On Tue, 02 Mar 2004 21:39:18 GMT, "flint"
wrote:

The Arabs were almost right on the money when they calculated the
circumference of the Earth, but you are right about Eratosthenes. However,
my argument still holds that simply not being able to measure something is a
poor argument for something not being there.

Did the Arabs invent a revolutionary new tool to make the measurement?
Or did they choose to interpret previously available data and
observations in a fresh way?

Once you admit the world MIGHT be round, it's not too hard to find
supporting observations.

There is lots of (really good) info regarding the scientific differences
already in this thread. As has already been noted there shouldn't be any
discern able difference between standard wiring and bi-wiring if all
other aspects are covered properly - i.e. decent speaker cable, amp, etc

Now before everyone starts getting jumpy I'll add that I am also of the
Technical persuasion and prior to various experiences would have been
just as pedantic but . . . . .
The problem comes from the generic question of "should I spend my last
$0.02 on bi-wiring my system ?"

Experience -1. Bro's Hi-Fi
The parts in question consisted of a Craft Audio power amp (local NZ
HIFI amp manufacturer of yesteryear) 100W/ch, a pair of Rodgers (sp) 2
way speakers and some (dubious) Hi-Fi speaker cable 5-mtrs long all from
an esoteric Hi-Fi shop in NZ. We ran up the system with one run of cable
to a speaker. Bro sat and listened (his system) and I stood behind the
speaker. After a listen to that configuration I removed the links
(between High & Low) and connected the second cable (from the amp). The
difference was extreme! I could easily hear the difference from behind
the speaker - even if I had a cold I would have heard the difference.

Experience -2. Hi Power Main Monitors
Utilizing a 900W/ch amp into home-brew Urei look alike speakers (a 15"
with concentric horn + another 15") with 10-mtrs of 4 mm cable I tried
the same trick. There was "maybe" a slight improvement in the clarity of
the mid-range but nothing worth getting excited about.


Now experience-2 is what I would expect, if that. However experience-1
really surprised me (not in a good way - at the time). Now I know where
I think the culprit is (hence the dubious) but it was sold as "Hi-Fi
Speaker Cable" and was moderately priced - no way a non-technical
non-speaker-cable-testing-instrument-in-back-pocket person would ever
know the true state of affairs.

So nowadays my advice to these people who ask (who may/may-not know
more/less than Bro - who ain't stoopid) is "if you got the dollars - try
it. You will probably end up with spare speaker cable but there is only
one way of finding out for sure" Of course, if it does make a difference
there is will be something more important to spend the money on.
BTW - Bro's ex-cables are now tying up the tomatoes.

Cheers

Steve Finucane
New Zealand


Bob Saccamano wrote:
I have a pair of speakers that support bi-wiring and bi-amping. I only have
one aplifier. Will I appreciate any improvements in sound by bi-wiring
alone?

There is lots of (really good) info regarding the scientific differences
already in this thread. As has already been noted there shouldn't be any
discern able difference between standard wiring and bi-wiring if all
other aspects are covered properly - i.e. decent speaker cable, amp, etc

Now before everyone starts getting jumpy I'll add that I am also of the
Technical persuasion and prior to various experiences would have been
just as pedantic but . . . . .
The problem comes from the generic question of "should I spend my last
$0.02 on bi-wiring my system ?"

Experience -1. Bro's Hi-Fi
The parts in question consisted of a Craft Audio power amp (local NZ
HIFI amp manufacturer of yesteryear) 100W/ch, a pair of Rodgers (sp) 2
way speakers and some (dubious) Hi-Fi speaker cable 5-mtrs long all from
an esoteric Hi-Fi shop in NZ. We ran up the system with one run of cable
to a speaker. Bro sat and listened (his system) and I stood behind the
speaker. After a listen to that configuration I removed the links
(between High & Low) and connected the second cable (from the amp). The
difference was extreme! I could easily hear the difference from behind
the speaker - even if I had a cold I would have heard the difference.

Experience -2. Hi Power Main Monitors
Utilizing a 900W/ch amp into home-brew Urei look alike speakers (a 15"
with concentric horn + another 15") with 10-mtrs of 4 mm cable I tried
the same trick. There was "maybe" a slight improvement in the clarity of
the mid-range but nothing worth getting excited about.


Now experience-2 is what I would expect, if that. However experience-1
really surprised me (not in a good way - at the time). Now I know where
I think the culprit is (hence the dubious) but it was sold as "Hi-Fi
Speaker Cable" and was moderately priced - no way a non-technical
non-speaker-cable-testing-instrument-in-back-pocket person would ever
know the true state of affairs.

So nowadays my advice to these people who ask (who may/may-not know
more/less than Bro - who ain't stoopid) is "if you got the dollars - try
it. You will probably end up with spare speaker cable but there is only
one way of finding out for sure" Of course, if it does make a difference
there is will be something more important to spend the money on.
BTW - Bro's ex-cables are now tying up the tomatoes.

Cheers

Steve Finucane
New Zealand


Bob Saccamano wrote:
I have a pair of speakers that support bi-wiring and bi-amping. I only have
one aplifier. Will I appreciate any improvements in sound by bi-wiring
alone?

