speaker requires break-in, it would be the surrounds. Seems logical that the rubber (or whatever elastic material) would need to loosen up a bit.

    3. I measured my 22's positioning and found that when measured from the centerline to to back wall it is 24", but again the speakers are set at a definite angle so take that into account.

    I hope this helps and let me take this opportunity to urge you to take some time tweaking them. Believe me, once you get them dialed in they are spectacular.

    P.S. I've listened to lots of speakers over the years and I found the 703's (and all B&W's for that matter) to be way too bright to me.

  10. #35
    Forum Regular hermanv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Santa Rosa, CA
    Posts
    968
    Quote Originally Posted by bigfanga
    ...edit....
    2. I've read various reviews that state that the 22's need anywhere from 100 to 200 hrs of burn in. Claims are that the kevlar drivers are the reason but it seems to me that if any part of a speaker requires break-in, it would be the surrounds. Seems logical that the rubber (or whatever elastic material) would need to loosen up a bit.
    ....edit....
    The cones in conventional drivers only act like true pistons near the lower limits of their frequency response. Above these frequencies the cones will flex to varying degrees and in varying modes. After a while this bending action makes the cones more flexible. An analogy of sorts can be heard If you crumple up a brand new dollar bill, you can hear the noise it makes. A nice old dollar bill is very soft and crumples up without a sound.

  11. #36
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Saint James, NY
    Posts
    232
    Quote Originally Posted by bigfanga
    Don't know if this'll help but here goes:

    1. I found that mine needed to be toed in a little more than I expected for them to sound right. Try this first.

    2. I've read various reviews that state that the 22's need anywhere from 100 to 200 hrs of burn in. Claims are that the kevlar drivers are the reason but it seems to me that if any part of a speaker requires break-in, it would be the surrounds. Seems logical that the rubber (or whatever elastic material) would need to loosen up a bit.

    3. I measured my 22's positioning and found that when measured from the centerline to to back wall it is 24", but again the speakers are set at a definite angle so take that into account.

    I hope this helps and let me take this opportunity to urge you to take some time tweaking them. Believe me, once you get them dialed in they are spectacular.

    P.S. I've listened to lots of speakers over the years and I found the 703's (and all B&W's for that matter) to be way too bright to me.
    Thanks for the info as I'm going to tweak the positioning as much as my room will allow for.Toeing them in is obviously easy enough to do but I'm definitely limited in spacing off the back wall to about 12" to the actual back of the cabinet unless I move them for each listening session which I guess isn't the end of the world.People tell me my room has horrendous acoustical features(14' vaulted ceiling,oak floors,2 large arches)so all I can figure is I got a little lucky with my Original Proacs as they shined in these very same conditions.I'm still glad the 703's are a thing of the past as yes bright is one word that would describe them.Enjoy

  12. #37
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    17
    Were the ProAcs bottom ported? Maybe with your space that's what you'll need. If so, ProAcs, Spendors and Neat Acoustics should be able to work. Another speaker I would highly recommend are DeVore Fidelity Gibbon Super 8's. Go listen to them if you can find a dealer.

    Of course, I wouldn't give up on the Quads just yet.

    P.S. I read somewhere (Asylum?) where a Quad owner said he had problems with his until he replaced all of his silver wires & interconnects with copper. I can't vouch for this as I'm not sure if I believe it nor do I own any silver wires (too expensive and not sold on their advantages, if any).

  13. #38
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Saint James, NY
    Posts
    232
    Quote Originally Posted by bigfanga
    Were the ProAcs bottom ported? Maybe with your space that's what you'll need. If so, ProAcs, Spendors and Neat Acoustics should be able to work. Another speaker I would highly recommend are DeVore Fidelity Gibbon Super 8's. Go listen to them if you can find a dealer.

    Of course, I wouldn't give up on the Quads just yet.

    P.S. I read somewhere (Asylum?) where a Quad owner said he had problems with his until he replaced all of his silver wires & interconnects with copper. I can't vouch for this as I'm not sure if I believe it nor do I own any silver wires (too expensive and not sold on their advantages, if any).
    The Proacs were (I believe MKII) 2-way stand speakers that were rear ported and yes the port was at the bottom of the cabinet.The Target stands were 18" so obviously that is relative to this issue.They were sweet and yes I was an idiot for replacing them 3 years ago.At least I gave them to my cousin so I still get to hear them occasionally.They don't sound as good in his system as my components are better than his .I just need to relax and give the Quads a chance as I'm no-where's near the point of thinking they were a mistake.My interconnects are Axiom RSC which I believe are silver but I already tried some old Monster cable interconnects ($40 range)I had laying around just for the hell of it and the Axioms were definitely superior.(as they should be at $140 a meter).Continue to enjoy yours as you're obviously into your system so If you like the 22L's to me that's another sign that these speakers are capable of good things.

