2. cables
  3. 1033539988

Why bi-wiring is bad

From a link at the Chris Van-Haus website:
THE DISADVANTAGE WITH BI-WIRE

One thing that happens when you biwire your loudspeakers is that the input of the high- and the low-pass filters are fed with different input signals. The difference is a result of the high frequencies and the low frequencies being forced to travel different paths, perhaps through different types of cables, but under all circumstances through cables who have seen different loads (a tweeter with a high pass filter has a completely different impedance response compared to a woofer with a low pass filter!).

What happens is that the drivers will work less good together than when their filter halves were fed with equal signals. The result is a generation of more static and stochastic phase error sounds at different directions from the loudspeaker. The stochastic phase error sounds appear because there may be different types of unlinearities in the low- and high-frequency paths.

What does this sound like? Well, usually, just as you may expect from physics, it appears as a change in the reproduction of space and sound stage. Often, the first impression is that the "biwired" sound presents extended "dimensions", more "air", and is more "living". The impression after a week or month, however, is that all recordings sound very much alike, and the "airiness" appears on all records. It does not even sound like air anymore, instead more like a slime that pollutes every record you play. No wonder, since it is not a real, recorded quality but a "speaker characteristic" added to all reproduced material. "Sameness" is another word for it.

I just went back to bi-wiring over the weekend. The first thing I noticed was cymbal-like instruments shimmer much more. Secondly the bass now seemed to be less perhaps due to the greater high frequency information.
On orchestra music the orchestra is now well behind the speakers instead of right at the speaker. Like the article said, this may be a phase or time shift error and the depth may become wearing over time.
Finally there is slighlty better separation between instruments. It's easier to pick out each instrument.
cdc
basement
245 posts
 
Just from a logic standpoint, this doesn't appear to make sence to me. It sounds right off that what is being stated is that the different drivers receive signals that are not identical, because of the different laods of the drivers.
Since one driver is not getting a signal affected by the load of another driver.
The last time I checked, this was the reason for biwiring.
If I understand this correctly, he is claiming that this is wrong because the signal does not have the same load? The speakers have different laods, feeding them a signal which is effected by all loads of all drivers will not change this.
If, as he infers, the signal is the same because the load is shared, the drivers would as a rule react differently because they have different loads. The signal would actaully be different to the different drivers, not the same, by the very nature of his claim.
Last but not least, his claim of less static and stochastic phase error caused by single wiring, and/or containing all loads in the same signal is unfounded in this statement. And therefore, his assesments.
And I see myself as not knowing too much about this subject. I just see his statement, reasons, and conclusion as contradicting within itself.
It could be that he left out some information, mistated, or that I don't know enough to be able to understand correctly, or it is supposed to be understtod that the reader of such have a certain level of knowledge on the subject.
Post removed 
zaikesman
3,017 posts
 
I have never been able to bring myself to believe the commonly-heard explanation that biwiring somehow reduces or eliminates an alleged modulation of the mid/treble frequencies supposedly caused by the back-EMF of the woofer. In fact, the whole "back-EMF modulation" concept has a stink of implausability about it to me, but I'm not expert enough (actually, at all) to really know why I suspect this. There's just a 'lift yourself up by your own bootstraps' air about the concept.

Besides, it doesn't seem as if the amplifier is 'seeing' anything different in biwiring, other than the extra set of cables. I tend to believe it is simply just the presence of this additional wire that results in any sonic change. But then again, I'm a Thiel owner, so what the hell do I know? (Saves on cable costs, tho'...)
bob_bundus
1,834 posts
 
some users will apparently seem to benefit sonically when biwiring while others may not, or may even seem to experience a degradation. Karls has a good handle on the situation; it is a simple synergy issue.
It's like I bring a cable or a component who's sound I prefer at my house over to your house. It may be more compatible, less compatible, or possibly (but doubtfully) even sound the same as used with your own cables or electronics.
The "problem" that biwiring attacks is *cable intermodulation*, which is not caused by reflected power (networked cables can take care of that issue) but by the *forward power* of all frequencies traveling the same path simultaneously. Intermodulation is a real & measurable phenomenon & it is significantly reduced by biwiring.
I am not taking up an argument here with CDC's reported results, what you heard is certainly what you heard. That experience cannot however be carried over to any other rig unless the physical makeup is completely identical.
chazzbo
1,007 posts
 
It would seem that bi-amping will create the desired effects that some ascribe wrongly to bi-wiring.I have heard the first step in more than one hi-end system followed by the installation of a matching amp where theresults that one wants come forth.
More to discover