There is lots of (really good) info regarding the scientific differences
already in this thread. As has already been noted there shouldn't be any
discern able difference between standard wiring and bi-wiring if all
other aspects are covered properly - i.e. decent speaker cable, amp, etc

Now before everyone starts getting jumpy I'll add that I am also of the
Technical persuasion and prior to various experiences would have been
just as pedantic but . . . . .
The problem comes from the generic question of "should I spend my last
$0.02 on bi-wiring my system ?"

Experience -1. Bro's Hi-Fi
The parts in question consisted of a Craft Audio power amp (local NZ
HIFI amp manufacturer of yesteryear) 100W/ch, a pair of Rodgers (sp) 2
way speakers and some (dubious) Hi-Fi speaker cable 5-mtrs long all from
an esoteric Hi-Fi shop in NZ. We ran up the system with one run of cable
to a speaker. Bro sat and listened (his system) and I stood behind the
speaker. After a listen to that configuration I removed the links
(between High & Low) and connected the second cable (from the amp). The
difference was extreme! I could easily hear the difference from behind
the speaker - even if I had a cold I would have heard the difference.

Experience -2. Hi Power Main Monitors
Utilizing a 900W/ch amp into home-brew Urei look alike speakers (a 15"
with concentric horn + another 15") with 10-mtrs of 4 mm cable I tried
the same trick. There was "maybe" a slight improvement in the clarity of
the mid-range but nothing worth getting excited about.


Now experience-2 is what I would expect, if that. However experience-1
really surprised me (not in a good way - at the time). Now I know where
I think the culprit is (hence the dubious) but it was sold as "Hi-Fi
Speaker Cable" and was moderately priced - no way a non-technical
non-speaker-cable-testing-instrument-in-back-pocket person would ever
know the true state of affairs.

So nowadays my advice to these people who ask (who may/may-not know
more/less than Bro - who ain't stoopid) is "if you got the dollars - try
it. You will probably end up with spare speaker cable but there is only
one way of finding out for sure" Of course, if it does make a difference
there is will be something more important to spend the money on.
BTW - Bro's ex-cables are now tying up the tomatoes.

Cheers

Steve Finucane
New Zealand


Bob Saccamano wrote:
I have a pair of speakers that support bi-wiring and bi-amping. I only have
one aplifier. Will I appreciate any improvements in sound by bi-wiring
alone?

There is lots of (really good) info regarding the scientific differences
already in this thread. As has already been noted there shouldn't be any
discern able difference between standard wiring and bi-wiring if all
other aspects are covered properly - i.e. decent speaker cable, amp, etc

Now before everyone starts getting jumpy I'll add that I am also of the
Technical persuasion and prior to various experiences would have been
just as pedantic but . . . . .
The problem comes from the generic question of "should I spend my last
$0.02 on bi-wiring my system ?"

Experience -1. Bro's Hi-Fi
The parts in question consisted of a Craft Audio power amp (local NZ
HIFI amp manufacturer of yesteryear) 100W/ch, a pair of Rodgers (sp) 2
way speakers and some (dubious) Hi-Fi speaker cable 5-mtrs long all from
an esoteric Hi-Fi shop in NZ. We ran up the system with one run of cable
to a speaker. Bro sat and listened (his system) and I stood behind the
speaker. After a listen to that configuration I removed the links
(between High & Low) and connected the second cable (from the amp). The
difference was extreme! I could easily hear the difference from behind
the speaker - even if I had a cold I would have heard the difference.

Experience -2. Hi Power Main Monitors
Utilizing a 900W/ch amp into home-brew Urei look alike speakers (a 15"
with concentric horn + another 15") with 10-mtrs of 4 mm cable I tried
the same trick. There was "maybe" a slight improvement in the clarity of
the mid-range but nothing worth getting excited about.


Now experience-2 is what I would expect, if that. However experience-1
really surprised me (not in a good way - at the time). Now I know where
I think the culprit is (hence the dubious) but it was sold as "Hi-Fi
Speaker Cable" and was moderately priced - no way a non-technical
non-speaker-cable-testing-instrument-in-back-pocket person would ever
know the true state of affairs.

So nowadays my advice to these people who ask (who may/may-not know
more/less than Bro - who ain't stoopid) is "if you got the dollars - try
it. You will probably end up with spare speaker cable but there is only
one way of finding out for sure" Of course, if it does make a difference
there is will be something more important to spend the money on.
BTW - Bro's ex-cables are now tying up the tomatoes.

Cheers

Steve Finucane
New Zealand


Bob Saccamano wrote:
I have a pair of speakers that support bi-wiring and bi-amping. I only have
one aplifier. Will I appreciate any improvements in sound by bi-wiring
alone?

Bob Saccamano wrote:
To those who are technically informed, there is consensus.

You decide.

So tell me, how does one determine those that are technically informed? :-)

Good question, since the mystics can spout off technical sounding stuff and
convince people.