  14. #39
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Saint James, NY
    Posts
    232
    Quote Originally Posted by bigfanga
    Don't know if this'll help but here goes:

    1. I found that mine needed to be toed in a little more than I expected for them to sound right. Try this first.

    2. I've read various reviews that state that the 22's need anywhere from 100 to 200 hrs of burn in. Claims are that the kevlar drivers are the reason but it seems to me that if any part of a speaker requires break-in, it would be the surrounds. Seems logical that the rubber (or whatever elastic material) would need to loosen up a bit.

    3. I measured my 22's positioning and found that when measured from the centerline to to back wall it is 24", but again the speakers are set at a definite angle so take that into account.

    I hope this helps and let me take this opportunity to urge you to take some time tweaking them. Believe me, once you get them dialed in they are spectacular.

    P.S. I've listened to lots of speakers over the years and I found the 703's (and all B&W's for that matter) to be way too bright to me.


    Just a quick question about my 22L speaker placement.The back wall in my listening room has a 7' arch right in the center of the wall which is about 19' long.Right now due to a curio cabinet one of the speakers is positioned right next to the opening of the arch but the other is about 3' away from the opening.I would think this would be terrible for imaging as my listening sweet spot is directly across from the center of the arch opening.I've been noticing that the right speaker which is the one that's off center sounds much less involved in the sound as if the channels are out of balance.I should have picked up on this sooner as my cousin reminded me my Proacs were set up this way originally as they fit better there.Does this sound to you like the kind of change that could make a significant difference in acoustics with the Quads.Even though I have to get this one past my wife I'd do it for improved sound and I think the speakers would actually look real slick skirting the arch.

  15. #40
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    17
    I'd say it definitely can't hurt. It certainly makes sense that you would want both speakers to have identical, or nearabouts, rear wall reinforcement.

  16. #41
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Saint James, NY
    Posts
    232
    [QUOTE=bigfanga]I'd say it definitely can't hurt. It certainly makes sense that you would want both speakers to have identical, or nearabouts, rear wall reinforcement.[/QUOTE

    I'm moving that right speaker today as it does seem logical to at least create as close to identical conditions for each speaker.I do remember when my Proacs were set-up if you sat in the center of them the sound seemed to be coming from the center of the arch as opposed to the individual speakers.The vocals were as if the person was sitting directly in the center of the arch and I presume that would be considered good imaging as I enjoyed that sound very much.I'm far from an expert so I don't know if the speakers skirting the arch is an acoustical drawback or if it might create imaging I can't otherwise get by bringing the speakers further off the wall due to room conditions.I know some very experienced audiophile swear by the importance of speaker placement saying it can be as important as system quality in the whole scheme of things.I'll check back after this change and I'm just curious if you're still as thrilled with your 22L's as when you originally posted.I listen to a lot of pop and rock and I hear some people say these speakers aren't that well suited for this.I'm not really buying into that theory too hard because I think a well designed speaker can handle all types of music reasonably well without sounding rough on the ears, and before anybody jumps all over this I am aware that certain speakers are better suited for Jazz,Rock,etc.I'm only saying a good speaker won't be excruciating just because you're not playing to it's strengths.

  17. #42
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    17
    I'm still extremely happy with mine. They handle everything I throw at them amazingly well. I must admit that I haven't tried any classical, but that's not really my thing anyway.

    My setup puts vocals at the precise midpoint between the two speakers. As a matter of fact, I find myself checking frequently that I have my receiver set to "stereo" as it sounds as if my center channel speaker is working. It took me about a week of monkeying with the spacing & toe-in (not to mention calibration) on mine to get them to sound like this.

    Again, I wish you luck in your endeavors, but it sounds as if your room conditions are the culprit in your sound quality issues. Take comfort, if you will, in knowing that this is the case in most setups.

  18. #43
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Saint James, NY
    Posts
    232
    Quote Originally Posted by bigfanga
    I'm still extremely happy with mine. They handle everything I throw at them amazingly well. I must admit that I haven't tried any classical, but that's not really my thing anyway.

    My setup puts vocals at the precise midpoint between the two speakers. As a matter of fact, I find myself checking frequently that I have my receiver set to "stereo" as it sounds as if my center channel speaker is working. It took me about a week of monkeying with the spacing & toe-in (not to mention calibration) on mine to get them to sound like this.

    Again, I wish you luck in your endeavors, but it sounds as if your room conditions are the culprit in your sound quality issues. Take comfort, if you will, in knowing that this is the case in most setups.
    Major improvement with the speakers equally spaced off the edge of each arch.The speaker which was offset now seems equally involved in the overall sound presentation which in itself is a big step in the right direction.They do look sweet set up this way and while that's far less important than sound it doesn't hurt any.I'm going to run them in and hope for the best.Glad you're enjoying yours and I appreciate your feedback.

