I am firmly of the opinion that any improvement noticed by bi-wiring is almost entirely due to the removal of those dreadful cheap metal shorting links manufacturers seem inexplicably happy to ship their speakers with. They are more or less just packaging. Replace them with a short piece of good quality speaker cable and the improvement will equal if not exceed bi-wiring.
Bi wiring is just using two transmission lines from the SAME amp output. (NOT different amps). The theory behind it has to do with "reflection" (eddy) currents that get reflected back from the high current LF (low freq.) drivers back down the transmission line to the amp by the induced EMF generated by movement of a large speaker cone (the woofer). On a single line this "reflection" may be audible since the high freq. signal will become modulated on top of a "reflected" LF signal. This mixing of direct (HF) and reflected (LF) signals may cause audible distortion. Bi-wiring just limits the induced LF "reflection" signal to the line carrying the direct (original) LF signal. The "reflection" currents are still there but it never gets mixed (or modulated) with high freq. signals. Bi-amping is even a better solution, since both signal are totally isolated you can avoid a passive crossover entirely.
Careful: Bi amping still requires a crossover at least to protect the tweeters! The crossover could be active, before the amplifiers. In which case the passive crossovers inside the speaker can be bypassed. Fortunately that degree of tweaking is left in the realm of dedicated Active speakers😅
@@zizendorf The quality of the amplifiers is way beyond what the physical speakers can accomplish, so yes. Speakers/room interference is the most degrading components to a good hifi system performance. Not amplifiers wich has been close to perfection since the early seventies. A Jap DC coupled amp from 79 could deliver 2x100w at 0.001% deviation from the input signalt, at a 100db s/n ratio, from DC to 100khz. Your speakers is 10000 miles from accomplishin that.
@@zizendorf Even if they don't they still manage to perform very well against seperate systems of much more value, just due to the fact of being designed specifically for the particular speaker, often with seperate amps for seperate drivers etc. For example if you compare ATC SCM40 passives and ATC SCM40A actives, you would really struggle to get the passives to the same level of sound quality that the active models produce, even using really high end components.
@@stu3232 Well, just wow! Perhaps your ears aren't deceiving you? I'd have to reevaluate my entire perspective if "active" speakers with their internal amps actually produce better quality sound. Then again maybe the question that matters is related to the quality of those types of speakers? This I don't know.
People who swear that replacing those jumpers with 2 inches of copper speaker wire makes all the difference in the world yet I've never seen any of them pass a blind test and SHOW us what they claim they can do
@@charlesf2804 I am confused with your response. You took a pair out but, replaced with what, another pair that was bi-wired and/or different speakers altogether?
@@zizendorf That was an incomplete post for sure. I was using two pairs of monoblocks to bi-amp my speakers. One amp had a bad power switch, so I took that pair out of the system and used only one pair in the meantime. The bass was lighter with only one pair being used.
@charlesf2804 So, again trying to understand: You had two pairs of monoblocks? That's a total of 4 amplifiers, two pairs... That's a lot of amplifiers.!
I'm still yet to see anybody pass a double-blind abx test on a pair of bi wired speakers vs non bi wired speakers. If you think you can hear a difference please make a video of you doing a double-blind test and show us that you can hear The Difference. Talk is cheap. If you can't show it, you don't know it
Sorry, but does anyone here have dog or cat ears? I have a pair of Totem Hawks and I tried bi-wiring and then single with jumpers. I couldn't tell the difference at all. If you happen to be a dog or a cat, please chime in!
I've never heard a difference in bi wiring any speaker I've ever owned ever ever. And I've never seen anyone do a blind test and be able to tell the difference either
IMHO: With modern advances in amplification, I personally think bi-amping (or bi-wiring) is more of nuisance for speaker manufacturers and consumers than a useful feature
I am currently bi-amping a pair of speakers and to my ears there is a very noticeable difference. I was previously bi-wiring another set of speakers and also noticed a difference however it was a much smaller difference as was stated in the video. Not really sure if it was worth the trouble, unless you are trying to extract that last 1 or 2% from your speakers. But bi-amping is certainly worth the improvement IMO. Or you could just buy better speakers.
@@zizendorf That was for bi-wiring and I agree, I don't think it is really worth the trouble. But bi-amping is easily discernible as an improvement to me. And I wouldn't say I have the greatest ears either, but I still hear it and it is an improvement. It's not sound "extraction". I would say bi-amping is a good 5-10% improvement. To me it makes the speaker more dynamic and with better separation. Bass is tighter and mids and highs are more defined in the soundstage. This applies to 2 channel setups. If you are listening to multi channel, then I wouldn't bother bi-amping in that case. And by the way, I am not a cable believer either. Just my thoughts, it's fine to disagree.
@@boneseyyl1060 Right, but like so many other vlogs I’ve watched, the discussion and issue is about the hoax of bi-wiring, not bi-amping. Good speakers have good crossover networks.
And then there's the option of vertical or horizontal biamping... Vertical being where each amplifier is dedicated to left or right speaker. Each half of the stereo amp handling treble/bass drive duties separately. Less load on the shared power supply. Etc
@TriAmpHiFi Ah, I recognize a friendly post-script - signature. I've read your comments on Audible Elegance. Nice to see you hear. I have my own take, different from this gentleman's video. Bi-wiring is BS. I've perused the internet and time and time again I read, hear, see substantiation for my opinion on this matter. I've also noticed that the use of "science" from certified Electrical Engineers does NOT come to the same conclusion. Opinions are all over the map and unresolved. However, I do also take stock in a statement made by the CEO of Polk Audio who disclosed that the only reason they built bi-wire-able speakers was because it was "trendy" and has visual appeal to prospective customers. Well, there you have it. The truth.
I like bi-amping for being able to supply more power to the speakers, either with multiple amps or an AVR.
We do Quad Amping or even Twelve Amping. Works like a charme!
I am firmly of the opinion that any improvement noticed by bi-wiring is almost entirely due to the removal of those dreadful cheap metal shorting links manufacturers seem inexplicably happy to ship their speakers with. They are more or less just packaging. Replace them with a short piece of good quality speaker cable and the improvement will equal if not exceed bi-wiring.
Bi wiring is just using two transmission lines from the SAME amp output. (NOT different amps).
The theory behind it has to do with "reflection" (eddy) currents that get reflected back from the high current
LF (low freq.) drivers back down the transmission line to the amp by the induced EMF generated by movement of a large speaker cone (the woofer).
On a single line this "reflection" may be audible since the high freq. signal will become modulated on top of a "reflected" LF signal.
This mixing of direct (HF) and reflected (LF) signals may cause audible distortion.
Bi-wiring just limits the induced LF "reflection" signal to the line carrying the direct (original) LF signal.
The "reflection" currents are still there but it never gets mixed (or modulated) with high freq. signals.
Bi-amping is even a better solution, since both signal are totally isolated you can avoid a passive crossover entirely.
Careful:
Bi amping still requires a crossover at least to protect the tweeters!
The crossover could be active, before the amplifiers. In which case the passive crossovers inside the speaker can be bypassed.
Fortunately that degree of tweaking is left in the realm of dedicated Active speakers😅
@@carlitomelon4610 true. For bi amp you must have a crossover somewhere. Either active or passive. But not both.
The best solution is amplified speakers, with buit in signal processing and amplification, its the only way forwards imo
Not the industry trend… more boxes sell more boxes
@@stighenningjohansen I don’t know, which is why I ask: do amplified speakers actually have quality amps built within?
@@zizendorf The quality of the amplifiers is way beyond what the physical speakers can accomplish, so yes. Speakers/room interference is the most degrading components to a good hifi system performance. Not amplifiers wich has been close to perfection since the early seventies. A Jap DC coupled amp from 79 could deliver 2x100w at 0.001% deviation from the input signalt, at a 100db s/n ratio, from DC to 100khz.
Your speakers is 10000 miles from accomplishin that.
@@zizendorf Even if they don't they still manage to perform very well against seperate systems of much more value, just due to the fact of being designed specifically for the particular speaker, often with seperate amps for seperate drivers etc. For example if you compare ATC SCM40 passives and ATC SCM40A actives, you would really struggle to get the passives to the same level of sound quality that the active models produce, even using really high end components.
@@stu3232 Well, just wow! Perhaps your ears aren't deceiving you? I'd have to reevaluate my entire perspective if "active" speakers with their internal amps actually produce better quality sound. Then again maybe the question that matters is related to the quality of those types of speakers? This I don't know.
What is the difference between the plates on the connectors and biwires connecting them on the amp terminals besides a few meters of copper?
People who swear that replacing those jumpers with 2 inches of copper speaker wire makes all the difference in the world yet I've never seen any of them pass a blind test and SHOW us what they claim they can do
I did passive bi-amping once. The bass was better with that configuration. When I took one pair out for repairs, I noticed the bass thinned out.
@@charlesf2804 I am confused with your response. You took a pair out but, replaced with what, another pair that was bi-wired and/or different speakers altogether?
@@zizendorf That was an incomplete post for sure. I was using two pairs of monoblocks to bi-amp my speakers. One amp had a bad power switch, so I took that pair out of the system and used only one pair in the meantime. The bass was lighter with only one pair being used.
@@charlesf2804 Thanks for clarifying.
Imagination is an amazing thing.
@charlesf2804 So, again trying to understand: You had two pairs of monoblocks? That's a total of 4 amplifiers, two pairs... That's a lot of amplifiers.!
I'm still yet to see anybody pass a double-blind abx test on a pair of bi wired speakers vs non bi wired speakers.
If you think you can hear a difference please make a video of you doing a double-blind test and show us that you can hear The Difference.
Talk is cheap.
If you can't show it,
you don't know it
There’s an argument that cross-overs are another on burden on performance. Purpose vs performance remains the deciding issue.
@@JingoLoBa57 And why wouldn’t good quality speakers have good crossovers?
Sorry, but does anyone here have dog or cat ears? I have a pair of Totem Hawks and I tried bi-wiring and then single with jumpers. I couldn't tell the difference at all. If you happen to be a dog or a cat, please chime in!
I've never heard a difference in bi wiring any speaker I've ever owned ever ever.
And I've never seen anyone do a blind test and be able to tell the difference either
Change jumpers to cables makes difference. If you don't hear it well, some can't notice wife new hair cut 😂.
@@sheerenergy8602
Show us the video of you passing a double blind ABX test, talk is cheap.
Show that you can do what you claim you can
@@crazyprayingmantis5596 😂😂😂😂And maybe something to drink?
IMHO: With modern advances in amplification, I personally think bi-amping (or bi-wiring) is more of nuisance for speaker manufacturers and consumers than a useful feature
I am currently bi-amping a pair of speakers and to my ears there is a very noticeable difference. I was previously bi-wiring another set of speakers and also noticed a difference however it was a much smaller difference as was stated in the video. Not really sure if it was worth the trouble, unless you are trying to extract that last 1 or 2% from your speakers.
But bi-amping is certainly worth the improvement IMO. Or you could just buy better speakers.
Indeed🤔
@@boneseyyl1060 As if my ears are going to pick-up that 1-2% sound "extraction". Sure...
@@zizendorf That was for bi-wiring and I agree, I don't think it is really worth the trouble. But bi-amping is easily discernible as an improvement to me. And I wouldn't say I have the greatest ears either, but I still hear it and it is an improvement.
It's not sound "extraction". I would say bi-amping is a good 5-10% improvement. To me it makes the speaker more dynamic and with better separation. Bass is tighter and mids and highs are more defined in the soundstage. This applies to 2 channel setups. If you are listening to multi channel, then I wouldn't bother bi-amping in that case.
And by the way, I am not a cable believer either. Just my thoughts, it's fine to disagree.
@@boneseyyl1060 Right, but like so many other vlogs I’ve watched, the discussion and issue is about the hoax of bi-wiring, not bi-amping. Good speakers have good crossover networks.
And then there's the option of vertical or horizontal biamping...
Vertical being where each amplifier is dedicated to left or right speaker. Each half of the stereo amp handling treble/bass drive duties separately. Less load on the shared power supply.
Etc
@@carlitomelon4610 Here again I am confused. One amp per speaker = bi-amping. You’re still using the speakers crossovers.
@@zizendorf
Indeed.
It's using the speakers with biwire/biamping connectors as shipped.
@@carlitomelon4610 That’s not what’s happening! See my link earlier in this discussion. It’s nice to have discussions!
. 0:27 Wrong. You're trying to describe bi-amping here, not bi-wiring.
Remember this; Two (2) amps = bi-amping & Two (2) wires = bi-wiring. Simple.
Acid Jazz, Funk & Brass 🔈🔉🔊
And active instead of passive crossover = active system
@@jorgebravo7980 .
You understand that (most) anyone adding a subwoofer is bi-amping?
@TriAmpHiFi Ah, I recognize a friendly post-script - signature. I've read your comments on Audible Elegance. Nice to see you hear. I have my own take, different from this gentleman's video. Bi-wiring is BS. I've perused the internet and time and time again I read, hear, see substantiation for my opinion on this matter. I've also noticed that the use of "science" from certified Electrical Engineers does NOT come to the same conclusion. Opinions are all over the map and unresolved. However, I do also take stock in a statement made by the CEO of Polk Audio who disclosed that the only reason they built bi-wire-able speakers was because it was "trendy" and has visual appeal to prospective customers. Well, there you have it. The truth.
@@zizendorf .
Hello again fellow traveler..........👍
@@TriAmpHiFi th-cam.com/video/NJhFxuymlCI/w-d-xo.html