No one actually knows how to lculate what speaker cable they need

Bi Wire

The base to the approach came from Bi-Amp (or Tri Amp.), in which the crossover was bypassed. An electronic cross is placed between the Pre and the powers. Each band that drives each of the units of that speaker is getting its specific audio band, its specific amplification and speaker cables. This is better than the ordinary method, because the speaker's crossover contributes some distortion that is avoided by the Bi/Tri amp.

Some manufacturers came up with an idea (not really works in real!) that if it's not Bi amp, it can be Bi-wired. The claim was, that the low Fr. Currents related to the woofer, won't affect the currents of the high Fr of the midrange and the tweeter. The Bi-wire became over night popular and most speaker makers provided two sets of binding posts and some flat jumpers.

This approach was good, if such a speaker owner would like to go Bi-amp without the need in some cases to replace the speaker or drill holes for more binding posts. The internal cross should be removed and bypassed in most cases.

If a simulation is run on a computer SW called "Spice" (most common for analog HW simulation with design) and the two options: Bi wire and single wire) are run, with identical speaker wires (represented by resistors of small value), the result of a single wire is better than a bi-wire.

To understand the why, a Bi-wire approach separates the current loops. So the low Fr. Loop, that drives most of the current, by nature of the audio band behavior, has only 1/2 of the cross section available, vs. one single thicker wire. The high Fr. Loop has the same cross section available, even it does not need that much. So you get one cable that is not really been fully used and one that is under sized for the requirement.

Digging deeper, for the Amp. it is the same.

So is for the speaker.

A wire can pass all frequencies as long thier total cuerrent does not exced the wires capabity. We most likely far from that in Audio.

You just have a less good speaker cable with the bi-wire. I would like to believe that we are gathered here to improve that part in our system.

 

On the other hand, who really cares what SPICE says about bi wiring. None other than John Atkinson of Stereophile reports otherwise. So, this appears to be one of those talkers vs doers type arguments. 😬 Or, perhaps a measurements vs listener argument. 😛

“Some audiophiles feel that bi-wiring produces an audible improvement over standard single cabling. For example, John Atkinson, writing in Stereophile, states that he observes "subtle but important" differences, particularly in reduction of treble hardness and improvement in bass control in one review.”

And this from Definitive Technology,

“Does doubling the connections double the sound quality?

Bi-wiring is intended to minimize impedance differences between high and low frequencies and its impact on the overall sound you experience. The result is an improvement in the midrange that many enthusiasts believe is significant enough to justify running the additional cable. You may not double the quality of your playback, but you will likely notice a major boost in clarity.”

There’s also this from Polk Audio, who knows something about speakers,

”What is it?

Bi-wiring is the using separate speaker wire connections to split the signal between high and low frequencies.

What does it accomplish?

The theory behind bi-wiring is that it can elevate a great sounding speaker and produce subtle, enjoyable, improvements in overall sound quality. In a sense, bi-wiring is to speaker connections as “star grounding” is to electronics connections.

When a piece of audio equipment uses a single circuit grounding point for all electronic sections as opposed to connecting them in a “daisy-chain” fashion, this is referred to as “star grounding.” The integrity of each ground path is maintained by individual connections to a low impedance point.

The same concept is applied when bi-wiring your audio system. Each “section” of your speaker is independently connected to the low impedance point (output transistors) in your receiver or amplifier. The effects of bi-wiring have been described as “lifting a veil from the mid-range” and that “voices seem clearer, more distinct, and less muffled.””

Mr. keppertup

Thanks for the photos. As it does the job, I can’t comment on functionality :-)

May I please comment on your workmanship? Ref. to your 2nd picture, that the two ends can be seen better:

On Spade side - you have a thread that was not captured by the crimp and is lose. Spades need maintenance as the binding post loose grip in time. This end could use a short shrinking sleeve to cover some of the cable and some of the exposed cooper sleeve. For the safety and for the good looking.

Your other end, with the short low gauge wire stacked in the 0 AWG: is a nice idea.

I’m not so sure if that would hold in the long term, if the 0 AWG weight is hanging on it.

Here is mine for ref. was posted on page 2 of this thread:

https://imgur.com/a/qwcIbTn

@geoffkait , absolutely. While the logic and absolute-ness (in audio, indeed!) might not be agreed on by everyone, I'm an advocate of trying it and seeing how I get on. If bi-wiring has claims to work (ignoring any bi-amping, whether active or passive) then swapping the cable for one double thick run instead of two thinner runs should achive a similar effect. Maybe that's what's being seen here? Either way, agreeing that bi-wiring might work but this can't seems like a contradictory argument.

Again, I'm putting aside the argument presentation, the use of DF as a variable, and the maths involved in the calculation. I'm just talking about increasing the cable size, which is all we're really doing.

@b4icu, can we see inside those cables to see what's under the heat shrink? I'd be interested in to see how you've stepped down from 0 awg to bananas. Doesn't the thinner bridge cable act as a limiter? The weak link in the chain, if you will?

Mr. geoffkait
You,  Mr. John Atkinson or others you may quote, never got the speaker cable thing right from the first time! so they added a second wire, of the same gauge to the single and the sound improved...
This is what this thread is all about. As if you read this thread thoroughly, you could get a slight impression of Mr. keppertup on his sharing of implementing this idea. A beautiful one.

I'm sure you would rather keep sticking to your false ideas and a limited sound quality (you most likely call high end) because Mr. John Atkinson or others said so. Enjoy both.

If you would get that, many of your falls accusations could be saved, with many of your postures posts and so you would earn less points...Sorry about that.

I've seen you on a parallel thread about the burn in, and I felt really bad for you.