What's new

new believer (1 Viewer)

Brian OK

Supporting Actor
Joined
Aug 29, 2000
Messages
550
Yeah, John, I too read the same sentiments in the Owners Manual for the Paradigm Studio 40's I received recently.
It says:
"Bi-wiring improves clarity and openness with less grain and more solidity to the bass....... it is also a low cost way to achieve even better performance from your speakers.

I already am bi-wiring with Analysis Plus 12/9's so this wasn't a news flash.

It also says "for optimum sound reproduction from your Reference speakers the use of high quality speaker cable is essential".

Again, just sound advise ..... one takes it or leaves it.


BOK
 

Mark Austin

Supporting Actor
Joined
Dec 28, 1999
Messages
639
Off the record I've read speaker manufacturers claim that they only make their speakers "biwirable" for marketing purposes because customers demand it, not because there is any difference.
There are literally hundreds of speaker manufacturers, they all don't speak with one voice. Just as they don't agree on the designs of speakers.
 

Phil Mays

Second Unit
Joined
May 20, 2002
Messages
361
Philip,

I completely disagree with comparing speakers in this manner as being irrelevent. After all, how are we to judge a "sound" system. The speaker that was bi-wired sounded "fuller" than the one that was not. Now that both are bi-wired they sound the same.

At first I was very skeptical which is why I asked my wife to give me her opinion on which speaker sounded better. It was very clear which one did. Trust me, I did not want to spend more money as the 8TC with terminates were about $17 per foot, twice.

I am not an audiofile and do not know the lingo and mumbo- jumbo that others know. However I do know what sounds good, and bi-wiring (as much as I hate it) sounds sonically better.

Phil
 

Phil A

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2000
Messages
3,249
Location
Central FL
Real Name
Phil
I've seen some things benefit via biwiring. The point I guess is would one get a bigger bang for the buck with a single more expensive cable vs. biwiring? That is Thiel's philosophy as Phil noted above. Before I would proclaim it as better in a particular situation, I would take my speaker cable budget and try a single wire of the same price range as the budget for biwiring. I would also recommend that if you try a single wire, you consider improving on the shorting bars. You don't have to go nuts and buy the WBTs but a couple of inches of good speaker wire could not hurt.
 

Matt_Sulli

Agent
Joined
Mar 13, 2002
Messages
38
phil mays, i was a little suprised to when i didn't hear a noticable difference between the monofocals and the 8tc, if you say you can hear the difference then either the images or the sherwood reciever were the limit of the system, and the 8tc brought out as much detail out of the system as possible, the difference would probably be more noticable on something more then a $2000 speaker/reciever combo

also the monofocals were not biwired, this is probably the other reason why the 8tc sounded just as good
 

Phil Mays

Second Unit
Joined
May 20, 2002
Messages
361
Hi Matt,

I have not tested the xl's. I was simply assuming if cable cost as much as the xl's do then they must sound better than the 8TC's. Of course going from the 16 guage Radio Shack wire to bi-wire 8tc there was a huge difference and I only assumed I would hear the same type of difference with the xl's.

:b

Phil
 

Chu Gai

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2001
Messages
7,270
Towards the bottom of the following thread, I've posted a reasonably simple method for determining wheter the effect of biwiring is audible or not.
http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htfo...threadid=36013
Perhaps it may serve as a means of answering the question to your own satifaction by removing any biases, known or unknown, that one may have. At a price of $17/foot twice well that's over 50 times the price of $0.30 12 gauge!
As for why countless speaker companies provide the capabilities of biwiring their speakers, well there are several reasons for this.
Some believe it makes a difference.
Some speakers also lend themselves to biamping.
Some don't care if it makes a difference and want to provide that capability because its another selling point and it's cheap.
Creates an impression of added value.
Joe's Speakers is doing it and we're not going to be left in the dust.
Market research indicates a signficant amount of consumers desire this feature.
Check out the thread, grab a couple of friends and have some fun.
 

Chu Gai

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2001
Messages
7,270
Just be honest with the test and let the chips fall where they may. get a few friends over, some good food, and have some fun with it. It would be nice if you posted your findings. Any questions either post 'em here or PM.

Oh, not everyone will be in the proverbial 'sweet spot', but then I don't seem to recall any admonitions from the companies selling biwire setups about that. If you've got a friend who's got a high-end (high priced?) amp or receiver, have him/her bring it along and repeat things if time permits. You'll walk away with something pretty valuable after you're finished...knowledge. On the other hand you just might not have that special talent...always something isn't there? Understand that what this procedure seeks to do is answer the question, will biwiring confer an audible improvement over the same wire non-biwired. Once you've answered that question, we can then move on to constructing a reasonable test that'll indicate if the $17/foot biwire is audibly superior to 12 gauge copper at ~$0.30/foot.
 