The best way would be to consult a first year electrical engineering or even
electronics technician textbook on basic circuits and impedances. It's
really not very difficult, but if you're not familiar with it, there is
a learning curve.

Don't consider the subjectivist press as factual, but as entertainment.

Among posters here, Dick Pierce and Stewart are very knowledgable.

Bob Saccamano wrote:
To those who are technically informed, there is consensus.

You decide.

So tell me, how does one determine those that are technically informed? :-)

Good question, since the mystics can spout off technical sounding stuff and
convince people.

The best way would be to consult a first year electrical engineering or even
electronics technician textbook on basic circuits and impedances. It's
really not very difficult, but if you're not familiar with it, there is
a learning curve.

Don't consider the subjectivist press as factual, but as entertainment.

Among posters here, Dick Pierce and Stewart are very knowledgable.

Bob Saccamano wrote:
To those who are technically informed, there is consensus.

You decide.

So tell me, how does one determine those that are technically informed? :-)

Good question, since the mystics can spout off technical sounding stuff and
convince people.

The best way would be to consult a first year electrical engineering or even
electronics technician textbook on basic circuits and impedances. It's
really not very difficult, but if you're not familiar with it, there is
a learning curve.

Don't consider the subjectivist press as factual, but as entertainment.

Among posters here, Dick Pierce and Stewart are very knowledgable.

Bob Saccamano wrote:
To those who are technically informed, there is consensus.

You decide.

So tell me, how does one determine those that are technically informed? :-)

Good question, since the mystics can spout off technical sounding stuff and
convince people.

The best way would be to consult a first year electrical engineering or even
electronics technician textbook on basic circuits and impedances. It's
really not very difficult, but if you're not familiar with it, there is
a learning curve.

Don't consider the subjectivist press as factual, but as entertainment.

Among posters here, Dick Pierce and Stewart are very knowledgable.

In , on 03/03/04
at 01:49 PM, Steve Finucane said:

[ ... ]

After a listen to that configuration I removed the links (between
High & Low) and connected the second cable (from the amp). The
difference was extreme! I could easily hear the difference from behind
the speaker - even if I had a cold I would have heard the
difference.

[ ... ]

Be careful about equating correlation with cause.

Did you take steps to make sure that the original connections were
clean and tight? If the originals were dirty, the accidental cleaning
while you were messing with things will make quite a difference. Most
of the links I've seen make bad connections. While eliminating the
links often results in an obvious improvement, it will more likely
prove that the links can cause trouble, not that bi-wire has a good,
bad or null effect. One generally needs more than one trial to prove a
point. In this particular case it is hard to return to the original
poor connection state and repeat the experiment.

---

Listening tests are fraught with difficulties. For example, it is bad
technique to begin your test presentation by saying, "I love how how
this blahblahblah gizmo improves the highs". Assuming you are the
respected audio guru, either to avoid being "wrong" or in a effort not
to hurt your feelings, the subject is likely to agree.

Very small changes in level will sway the results. In a quick switch,
the subject tends to prefer the louder source.

I once worked for a (defunct) hi-fi chain that used a speaker
comparator box to the store's advantage. The subject was told that the
sales person would adjust the "A" and "B" pair of speakers to operate
at the same level, thus compensating for differences in efficiency and
eliminating the louder speaker bias, however, this quickly morphed into
adjusting the levels to sell the speaker you were told to sell. (One
could loose a monthly bonus by selling the wrong speaker) It was also
clear that the inconvenience of holding the button down to listen to
"B" gave "A" an advantage.

Even some of the objective tests bother me. For example, there are many
well intentioned, but, (in my opinion) somewhat limited experiments
conducted in university labs. While I am very interested in their
results and I don't want to discard or ignore their work, I am careful
not to generalize their results to the general population because the
test subjects tend to be students and staff who hang around the lab.

-----------------------------------------------------------
spam:
wordgame:123(abc):14 9 20 5 2 9 18 4 at 22 15 9 3 5 14 5 20 dot 3 15
13 (Barry Mann)
[sorry about the puzzle, spammers are ruining my mailbox]
-----------------------------------------------------------

In , on 03/03/04
at 01:49 PM, Steve Finucane said:

[ ... ]

After a listen to that configuration I removed the links (between
High & Low) and connected the second cable (from the amp). The
difference was extreme! I could easily hear the difference from behind
the speaker - even if I had a cold I would have heard the
difference.

[ ... ]

Be careful about equating correlation with cause.

Did you take steps to make sure that the original connections were
clean and tight? If the originals were dirty, the accidental cleaning
while you were messing with things will make quite a difference. Most
of the links I've seen make bad connections. While eliminating the
links often results in an obvious improvement, it will more likely
prove that the links can cause trouble, not that bi-wire has a good,
bad or null effect. One generally needs more than one trial to prove a
point. In this particular case it is hard to return to the original
poor connection state and repeat the experiment.

---

Listening tests are fraught with difficulties. For example, it is bad
technique to begin your test presentation by saying, "I love how how
this blahblahblah gizmo improves the highs". Assuming you are the
respected audio guru, either to avoid being "wrong" or in a effort not
to hurt your feelings, the subject is likely to agree.

