That's great Liguy! All the EE's I've talked to say that based on mathmatical calculations, cable design/material should make a significant difference in stereo output. But.... it's the same EE's who say they just can not HEAR the difference regardless of the design/material.
I think they just don't know what to look for.. or have lousy equipment. |
I think that a great majority of EE's are "spec readers" by nature. As such, most probably have equipment that measures well but sounds less than optimum. To have one "cross over" to the land of "believers" is quite excellent. Kudos to you Liguy and congrats on your purchase. Hope they make you happy for quite some time. Sean
> |
|
Liguy, thanks for your intellectual honesty and sharing it with us. Obviously you are a true empiricist, not stuck in the ideologies, which are passed on from one generation to the next, which in maintaining to be scientific fact more often than not just cover plain ignorance as regards phenomena occuring outside of the mainstream of official thinking. |
Hey its incredible. Liguy has already been voted down! I gave him a plus 2/2 and got two zeros as a result. Shooting in the back I call that. Why does the person not speak out, if he has something to criticise. Its just plain lazyness and or cowardice or probably both. So, that will get me a few minuses too, but I had to speak out. |
Hello, I gave everyone two points to even out that ridiculous backsniping. Great thread Liguy! |
I have posted this in other bi-wire threads, but for speakers designed for bi-wire the only consideration for the customer is does the additional cost of bi-wire ($500 + $500) sound better than a more expensive single run of speaker cable ($1000) with jumpers. The answer to this depends on what cables are being considered.
Even though I bi-wire I recognize there is no one correct
answer to this subject, each person must try out on their own system and see if it is worth the additional cost.
I take it from LiGuy that he feels the improvement is worth the additional cable cost. Also LiGuy the bi-wire improvement is maximized when two runs of speaker cable are used versus a single internal bi-wire cable which is an effective compromise to keep cost down. |
I agree many people look too much at the specs. Lets take that logic in a differenct direction. Now take the human voice. It also produces sound by way of vibrating vocal cords. Your typical decent tenor who sings as the cantor at your favorite place of worship can hit all the same notes as Pavarotti. So on paper all tenors will spec out the same. Therefore all tenors must sound exactly the same (NOT). This would mean that people who pay $300 for a ticket to hear Pavarotti at the Met, could hear the same thing at the local community opera for $20; and must be as crazy as people who spend $500 on a pair of cables, when $50 will do. So next time you get in that debate, ask the person if they can tell the difference between Pavarotti and a local tenor at church. If they are true to their belief, they will say there is no difference. |
I don't mean to throw cold water on this good discussion of the merits of biwiring, but if I read your post correctly Liguy, the jaw-dropping experience you had was when you first played your new speakers in your system at home. You seem to attribute the stunning sound to biwiring, but many other variables were changed at the same time. Maybe the MLs just sound better in your room, or with your equipment, than they did at the dealer's, irrespective of wiring configuration. Or did I miss something? -Dan |
Sugarbrie, that is an excellent analogy, thank you for cuttin that one loose. In the quiver it goes. I just dont understand this controversey though. |
excuse. . .please strike a certain offending letter "e" in that last one. You know, vanity and all. |
I had the same thoughts as Dan when I read the opening of this thread. It will be easy enough to check out, just try them both ways in your current setup. |
Chstob: I am just commenting on the controversy of all cables with the same specs should all sound the same, and those who hear a difference are just imagining they are. Same controversy with Digital Cables. It is just 1's and 0's going to a computer chip, so all digital cables are the same and the difference is just our imagination.
Megasam's comments are valid and right on. Is a better single $XXX cable better than a lesser Bi-wire cable that cost the same? I have Bi-Wire cables on my B&W's and like what they do. I may try to borrow (or buy used that I can resell) some better single cable and try it out.
|
If you don't mind a double run instead of Bi-Wire cables, I guess you could buy the better single cable and save up for a second pair later to double run. But, then some find a difference between double runs and Bi-Wire cables, which makes this hobby fun and crazy. |
Sugarbrie, I was not speaking to anything particular in your post re:a controversey, but admit I was unclear. My final comment was general and rhetorical.
Whether real or imagined, there is a difference. No one gets into any trouble until they try and explain why. We humans, with our ultra-sophisticated reasoning abilities, are not very well-suited to just let little conundrums rest. Me? I could care less why, just is. Hence, I don't understand how it amounts to a controversy. Lost o' things are hard to explain in mathematical terms. But to me, that says more about mathematics than it does anything else, because humans don't interface with the world via math formulas.
