Speaker Break In Question - going from single wired to bi-wired

I own a pair of Wilson Benesch Square 5's and have had them hooked up as a single wire connection for the past year until recently when I had my speaker cables re-terminated to be bi-wired. The question I have and I do realize that the cables themselves need time to break in, but do the terminals themselves and any associated electronics in the speakers also need break in time due to the wiring change ?     
Assuming you were using the loudspeakers with jumpers when connected to your non-bi-wire cables, then no additional break-in will occur to the loudspeaker when switching to biwire cables.
OnHhy61 - you are right and that answers that one ! It just taken soo long for the '' new '' bi-wiring to break in.  
I will let you know on that one  -  I have heard the same but did I listen ...No !  
Makes no difference. New or old wires. Break in is not needed for wires and for speakers we are talking may be a few hours if anything at all. My drivers are stress tested before installation - so break in is not needed at all.

If your speakers need a long break in then it suggests the drive motors are insufficient and the surround and spider compliance is way too high (bad design).
Some feel that each element (woofer or tweeter) needs a specific type of speaker wire, and those who say that are often wire manufacturers. They could be right, but the dude who designed my speakers told me they were "more coherant" single wired, and he was right (tried both ways). I think it has to be a speaker-specific thing, and I understand that one run of excellent single wire is better than 2 runs of mediocre bi-wire…for whatever THAT'S worth. It would make sense to have very good internal wire in your speakers to make bi wiring less of a big deal as a single wire run is split anyway after the crossover (or high and low pass elements) does its thing. Also, cable break in is interesting as it would seem you need to listen to it throughout to determine if it's ready for prime time.
" I had my speaker cables re-terminated to be bi-wired."

Were they re-terminated so that the high and low sections are identical? Sometimes they allow more conductors for low frequencies, or if the cable has more than 1 type of conductor, they will split them up by type. (Example: silver to the highs, copper to the lows.).  
Thank you gentlemen for your responses  - and Mr Shadorne not sure where you are going as the speakers are a year old and just was wondering. OnHwy61 - got it right    
I'm guessing the reason behind the original question is there was no perceived sonic improvement between the single-wire and bi-wire arrangements. If so, I don't think the "break-in" had anything to do with this result, especially if you just "re-terminated" the same cables. I did help a friend a couple of years ago to switch from single to bi-wire and the SQ did improve a little but he also used much better (bi-wire) cables. Even then the improvement was very subtle. He eventually bi-amped the speakers using identical monoblocks and that DID make a noticeable difference.
Ideally you should run 2 pairs of speaker cables to different amps (i.e. bi-amp).  AND use a monoblock for each driver with a short cable...

Dick Vandersteen does like bi-wiring and IIRC he has some explanations for it on the internet somewhere.

That does not mean it will work with all designs
" Ideally you should run 2 pairs of speaker cables to different amps (i.e. bi-amp).  AND use a monoblock for each driver with a short cable.."

Biamping like you are suggesting almost always fails. 90%+ chance you'll need to get an active xover, and they create as many problems as they fix. It makes more sense to do a vertical biamp with 2 identical stereo amps because you can get around all those problems. Actually, not long ago I was fooling with my system which has 2 Ayre V-5's amps in a vertical biamp. I connected them horizontal to see what it would sound like because its been a long time since I last tried it. It turned out to be a train wreck. It ruined the overall sound of my system.

I do believe bi-wiring is a voodoo thing ,it's better to invest on good jumpers or biamp with 2 identical stereo amps as @sfall suggested for a real sound improvement. 
Yes, I don't think anyone will claim that biwring is as good as biamping - the problem with multiple amps is cost.

sfall - no manf. would use an amp for every driver with a Xover between them - you would use DSP ahead of all amps to deal with this, as meridian has done since the 1990s - yes, expensive
Richard Vandersteen has always been clear that running two single wire sets of identical cables or at least cables of identical topology is the way to go with his speakers.  RV provides designs of such value that few customers have bawked at the extra expense. If you have the $ to bi-amp then have at it and congratulations.  If you mate those amps with quality wires you should be getting from the speakers that which they are capable of giving.

unless you have some exotic or very expensive cables, it's pretty easy to determine which solution works best for you...I'm lucky, my Cerious Nano are not expensive and I can use a double run...
I think the thread diverted from what the OP was asking about but for me the best bi-amping approach was using an identical pair of stereo amps (MC2200) switched to mono and hooked to bi-wired capable speakers using two pairs of cables. I had to use two pairs because the amp only had one set of ports. Some amps have two sets of speaker ports making bi-wiring a little easier.