So whats with this bi-wiring business anyway?

[Rick J B]

The thread the other day where speaker cables were mentioned got me in the mood to build a new pair.

 

Then my RF-82 II's arrived and I learn that they are bi-wire equiped.

 

So, my question is; is there truely a benefit to bi-wiring a speaker of this sort?

 

If I decide to do it, should I run two sets of 12 gauge cables or would something lighter make more sense since there are two?

[Ski Bum]

Bi-wiring is a fool's errand.  The capacity to bi-wire is demanded by marketing interests, but has no practical benefit.  Leave the jumpers in place, use a single run of 12 ga. wire, and you're good to go.

[dtel]

If you just run another wire all your doing is adding wire, to really bi-wire you would remove the straps between the connections and run the second set of wires to drive the crossover (different drivers)  with separate amps or more amps. 

 

I think I got that right

 

Either way I wouldn't bother, do what Ski Bum said.

[Rick J B]

Bi-wiring is a fool's errand.  The capacity to bi-wire is demanded by marketing interests, but has no practical benefit.  Leave the jumpers in place, use a single run of 12 ga. wire, and you're good to go.

 

So do you think this is just one of those deals that gets started and then takes on a life of its own, and the manufacturers are just trying to keep everyone happy?

[Rick J B]

If you just run another wire all your doing is adding wire, to really bi-wire you would remove the straps between the connections and run the second set of wires to drive the crossover (different drivers)  with separate amps or more amps. 

 

I think I got that right

 

Either way I wouldn't bother, do what Ski Bum said.

 

Wouldn't that be actual bi-amping?

[dtel]

Well I guess, but what would be any difference at all, if it were run with the same signal. 

 

I guess real bi-wiring is by bi-amping, or at least a different signal ? I don't see any advantage in separating the drivers in a speaker unless your going to give them something different.

 

I bi-amp, but the signal is different for each driver, an amp (channel) for each bass cabinet and for each horn.  A stereo pair of 2 way speakers using 2, 2 ch amps and a Dx38 to separate 2 ch into 4 separate channels.

 

? I don't understand the how this works, it just does not make sense to me why an extra set of wires doing the same thing is any different than what is normally done with one pair and a crossover.

 

Hopefully someone can explain the advantage ?  I never did understand it

Edited September 15, 2014 by dtel

[Don Richard]

Proponents of bi-wiring say that a woofer that "strokes" the cone creates back EMF that is best dissipated by connecting the woofer with it's own set of wires so that the tweeter is not contaminated by the back EMF. Sounds like an excuse to sell more copper to me.

[Sancho Panza]

Bi-wiring is a fool's errand. The capacity to bi-wire is demanded by marketing interests, but has no practical benefit. Leave the jumpers in place, use a single run of 12 ga. wire, and you're good to go.

So do you think this is just one of those deals that gets started and then takes on a life of its own, and the manufacturers are just trying to keep everyone happy?

Think you nailed it!

[russ69]

Proponents of bi-wiring say that a woofer that "strokes" the cone creates back EMF that is best dissipated by connecting the woofer with it's own set of wires so that the tweeter is not contaminated by the back EMF. Sounds like an excuse to sell more copper to me.

I'm going to surprise a few people here. I fully understand and use quality speaker cables however bi-wiring has not shown any benefit to me. It's not as dtel describes it's just two runs from the amp with the speaker strap removed, both drivers get the same signal just like they would with the strap in place. You basically double your cable cost for no improvement. A bigger change would be buying better cable than double the length of lessor quality cable.

[minermark]

Bi-wire is BS.

Bi-Amp, well now, that is the top of the mountain, just ask my neighbor(one street behind me and three houses down).

[wvu80]

I previously bi-amped my Onk 717 (125wpc) to my CF-4's.  I would love to have heard a difference, but alas, my Golden Ears were apparently not up to the challenge.  I might have convinced myself there was some small difference, but it would be minute at best.  The CF-4's are now wired with the standard single pair.

 

A caveat:  My Onk puts out 125 wpc, 2 channels driven.  Divided by 5, that means each channel gets 25 wpc.  If I bi-amp the divisor becomes 7, so 7/125 is 18 wpc. 

 

I don't want to jump to an erroneous conclusion, so I'd like to hear someone comment on how lessor power to each channel might affect the performance, or the perception that bi-amping does not work. 

 

 

+++

 

Minor thread drift:  I am not a big numbers/graph guy, but this is the one time I might be interested in studying the charts.  Isn't there some objective data that indicates differences in bi-amp or bi-wiring?