Very small changes in level will sway the results. In a quick switch,
the subject tends to prefer the louder source.

I once worked for a (defunct) hi-fi chain that used a speaker
comparator box to the store's advantage. The subject was told that the
sales person would adjust the "A" and "B" pair of speakers to operate
at the same level, thus compensating for differences in efficiency and
eliminating the louder speaker bias, however, this quickly morphed into
adjusting the levels to sell the speaker you were told to sell. (One
could loose a monthly bonus by selling the wrong speaker) It was also
clear that the inconvenience of holding the button down to listen to
"B" gave "A" an advantage.

Even some of the objective tests bother me. For example, there are many
well intentioned, but, (in my opinion) somewhat limited experiments
conducted in university labs. While I am very interested in their
results and I don't want to discard or ignore their work, I am careful
not to generalize their results to the general population because the
test subjects tend to be students and staff who hang around the lab.

-----------------------------------------------------------
spam:
wordgame:123(abc):14 9 20 5 2 9 18 4 at 22 15 9 3 5 14 5 20 dot 3 15
13 (Barry Mann)
[sorry about the puzzle, spammers are ruining my mailbox]
-----------------------------------------------------------

In , on 03/03/04
at 01:49 PM, Steve Finucane said:

[ ... ]

After a listen to that configuration I removed the links (between
High & Low) and connected the second cable (from the amp). The
difference was extreme! I could easily hear the difference from behind
the speaker - even if I had a cold I would have heard the
difference.

[ ... ]

Be careful about equating correlation with cause.

Did you take steps to make sure that the original connections were
clean and tight? If the originals were dirty, the accidental cleaning
while you were messing with things will make quite a difference. Most
of the links I've seen make bad connections. While eliminating the
links often results in an obvious improvement, it will more likely
prove that the links can cause trouble, not that bi-wire has a good,
bad or null effect. One generally needs more than one trial to prove a
point. In this particular case it is hard to return to the original
poor connection state and repeat the experiment.

---

Listening tests are fraught with difficulties. For example, it is bad
technique to begin your test presentation by saying, "I love how how
this blahblahblah gizmo improves the highs". Assuming you are the
respected audio guru, either to avoid being "wrong" or in a effort not
to hurt your feelings, the subject is likely to agree.

Very small changes in level will sway the results. In a quick switch,
the subject tends to prefer the louder source.

I once worked for a (defunct) hi-fi chain that used a speaker
comparator box to the store's advantage. The subject was told that the
sales person would adjust the "A" and "B" pair of speakers to operate
at the same level, thus compensating for differences in efficiency and
eliminating the louder speaker bias, however, this quickly morphed into
adjusting the levels to sell the speaker you were told to sell. (One
could loose a monthly bonus by selling the wrong speaker) It was also
clear that the inconvenience of holding the button down to listen to
"B" gave "A" an advantage.

Even some of the objective tests bother me. For example, there are many
well intentioned, but, (in my opinion) somewhat limited experiments
conducted in university labs. While I am very interested in their
results and I don't want to discard or ignore their work, I am careful
not to generalize their results to the general population because the
test subjects tend to be students and staff who hang around the lab.

-----------------------------------------------------------
spam:
wordgame:123(abc):14 9 20 5 2 9 18 4 at 22 15 9 3 5 14 5 20 dot 3 15
13 (Barry Mann)
[sorry about the puzzle, spammers are ruining my mailbox]
-----------------------------------------------------------

In , on 03/03/04
at 01:49 PM, Steve Finucane said:

[ ... ]

After a listen to that configuration I removed the links (between
High & Low) and connected the second cable (from the amp). The
difference was extreme! I could easily hear the difference from behind
the speaker - even if I had a cold I would have heard the
difference.

[ ... ]

Be careful about equating correlation with cause.

Did you take steps to make sure that the original connections were
clean and tight? If the originals were dirty, the accidental cleaning
while you were messing with things will make quite a difference. Most
of the links I've seen make bad connections. While eliminating the
links often results in an obvious improvement, it will more likely
prove that the links can cause trouble, not that bi-wire has a good,
bad or null effect. One generally needs more than one trial to prove a
point. In this particular case it is hard to return to the original
poor connection state and repeat the experiment.

---

Listening tests are fraught with difficulties. For example, it is bad
technique to begin your test presentation by saying, "I love how how
this blahblahblah gizmo improves the highs". Assuming you are the
respected audio guru, either to avoid being "wrong" or in a effort not
to hurt your feelings, the subject is likely to agree.

Very small changes in level will sway the results. In a quick switch,
the subject tends to prefer the louder source.

I once worked for a (defunct) hi-fi chain that used a speaker
comparator box to the store's advantage. The subject was told that the
sales person would adjust the "A" and "B" pair of speakers to operate
at the same level, thus compensating for differences in efficiency and
eliminating the louder speaker bias, however, this quickly morphed into
adjusting the levels to sell the speaker you were told to sell. (One
could loose a monthly bonus by selling the wrong speaker) It was also
clear that the inconvenience of holding the button down to listen to
"B" gave "A" an advantage.

