Biwire & Rf3's

[Airpirate CVG]

Ok I have read some things on biwiring but still need clarification. For instance do you run one set of wire from the "A" speaker terminal (on amp) to the high end and another run from the "B" speaker terminal to the low end?? Or do you run both sets of wire from the "A" terminal. I really can't figure out how that would help. Since electrical signals travel at incredible speed how would this "sound better" than a standard configuration of using the supplied jumpers? Anyone ever tried to hit a light switch and jump in to bed before the light turns off????

This message has been edited by Airpirate CVG on 09-13-2002 at 09:15 PM

[Soundthought]

Hello.

Here's some bi-wiring basics.

You hook both sets to the A terminals.

2 on each postive.

2 on each negative.

Essentally, your doubling up the speaker wire on each channel.

Take a pair of wires of the same length,

On one end twist both positives together.

Do the same on the negatives.

Then hook the combined ends up to your amp as you would a single wire.

Do that for both channels.

Then, remove the binding straps on the input cups of the speakers.

Hook one set to the HF posts, and the other the LF posts.

The general concept is related to the passive crossover network inside a speaker.

True bi-wiring is only really acheived when combined with split crossover network inside a speaker.

Basically, it allows the low frequencies to be returned to the amp without re-entering the High frequency section of the speakers crossover.

This "frees up" the signal passing through the hign frequency section.

The nature of LF has a tendancy to add unwanted harmonics into the networks of non-bi-wireable crossovers.

With a definitive separation in the crossover, these anomolies do not occur.

The reason people hear more detail and low end accuracy with bi-wiring is simple.

When the HF has the ability to pass through the crossover without disruptions, then many HF harmonics are realized.

It's those supersonic sounds that actually give definition and clarity to many sounds we hear.

They essentially sculpt the sound.

It puts an edge on bass and sharpens up the mids.

It brings out the fine details in the treble.

Details that would normally be cancelled out by returning LF in a standard crossover.

It's kinda like the contrast on your TV.

Low contrast gives a duller, less sharp picture

High contrast exposes details not previously seen.

The low contrast could relate to a standard non-biwireable speaker running a single wire.

The high contrast is acheived through a bi-wired crossover by allowing the HF not to be muddled by LF.

A greater amount of full range detail (that is supported by the HF section of the crossover} is realized because it's not interacting with LF waves returning back into the crossover upon its loop through the woofer.

Instead it's channeled directly back to the amp.

This is relative to improved damping ability.

It is my impression that bi-wiring is really only effective with a two-way loudspeaker.

Can't say for sure, because I don't know that much about it yet.

I hope that helped answer your question.

Enjoy your system.

------------------

You should of heard just what I've seen.

[T2K]

Sounds to me like it would be a waste of your time for you to try bi-wiring.

Keith

[Soundthought]

Keith,

I respect you but,

If it sounds that way to you, then your not hearing what i'm saying.

Why would so many loudspeaker manufactures put the cost and effort to design and implement bi-wireable crossover networks into their equipment if it had no inherant benifit?

Don't you think the same benefits achieved through bi-wiring aren't also seen when bi-amping.

Besides that, how many companies market their loudspeakers as having bi-amp inputs?

Do you think marketing a bi-wirable speaker, as such, is a grand marketing plot to get the consumer to but more wire?

It would make mre sense, financially, to market it for bi-amping?

You know, to push multiple amplifier sales.

Don't you think?

The science and theory surrounding the concept of internal crossover network seperation to support bi-wiring/bi-amping capabilities isn't new.

Many of the realized benefits, however, are still being researched.

Their hard to measure and many are cliamed immeasurable.

But for sure, separation of networks in crossovers aids in transient realization.

LF waves corrupt HF waves.

This message has been edited by Audioreality on 09-15-2002 at 01:41 AM

[T2K]

ar, perhaps you should re-read my comments. Let me clarify. It appears the pirate has already formed his opinion regarding wire, etc. To me it

"Sounds to me like it would be a waste of your time for you to try bi-wiring."

Keith

[Soundthought]

Sorry for jumping on you there Keith.

When it comes to wire, i'm vigilant.

I see where your coming from now.

My attention was on helping the guy out,

I didn't read much into his post.

I only caught the part about needing clarification about the general concept.

Guess I should really learn to read all of someones' post before I reply.

My bad....we cool?

------------------

You should of heard just what I've seen.

[boa12]

pirate, in this case, can't critisize til u try it yourself. that's why even dan rather has tried coke, lsd & herion.

i noticed a positive dif on the speaks that had the adequate amount of space between 'em. i think its one of those paranormal phenomenons which doesn't fall into the 3 dimensions of pragmatic science.

------------------

My Home Systems Page

This message has been edited by boa12 on 09-15-2002 at 01:40 PM

[zandern]

I bi-wired my RF-3II's. Didn't really notice a difference. I did it because I got the wire for cheep. Maybe for really expensive speakers it would do more, but not the 3's. To me the logic seems dumb too.

