Bi-wiring speakers. Really?!

debitcardmayhem

Ergates said:

debitcardmayhem said:

Ergates said:

debitcardmayhem said:

My word, words like snake oil, 1s and 0s , cable attenuation etc !!!!!! .

Are your ears perfectly able to determine such nuances in EACH ear equally ? OK I'll leave my coat it's too hot to get it and my hat 

Oh as if your opinions are going to make everyone else bow down to your knowledge. It is all about the perception of each of your lug holes, being able to convert analogue sound waves to 1's and 0's to transfer that to the the CPU (your brain) and then the brain may be a celeron or an i9 24 core beast and it spits out the answer you expect. All other points are moot

I'm not exactly clear on what point you're trying to make....?

The point was addressed to the OP , but you just seem to want to pick a fight with anyone , now I have made a point rather than a rather light hearted response. I have finished

Fair enough - I apologise if I came across as wanting to pick a fight, I just didn't know what you meant.

and the OP was

Just been looking at what bi-wiring entails, as I'm toying with getting hold of some new speakers. Hmm, cynical antennae were twitching madly, certainly when it was recommended for use with amps not equipped with a 'bi' output. Ie, the suggestion you should just run two sets of cables from the single channel of the amp.

Some reviews really got on my goat, such as:

And I was addressing the aureal aspect , the HDMI arguments have nothing to do with that

Bendy_House

Sandtree said:

We get the likes of WhatHiFi? that claim the cable materially alter the sound whereas the naysays show the results of tests of these cables. http://archimago.blogspot.com/2020/02/measurements-do-power-cables-make.html is a particularly amusing review by a naysayer comparing a praised after market power cable to an aged 50' cable from a lawn mower which at typical loads at no difference at all and at high loads 0.1db difference which is most likely caused by the difference in length of cable. 

And the attenuation of that 50' of lawn mower cable would also pale compared to the much larger natural fluctuations you'd get in your mains power supply.

Sound quality difference? No.

Great blogpost - thanks for that, Sandtree

Heedtheadvice

Regarding the improvement claimed for the  changed mains cable:

I do have to laugh at the claim for the better mains cable making an output quality difference!If the power supply was struggling to convert mains to DC in the device then changing cable might (a very slim might!!) make a slight difference from a bad cable that caused losses such as from a very high resistance on live neutral or Earth i.e. a faulty or unsuitable cable.

Just however consider the following.

Having changed for a very expensive lead, did you change all the rubish house wiring, the power from the DNO coming to your house, the earthing system etc. to match?

How did your new cable reduce the variations in supply voltage and frequency?

In fact what technical aspect of the cable was responsible for the perceived improvement.

I write as a persion very interested in both audio and video quality of the highest standard. I would not use terms such as audiophile to describe as that implies unlimited budget to spend on nonsense items as part of a belief!

Rather I have worked professionally in the electronics audio and video industry designing and using the equipment  and recording the programme material that is the source for the users enjoyment and comparisons.

There are some things even in the digital world that make a difference to quality. Both analogue and digital systems have been developed to standard that the ear, eye and brain cannot note anything better. That does not imply all systems are equally good and artifacts cannot be introduced. Far from being just 1s and 0s on the digital side processing of them and algorithms do vary. One such is compression of one sort or another, analogue and digital. Another is error correction particularly at analogue to digital conversions such as from optical reading of disks to electronic digits. A lot of processing takes place at all parts of the chain that the user has no control over. All these are demonstrable and measurable. Not all equipment is the same and some improvement can be properly and statistically evidenced between very good equipment and excellent equipment.

However we are at a stage where there is little left to improve and most changes now come from making things cheaper, more readily available, smaller, gimics and fashion,more profitable etc.

For anyone who believes a mains cable (faults excepted) makes a big difference, as yourself why the professionals do not use such cables.

The absolute most important aspects of getting high quality are the transducers and their working environment capturing and reproducing the most excellent of material. So yes screens, lighting, speakers acoustics are still the areas to concentrate on. Unless the electronics are not doing their job properly, have a fault, are just poor quality then cable change such as being discussed will have no significant affect, and by that I mean noticeable and measurable.

Psychological factors play a big part in perceived quality such as expectations of improvement (and the reverse) and louder sounds, greater contrast thought to be improvements. That is why we do double blind and the like testing and only accept results when it is statistically significant.

Snake oil and hype abound especially in the world of sales and advertising, some of it very subtle and not entirely untrue but perhaps  tad economical? That applies all over such as getting your clothes whiter than white!!