Even some of the objective tests bother me. For example, there are many
well intentioned, but, (in my opinion) somewhat limited experiments
conducted in university labs. While I am very interested in their
results and I don't want to discard or ignore their work, I am careful
not to generalize their results to the general population because the
test subjects tend to be students and staff who hang around the lab.

-----------------------------------------------------------
spam:
wordgame:123(abc):14 9 20 5 2 9 18 4 at 22 15 9 3 5 14 5 20 dot 3 15
13 (Barry Mann)
[sorry about the puzzle, spammers are ruining my mailbox]
-----------------------------------------------------------

On Tue, 02 Mar 2004 21:29:37 GMT, "flint"
wrote:

"Colin B." wrote in message
...
Bob Saccamano wrote:

Audio is one of those areas where there are so many mistruths, myths and
emotions floating around, that all you can trust, and probably should,
is
your own ears. If *you* think it sounds better, then it does.

It depends on how you define "sounds better." If you mean that it
makes you happier, then go for it. If you mean that the sound you hear
is materially changed, then it's a very simple matter to measure and
quantify it. If it's not measurable, it ain't there.

Colin

Though I agree with the premise about bi-wiring, the idea that nothing
exists that cannot be measured is dead wrong.

That's not what was said. In the more limited context of human
hearing, we have been able to measure well below the threshold of
audibility for more than half a century.

Humans didn't have the ability to measure the curve of the surface of the
Earth until the Arabs did it in the early dark ages. Does that mean the
world was flat until they figured out how to measure it???

Not true, this was done by the ancient Greeks. The problem with the
Dark Ages was that we forgot all that earlier stuff!

We need to present a good logical argument to defend the fact that bi-wiring
doesn't do anything.

That argument has been presented on numerous occasions. The only
*possible* effect of bi-wiring is at a level more than 40dB down
(usually *much* more), and then only in the octave which includes the
crossover frequency. IOW, all those claims of 'clearer treble' and
'improved bass slam' are patent hogwash.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Tue, 02 Mar 2004 21:29:37 GMT, "flint"
wrote:

"Colin B." wrote in message
...
Bob Saccamano wrote:

Audio is one of those areas where there are so many mistruths, myths and
emotions floating around, that all you can trust, and probably should,
is
your own ears. If *you* think it sounds better, then it does.

It depends on how you define "sounds better." If you mean that it
makes you happier, then go for it. If you mean that the sound you hear
is materially changed, then it's a very simple matter to measure and
quantify it. If it's not measurable, it ain't there.

Colin

Though I agree with the premise about bi-wiring, the idea that nothing
exists that cannot be measured is dead wrong.

That's not what was said. In the more limited context of human
hearing, we have been able to measure well below the threshold of
audibility for more than half a century.

Humans didn't have the ability to measure the curve of the surface of the
Earth until the Arabs did it in the early dark ages. Does that mean the
world was flat until they figured out how to measure it???

Not true, this was done by the ancient Greeks. The problem with the
Dark Ages was that we forgot all that earlier stuff!

We need to present a good logical argument to defend the fact that bi-wiring
doesn't do anything.

That argument has been presented on numerous occasions. The only
*possible* effect of bi-wiring is at a level more than 40dB down
(usually *much* more), and then only in the octave which includes the
crossover frequency. IOW, all those claims of 'clearer treble' and
'improved bass slam' are patent hogwash.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Tue, 02 Mar 2004 21:29:37 GMT, "flint"
wrote:

"Colin B." wrote in message
...
Bob Saccamano wrote:

Audio is one of those areas where there are so many mistruths, myths and
emotions floating around, that all you can trust, and probably should,
is
your own ears. If *you* think it sounds better, then it does.

It depends on how you define "sounds better." If you mean that it
makes you happier, then go for it. If you mean that the sound you hear
is materially changed, then it's a very simple matter to measure and
quantify it. If it's not measurable, it ain't there.

Colin

Though I agree with the premise about bi-wiring, the idea that nothing
exists that cannot be measured is dead wrong.

That's not what was said. In the more limited context of human
hearing, we have been able to measure well below the threshold of
audibility for more than half a century.

Humans didn't have the ability to measure the curve of the surface of the
Earth until the Arabs did it in the early dark ages. Does that mean the
world was flat until they figured out how to measure it???

Not true, this was done by the ancient Greeks. The problem with the
Dark Ages was that we forgot all that earlier stuff!

We need to present a good logical argument to defend the fact that bi-wiring
doesn't do anything.

That argument has been presented on numerous occasions. The only
*possible* effect of bi-wiring is at a level more than 40dB down
(usually *much* more), and then only in the octave which includes the
crossover frequency. IOW, all those claims of 'clearer treble' and
'improved bass slam' are patent hogwash.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Tue, 02 Mar 2004 21:29:37 GMT, "flint"
wrote:

"Colin B." wrote in message
...
Bob Saccamano wrote:

Audio is one of those areas where there are so many mistruths, myths and
emotions floating around, that all you can trust, and probably should,
is
your own ears. If *you* think it sounds better, then it does.

