bi wire,is there much point????????

Those KEF speakers with so many terminals at the back (3 pairs plus an extra one for the super tweeter IIRC) are getting ridiculous.

Is it a speaker or a bloody telephone junction box? :rolleyes:

Michael.
 
Although I haven't had much experience of this, to be fair I must point out that most people are putting down Bi-wiring with two runs of cable from one amp. I would have thought that the the main reason for having two sets of terminals on your speakers is to BI-AMP which would then be a whole different kettle of fish (maybe...)
On the other hand, if say you had a single run of Kimber 4VS cable, bi-wiring with another run of 4VS should (I say should!) be the same, if not better, than upgrading to a single run of 8VS as it is the same cable but with twice the amount of conductors. That of course, should save you a few quid.
Anyway, it's all IMHO!

Liam.
 
Until a few days ago I would have sworn that biwiring made things better.

However after having a pair of single run only speakers its been a bit of an eye opener. The old speakers I have on loan sounded far better with a single run than my missions did biwired:eek: :confused:

Will wait until I get my missions back and try the same cable combo that I am using now (qed quenex1 and Qed 4x4 biwire ironically)before making any conclusions.
 
Originally posted by davidcotton
Will wait until I get my missions back and try the same cable combo that I am using now (qed quenex1 and Qed 4x4 biwire ironically)before making any conclusions.
Click to expand...

Yup! that will be a valid comparison.
Don't forget to post your findings here! :)
 
Well guys,
Something to think about is the fact that electrically, single-wiring and bi-wiring on bi-wire capable speakers are exactly the same. Imagine if that the jumber bar that runs between the Pos and Neg terminals on the speakers could be stretched all the way back to your amplifier output terminals, then you have exactly the same set up as with the jumper bars removed but, with the speaker cables at Pos and Neg acting as a very long jumper bar (as in Bi-wiring). Hmmmm.

But do they sound any different? Well a bit I tried it once on my old Eltax Symphony 4s and when Bi-wired they sounded less fuzzy and indistinct (but not much). I suspect that any differences are due to the different electrical properties of two long runs of cable versus that of a short link and one run of cable. Any differences heard will probably be due to to cable capacitance, inductance and resistance slightly affecting frequency and transient response.

I recently tried Bi-Amping, with NAD 370 (Bass), Naim Nait 5 (Treble) and MS 25i Pearl speakers and the results were impressive and totally obvious. Bigger, faster, but nore controlled bass, more expansive midrange, bigger soundstage but most impressive was the sweetness of the treble (possibly due to the Nait5).

Like I said in one of my few previous posts Bi-Amping probably has a bigger effect because each amplifier is dealing with a much simpler electical load and is working over a narrower frequency range.


Anyway, conclusions?

BI-WIRE Slight changes in sound (Dependent mostly on electrical characteristics of cable used). Doesn't really cost much.

BI-AMP Significant (and stunning) changes is sound quality. It does mean another amplifier. But I for one am saving up for a decent Amp for the treble.



Right, hope that all makes sense, if not then post back, and I'll try and clarify
 
steven,
i'm currently committing heresy and biamping my all naim setup. my nait 5 is running the tweeters and an olive 250 is running the mid / bass.
as my nait's power section has been inactive since february and the speaker wire is brand new off the reel i'm giving it some time to wake up however even with only a weeks burn in i'd say that timing and integration hasn't suffered, impact and 'thwack' is improved along with soundstage width. soundstage height has collapsed a little though although this may be due to the fact that i fire my speakers straight down the room.
room integration has improved slightly with less boom as i walk through the room on some tracks.
overall i'd say that the 'hairs on the back of your neck standing up factor' has increased - which is one of the things i like about naim in the first place.
in a weeks time i will be swapping things round so that the 250 is running the treble and the nait is running the mids and bass. then i'll go back to how it is currently for a week to compare the differences. after that i'll go back to the 250 on it;'s own for a week to see if there are real improvements and not emporors new clothes. i'll add an update at that point as to my final opinions and what i'll be sticking with.
cheers


julian
 
Bi-wiring worked for me with a pair of Mission 753s. Main improvement was in the bass.

I tried the same cables with a pair B&W DM603 S3s on another system. Did not seem to make any improvement.

However, both pairs are used in different properties.
So to make a judgement, I guess I will have to cart these heavy speakers to the same place and listen to them with the same system set up.
 
Originally posted by dex I recently tried Bi-Amping, with NAD 370 (Bass), Naim Nait 5 (Treble) and MS 25i Pearl speakers and the results were impressive and totally obvious. Bigger, faster, but nore controlled bass, more expansive midrange, bigger soundstage but most impressive was the sweetness of the treble (possibly due to the Nait5).
Click to expand...

I was always under the impression that identical amps are required for bi-amping. But glad to hear that it worked for you?
 
Like I said in one of my few previous posts Bi-Amping probably has a bigger effect because each amplifier is dealing with a much simpler electical load and is working over a narrower frequency range.
Click to expand...
em unless your using an active x-over both amps are still dealing with the full frequency range,it olny gets filtered at the speakers x-over
 
Slight oversight on my part there, both amplifiers still ouptut full range of frequencies which are then filtered by the crossover leaving only highs at the tweeter and lows at the woofer.
 
each amp will definately be seeing different load characteristics as all 2 (3) drivers are no longer connected together.
true each amp would be generating the entire frequency range but it would be under less (presumably) load.
or am i totally wrong here?

cheers


julian
 
I agree completely and whole heartedly with Ian and Tones.
..and it seems the majority of people.

Single wiring all the way (with jumpers).

Id reccomend anyone thinking of bi-wiring or passive bi-ampling to try spending the same budget on a better single run of cable, or better single amp.

For instance, the guy thinking of a NAD and a NAIM, why not put the budget together and demo a power amp for the same money?

In my experiences both bi-wiring and passive bi-amping make the sound seem disjointed and give excess at frequency extremes, particularly treble. Its the kind of result that gives easy to appreciate differences... differences that become wearing and unpleasant in the long run IME.

Active being a different kettle of fishies obviously.....

Thats my take on it.
Chris

NB... went to a car boot today, got 1 x CD and 8 x LPs for £8!
 
whatever floats yr boat

I was under the same impression as Blue Max, and this mix of Nad and Naim amps looks totally freakin' weird to me. However if you like it, Dex.

Also, I believe Naim explicitely discourages bi-amping (within the brand).

Long time ago I bi-amped (identical amps, obviously) and the sound was a little better; however getting a better pre + amp turned out to be a more effective upgrade.

I do, however, biwire - Keilidhs and Epos 22 (which have 3 posts per speaker).

Herman
 
Last edited by a moderator:
steven,
i'm currently committing heresy and biamping my all naim setup. my nait 5 is running the tweeters and an olive 250 is running the mid / bass.
as my nait's power section has been inactive since february and the speaker wire is brand new off the reel i'm giving it some time to wake up however even with only a weeks burn in i'd say that timing and integration hasn't suffered...
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say you were committing heresy in my book. I've heard a Nait 5 biamping a 150 and it sounded just fine in the timing department. I'd go a far to say that it even bettered using the Nait 5 as just a preamp.

Before I got my B200 preamp, I was biamping a B100 integrated with a B300 power amp, and there were no timing glitches to speak of. The swap from B100 to 200 pre was one massive upgrade though, and is still the biggest I've made to date, including subsequent source/rack/interconnects/mains block and leads upgrades.

Both of us were/are matching a big orange with a little orange for treble duties.

(A Nad amp biamping with a Naim amp must be like matching a little orange with a big pear. Then there are the gain matching issues; as you turn up the wick one amp is gong to get loud faster than the other, and the tonal balance is going to alter as the volume rises.)

Just imagine what a s/h 82 will do for your musical enjoyment...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
steven,
i'm trying not to imagine what an '82 will do for my system and get my music collection up to scratch before i blow big dosh on another box. but a pre is the next thing on my list although i may try a valve pre just for a laugh. the bi-amp experiment cost me 40 quid for 2 runs of cheepie qed speake cable so i can justify that expense.

les,
surely there will be some difference in the load characteristics that the amp sees if it';s not driving (in my case) all 3 drivers just those for treble or mid/bass?
cheers


julian
 
Ju -


Seeing as you're down the road - If you want to borrow my valve pre for a laugh you'd be welcome.

:)

Cheers
Chris

NB you should check out the car boot sale on a sunday morning at the greyhound stadium at MK. You'll get loads of cheap CD/DVD etc to look at, and your little girl would love it too.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top