------------------

27" 3 line digital comb filter JVC TV

Denon AVR-2802 Receiver

Denon CDM-270 CD Player

Aiwa DVD Player (sucks)

Klipsch RF3-II's Fronts

Klipsch RC3-II Center

Infinity HPS-250 Subwoofer

Yamaha ??? surrounds

69"X76" Hand made oak entertainment center.

[powdermnky007]

I also have a question about bi-wiring.

Would it be of any benefit to hook up both the A and B Channels of your amplifier to the same speaker? Of course with left to left & right to right. Or is that a bad idea.

Just ordered my klipsch speakers TODAY and must wait (impatently) for them to come in. THey are my first pair of klipsch's (rf-5) and i must say i'm excited!!

Thanks for the help

[boa12]

pm, not a bad idea if your talking about connecting to biwirable speaks w/ 2 sets of posts (& the connectors between posts removed as always when biwiring), but i'd do it like ar's post above. if you can't get the combined wire around the receiver terminals or in the clip holes, you could use connectors like spades, pins, etc.

------------------

My Home Systems Page

This message has been edited by boa12 on 09-16-2002 at 11:16 PM

[powdermnky007]

i'll have to do it the way he posted it...

besides my klipshs are loud enough as they are

don't need any more power going to them

thanks

-justin

[boa12]

pm, actually when you do a+b w/ about all receivers it cuts the total power to each in half. to expand power you'd have to expand the power source, & a+b doesn't do that. its really for driving another pair of 8 ohm speaks.

& i would think it could be a problem sending 1/2 the power to the bass section that may need more power, at time anyway. maybe the guys that know more about electricity can address that.

------------------

My Home Systems Page

[zandern]

I think Boa is right. My brother is an eletrical engineer and he said not to do that. Don't know why but he said not to. If a dealer or other audiophiles haven't done it, I wouldn't because if you could/should, I'm sure they already would have.

------------------

27" 3 line digital comb filter JVC TV

Denon AVR-2802 Receiver

Denon CDM-270 CD Player

Aiwa DVD Player (sucks)

Klipsch RF3-II's Fronts

Klipsch RC3-II Center

Infinity HPS-250 Subwoofer

Yamaha ??? surrounds

69"X76" Hand made oak entertainment center.

[WMcD]

I'm a member of the old fogie club. Zip cord is good enough and no problem. Since there is no problem, bi wiring can't solve a none existent problem.

Of course others differ with my conclusions. BTW I must admit to never having bi wired. But I have tested wire and found no frequency response problems.

To go further.

I have not seen anyone claim that it is a velocity problem. Some propose the argument that the bass signal somehow compromises the treble signal. How this happens is not explained by electrical theory. I've not seen the theory used in any other part of the long electronic chain between the recording microphone and the output of the amp.

Of course we know that there are many radio frequencies sent down the cable feed to our TV's. No one says that Channel 2 interferes with Channel 13.

In home amps, there is only one amplifer for each channel. The A and B switch simply connects A or B or both, and sometimes a direct feed to the headphone jack. The switch puts the A and B output in parallel to the actual amp. This is why amp manufacturers recommend caution when connecting two low impedance speakers on A and B together. They are just in parallel.

There are not two amps, e.g. A amp and B amp. Naturally there is a left and right or multi channel set up.

Further, the circutry does not magically divide power any different than a parallel connection.

Now, that does mean that running the two wires to A and to B and using the Both or A plus B . . . is equivalent to wiring the leads in parallel to just one. Keep track of the phase with plus to plus, etc.

I also can't quite agree with the notion that very high frequencies enhance the mid or the bass. They each have their passband which is far below the high frequencies.

Why would manufacturers make this bi wiring possible if it is not worthwhile? My guess is that it is the market. Some salesmen and buyers see this as a selling point.

Of course bi wiring is inexpensive, so I wouldn't discourage experimentation. But be realistic and draw your own conclusions. If you find a more pure sound, more power to you.

Gil

[boa12]

gil, the most pronounced effect when i biwired my rf-3 that have a good distance between them was the stereo imaging. i use these only for stereo music in direct mode. the sound distinctly shifted more to the center. it was a marked dif that i'm sure i could tell

in a double blind test. i did a lot of non-blind tests back & forth, but no blind.

i just can't explain why. but i can't isolate it to anything but the standard biwire cables of equivalent gauge to the regular 12 ga i used to compare. but to my ears, something in the electromechanics (or is it quantum physics?) of it all changes w/ biwiring to produce a positive dif in sound.

------------------

My Home Systems Page

[Airpirate CVG]

Ok biwring complete. Personally having Rf3's since they first came out I don't hear any improvements. Like the Rf's really need any improvement anyway. On the other hand the connection has got to be better than the supplied jumpers. My biggest sound improvement came from when I dumped my crappy reciver for a good one, now that was like "night and day". More than likley the terminals are really ment for biamplification thus bypassing the internal crossover in speakers. I don't now anyone who has done that probably due to cash flow knowledge or whatever. That being said maybe it's easier to call the speakers terminals biwire rather than biamp. Biwiring the poormans biamplification? Anyway the cost was little. As it stands I will leave things biwired as at the least it has not shown any negative effects.