Maybe though, I have missed the boat completely on this one, and all here are just speaking on some plane I am unable to grasp. If that is the case, I expect to take my licks gettin' straightened out.
Thanks,
Chris |
There are too many points being raised to address properly, but here goes. Upfront, I’ll proudly admit to being an EE. I’m also a musician (amateur, but get paid fairly often), and while some of you wouldn’t consider my system high end, it’s not too bad: Dunlavy SM-1s driven by a Plinius 8150, with a Marantz CD/Pioneer DVD feeding an MSB Link DAC III.
First, Liguy, if you like the setup, great! No need to go to single cables, just enjoy. That’s the most important message. But Liguy is no empiricist, at least not as indicated in his message. As others have noted, he just set up new speakers, for crying out loud! This would be like me upgrading to Dunlavy SC-VIs while changing the Plinius’ power cord and then talking about how the power cord added so much bass!
Second, Sugarbie's Pavarotti example is absurd. The differences between voices are so gross as to be orders of magnitude greater than any effect cables (or most other equipment) can have. This is why you can tell your mom’s voice from a telemarketer immediately (other than the fact your mom probably doesn’t call during dinner . . .), even though it has traveled over miles of cable (not even silver) and passed through non-linear speech coders which have limited both the bandwidth as well as dynamic range.
Third, what are these “phenomena occuring outside of the mainstream of official thinking.”? Science has a VERY solid understanding of electrical signal propagation, especially at audio frequencies. If you know of any truly new effects that are significant at audio frequencies, you’re well on your way to a PhD in physics.
Last, there certainly are measurable differences between some audio cables. Except in extreme cases, though, I’d be willing to be that most of the differences have no audible effect. Solid empirical evidence that cables with similar electrical properties have audible differences is pretty hard to come by, to say the least.
Cheers,
JHunter |
Glad I got mine in before that last one!
*This is not an attack* Mr. Hunter, doesn't the word 'empirical' mean 'of, or pertaining to the senses'? If that is so (it is so), my ears provide the empirical evidence of discernable audible differences. I think you mean solid mathematical evidence, don't you?
Thanks,
Chris |
J Hunter: I am curious as to why you would be willing to bet that there would be no audible differences (in most cases) between wires and cable if you have not listened to "many/most" of them yourself (which you have obviously not done, based on your post). It does not seem to be much of a scientific approach on your part, IMO. Granted, I have listened to cables from different manufacturers that sounded very much alike (close but no cigar) and some sounded so awful (even after a few hundred hours of play) that they were sent back. Hearing is believing, but first you must take the time to listen. |
Thanks, I accomplished something for once. My point on voices is meant to be absurd. All of our voices are produced by exact same material; the same human flesh. But they all sound different. So why is it absurd to some that some of us think cables sound different made of the same material? I notice always notice a difference cable to cable, sometimes even a different length of the same cable (mainly with interconnects). |
Durbin, you bring up an excellent point. I should have been scientific and tried it both ways but I was just so happy with what I heard I just figured the heck with it because I am simply estatic with what I am hearing. Thanks everyone for the great response. |
Megasam, you also make a good point. I am presently using what the dealer lent me but soon I will have to purchase my own cables. I think I will take your advise and purchase separate cables. So for now it's onward to the hunt! (for cables that is :>) ) |
"Liguy, thanks for your intellectual honesty and sharing it with us. Obviously you are a true empiricist, not stuck in the ideologies, which are passed on from one generation to the next...."
--Lol! Empricism is as much an ideology as any other set of assumptions about how the world works. (Of course, "ideology" has a variety of meanings, which we can't go into here.)
"doesn't the word 'empirical' mean 'of, or pertaining to the senses'?"
--'Empirical' is probably best understood as a view of the world in which conclusions are drawn and truth-claims made on the basis of observation rather than speculation or unexamined assumption. In terms of western science, 'empirical' is generally taken to mean measurable, reproducable results that can be verified by a third party. So while what one hears may be 'empirical' in the strict sense of being a form of observation, from the point of view of science (or its practical application as engineering), the fact that what one claims to hear cannot be independently verified makes it suspect as a basis for drawing firm conclusions about the question at hand--in this case the value of bi-wiring.
"Whether real or imagined, there is a difference."
--??? To what extent can we say that an imaginary difference is a real difference?
