more biwire....

[illthreat]

biwired my rf5's last night. Didn't get a chance to try it out until now.

It appears as if I lost a bit of volume? IOW, I have to turn my receiver up higher.

Cannot really tell if it sounds better becuase of the biwire or the new wire.

But there is a little more crispness. But seems I lost something...

I removed Monster XP that was like 9 years old.

Replaced with (rat-shack) Monster XP that I made into biwire.

Any Thoughts?

Chris

[illthreat]

I just went back to std. wiring.

Okay... now there is waaaaay more sound with single wire!

Could there be that big of a difference between the wire I used?

The Single Wire I had been using was white colored, 10 year old, Monster XP.

The Biwire I made last night was clear, 2 year old, Monster XP.

Either way, Single Wire sounds a hell-of-a-lot better!

Now... whether or not I even should swing for the UltraLink cable. Probably will just so I can stop using Monster products.

Best Regards & Comments Welcome!!

Chris

[masterpp]

i wonder which way should I put two wires together on Amp output?

Example for black wire

1) 1st spade on 1st wire, 2nd spade on 2nd wire

or

2) 1st spade on 1st wire, 1st banana on 2nd wire

or

3) twist both wires into one spade.

[DrWho]

Did you hook your bi-wire up wrong? Did you remember to remove the binding posts on your speaker? You shouldn't notice any change in volume when bi-wiring. How did you connect the cables?

[illthreat]

yeah, I did remove the jumper.

The volume thing I can explain like this:

The night before I forgot that I had att. the front ch. by -10db.

This would obviously explain the loss of volume. BUT:

I compared the biwiring to the std w/ the att. of -10db ON.

So both comparison's had been att. by -10db.

So, it was not as loud, sure. But atleast I made a fair comparison. Both Biwire and Std. had the -10 db thing going on. Std. wire still had more of a level. Not the best comparison, so...

...that being said. the Biwire was just wire I made into biwire instead of dedicated.

I've since bought some Ultralink Ch. Biwire from Omer Humayun of www.ozenterprises.net

I'll follow this up when I get the cabling.

Best Regars,

[illthreat]

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

On 12/28/2004 1:41:14 PM illthreat wrote:

...that being said. the Biwire was just wire I made into biwire instead of dedicated.

I've since bought some Ultralink Ch. Biwire from Omer Humayun of www.ozenterprises.net

I'll follow this up when I get the cabling.

Best Regars,

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

Wow. I just hooked up my UltraLink Challenger Biwire cable. (pretty sure the least $ they offer)

Def. Better!! Waaaay better imaging. And a more provound, tighter beat.

They are loads better then the Monster XP I was using. So I can't say it's all from the biwire, But I'll NEVER look back.

Klipsch RF-5 on steriods.

Best Regards & Mega Happy,

Chris

[dougdrake]

I think the problem with your home-made bi-wire is that it was clear, rather than the white you WERE using, thus letting all the electrons seep out and cause lower volume . Seriously, I wonder if you somehow had the bi-wire hooked up out of phase, causing cancellation between the two speakers?

[meuge]

Biwiring will decrease the resistance in the speaker wire by a factor of 2. For 12-gauge copper wire this will lead to something like a 0.003 dB change in acoustic output for a 10-foot cable, assuming 100% efficiency.

In short -> biwiring does nothing.

[J.4knee]

meuge, thanks for saving me the time of having to state the obvious. Well put!

[illthreat]

except in your drawing, the crossover is 1 pc. Divide it in two and it's quite different. The highpass uses the infinite resistance of the opposide side of it's filter (low) to "draw" what it needs from the amp. The low pass does just the opposite.

When the woofer stops moving, it's energy is keep away from the high pass side for a lot longer time. Providing a better image.

One mechanical benefit is that you can tune the speakers also. By using a thicker wire on the low pass if you are a little bright.

Disclaimer:

i know what I hear. It's def. better sound. Do a comparison if you don't believe me. But, eh, I don't care either way.

I'm not trying to sell anything. Just share what I've experienced. Like I stated, it sounds better. I am also using better cabling. So who knows.

I needed new cables, I bought them, I'm using them, I'm happy. Thought perhaps someone may want to try this for themselves. If you don't like the info, don't bash it without discussing it.

[tpg]

I am not on either side here... but figure I might as well bi-wire for the heck of it. I am using 16 guage Monster Cable and want something better for the KLF-30's. The RF-3's can keep the MC.

I do have one question about the biwire you ordered (I might get the same, or similar, or make my own). Does one end terminate to just two bananas (ie one postive and one negative) and then split out to the double positive double negative? I would surely hope it is done this way, but who knows... The picture leads me to believe otherwise.

