The truth about biwiring!!!

Superfi in Leeds told me that you can achieve biwiring simply by twisting cables together and plugging them in each single channel socket. When I queried this I was asked whether I knew anything about electricity and an explanation came out that I won’t bore you with.

On the other hand, Barnsley Hifi told me it only really makes a difference if you have A & B speaker outlets. Are they both correct?

This issue came up when I suggested the advantage of 7.1 was that you can bi-amp the front speakers (I know this is different to biwiring). Hence, wire twisting the front speaker if you only have 5.1.

Incidentally, Superfi Leeds also told me there was no such thing as a Marantz SR5400OSE even though it’s listed on their website!

I think some of the people that work in hifi shops have a serious attitude problem. I really hate their supercilious manner and their attempts to use subterfuge.

 

well you can biwire by twisting together...... i suppose the using A and B could be called biamping, but since often these actually come from the same place, its a very loose way to describe things.

as far as the truth, dont even think about trying to get it!

ad

 

Glad you agree. At the end of the day I would rather buy my stuff over the internet than have to deal with those guys. It appears both are methods are right. Whathifi have a good description of it here put quite eloquently.
http://www.whathifi.com/newsMainTemplate.asp?storyID=59&newssectionID=3

I think am going to buy a 7.1 and biamp. It seems this is the real way to go and appears more likely to reap benefits to my simple mind.

 

A + B speaker terminals are still powered by the same amp internaly. All that does is virtualy twist the wires together.

I'm not convinced about bi-wireing even though I always have done to speakers that can (I use A+B terminals). Logicaly, electricaly I dont see how the wire makes a difference apart from using more of it.

Bi amping on the other hand keeps the high/low sections completly separate, and usualy provides more power etc too.

 

You want to bi-amp by using the 2 unused channels in a 5.1 setup? If not, what is the advantage of bi-amp with 7.1 compared to 5.1 ?

I would guess you would use the surround back channels for the bi-amp then, but those channels will not get the same signal as the front channels get, so I don't think it will sound any good... Or maybe you have a receiver that supports bi-amp via the surround back?

 

Yes I was planning to get the VSX-AX3 that has a biamp setting for the rear surrounds. I can't see myself ever having space for 8 speakers!

 

Then it makes a lot of sense

 

I always use the explanation bi-wiring will always make an improvement but not always alot. It seems to have a big impact on mission and castle speakers but varies on alot of others?!?

 

Has anyone tried a bridged operation with their amps?

 

Here are lots of reading on bi-wiring:

Confused about Bi-wiring?

Bi-Wiring Questions Answered

Analytical Approach to Bi-Wiring

More Than You'd Ever Want To Know about Bi-Wiring

WireWorld Audio on Discrete Bi-Wiring

Thiel Audio against Bi-wiring

Advantages & Disadvantages of Bi-Wiring

The Problem with Bi-wiring

My take is that if you use bi-wire cable, the cable actually increases in gauge and therefore better. Rule of thumb states that the thicker the gauge, the better. However, it's going to cost more so just use what is sufficient. IMO, 12AWG is ample.

 

bridging has been mulled over extensively also. I believe the opinion is that it is not the wisest setup since it limits the current available

ad

 

Simple arithmetic shows you can still have 5.1 surround sound rather than 3.1.

Simple again, for a 5.1 amp use 5-Stereo - in this mode the left and right rears have the same signal as the left and right fronts. 7.1 amps can be configured for biamping.

 

Can all 7.1 amps do this? I don't think my hk avr4550 can...
If it can, can you plz tell me how?

 

Reading the manual it appears you can biamp by using the multizone feature. However, the volume is not set using the volume control and therefore you might find it hard to keep them in sync. Whereas the Pioneer VX3 volume works for both when set to the biamp option. Otherwise I stand corrected.

 

I would recommend anyone doing this do it with their eyes open.... just because it is a biamp doesnt mean it is better.

The 2 channels spare that you use are likely to be the least equipped of any channels since they expect to be smaller than the main channels. If this is the case, you could seriously strain these channels by driving the biamp. Even if it isnt and all channels are identical (which i doubt), you are using common supplies so will be straining the whole system and will reduce quality on the main 2 channels as well as all of the other channels. So you see, it may not be worth it

ad

 

I thought AV amps were supposed to run without 'strain'. You may be right on the pros and cons but Pioneer for one clearly discuss the biamp facility in their manual. Many people do believe dynamics are improved particularly for the top end. If the channels are not identical I agree this would be a major flaw.

 

Even ultrahigh end levinson amps will experience strain in certain situations. AV amps have major design limitations (space/heat/cost) which mean that they are going to be the most prone of almost any type of amp. Dont necessarily believe that Pioneer mentioning it means that it is good. It is just a feature, like a sound format. Just because Pioneer mentions its dsp modes doesnt mean you will be using them!

ad

 

I have two mark levinson dual mono amps bi wired and bi amped and they sound great for both music and a/v on my kef ref. 4 speakers.

 

I didnt think anyone would actually be able to tell me they were in this situation! Im very jealous!

ad

 

I have the levinson 37 transport the 360s dac and the 380s pre amp together they make nice music

 

If i were you, id never tell anyone on here wheree you live!

ad