Quote:
Originally Posted by GrimJosef
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beobloke
... The advantage is that it allows you to use two different cables for the high and low frequency, assuming of course that you believe different cables can sound different!
However, I would agree that bi-wiring with two runs of the same cable is indeed pointless.
|
Does this just boil down to a question of whether the cable's impedance is significant (i.e. audible) or not ? If it's not then one piece of cable will have no audible effect and multiple pieces will do nothing several times over. But if it is significant then running separate cables to the individual drivers might plausibly be audibly different from using just one cable. At the very least you could 'bi-wire' by putting two runs of the same cable simply in parallel - joining red to red and black to black both at the amp end and the speaker end. You'd have halved whatever resistive or inductive impedance they had and doubled the capacitative component and that ought to change the audible impact. |
Perhaps look at it from the viewpoint of someone in the snake oil business, into which category the biwiring concept would seem to fall. Offering a cable pair consisting of two identical “blameless” constituents would probably not be very productive. Better I think to deliberately endow one of the pair, perhaps that on the HF side, with non-negligible impedance characteristics (magnitude and angle) such that it does have an audible (and a measurable effect). Thus the sound heard will be different to that with “monowiring” (say using the LF cable), and very likely different to that with the cables reversed. Then it is probably not hard to convince a would-be purchaser (who was probably at least somewhat open to the benefits of biwiring) that different equals better. It might have fooled a reviewer or to, as well. Job done!
Cheers,