Mark Austin

Supporting Actor
Joined
Dec 28, 1999
Messages
639
Towards the bottom of the following thread, I've posted a reasonably simple method for determining wheter the effect of biwiring is audible or not.
That test cannot be used to determine if the effect of bi-wiring is audible or not, under any circumstance.
 

Chu Gai

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2001
Messages
7,270
What is it about the procedure that you find deficient Mark? Perhaps you'll share a methodology that will determine the audible benefit if there is one.
 

Mark Austin

Supporting Actor
Joined
Dec 28, 1999
Messages
639
Perhaps you'll share a methodology that will determine the audible benefit if there is one.
I sure will. It's called just plain, and simple listening. You're not gonna be able to write a white paper on your findings, but all in all, it's the only way to make the determination on which is best for you.
Here's an interesting little review/article that I read recently that somewhat sums up some of my opinions on cables.
http://www.stereotimes.com/cables042501.shtm
 

Mark Austin

Supporting Actor
Joined
Dec 28, 1999
Messages
639
What methodology do you have that backs up your claim?
That is the sum total of how objectivists are taught to think. Think inside the box. And, it's no fault of their own, it's the way we have taught them to think, and for most things it works very well. Without that way of thinking we would be far worse off, but it does not apply to everything.
Ask yourself this question. Why are the the objectivists so consumed with this issue? Why are the objectivists sooo consumed with telling me what I hear is just placebo? I'm not just talking cables here, I'm talking amps, cd players, tweaks, etc.. Do you really think that each and every one of them has this calling to be the conscience for the audio buying public, and doesn't want anyone to be ripped off? Puuuuh-leeeeeeease! It's much, muuuuuuch deeper than that. We're not just talking guys on the internet here, we're talking the AES. It's because the issue goes to something much deeper than people spending money. It goes to their ability to explain scientifically what we hear. I don't see them telling me a Chevy drives just as well as a Mercedes, do you?
If they can't explain it, it doesn't exist, in their view. And, they will go to almost any means to justify their position. Just ask the scientists who argued that the world was flat.
 

Chu Gai

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2001
Messages
7,270
You state that the blind test is grossly insufficient in determining subtle differences in perceived sound. Well blind tests find great utility in a variety of fields involving sensory perception. Photography, taste, touch (fabric softeners...cloth treatment, etc), smell (odor masks, perfumes, etc.), audio (speaker design, determining minimum levels of audible distortion. They are used to evaluate the impact of consumer perception on things as simple as a change in raw material vendor, as complex as evaluating differences in formulation and mixing order, substitution of one ingredient for another, in determining whether a new mouthpiece on a woodwind or horned instrument results in an audible change. Subtle differences are indeed the forte of blind testing.
The main problem with your approach, Mark, is that a sighted test is fundamentally flawed because you don't eliminiate non-auditory biases. This in itself is reason alone to invalidate your method. Your method also has other severe limitations in that it suffers from a lack of being reproducible and consistent. Moreover, it lacks a consistent methodology. It is also based upon a false premise that we humans are able to successfully compare one auditory experience with another that may have taken place some time ago. One would indeed need a gross difference in order for that to be the case and it has already been proven that our people will evaluate exactly the same song, musical passage, whatever differently depending upon external factors. Nothing has changed yet the response by individuals is different. Now magazines such as Stereophile, sites such as audioasylum, will say oh no...the music is different, you scientists just aren't measuring the right thing. Now that's just plain foolishness upon their part.
Now a blind test does not suffer from these limitations. Properly performed and administered, a blind test is crucial in determing differences. Yes there is much at stake to not use a blind test. To allow the truth to be colored and perhaps erased by biases is too much of a price to pay.
If a blind test does not reveal differences then one is faced with one of two possibilities.
1) The test was not properly designed. No problem. Improve upon the design.
2) The test is properly designed and the those listening could not reliably detect any differences.

No one is saying that one shouldn't choose program material that should seek serve to accentuate differences. Indeed that is to be encouraged. No one is saying that listeners shouldn't be trained. Train away.

Magazines, reviewers, websites, have done their readership a disservice by not educating them about scientifically controlled listening tests. They don't promote their use for a variety of reasons: no time, financial constraints, no expertise on the staff, not interested, we've got acclaimed reviewers...please feel free to add your own reasons and while you're adding them make sure you include that those who sell wire don't want you to know. To make an effort to educate and inform their readership can be looked upon as a tacit admission that they've been doing it all wrong for a number of years. In other words, they've failed the public and probably been responsible for aiding in the fleecing of the unknowing and trusting public. Reviewers are notorious for ignoring scientific evidence but are quite adept at inventing and extrapolating all sorts of theories but never going to the root of the claim...Is this wire, amp, whatever different?