It depends on how you define "sounds better." If you mean that it
makes you happier, then go for it. If you mean that the sound you hear
is materially changed, then it's a very simple matter to measure and
quantify it. If it's not measurable, it ain't there.

Colin

Though I agree with the premise about bi-wiring, the idea that nothing
exists that cannot be measured is dead wrong.

That's not what was said. In the more limited context of human
hearing, we have been able to measure well below the threshold of
audibility for more than half a century.

Humans didn't have the ability to measure the curve of the surface of the
Earth until the Arabs did it in the early dark ages. Does that mean the
world was flat until they figured out how to measure it???

Not true, this was done by the ancient Greeks. The problem with the
Dark Ages was that we forgot all that earlier stuff!

We need to present a good logical argument to defend the fact that bi-wiring
doesn't do anything.

That argument has been presented on numerous occasions. The only
*possible* effect of bi-wiring is at a level more than 40dB down
(usually *much* more), and then only in the octave which includes the
crossover frequency. IOW, all those claims of 'clearer treble' and
'improved bass slam' are patent hogwash.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Tue, 02 Mar 2004 21:39:18 GMT, "flint"
wrote:

However,
my argument still holds that simply not being able to measure something is a
poor argument for something not being there.

You miss the point. In audio terms, we can very easily measure
differences which are totally inaudible. Hence, if it ain't
measurable, it ain't audible.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Tue, 02 Mar 2004 21:39:18 GMT, "flint"
wrote:

However,
my argument still holds that simply not being able to measure something is a
poor argument for something not being there.

You miss the point. In audio terms, we can very easily measure
differences which are totally inaudible. Hence, if it ain't
measurable, it ain't audible.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Tue, 02 Mar 2004 21:39:18 GMT, "flint"
wrote:

However,
my argument still holds that simply not being able to measure something is a
poor argument for something not being there.

You miss the point. In audio terms, we can very easily measure
differences which are totally inaudible. Hence, if it ain't
measurable, it ain't audible.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Tue, 02 Mar 2004 21:39:18 GMT, "flint"
wrote:

However,
my argument still holds that simply not being able to measure something is a
poor argument for something not being there.

You miss the point. In audio terms, we can very easily measure
differences which are totally inaudible. Hence, if it ain't
measurable, it ain't audible.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Wed, 3 Mar 2004 09:50:53 +1100, "Bob Saccamano"
wrote:

To those who are technically informed, there is consensus.

You decide.

So tell me, how does one determine those that are technically informed? :-)

We can start by eliminating those who *do* believe that bi-wiring is a
good idea...............

Note for instance that several of the very best speaker manufacturers
have dug their heels in, ignored their marketing guys, and have simply
*refused* to put those stupid terminals on their speakers. The new
Sonus Faber Stradivari is a fine example.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Wed, 3 Mar 2004 09:50:53 +1100, "Bob Saccamano"
wrote:

To those who are technically informed, there is consensus.

You decide.

So tell me, how does one determine those that are technically informed? :-)

We can start by eliminating those who *do* believe that bi-wiring is a
good idea...............

Note for instance that several of the very best speaker manufacturers
have dug their heels in, ignored their marketing guys, and have simply
*refused* to put those stupid terminals on their speakers. The new
Sonus Faber Stradivari is a fine example.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Wed, 3 Mar 2004 09:50:53 +1100, "Bob Saccamano"
wrote:

To those who are technically informed, there is consensus.

You decide.

So tell me, how does one determine those that are technically informed? :-)

We can start by eliminating those who *do* believe that bi-wiring is a
good idea...............

Note for instance that several of the very best speaker manufacturers
have dug their heels in, ignored their marketing guys, and have simply
*refused* to put those stupid terminals on their speakers. The new
Sonus Faber Stradivari is a fine example.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Wed, 3 Mar 2004 09:50:53 +1100, "Bob Saccamano"
wrote:

To those who are technically informed, there is consensus.

You decide.

So tell me, how does one determine those that are technically informed? :-)

We can start by eliminating those who *do* believe that bi-wiring is a
good idea...............

Note for instance that several of the very best speaker manufacturers
have dug their heels in, ignored their marketing guys, and have simply
*refused* to put those stupid terminals on their speakers. The new
Sonus Faber Stradivari is a fine example.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Wed, 03 Mar 2004 03:09:00 GMT, wrote:

Bob Saccamano wrote:
To those who are technically informed, there is consensus.

You decide.

So tell me, how does one determine those that are technically informed? :-)

Good question, since the mystics can spout off technical sounding stuff and
convince people.

The best way would be to consult a first year electrical engineering or even
electronics technician textbook on basic circuits and impedances. It's
really not very difficult, but if you're not familiar with it, there is
a learning curve.

Don't consider the subjectivist press as factual, but as entertainment.

Among posters here, Dick Pierce and Stewart are very knowledgable.

On speakers, Dick is *way* more knowledgeable than I shall ever be. He
still beats me up on accasion, when I don't get it exactly right! :-)
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Wed, 03 Mar 2004 03:09:00 GMT, wrote:

Bob Saccamano wrote:
To those who are technically informed, there is consensus.