Don't believe all the advertising( or unbiased reviews!) and if you are daft enough to think that A is better than B cos it costs more then that is your right.

Bendy_House

A double-blind test would disprove the claims instantly, I have no doubt.

Or, as in the Blogpost earlier, test readings of the actual outputs produced.

Bendy_House

It is astonishing how this is 'allowed' to continue with so little challenge, and how what I assumed were respected and trusted HiFi reviewers are seemingly also be sucked in. (Yes, I mean the likes of you, WhatHiFi).

I can understand possible reasons; not only to keep advertisers happy (the most cynical of) but also perhaps a more altruistic one - it keeps lots of small, specialist companies going, and the whole larger aura of HiFi's Holy Grail.

Like all other belief systems (that don't cause harm to others), folk can fill their boots. But they should also be prepared to either present evidence for their beliefs, or to grow a thicker skin. Or, simply keep it nice and quietly to themselves.

Ozzig

In case I missed it whilst skimming through the prior 6 pages of posts, but, I don't think anyone has mentioned  ...

Doesn't bi-wiring bypass the individual speaker crossover circuits (or some of them?) - I'm a bit vague as it's been a long time since I researched it - pre-internet days  

Ergates

Bendy_House said:

It is astonishing how this is 'allowed' to continue with so little challenge, and how what I assumed were respected and trusted HiFi reviewers are seemingly also be sucked in. (Yes, I mean the likes of you, WhatHiFi).

I can understand possible reasons; not only to keep advertisers happy (the most cynical of) but also perhaps a more altruistic one - it's keeps lots of small, specialist companies going, and the whole larger aura of HiFi's Holy Grail.

Like all other belief systems (that don't cause harm to others), folk can fill their boots. But they should also be prepared to either present evidence for their beliefs, or to grow a thicker skin. Or, simply keep it nice and quietly to themselves.

I believe that the main reason there hasn't been a clamp down on these snake oil suppliers is that they're mostly targeting people wealthy enough to be able to waste £3000 on a magic power lead.  It's not like they're conning OAPs out of their life savings, so they're mostly left to get on with it.

in_my_wellies

I've just read 6 pages on a subject I knew nothing about. I still know nothing but it was strangely interesting.

My late husband had three lots of speakers connected to various items. When I moved I unplugged everything and put all the wires in my 'box of wires' (every household has one!)

A year later I unpacked and decided I only needed one set of speakers for my record player. Then the fun began! After three evenings of trial and error I was pleased to get a sound, any sound, from my 40 year old Pioneer speakers.  

Then at Christmas when the boys came home of course they thought they could do better. Out came the remaining speakers and all the wires. I suggested a blind test of all the various combinations and guess what! My Pioneer speakers and wires I had chosen came out best not only for me but for three children too.  In my case I expect my ears were used to the sound but not for them. 

Sandtree

Ozzig said:

In case I missed it whilst skimming through the prior 6 pages of posts, but, I don't think anyone has mentioned  ...

Doesn't bi-wiring bypass the individual speaker crossover circuits (or some of them?) - I'm a bit vague as it's been a long time since I researched it - pre-internet days  

In most of them no, given its just a metal plate connecting the two sets of terminals and so the crossover has no idea if the plate is in place, if the plate has been removed but replaced with bridging wires or its removed and replaced with bi-wiring or bi-amping. 

A minority have a switch or dial which in theory could change the electronics.

Ozzig

Sandtree said:

Ozzig said:

In case I missed it whilst skimming through the prior 6 pages of posts, but, I don't think anyone has mentioned  ...

Doesn't bi-wiring bypass the individual speaker crossover circuits (or some of them?) - I'm a bit vague as it's been a long time since I researched it - pre-internet days  

In most of them no, given its just a metal plate connecting the two sets of terminals and so the crossover has no idea if the plate is in place, if the plate has been removed but replaced with bridging wires or its removed and replaced with bi-wiring or bi-amping. 

A minority have a switch or dial which in theory could change the electronics.

Every day's a school day (how do I get a thumbs up on here ?)

I always assumed the bridge plates connected the single source to both high and low cross-over gubbins.
So removing it and bi-wiring meant each one got their own connection to the amp, not that electrically it would make a lot of difference.
I have some oldish (20+ years) Castle's and used to bi-amp them with some Rotel power amps and from memory, bi-wiring made a bit of difference, richer high end, which led me down the bi-amp path which improved the lower end as well.
Now they're all sat in boxes in the wardrobe to stop the kids poking the tweeters