[illthreat]

Yes. One end is terminated into two banana the other into four.

it looks like this:

(attachment)

[leggatt]

I bought some Ultralink biwire cable off a buddy and wired up my RF-3's and the difference was substantial, much more bass and the imaging was better. Now since I paid about the same price per foot for the ultralink as the home depot zip cord, I am not biased due to price. I cannot explain it but the sound is much, much fuller than it was before.

[Joe Shmoe]

Heh... more crazy bi-wiring talk.

Those Ultra Link cables look great! I myself use Audioquest Type 4 & CV4.

Unfortunately way back when I bought my KLF-30's I knew nothing of bi-wiring. Being the money hungry opportunists they are, my local stereo shop sold me a crap load of the stuff. Obviously they really knew nothing about bi-wiring either because they said to use the Type 4 for the Low frequencies & the CV-4 for the High frequncies. Didn't really think twice about anything until quite a while after I hooked it all up. Turns out what I actually ended up with is "double bi-wiring".... I know sounds crazy doesn't it LOL.

Both cables... the Type 4 & the CV4 have (4) conductors... so yup 4+4=8, 8 damn wires to each speaker! Just thought I was doing it the normal way when I hooked it up & now thinking back... what a PITA that was. Does it sound better? HELL YES! lol... I would hate to think I wasted all that hard earned money on nothing LOL.

[illthreat]

joe,

what did you hook the other 2 cables per wire up to? the b channel?

[Joe Shmoe]

No, they all come together on the A. you just have 4 conductors on both the + & the -. I attatched some pics of the wire above. That's why it was such a PITA to do.. two wires from each cable are hooked up to each post (4 wires). At the time I thought it was the way to do it, not knowing any different. Does sound good... I haven't changed it al the time I've owned them.

[illthreat]

i gotcha.

that must have been fun hooking up. ;P

[Speedball]

I know exactly what you are talking about Ill, Some people say it will make no difference and I'm just wasting my time but (to me) there seems to be more low volume control and yes, the need to crank the knob further. Seems like the best way for me.

...this being for two channel only.

[DrWho]

Was your old monster cable tarnishing or anything like that? What color were the copper strands? I have had problems with cable ends going bad and the solution was to cut them shorter and use a non-tarnished part of the cable. Perhaps something like this might explain the difference you hear...

If bi-wiring was so beneficial, then I dare say the speaker manufacture would have put a couple feet of cable between the speaker inputs and the crossover (which is electrically what you're doing)...Instead of the binding posts bridging the LF and HF sections, the cable is doing this at the other end.

I have heard discussion in the past talking about how the woofer's tendancy to keep moving causes some electrical flow in the wires. I think it's called "back EMF"? Anyways, isolating this from the HF section is supposed to be an advantage to bi-wiring. I understand how bi-amping (which requires bi-wiring) can get rid of back EMF, but I can find no electrical explanation as to how bi-wiring could possibly make a difference.

One way you could A/B bi-wiring versus normal would be to set your speakers up for bi-wiring and then have someone attach and reattach the binding posts and see if you can hear the same large difference. It sounds to me like you've simply got a better connection with the new wire.

[illthreat]

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

On 1/6/2005 2:30:39 AM DrWho wrote:

Was your old monster cable tarnishing or anything like that? What color were the copper strands?

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

The cable may have been. But I stripped new ends before using them again.

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

On 1/6/2005 2:30:39 AM DrWho wrote:

I have heard discussion in the past talking about how the woofer's tendancy to keep moving causes some electrical flow in the wires. I think it's called "back EMF"? Anyways, isolating this from the HF section is supposed to be an advantage to bi-wiring. I understand how bi-amping (which requires bi-wiring) can get rid of back EMF, but I can find no electrical explanation as to how bi-wiring could possibly make a difference.

One way you could A/B bi-wiring versus normal would be to set your speakers up for bi-wiring and then have someone attach and reattach the binding posts and see if you can hear the same large difference. It sounds to me like you've simply got a better connection with the new wire.

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

I have read quite a bit in the last few weeks, both for and against it. I don't see there being a clear cut answer unfortuneately. Except my ears.

I agree. Your comparison would give results. Give it a try all you skeptics.

I also agree that it COULD be simply the fact that I have newer and better wire.

Like I said, I'm happy. I know what I hear. And it's not my wallet screaming that these are better, because I simply could care less about the money. It's all about quality. And these cables have given me better quality hands down.

Best Regards,

Chris