"My point on voices is meant to be absurd. All of our voices are produced by exact same material; the same human flesh. But they all sound different. So why is it absurd to some that some of us think cables sound different made of the same material?"
--Is your flesh my flesh? I think not! But the analogy doesn't work no matter how you frame it--a singer is a source, whereas cable is a carrier or transmitter, clearly an apples-and-oranges situation. A more apt analogy would consider various transport media; for example, would Pavarotti (or, to take someone who's voice isn't shot, Domingo) sound different in Boston's Symphony Hall than he would in the Academy of Music in Philly, and if so, would it be because the air in Boston is different from the air in Philadelphia, or because of other factors? (The source material is unchanged, but the carrier is different.)
--This is all in good fun, of course. But it is interesting to note that several folks here have raised complex epistemological issues, possibly without even realizing it. There's certainly no way to discuss those issues in a forum such as this, and in any case it's likely that many folks wouldn't even recognize these questions as either philosophical or open to discussion--folks from the U.S. anyway, with its aggressively positivist outlook. :-)
Cheers! . . . and good listening. |
Callahfc: Interesting post, however where do you think that most of us U.S.'ers came from, well it certainly wasn't from the U.S. and most families (that I know anyway) do hang on to many of their cultural though processes (ones that vary from group to group, IMO). In other words I feel that it is easier (and more on the money) to characterize a cultural group than it is to do so to a conglomerate group (namely the U.S.) which is more of a storage than a melting pot. |
Holy heck! Liguy tried something - liked it immensely and decided that sharing his good feelings with this community would add to the moment. And then you guys turn it into a debate on electronic engineering theory again - like we haven't done the theory of bi-wiring before without any useful conclusion. Liguy does not need to do a double-blind test with a panel of listeners. He plugged the stuff in, it worked and he found the music to be wonderful - as it should be. In his situation I would be the same as him - my next thought would be to spin some disks, and tell some people about it. Liguy stated what he did and what happened - thanks Liguy, that is what I come here for. |
Redkiwi: Liguy's comparison is betwwen a Dealer demo and a home audition that also included the bi-wire cables in addition. Dan and myself had hoped that he would do another comparison between bi and single wire, at home, which would paint a much clearer picture of the difference in sound. If they are internally bi-wired cables though I don't know if would be right to use them in single wire mode as I am not familiar with the internaly bi-wired type. And yes, the rest of the comments are just fluff. |
"the comments" meaning my other comments. |
My take too Redkiwi, nice post. Craig |
Red and Garfish: So you guys don't think that there is much of a difference between auditioning the same set of speakers in different rooms, with different equipment different cabling. Now I am confused. |
Callahfc, "probably without realizing it"??????? How very condescending of you! In fact, this whole problem boils down to a theory of knowledge, and it was exactly that point that I was trying to make. You are in a lot worse a position to tell me how a thing affects my senses than I am to tell myself how my senses have been affected.
Empericism n. 1. the view that experience, especially of the senses, is the only source of knowledge. (The American Heritage College Dictionary, Third Edition, Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston-New York, 1997. at p.451.)
We can argue all day long about which is better, red or blue, and how to measure that difference in scientific terms. But as long as I live, no amount of partonage will ever convince me one way or the other. It is a subjective determination under any circumstance.
Cogito, ergo sum.
Thanks,
Chris |
Hi Dekay,
This is wildly off-topic, but--
I would argue that there's a lot less "storage" going on here in the U.S. than you suggest. In any case, I *was* referring to a cultural group when I remarked on the generally postivistic outlook of most Americans--it is a deeply-embedded part of our culture (regardless of whatever multi-cultural melting takes place). And of course, the dominant culture of the U.S. derives from European culture--and Positivism is a French invention (Comte). So I don't think we're really in disagreement here. |
Hi Chris,
In all fairness, I did say "possibly," not "probably." In any case, I agree that it's an interesting epistemological problem, not because of what it means for the way we understand audio gear, but for what it means regarding our understanding of how the world works.
I attempted to suggest that in our culture a substantial proportion of the population doesn't realize that there is even such a thing as an epistemological problem. It's easy enough to talk about objectivity, subjectivity, empiricism, and all that, but when we dig down to examine what these really mean and what their ramifications are regarding how we view the world, not to mention their cultural and historical origins, things become more complicated; and this is an endeavor that IMO few in the population at large ever attempt, or even recognize as possible.