Edited September 15, 2014 by wvu80

[minermark]

I have bi-amped my Onk 717 (125wpc) to my CF-4's.  I would love to have heard a difference, but alas, my Golden Ears were apparently not up to the challenge.  I might have convinced myself there was some small difference, but it would be minute at best.

+++

 

Minor thread drift:  I am not a big numbers/graph guy, but this is the one time I might be interested in studying the charts.  Isn't there some objective data that indicates differences in bi-amp or bi-wiring?

Bi-Amp has NOTHING to do with Bi-wiring, think about it.

[wvu80]

I think I have it straight, but it does get confusing.

 

On my setup, my Onk 717 must be changed in the setup to bi-AMP.  The channels used for 7.1 (back surround) then becomes the low frequency, and 5.1 becomes my only option.  On the speaker end, one set of cables goes to the H/F, the set for the back surrounds goes to the L/F, and the jumper gets removed.

 

For bi-wiring, the Onk does not have any settings changed.  The output for L/R goes to the H/F, then another set of wires from the same output goes to the L/F, and the jumper on the speaker gets removed.

 

Did I get that right? 

+++

 

And my question remains, hasn't anyone thought to measure the differences?  And, would a properly balanced bi-amp'ed solution (same wpc for each measurement) show some improvement?  It's this last thing that doesn't have me convinced, but does have me wondering.

Edited September 15, 2014 by wvu80

[minermark]

I think I have it straight, but it does get confusing.

 

On my setup, my Onk 717 must be changed in the setup to bi-wire.  The channels used for 7.1 (back surround) then becomes the low frequency, and 5.1 becomes my only option.  On the speaker end, one set of cables goes to the H/F, the set for the back surrounds goes to the L/F, and the jumper gets removed.

 

For bi-wiring, the Onk does not have any settings changed.  The output for L/R goes to the H/F, then another set of wires from the same output goes to the L/F, and the jumper gets removed.

 

Did I get that right?

correct for Bi-wiring.

Bi-amping requires more amp(s)

[ChuckAb3]

While I'm no expert on the subject, this seems to be the consensus of opinion that I've seen over a fairly long period of time.

[garyrc]

Bi-wiring is a fool's errand.  The capacity to bi-wire is demanded by marketing interests, but has no practical benefit.  Leave the jumpers in place, use a single run of 12 ga. wire, and you're good to go.

 

I agree with Ski Bum.   Bi-wiring is snake oil .  Why would it help?  I'll bet it was thought up by cable companies

[mboxler]

I think I have it straight, but it does get confusing.

 

On my setup, my Onk 717 must be changed in the setup to bi-AMP.  The channels used for 7.1 (back surround) then becomes the low frequency, and 5.1 becomes my only option.  On the speaker end, one set of cables goes to the H/F, the set for the back surrounds goes to the L/F, and the jumper gets removed.

 

For bi-wiring, the Onk does not have any settings changed.  The output for L/R goes to the H/F, then another set of wires from the same output goes to the L/F, and the jumper on the speaker gets removed.

 

Did I get that right? 

+++

 

And my question remains, hasn't anyone thought to measure the differences?  And, would a properly balanced bi-amp'ed solution (same wpc for each measurement) show some improvement?  It's this last thing that doesn't have me convinced, but does have me wondering.

 

After reading the manual for your AVR, you have it set up correctly, although I'm pretty sure both the high and low signals to each speaker are identical.

 

Yes...this is bi-amping, as your are powering each speaker with two separate amplifiers.  The advantage, if any, would be that the low amplifier/passive crossover circuit is completely separate from the high amplifier/passive crossover circuit.

 

Granted, this is passive bi-amping, as opposed to active bi-amping.  I would not call this bi-wiring.

 

As far as improvement, trust your ears.

[paul79]

Bi-wire from the same amp channel? Ya, this is total crap. The wires are still connected at the amp. No possible way on earth this would make any difference at all, other than emptying your wallet.

[Gold Deez]

When I was making good money as a contractor I fell for the whole bi-wire business and bought some expensive premade Monster bi-wires for my 3 front speakers. One of the biggest wastes of money I've ever spent on my system. No benefit whatsoever.

[Fjd]

I believe that bi-wiring is one of those areas where “theoretically” it seems possible that bi-wiring could “alter” (not to be confused with "make better") the system’s overall frequency response.   For example, I would guess that the details of any change would depend upon the series impedance of the cables being used, and the impedance properties of the loudspeaker at different frequencies in the overall frequency response. 

 

There again, any change could just be swamped out as the crossover itself is somewhat of a "bi-wire-type" setup.  However, even given these possibilities, I have found that reaching over my shoulder to scratch an itch while listening to music seemed to have a far greater impact on the frequency response of my speakers than the bi-wiring did.