You decide.

So tell me, how does one determine those that are technically informed? :-)

Good question, since the mystics can spout off technical sounding stuff and
convince people.

The best way would be to consult a first year electrical engineering or even
electronics technician textbook on basic circuits and impedances. It's
really not very difficult, but if you're not familiar with it, there is
a learning curve.

Don't consider the subjectivist press as factual, but as entertainment.

Among posters here, Dick Pierce and Stewart are very knowledgable.

On speakers, Dick is *way* more knowledgeable than I shall ever be. He
still beats me up on accasion, when I don't get it exactly right! :-)
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Wed, 03 Mar 2004 03:09:00 GMT, wrote:

Bob Saccamano wrote:
To those who are technically informed, there is consensus.

You decide.

So tell me, how does one determine those that are technically informed? :-)

Good question, since the mystics can spout off technical sounding stuff and
convince people.

The best way would be to consult a first year electrical engineering or even
electronics technician textbook on basic circuits and impedances. It's
really not very difficult, but if you're not familiar with it, there is
a learning curve.

Don't consider the subjectivist press as factual, but as entertainment.

Among posters here, Dick Pierce and Stewart are very knowledgable.

On speakers, Dick is *way* more knowledgeable than I shall ever be. He
still beats me up on accasion, when I don't get it exactly right! :-)
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Wed, 03 Mar 2004 03:09:00 GMT, wrote:

Bob Saccamano wrote:
To those who are technically informed, there is consensus.

You decide.

So tell me, how does one determine those that are technically informed? :-)

Good question, since the mystics can spout off technical sounding stuff and
convince people.

The best way would be to consult a first year electrical engineering or even
electronics technician textbook on basic circuits and impedances. It's
really not very difficult, but if you're not familiar with it, there is
a learning curve.

Don't consider the subjectivist press as factual, but as entertainment.

Among posters here, Dick Pierce and Stewart are very knowledgable.

On speakers, Dick is *way* more knowledgeable than I shall ever be. He
still beats me up on accasion, when I don't get it exactly right! :-)
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

"Steve Finucane" wrote in message


There is lots of (really good) info regarding the scientific
differences already in this thread. As has already been noted there
shouldn't be any discern able difference between standard wiring and
bi-wiring if all other aspects are covered properly - i.e. decent
speaker cable, amp, etc

Now before everyone starts getting jumpy I'll add that I am also of
the Technical persuasion and prior to various experiences would have
been just as pedantic but . . . . .
The problem comes from the generic question of "should I spend my last
$0.02 on bi-wiring my system ?"

The problem is Steve, you obviously don't have a clue about how to do a
proper listening test. Therefore, it's easy to dismiss all of your alleged
results.

If you want some basic training in how to do proper, reliable listening
tests, please proceed to www.pcabx.com .

"Steve Finucane" wrote in message


There is lots of (really good) info regarding the scientific
differences already in this thread. As has already been noted there
shouldn't be any discern able difference between standard wiring and
bi-wiring if all other aspects are covered properly - i.e. decent
speaker cable, amp, etc

Now before everyone starts getting jumpy I'll add that I am also of
the Technical persuasion and prior to various experiences would have
been just as pedantic but . . . . .
The problem comes from the generic question of "should I spend my last
$0.02 on bi-wiring my system ?"

The problem is Steve, you obviously don't have a clue about how to do a
proper listening test. Therefore, it's easy to dismiss all of your alleged
results.

If you want some basic training in how to do proper, reliable listening
tests, please proceed to www.pcabx.com .

"Steve Finucane" wrote in message


There is lots of (really good) info regarding the scientific
differences already in this thread. As has already been noted there
shouldn't be any discern able difference between standard wiring and
bi-wiring if all other aspects are covered properly - i.e. decent
speaker cable, amp, etc

Now before everyone starts getting jumpy I'll add that I am also of
the Technical persuasion and prior to various experiences would have
been just as pedantic but . . . . .
The problem comes from the generic question of "should I spend my last
$0.02 on bi-wiring my system ?"

The problem is Steve, you obviously don't have a clue about how to do a
proper listening test. Therefore, it's easy to dismiss all of your alleged
results.

If you want some basic training in how to do proper, reliable listening
tests, please proceed to www.pcabx.com .

"Steve Finucane" wrote in message


There is lots of (really good) info regarding the scientific
differences already in this thread. As has already been noted there
shouldn't be any discern able difference between standard wiring and
bi-wiring if all other aspects are covered properly - i.e. decent
speaker cable, amp, etc

Now before everyone starts getting jumpy I'll add that I am also of
the Technical persuasion and prior to various experiences would have
been just as pedantic but . . . . .
The problem comes from the generic question of "should I spend my last
$0.02 on bi-wiring my system ?"

The problem is Steve, you obviously don't have a clue about how to do a
proper listening test. Therefore, it's easy to dismiss all of your alleged
results.

If you want some basic training in how to do proper, reliable listening
tests, please proceed to www.pcabx.com .

afh3 wrote:

Essentially, all bi-wiring is doing is moving the shunt-block from the back
of the speaker to the back of the amplifier. If this makes a difference in
the sound, there is a problem with one or more of your speaker wires.

I have found this to be true in my case. I have Von Schweikert VR4's.
Initially, I had plain 12ga zip as the shunt. Then, I thought I would
try the bi-wire thing. I was able to get a hold of Audioquest Indigo 2
wires (real cheap) and 'shotgunned' them to the top and bottom of the
speakers. The sound? I didn't hear a difference. They look nice and
impression to other people, but, I can honestly say, there was no
difference in the sound. The amp was a Counterpoint SA220.

afh3 wrote:

Essentially, all bi-wiring is doing is moving the shunt-block from the back
of the speaker to the back of the amplifier. If this makes a difference in
the sound, there is a problem with one or more of your speaker wires.

I have found this to be true in my case. I have Von Schweikert VR4's.
Initially, I had plain 12ga zip as the shunt. Then, I thought I would
try the bi-wire thing. I was able to get a hold of Audioquest Indigo 2
wires (real cheap) and 'shotgunned' them to the top and bottom of the
speakers. The sound? I didn't hear a difference. They look nice and
impression to other people, but, I can honestly say, there was no
difference in the sound. The amp was a Counterpoint SA220.

afh3 wrote:

Essentially, all bi-wiring is doing is moving the shunt-block from the back
of the speaker to the back of the amplifier. If this makes a difference in
the sound, there is a problem with one or more of your speaker wires.

I have found this to be true in my case. I have Von Schweikert VR4's.
Initially, I had plain 12ga zip as the shunt. Then, I thought I would
try the bi-wire thing. I was able to get a hold of Audioquest Indigo 2
wires (real cheap) and 'shotgunned' them to the top and bottom of the
speakers. The sound? I didn't hear a difference. They look nice and
impression to other people, but, I can honestly say, there was no
difference in the sound. The amp was a Counterpoint SA220.

afh3 wrote:

Essentially, all bi-wiring is doing is moving the shunt-block from the back
of the speaker to the back of the amplifier. If this makes a difference in
the sound, there is a problem with one or more of your speaker wires.

I have found this to be true in my case. I have Von Schweikert VR4's.
Initially, I had plain 12ga zip as the shunt. Then, I thought I would
try the bi-wire thing. I was able to get a hold of Audioquest Indigo 2
wires (real cheap) and 'shotgunned' them to the top and bottom of the
speakers. The sound? I didn't hear a difference. They look nice and
impression to other people, but, I can honestly say, there was no
difference in the sound. The amp was a Counterpoint SA220.

On Tue, 02 Mar 2004 22:13:39 GMT, "afh3" wrote:

"flint" wrote in message
...



Here is my attempt at the "good logical argument."

It's called the application of Kirchoff's laws.

Since the bi-wired speakers ultimately connect to the same set of output
terminals on the voltage source (amplifier/receiver/whatever) all of the
points on both pairs of conductors will be at the same electrical
potential at any one point in time.

Excluding the negligible resistance of the conductors

Actually, you can't. That small change is exactly what is being
counted on to create the isolation improvement between the halves of
the crossover. The idea is to work that increased resistance or more
properly, impedance, against the very, very low output impedance of
the majority of today's solid-state amplifiers as a Tee network.

The possibility of the difference being audible is pretty slim.
Regards,

Bruce
Hitting reply is futile, use the following:
).

On Tue, 02 Mar 2004 22:13:39 GMT, "afh3" wrote:

"flint" wrote in message
...



Here is my attempt at the "good logical argument."

It's called the application of Kirchoff's laws.

Since the bi-wired speakers ultimately connect to the same set of output
terminals on the voltage source (amplifier/receiver/whatever) all of the
points on both pairs of conductors will be at the same electrical
potential at any one point in time.

Excluding the negligible resistance of the conductors

Actually, you can't. That small change is exactly what is being
counted on to create the isolation improvement between the halves of
the crossover. The idea is to work that increased resistance or more
properly, impedance, against the very, very low output impedance of
the majority of today's solid-state amplifiers as a Tee network.

The possibility of the difference being audible is pretty slim.
Regards,

Bruce
Hitting reply is futile, use the following:
).

On Tue, 02 Mar 2004 22:13:39 GMT, "afh3" wrote:

"flint" wrote in message
...



Here is my attempt at the "good logical argument."

It's called the application of Kirchoff's laws.

Since the bi-wired speakers ultimately connect to the same set of output
terminals on the voltage source (amplifier/receiver/whatever) all of the
points on both pairs of conductors will be at the same electrical
potential at any one point in time.

Excluding the negligible resistance of the conductors

Actually, you can't. That small change is exactly what is being
counted on to create the isolation improvement between the halves of
the crossover. The idea is to work that increased resistance or more
properly, impedance, against the very, very low output impedance of
the majority of today's solid-state amplifiers as a Tee network.

The possibility of the difference being audible is pretty slim.
Regards,

Bruce
Hitting reply is futile, use the following:
).