Generally speaking, you can expect a cleaner sound overall with better separation between instruments. A little better imaging also. The real issue with bi-wiring is, is it worth doing? That all depends on your equipment. Most people will tell you to get a single run of a really good cable with jumpers, instead of 2 lesser runs. I feel that is the way to go most of the time. There are some exceptions, however. In my main system, I use Vandersteen speakers. They design their speakers to be bi-wired. It makes a very big difference. In my system, 2 inexpensive runs of cable sound much better that 1 really expensive pair. In my 2nd system, I have a pair of Wilson speakers. They don't believe in bi-wiring. They only put 1 set of binding posts on the speakers and don't even allow for it.
In the end, every system is different and you just have to try it. Theres really no other way. I had a pair of Martin Logan ESL's and I preferred 1 run of cable with jumpers with those speakers.
I prefer a single wire with jumpers to biwiring. I agree it really depends on the speaker and how the crossover is designed.
I have owned many, many, many speakers and outside of the Vandys, I always preferred the method above.
It's not always better. I don't know if it is my speakers, my amps, or the speaker/amp interface, but, my system sounds better not bi wired. It is better though using a double run of the same cables.
The cables may not make all that much difference - the speaker crossovers are probably the bigger determining factor for what if any benefit you might find with bi-wiring. There's some fairly good and accessible info at sites like Elliott Sound Products: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=elliott+sound+products+bi-wiring
I agree with the other comment above that this will depend on how the speaker was designed. Was the designer crafting the crossover with bi-wiring or bi-amping in mind? Or are those dual binding posts an afterthought, aimed at not losing potential sales t folks who may want to bi-wire or bi-amp.
Definitely biwire, no questions about it. The King will sound much better when biwired, as will the VAC amps.
I reviewed the King as well as the VAC Phi 200 amps for Dagogo.com. I bought the King following the review, as it is such a fantastic ESL, and without exception ran it biwired. You would be losing a lot of the speaker's potential if you did not do so.
The other option is to secure a very good quality jumper cable as opposed to the supplied jumpers. This will likely improve the sound nicely but I cannot say whether it will be as good as biwiring.
Now, the speaker cabling itself used for biwiring is critical; if a poor caliber of wire is used the system sound will suffer, but if you use a fine quality sounding wire your system will shine.
Theoretically, if you use the highest grade cable between your terminals as jumpers or if the crossover uses the best cable, Bi Wiring should not sound better. I've never seen 8 or 10 foot of cable sound better than a few inches of cable if equivelant cable is used throughout.
I stripped a small section of insulation off my speaker cable and ran it through to the second terminal figuring a consistent cable had to be not a bad thing?
the section between the two posts has the insulation.
O second terminal post
(|) first terminal post
|_____ Speaker cable
In every situation where I've biwired, the sound quality improved. This was limited to using the same quality cables in both single wire and biwiring. I have never compared more expensive single wiring to lower priced biwiring. The typical benefit was an increase in midrange clarity.....similar to the difference when using good power conditioning.....the offending artifacts aren't that noticable until removed.
I think I first experimented with biwiring with Mission speakers in the mid 1980's.
Cable makers in general are not surprisingly behind bi-wiring...intersting to note that Wilson, a premium maker, doesnt see the benefits...which mirrors my experience...to each his own...
Asked another way, is there a disadvantage to bi-wireing speakers having the required binding posts.
I biwire my Apogees, but that's no surprise because they pretty much HAVE to be biwired due to their low impedance. It's very noticeable, but maybe not so much on other speakers that present less of a load to the amp.
That being said, I use the same wire on both tweeter and woofer. I do see some biwire cable companies using different wire for tweeter and woofer (or perhaps just different gauge). I would think you would want to retain the character of the wire on both top and bottom, so using the same wire for both makes sense to me. But I can understand others thinking "more transparent on top" or "more tingly" and using silver on the tweeter with big gauge copper on the bass.
What do you use?
Are you sure those dual/jumpered posts aren't there mainly for bi-amping, bi-wiring merely an incidental afterthought? Bi-wiring is a relatively recent practice. Bi-amping is not. Adequate guage is what matters. Where are the dual posts when you choose to bi-amp?
I assume Csontos means recent few decades when he says recent practice. I was introduced to the idea of biwiring more than 40 years ago by a high-end shop in Palo Alto, CA when I bought my first Proceed amp and KEF speakers.
Okay, fine. Same question though. However, how many hi-end speakers can you name with that capability 40 years ago? I'm aware of all of them and none had it. Dual posts only came into the picture when bi-amping mods were on the table.
I suppose it depends on how narrowly you define high-end. But what's the point? I think your recency notion is incorrect, but what difference does it make to the question of whether biwiring is efficacious.
It's a matter of relevance.