Biwire cable on a standard 2 terminal speaker?


Is this simply a dumb idea?

13 years ago after auditioning many different speaker cables I came across some MIT biwires which at the time were expensive to buy.The difference with these cables was the quality of sound they produced on my Def Tech BP2000's which are biwireable.

After all these years I finally took possession of a pair of AV13 LS-6 line arrays. They are not biwireable. I purchased a set of Reality cables which seem to work OK. I do have issues with sound as I try to marry my cables and equipment to these speakers.

Out of curiosity I connected the Reality cables to Def Techs, listened, then put the MIT biwires back in. The MIT cable produced far more magic in terms of soundstage, imaging, air, all the reasons why I bought them so many years ago.

The wife asked why I don't use them with our new speakers. The answer was simple, "they're biwires, 4 terminals don't fit on 2 binding posts. In reality, they could. Would there be a reason not to try other than reterminating the ends to spade lugs?

The biwires cables have a built-in network box which I pretty sure separate the high and low frequencies. So I'm defeating the idea of a biwire cable by connecting the separated wires (frequencies) together as one. Maybe I just answered my own question. More experienced folks may have better knowledge than I I'm sure.
128x128desalvo55

Showing 4 responses by kr4

1. If there's a network to separate the high and low frequencies (which I doubt), you would want to defeat that separation by combining the wires for a non-biwired speaker.

2. OTOH, the presence of such a network (which I doubt) would impose a loss with this cable compared to an ordinary single-wire arrangement.

Kal
I have several sets of AQ shotgun biwires and none have any differentiation between the two runs.

Kal
All my AQ shotgun cables came directly from AQ and at their suggestion.

Kal