Sometimes you need to toss a bomb or two to get folks to take a look at their unexamined assumptions. ;-)
And as I said before, this is all in fun. |
Callahfc: Yes and no, I would guess on agreement. I have a tendency to view America as being divided/segregated on a whole. I do however prefer to live in areas that I find to be a melting pot (we live in West Hollywood, CA right now which is a good example of this) and do not feel comfortable in exclusive areas, regardless of who habitates them. I came from a very mixed family which I am certain influenced me in this regard. Anyway, back to audio and I hope that Liguy will be able to try out the ML's with both single and bi-wiring in his own setup and post the results. |
I am stunned. By many of the responses above.
Of course Liguy's reported experience tells us nothing about bi-wiring. At a minimum, Liguy, you could compare "biwiring" with the jumpers or shorting straps in place to traditional bi-wiring (taking them out), and then tell us what you think. If you prefer the sound with the jumpers removed then we would "know" that with your speakers in your room you think bi-wiring is better than single wiring (that's for Callahfc, with whom I am in general agreement).
I also appreciated Jbhunter's post. I don't even want to talk about the voice analogy.
And I agree in spirit with Redkiwi and (I think) Chstob. We've beaten this issue to death. Nothing any of us can say will lead to any sort of conclusion about the merits of biwiring. If you have single wire cable now and you are happy with the sound, leave well enough alone and experiment with the placement of your speakers. You'll get more of a difference from repositioning your speakers than from changing wires unless there is really someting wrong with the wires you have.
If you have bi-wire cables like Liguy, experiment with leaving the jumpers/shorting straps in and taking them out. Decide for yourself if you can detect a difference and prefer one way or the other. I did and I like my speakers bi-wired. That proves nothing other than I like my speakers bi-wired. |
Sugarbrie- I was ready to congratulate you (you're first post) on a first rate ecumenicalism, but then I found out it was really epistemological which certainly has ramifications for the ontology of the audible ephemera of the connective media in question. As Teilhard de Chardin wrote as commented upon by Alfred North Whitehead in response to the monograph by Soren Kierkegaard, (quote)
'Je parle espagnol a Dieu, italien aux femmes, francais aux hommes et allemand a mon cheval.' |
Kitch rules! I have no horse, though I live in Texas. Now that we all agree (I think) do any of you know about a biwire tweak where you take the brass strap and put it back on the negative side only? I was reading at a nother lesser forum this is supposed to be the cats meow. Anyone tried it? I'm afraid to, without first knowing about it. It can't hurt right?
Thanks,
Chris |
Chris, yes I suggested to Doug S that he try it on the last bi-wiring thread. It's as safe as leaving both straps in, which is safe as long as you dont cross positive and negative. Jon Risch, who recommends trying it says its system dependent and may or may not yield any benefit.
I think the majority of people who have tried it have said it sounds better that way, more detail. A few have said it makes no diff, and a few (like me) say it's worse. I notice a real difference in frequency response, almost as though the tweeter output is boosted with the one strap in, and subjectively, there's less bass. That is consistent with reports by others of greater detail and more air, but as to whether that is "better" is a matter of opinion. Seems like a modification to the speaker's design, which I would not want to with my speakers. |
I shall try it then. I just wanted to make sure I wouldn't smoke something. If it works though, and I do like it 'better', based on this thread, should I report it?
Thanks for imparting some of your knowledge, it is most appreciated.
Chris |
BTW, I cannot tell a lie, the correct attribution is not de Chardin, the dreaded humanist, but actually Charles III of Spain. I don't remember the context, but it was likely what he said in response to his query about the weather in the English Channel that summer of 1548. |
Dekay, I apologize because I think I may have caused some confusion. My origional post was not clear as it could have been. When I auditioned the speakers at the dealer he asked me if I would be biwiring. I said no (Very foolish on my part) so he disconnected the biwire cables, installed the jumpers and used single cables for the audition. Once I got the speakers home I figured what the heck and removed the jumpers and conned the biwire cable (Best move I ever made). If there was any confusion I apologize and hope that cleared it up. Thank you all for posting as I am thrilled to read all of your responses. |
Dekay; don't read too much into my agreement with Redkiwi. It's as Paulwp said, I agree with the "spirit" of Redkiwi's post. Otherwise, IMO, in the near term, we've had enough of going around and around around about AB testing, ABX testing, science vs subjectivism, XYZ testing, objective vs subjective etc etc etc.
