[eaglerider94]

I've read that Bi Wiring results in better sound. That being said, since I've already run speaker wire thru my wall can I simply split the wires from the speaker junction terminal on the wall (speaker plate) or do I have to run an second cable from the amp? I have Monitor Audios which are capable of Bi-Wiring.

 

[brucek]

do I have to run an second cable from the amp?

Yes, you would need to run a second set of cables from the amp.

brucek

 

[nova]

Yes, as Bruce said, you'll need a second cable.

"I've read that Bi Wiring results in better sound"

That statement is definitely debatable. :boxer: :bigsmile:

 

[Candoo]

I have been told that because of my bieng visually impaired that my hearing is better in some ways to compensate. here is my experiences reguarding bi-wireing usieng a pair of Polk Audio Monitor 60's

now i fullly recognize and understand that the Polk monitor 60's don't stand out in their catagory as strong heart stopping sound. and for them biwireing is more a gimick than a feature. but let me say this.

during my tests and calabration i have found that biwireing can add too the definiiton and clearity of the sound and too the fullness and richness.
the audio having two seperate direcitons to reach seperate ends allows for seperation and a fuller more sperated sound between speaker sections that are seperated by the biwire method.

ok that said. my test went as fallows

1. I disconnected one speaker and connnected it with a single pair of wires. and left the other biwired.

2. i listened too a track that had suble timbres and sudden deep base sounds.

3. i reversed the speakers making the opsite one biwired and the other stright single paired.

while the MOnitor 60's don't show much difference between the two. i can say that there was some very suble differences.

can this be atttributed to speaker placement or room shape. who knows.
but at the cost of a few extra bux for some wire. why not just do the slightly more work involved task of biwireing them. than you can experience for yourself.

thank you for readirgn my reply. and i really am enjoying this forum

 

[Jeff Aguilar]

When my system comprised of Energy Veritas, I tried bi-wiring them and eventually bi-amped them. To me, in my system, in my mind, there was a difference, a definite difference. I then moved to Martin Logan's and bi-amped them. I could definitely tell a difference between bi-amping them and not bi-amping them. I eventually ended up getting tube amps and did not bi-amp them. (I tried, but trying to mix tubes and solid state biamping, just didn't work for me, with the equipment I had).

For demanding speakers, I think it is benificial to biamping speakers. But that is just my opinion. This is such a touchy subject to people, it usually starts flame wars.

Jeff Aguilar

 

[eaglerider94]

Thanks Tim & Jeff. I guess I'll just have to wire them up and test for myself. Since I already ran the wires thru the wall I thought I could just split them from the speaker receptacles but was informed that I need to run separate wires from the amp, ugh.

 

[tonyvdb]

Bi Wireing speakers is not going to improve sound unless you do it properly. This means running two dedicated amps (or amp channels) for each speaker and alot of time spent making sure levels are correct as this gives you the ability to increase/decrease the level to the highs/lows without affecting the the other (this is where most people hear a difference). Running two separate sets of speaker cables but attaching them to the same terminals on the amp wont make any difference unless your speaker wire gauge is too small to begin with. Increasing the gauge of the wire would be far more beneficial.
If you do bi-amp your speakers, make sure the lengths of wire are the same and that the same kind of wire is used for both.

 

[tcarcio]

Bi-wireing and bi-amping are two different things completly. I have done both. Bi-wireing I found no difference, Bi-amping on the other hand it was definitly better.

 

[eaglerider94]

Well Tony,
That makes sense. Perhaps I'll just forget about Bi-wiring for now and concentrate on buying a much needed sub. I've emailed Ron over at SVS and received his suggestion on which one for my room size. (20Lx15.5Wx8H) I'd really love to buy their New SB12-Plus but due to a sudden set of circumstances, (this economy is no picnic) I'll have to settle for their older SB-12 Plus.

 

[Candoo]

well. i'll be honest while my Polk Monitor 60's support biamping or biwireing

I see it more as a gimik than a functianl improvement for these speakers
now perhaps for higher end speakers it would offer more noticeable differnces.

I have a Sony DGS910 reciever and can't see forking out another $400 to buy another one just to bi amp the speakers.

the reciever i use the dgs910 as speaker sets for A and B so biwireing done'st connect too the same terminals unless it's the same terminals internally.

 

[brucek]

the receiver i use the dgs910 as speaker sets for A and B so biwiring doesn't connect too the same terminals unless it's the same terminals internally.

It would be the same terminals internally, through a set of select switches.

I see it more as a gimmick than a functional improvement

Well, bi-wiring can theoretically create an improvement, but whether you will hear depends on some variables.

The standard debate is that the superposition theorem states bi-wiring cannot produce a benefit. But, this assumes that the bi-wire speaker cables present a zero impedance, and that distortion from one driver will not affect the performance of the other driver.

Superposition only holds true for a linear system. Bi-wiring will only theoretically be a benefit when drivers distort and linearity is no longer maintained.

With sufficient voltage a driver can deviate from ideal linearity so the current in the connection between the low output impedance of the amplifier and the woofer (in this case), will carry harmonic distortion components which can create intermodulation products. In a simple non-bi-wire situation, the tweeter driver terminals will see these distortion components through the speakers low to zero impedance straps (when a single non bi-wire set of cables is used).

The theoretical advantage is now valid if you assume a set of bi-wire speaker cables has some finite impedance (obviously, the longer the cables, the more pronounced the effects will be). When bi-wire cables are used rather than single wires with straps, the distortion components (caused by the woofer driver) will have a lower impedance path to the amplifiers low output impedance sink, rather than travel back and down the tweeters speaker cable.

Yeah, you're right, it's a small advantage and you could argue that the tweeters crossover would help to reduce the problem, but I suppose you could argue that the harmonic and intermodulation products will be at a higher frequency and may pass through to the tweeter driver.

The entire advantage is gained by asking this question. From the perspective of the woofer driver terminals, which is the lower impedance path to the tweeters driver terminals? Is it a set of straps in a non bi-wire situation, or is it the route of a set of bi-wire cables that has a theoretical ideal voltage source (amplifiers low output impedance) in the path?..........

brucek

 

[Candoo]

Thoes are very good points. and i'd have to research a bit more I could answer in any intelectual way...

i was thinking that looking the hdmi out of one sony dgs910 to another identical sony dgs910 would give me the ability to do bi-amping with mathcing recievers from digital sources.

 

[badaboom]

if you have speakers that support bi-amping (four posts in rear) then you're probably NOT getting the right power/sound out of them if you fail to bi-amp them, and many receivers support bi-amping now (no need to get another reciever

my Denon AVR-1907 allows you to use the rear surround channel amplifiers to bi-amp the front R/L. it's an amazing feature - I didn't realize why my Polk Audio Rti10 speakers sounded so weak. I wasn't impressed with them, after all that $$ ----but I was using the rear two channels to power speakers in a 7.1 layout. what a waste - there are so few DVD's that provide distinct channel information to those speakers. most amps actually FAKE the sound.

the result ? a muddied sound with a strange confusion of presence.

but now that I've bi-amped my front speakers, it is simply night and day. like I have a new system.

I just wish Polk Audio had put a better plug in for this than they do in their manuals, etc. the speakers sound professional and the presence is intense and clear. the bass especially was suffering greatly from one pair of wires going in.

I'm so excited by this change that I've posted in other forums...so noone has to suffer the years I did from underpowered front R/L. what a waste !

when a good strong selection of 7.1 source material - DVD's and HD TV - comes around, I'll definitely go for 7.1, but I will never underpower my fronts again....I will get a 7.1 receiver that ALSO offers bi-amped fronts, or, better yet, a solid multi-channel amp (from what I've learned, much better channel separation, lower distortion, etc than a receiver/amp combo)

never again !

 

[recruit]

I have never noticed improvements by biwiring speakers, bi-amping is a different matter and improvements can certainly be made by doing this...

 

[badaboom]

my point exactly !!!

 

[tonyvdb]

my point exactly !!!

All you proved by bi-amping your speakers with your receiver is that your receiver was underpowered to drive the fronts properly without distortion. I bet if you took an external amp and hooked them up to it using the receivers pre outs you would hear the same difference.
As I stated above to truly bi-amp your speakers properly they need time and money spent buying EQs and external amps.

 

[badaboom]

I guess I'm still learning...above you say "This means running two dedicated amps (or amp channels) ".

Aren't the 2 rear back channels at 120W per channel that I'm re-directing to the Front R/L for the bi-wire "dedicated amp channels" ?

And doesn't that mean I now have max 240W per channel going to those speakers now, whereas before I had 120W per channel ?

My speakers handle 300W per channel, so I guess you're saying when I run the autosetup and let the Denon adjust the levels of all the speakers using it's microphone, Denon is bumping up the watts going to the fronts so high that it is maxing out the amp ? But when I had one set of wires going to them, after I ran the setup, when I checked speaker levels, there wasn't a +5 next to R/L - it was like +1 (the auto-set level).

I'm not sure if I can adjust the levels now going to the midrange/tweeter (regular front R/L) separately from the levels going to the bass (surround redirected to front R/L). But I really like the balance between the two right now. Seems perfect. Are you saying the ability to adjust these two separately is essential ?

 

[Kal Rubinson]

And doesn't that mean I now have max 240W per channel going to those speakers now, whereas before I had 120W per channel ?

Not really considering the dynamic distribution of music energy. Effective increase is probably much less than 3dB.

 

[tonyvdb]

I guess I'm still learning...above you say "This means running two dedicated amps (or amp channels) ".

Aren't the 2 rear back channels at 120W per channel that I'm re-directing to the Front R/L for the bi-wire "dedicated amp channels" ?

And doesn't that mean I now have max 240W per channel going to those speakers now, whereas before I had 120W per channel ?

No not really as Kal has already stated. Most receivers do not drive all channels at there rated output (this usually drops to half) Bi-Amping the speakers highs is not the real issue as that draws very little you still are trying to drive the mids/lows using the same amplifier you were before. Its not really the amplifiers limitation its the power supply in the receiver supplying power to the amps that cant keep up.

Are you saying the ability to adjust these two separately is essential ?

Yes, essentially bi-ampling was intended to give the user the ability to have control over how the speaker sounds by adjusting the highs and the low/mids separately.

 

[badaboom]

so perhaps much of my improvement came from the thing that accompanied my switch to bi-amping - that I went from 7.1 to 5.1, redirecting the power from lesser spearkers and a muddy presence (faked rear back channels for most sources) to my Rti10's front R/L