  19. #44
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    33

    It's Amazing

    This bi-amp/bi-wire thread has turned into a pretty hot thread! huh? Although speaker types have surfaced. So to conclude bi-wiring does nothing except split the signal. Thanks to all for your help in showing me the way.
    KDS-R70XBR2
    AVR 2807
    Monitors 7v.4
    CC-370
    Mini Monitors
    Synergy 12"
    PS3
    D-TV HR21

  20. #45
    Crackhead Extraordinaire Dusty Chalk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    below the noise floor
    Posts
    3,636
    Quote Originally Posted by aeh10
    So to conclude bi-wiring does nothing except split the signal.
    Actually, it doesn't even do that. If one were to diagram out a circuit for biwiring, and for single wiring, they'd be the same.
    Eschew fascism.
    Truth Will Out.
    Quote Originally Posted by stevef22
    you guys are crackheads.
    I remain,
    Peter aka Dusty Chalk

  21. #46
    Forum Regular hermanv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Santa Rosa, CA
    Posts
    968
    Quote Originally Posted by Dusty Chalk
    Actually, it doesn't even do that. If one were to diagram out a circuit for biwiring, and for single wiring, they'd be the same.
    Only if the resistance, capacitance and inductance of the wire were exactly zero. Since it is not, bi-wiring and single wiring are in fact different. If you draw in the admittedly small resistance in that diagram you begin to see why it might help to bi-wire.

    Some speakers I have listened to sound considrerably better bi-wired, with others I have heard no difference at all. I have never heard a speaker sound worse when bi-wired.

    To anyone who asks I always reply; try it and listen for yourself.

  22. #47
    Crackhead Extraordinaire Dusty Chalk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    below the noise floor
    Posts
    3,636
    Quote Originally Posted by hermanv
    Only if the resistance, capacitance and inductance of the wire were exactly zero. Since it is not, bi-wiring and single wiring are in fact different. If you draw in the admittedly small resistance in that diagram you begin to see why it might help to bi-wire.
    Yes, but most people most of the time don't diagram the resistance, capacitance, and inductance of the wires.

    Agreed: it will not sound worse.
    Eschew fascism.
    Truth Will Out.
    Quote Originally Posted by stevef22
    you guys are crackheads.
    I remain,
    Peter aka Dusty Chalk

  23. #48
    Forum Regular hermanv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Santa Rosa, CA
    Posts
    968
    One of the problems with discovering why some amplifiers or some cables for example might sound different or better than other cables or amplifiers is a circuit diagram.

    A schematic is an abstract representation that shows the interconnections between parts. Sometimes people start to believe it shows how the circuit works, in a way it does, but an amazing amount of information that determines tiny differences between one circuit and another is missing.

    Most secondary effects such as the difference between a ceramic and a film capacitor are not shown on a circuit diagram, the miller effect is missing, intercircuit coupling through magnetic interaction or tiny capacitors between various circuit elements are always missing. Some of these effects have a disproportionate effect on the final circuit behavior. Maybe a good example is a star ground. Star grounds are usually very effective, yet the schematic rarely shows them.

    The point I'm trying for is that this electronic reproduction of music is not at all simple, much of the end result is governed by secondary or tertiary effects. There is a tendency to over simplify. The number of posts that say wire is wire for example, when even the poster knows that gauge, capacitance and inductance vary in different wires and effect the signal in different ways.

  24. #49
    Forum Regular BackinHi_Fi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Virginia Beach, VA
    Posts
    10

    Why not?

    If I might add my two cents as most of you, I have pondered on the bi-wiring/amping issue. Bi wiring I would think that varies the actual connection from series to parallel, therefore changing the resistance and/or current flow depending on the choice. I would think will vary the way in which the speaker works the amp. Also some other variants that can be added to the mix would be combining different types of cable on such a configuration, as high and low frequencies tend to travel differently, IE using semi solids or thicker strands for lows than highs. Also logic will dictate that a crossover network designed with this capability would benefit from dedicated source as it would handle the main signal in different ways. Both frequency spectrum's as we know place different load demands on the amplifier therefore by engaging the circuit from two different points it will allow the amplifier to be used with greater efficiency thus also improving the performance of the speaker. You don't have to go super esoteric to understand this concept car audio utilizes the same principle quite often with noticeable results why would it be so far fetched in home audio? Then again not trying to be the devil's advocate but with audio there are a few absolutes as there are infinite variables and at the end for each particular individual the measure of performance lays part in theory, part in actual equipment and sometimes even part physiological. Sorry if I got long winded this was more like fifty cents.
    My motto" A system in every room"

  25. #50
    Forum Regular hermanv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Santa Rosa, CA
    Posts
    968
    Since drivers and crossover networks are inherently complex impedances, it is possible that using bi-wiring affects the way the amplifier feedback loop works. After all these complex impedances are tied to the point from where feedback to the earlier stages is usually connected.

    Like I said earlier, I have certainly heard systems where bi-wiring appears to do nothing and I've heard others where increased clarity or resolution was the result. Often bass performance is improved but that may be because more of the wire gauge is now available for bass exclusively. When I bi-wire I usually use a larger pair for bass and a smaller for treble, last time on my Martin Logan's, I used copper for the woofer and silver for the mid/treble.

    My opinion on these things is always the same, listen for yourself. You have little to loose and perhaps something to gain.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •