About 10 years ago, I know transparent bi-wire was just a double run of cables out of the network box for connecting to four binding posts and was priced a small premium above single wire cables mainly for the additional pretty terminations. Transparent bi-cable, on the other hand, has one network specifically for HF and another for LF (albeit in the same box), this was about priced 50% more than the single wire version Looking at the pricing now, perhaps they streamlined the catalog and got rid of the old bi-wire nomenclature and then bi-cable became the new bi-wire. You could always call and get the answer straight from them. |
No, I think Bi-Wire and Bi-Cable are different designs. I'm interested in Bi-Cable since it was designed for difficult to drive speakers like B&W. Makes sense but leaves more questions than answers - the difficult B&Ws didn't go anywhere - why then Transparent gave up on the idea? Was it not worth the extra cost? |
I had never heard that B&W were difficult to drive in the accepted sense of the term, that is a difficult impedance curve. This certainly wasn't true when I sold them years ago and I haven't seen anything in the tests showing that the newer ones are that different. Which ones do you have in mind? The biwire configuration would have little effect on the drive difficulty in any case as the amp is still seeing the same speakers and crossover. B&Ws do like a lot of power and have for years but are not in my experience a difficult load for an amp to drive in the same way as my GamuTs or my friend's Wilson's. |
Actually, the 802Ds are an easy load, Looking at the recent test in HIFICRITIC they found that they had a sensitivity of 93 Db with a minimum impedance of 4 ohms and a 6 ohm average. They were 3 to 4 db more sensitive than the proceeding model. Compare this with my Gamut L5s, 89db sensitivity, 2.8 ohm minimum and 4 ohm average. This is a much harder load. ANY good amp, tube or transistor should have no trouble with the 802Ds. They do like power if they are like the older ones but they should play quite loud with amps of moderate size. 93 db for one watt, 96 for 2, 99 for 4 etc. Stan |
Hi, this I do know a few things about. It's pretty significant in the areas of lower noise, increased resolution, more organic/smoothness but with no loss of detail. The MM2 vs XL is a major change. With MM2 you can almost step down a level or two and get the same/better performance than XL. So if you have Ref with XL you may like Ultra MM2 better. Hope this helps a little |
Thanx! My main problem right now is the lack of power in the bass region with weak and muddy bass. I've been told that Bi-Cable makes you feel that your amp is much more powerful and that's how I got hooked. Are you sure the MM2 Ultra will do a better job with the bass even without a bi-cable configuration? |
Don't blame the miserable sound of the Mac on the B&Ws, any speaker with an average impedance of 6 ohms and a minimum of 4 is easy by definition. Sound quality is something quite different from ease of drive. Change the amp, not the cables; just how do you think a change of cable will make them easier to drive? |
02-12-11: AntonkkWhich output tap are you using (2, 4, or 8 ohms), and have you tried the other ones? If you haven't tried it, I suspect that going to the 2 ohm tap may help, assuming this is the impedance curve for your speakers. Regards, -- Al |
What cables are you using now? Lack or power and muddy bass can also be a speaker placement issue, a room issue or node. Different cables may just excite a room or placement issue in a slightly different way...but it still maybe there. Also, are your B&W's brand new? Could be a break in thing to.... Just trying to help... (good point on the amp taps to..) |
Jfrech, I was using Cardas Neutral Reference (way too muddy and grey sounding) and Siltech Anniversary (way too sharp and sterile with weak bass). Right now I don't even have any good cables. The best ones so far were MITs though I haven't auditioned any serious line like Shotguns. I'm certain that I need a copper cable (no silver for me) with full bodied sound. |
Hi I"ve used Golden Cross and Golden reference before. Then went to Transparent Ref w/XL-major improvement in the areas you're asking about. Currently using Purist Audio Designs Dominus Ferrox (sold a bit ago) and now Purist Proteus Provectus Praesto...which is the best I've had so far. I can't stress speaker placement and room tuning enough. I just left a friends house on saturday, he had wilson watt puppy 7s, all Cardas Golden Reference cabling...full set of ASC tube traps and a Rives Audio PARC. Killer killer good bass deep, tight, powerful with clarity... I wish I could say the Transparent cabling will be perfect, I think it will help, and help a lot. But so would the better Cardas cabling, Purist and several others...Transparent has a try before you buy program right now. Might be worth checking it out... |
Since Ultra wasn't available I auditioned Music Wave Plus MM2 and frankly the only thing that I liked about it was a deep, holographic soundstage. Everything else is pretty poor - bass and highs are rolled off (up to everything sounding weird with bass trailing somewhere far beyond the drums) and there is only one tonal colour - grey. Plus the level of speed and detail is really poor. Unless Ultra is lightyears above in terms of everything I mentioned these are not the cables for me. |