You must be feeling a little "frisky" and looking for some action though, heh heh heh. Yes, there are a few things Liguy could do to narrow down what is causing his recent bout of happiness, but I'm content to just let him do it, and happy that he's found a system configuration that he is really grooving on. BTW, I use bi-wiring but I've done it for so long that I forget why. Maybe just because Vandersteen recommends it very highly. Cheers. Craig. |
Garfish: I get it. Can Liguy use the internaly biwired cables both ways to test the difference in sound (hooking up both leads to the low frequency posts with a jumper) or is this not a good thing? It is of course up to Liguy as to whether he wants to perform the test. I do not know if I myself would want to touch a thing at this point if the sound is that nice. I swear that some of the times I have jockied cables around and then put them back in order, the sound was not as good afterward. I am going to pick up one of the "noise sniffer" pens described on the PS Audio site mentioned in another thread for my next cable venture and see if it will take some of the guess work out of it. It also drives my wife nuts when I keep jacking the cables around for days to get the sound back to where it was. Oh, and I wasn't really feeling frisky, just a little gas which is normal for my age. It has passed though. |
Hi Dekay. What I saw was a guy (Liguy as it happens) reporting an experience here. He did not misrepresent it but perhaps he could have been more specific about what he was comparing. The way I saw it was that what he did was no conclusive proof of anything in particular, except that he was enjoying his music. My post was an emotional reaction to this thread diverting itself once again into the "who has the biggest speaker cable" discussion - if you get my meaning - and I found it to be a bit disrepectful of the spirit of Liguy's post. But it was an emotional over-reaction and I apologise. By the way, did you try the "Rainbow Foil"? I tried it briefly and did not find any musically significant difference, but will try it again. |
Liguy your comments are not valid on biwire.You failed to take into account the reasons for the potential improvment in sound.
Was it really the biwire that made the difference.
You listened to them at the dealrs location.Different room different amps pre amps source.
If your Cd player at home is better than the dealers thats the source of your improvment not the biwire
Is your room a better set up probably.
Are your amps pre better suited to the Logans.
I suggest you hook them up jumpered and then biwired and listen.
I hope you see where i am coming from.As an EE you would think you would be more anylitical.
Where the volume levels identical,I could go on and on. |
Wow - don't think I've ever seen a thread grow so fast.
Christ (Chstob) - point well taken. I'd used empirical to mean experimental (not pure math at all, just the opposite). In a real sense I don't feel that Liguy performed any kind of experiment, at least not pertaining to biwiring.
Dekay - what can I say? I'm a gambling man ;-). My relative certainty is based on a lack of any solid objective evidence that similarly measuring cables sound audibly different while the converse does hold (IIRC). I'm certainly willing to change my mind, though am personally disinclined to spend time swapping cables at home in an experimentally invalid environment.
Sugarbie - now I see what you were getting at w/Pavarotti. It's an interesting approach, but I suspect that there are substantial and meaningful physical differences between most of us and Pavorotti (make of that what you will . . .). The cable differences are easily quantified and most fall "in the noise" as far a effect on sound.
Redkiwi - if Liguy did as you said, I'd be in wholehearted agreement with you. But he didn't try anything whatsoever meaningful re: biwiring, yet claimed that as the cause of the wonderful new sound. It's like the Dunlavy SM-1 vs. SM-VI example I gave previously.
Oh, dear - looks like I'm setting myself up to be the next objectivist-in-the-barrel!
Jhunter |
JHunter: Auditioning cable is work to me (and I do not do a lot of it). I am certain that I could find better matches, but again I am not willing to put forth the effort. I do not however disbeleive the observations of most others, though it is uncertain as to whether I would hear exactly what they are hearing if I were in the same room at the same time. This whole business is, as always, of a highly personal nature. Redkiwi: I also apoligize for "digging". I have noticed a difference on "some" duplicate A/B discs with the Rainbow Foil but have lacked the concentration as of late to do any serious listening. I am also waiting for the return of my SET amp which due to its greater detail (than my SS amp) will take a lot of the guess work out of testing the foil and will make it an easier and much more enjoyable project (I love the sound of this amp). In addition I am still awaiting the Nueance shelving and am looking into new speaker cable as well, so seem to have quite a lot (for me anyway) stacked up in my audio in box. I also ordered the Absolute power cords to play around with on my power conditioners and as Elizabeth am looking for high quality male IEC plugs as I will need to retrofit such plugs to the Monster HTS2000's. I looking for a CD mat at this point on which to apply the Rainbow foil (instead of applying it to the CD itself). I plan on using two identical (sound wise) CD mats (one with Rainbow foil and one without for the testing). |
Hi Dekay; re your last 4/19 post: I suppose an internal biwire could be connected as you suggest, eg to compare single wire vs biwire, but I think the results would only be valid for that particular set up. R. Vandersteen says true biwiring is preferrable to "internal" biwiring, and I've read that the wires in a true biwire should be separated by an inch or two, however, this has low WAF. It even makes me nervous when my wife gets the vacuum near my speaker cables. The vacuum makes the wires nervous-- just as it does our cat. I want nice relaxed wires.