A blind test also serves another useful purpose. It permits you to get off the belief wagon and allows you to walk away with something useful...knowledge.

I think its a terrible state of affairs and certainly I don't expect most consumers to go in for the concept of blind testing. The method I proposed can be done in an evening with a group of friends and family. Such tests rightfully need to be a main component in experimentation and in any serious R&D. They ought to be done by the reviewers since the manufacturers are loathe to do it. It can be an unnerving experience to have one's faith tested and many a person has walked away with their beliefs and preconceived notions shattered. You ought to try it someday Mark. Won't hurt you. Then we can move on to discussions of other matters.

Perhaps you can provide a link to the methodology that your 'Professor of Guitar' used. I'm sure he published something after all this effort. However based upon the limited information provided, it would seem that his experimental design was flawed. Without further information from your part it's difficult to suggest meaningful improvements. I trust he consulted with mathemeticians and the requisite audio journals. Why perhaps Nousaine would've offered his guidance.

You suggest that blind tests are geared towards finding no differences as if there were some conspiracy. Poppycock! A simple listening test that lets any and all external influences enter into the evaluation is to be condemned and rejected. It's shameful and dishonest.

Are objectivists consumed? It may sound like that because the reality of things just doesn't seem to sink in. Subjectivists, if that's the correct word, continue to ignore scientific evidence. While this may be a bit of a generalisation, subjectivists continue to believe they can somehow overcome personal biases. I just take them out of the equation Mark and if that's thinking inside a box, then its a rather sturdy box to my mind. I don't think you take the same position when it comes to people who subscribe to your belief system.

The world was known to be round long before Columbus but perhaps you can point me to the experiments that these scientists you metion performed that gave credence the world was flat. Science continues to expand our understanding. Sometimes quickly, sometimes agonizingly slowly. The box continues to get painted in greater accuracy. You ought to try the biwire test Mark. Hell do it under your own conditions just don't peak behind the speakers. Make sure you get a few repetitions in otherwise you'll fall into the trap that you called heads and heads came up so therefore you can predict the outcome of a coin toss.
 

Chu Gai

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2001
Messages
7,270
Oh, I do apologize for my earlier 'tongue-in cheek' comments at the beginning of my thread. I'd hoped that someone would've called me on the following quote I'd made.
Try to burn them in using the same kind of music you listen to and just disconnect your speaker wires from your speakers so you don't stress the voicecoils.
Considering the speakers aren't connected we have an open circuit. No current flows. At least that's what it says on the wall of the box i'm in.
 

Mark Austin

Supporting Actor
Joined
Dec 28, 1999
Messages
639
You ought to try the biwire test Mark.
My current speakers aren't bi-wirable. :)
In conclusion I will just say that until the science crowd can take an honest look at what ABX is actually testing, and admit the errors in the conclusions drawn from a misapplied test, their will never be any sort of consensus.
 

Chu Gai

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2001
Messages
7,270
Your proposal harkens to a return to the dark ages without the promise of light. Come up with something that improves the consistency over what is currently done and removes the inherent biases. Pick a particular test that you have an issue with that you and perhaps the rest of us may have access to from the internet. Tell me the deficiencies you've found. Let's discuss how we can improve upon what has been done by incorporating modifications. Certainly you must have something better than 'just listen'? Geez Mark, you ought to participate in a blind test once. You even ought to look into selecting the musical material that you feel best will serve to support your beliefs. Go on and practice the training. I believe you'll find local universities in your general geographical area with listings of professors on the internet along with their phone numbers and email addresses. Many welcome the general public's questions and even will make the time for you to visit with them personally. Perhaps you may find it to be a beneficial and educational experience and get a greater understanding of just what such tests are used for. Differences are successfully tested using blind methodology all the time but if one seeks to turn audio into a mystical experience based upon a belief system...well that's their choice.
 

Chu Gai

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2001
Messages
7,270
maybe someday Mark, it'd be fun...now if you have those links to the 'guitar professor' or to some of the abx tests that you found deficient, i'd be pleased to look at them?
Hey no one said you can't be happy with your equipment and i'm sure you've spent much time selecting, moving, modifying, to maximize your enjoyment. yes the mystical side is fun...a pity there's a substantial price to pay for it.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Forum statistics

Threads
356,814
Messages
5,123,749
Members
144,184
Latest member
H-508
Recent bookmarks
0
Top