I did try separating my biwired spkr cables(for a few hours) and it made quite a dramatic difference-- all bad; bright, harsh, aggressive. But then, I've had my cables tightly tied together for 2-3 years (with wire ties), and I'm convinced that I have, in effect, turned them into an internal biwire. To really test this, I think I would need to separate the wires for several days or weeks.
Supposedly, the bass wires carry much more current than the mid/treble cables, and thus-- at least when close-- could have some kind of effect on all four wires. But my system sounds very good with the cables tied together so I haven't had much incentive to change it. Cheers. Craig |
Leafs, I recieved your email but I will attempt to answer you here so everyone can participate. I will attempt to answer each one of your questions but I warn you as you may not like some of the answers. First some background. I graduated with a BSEE from Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn in 1976. That is all you need to know about my technical background so let me start answering some questions for you. If you read my origional post carefully you would see that I have a good relationship with my dealer who I have dealt with throughout the years. After all, he lent me cables until I have the money to buy some. He did not have to do that. Since I have this relationship can you guess where I bought all of my audio equipment and can you guess what I auditioned the speakers with. If you read my other posts you would have seen that in the store the speakers had a single wire and the biwire jumpers in. I can tell you that my dealer's room has been specifically designed for sound. He wouldn't be in business long if the equipment he sold sounded lousy in his own establishment. I can also tell you my living room is just that: "a living room". It is not, and will never, have the acoustics of an auditioning room at a audio dealer. With all of this information I can safely say it was the biwiring. Redkiwi was correct in his acessment that I heard something that I thought was tremendous and wanted to share it. I also wanted to share, that as an engineer I was not tempted to try and understand why but only enjoy what I had heard. So there you have it. If it was not scientific enough for you Mr. Leafs, sorry that is just too bad. I am not, under any circumstances going to let you prevent me from enjoying what I heard that evening. If it bothers you so much you figure out why it sounded better. |
Garfish: I was discussing cable in general with Pierre at Mapleshade and got the impression that it is most important to space the channels from each other and not the highs from the lows on one channel (I did this as we were talking on the phone and bingo, much more open sound - boy he/Pierre has a lot of patience). Your situation makes perfect sense, except I never did try spacing the high and the lows as you did. I wish that I would have played around with it more when I had the bi-wire setup, but there is always the next time. And, Liguy, if you are bowled over with your current setup then good for you. As I said above I would be hesitant to touch/move anything. My system has been off since I demoed some wire a friend brought over two weeks ago (the center image moved to the left) and I have not been able to set it right. I am wondering now if I might have damaged my micro wire IC and will switch it out next. |
Liguy,I am very very happy for you.You are happy with the sound .You still have not told us if you have tried single wire with jumper at home.Only then can you say biwiring is better.So dont get me wrong.I am so happy for your results.I just dont want you to mislead others.
I went from BI to single wire with my set up at home and single wire is better. |
liguy, i too, prefer bi-wire to single wire in my set-up. but, i've tried it both ways. (now that i'm running an identical pair of electrocompaniet amps in a vertically biamped set-up, i can say, that in my system, at least, this is *really* the way to go!) i'd really be interested in your reaction to using these same speaker wires, doubled-up to one speaker jack, w/the jumpers in place. you have everything there at your disposal, it would take you only a few minutes, at most, to make the change. don't get me wrong - i'm sure your set-up in your home is great, & i'm also sure your dealer has an excellent demo set-up. but, i have to side w/those who feel that moving speakers from one room to another, w/who-knows-what different electronics/cabling, will introduce far more change/variables to the sonics, than yust the fact that the speaker wiring was changed from single-wire set-up to bi-wire set-up. are these even the same brand of wire that were used when at the dealers? regards, doug s. |
