Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Technical Questions Bi-wiring and Speaker wires: Is it necessary?

In the past many have asked does Bi-wiring and expensive speaker cables work? The supposed experts (Engineers, Electrician and Electronics expert) used there "great" knowledge in "VERY basic electrical circuit theory" and apply the electrical parameters of the cable (the inductance, capacitance, and resistance) Here are some articles with scientific methods used to quantify there some benefits.

http://www.geocities.com/jonrisch/c3.htm
http://www.sonicdesign.se//biwire.html
http://www.geocities.com/jonrisch/index2.htm
http://www.venhaus1.com/diycatfivecables.html

These are some articles that show a plausible quantifiable change either good or bad in a language that you are familiar with.

Have you guys ever bother to try the experiments yourselves and prove that higher end wire and bi-wiring DOES NOT work?

On the other side of the coin here is the other side....

http://home.earthlink.net/~rogerr7/wire.htm

Is the el cheapo 12 gauge good enough? Of course it is. But I still like the way my Kimber sounds. And it does sound a little DIFFERENT than my 8 year old crappy Monster cable.

This is to all Audiophiles....

http://www.mothraresearch.com/index.html


Kimber!
Kimbeerrrrr!
www.kimber.com!!!!!
lazer!
sharks with frikin lazer beams!

Saturn.
Of course you know this post will be scrutinized, so allow me to begin by looking at the first link you've provided. I will look at the other links later when i have more time, unless someone like sushi or Semi beats me to it. I commend you on giving this topic another go.

Mr. Risch discusses this biwiring issue from a very narrow point of view. His article, although articulate, is full of some very questionable ideas. Two of these ideas include notions on how signals flow through, or according to Risch 'around' but not actually IN the wires, as well as physicall vibrations from speaker sound creating a new signal within your cables from movement.
Although this is very interesting and incredibly unbelievable by anyone who knows how electrons work within a metallic crystaline structure, Mr. Risch still does not provide any scientifically proven data for his ideas. He clearly states his opinion is...this and then states it is backed up by 'listening tests'.
Note this quote from his webpage:

In reply to:

---

In my opinion {HIS opinion}, backed up by both listening tests, and measurements {no reference as to how, where or data shown}, steel in an interconnect can be heard as a
detriment, and steel near speaker cables, or in the connectors for either, can be a detriment. Excessive inductance in a speaker cable, such as simple zip cord, can also make the sound dull and lifeless{according to whose definition? 50 ppl sampled all said the same thing?}

---

Mr. Risch does not reference any science journal with the methodology or results of such tests. In fact, his entire bibliography, with the exception of TWO, somewhat related papers, all come from magazine sources which are not credible scientific publications.
Second to that, virtually anyone can publish a book or write a website. An example is a friend of my father's who recently published a cook book and a book on electronics, paid out of her own pocket for 1000 copies and she's given away about 10 of them and cannot sell the rest. Would you take info from this electronics book and use it as fact?
Mr. Risch has quoted a ton of 'references' from these single source, non-peer reviewed information. This alone makes any of statements pure opinion and not scientifically credible.

Certainly many people can debate the electrical theory of cables but ultimately the NRC Ottawa tests have already shown, in a credible and scientifically tested, peer reviewed manner, that people cannot tell the difference. It is interesting how few people care to believe in that research instead of articles read in magazines.

If as an individual you hear a difference in cables, again, the more power to you, but when other's try to sell those concepts to newbies, that's when i get unsettled.
You ought to see how i am during commercials on tv for products like hair care and body soaps. The jargon is incredible.
I believe it was some clothes detergent now selling the power of oxygen in their soap. It is absolutely laughable, but i guarantee you that company has some scientific reasoning for that as well. Chemistry is really more my strong suit but it relates to electrical physics in many ways.

Show me the proof.

Not sure if anybody reading this is familiar with the Mr Risch in question, but here is a little bio he wrote on himself.

http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.pl?forum=cables&n=67724&highlight=jon+risch+qualifications+Jon+Risch&r=&session=

Bottom line -- he's an EE, has been in audio for a fair number of years, an advocate of DIY (so no he is not selling anything, and generally upset with the way the industry going).

I see very little incentive for him to "bend" the facts (i.e. lie, but that's MY opinion).

I applaud Chess for his patience, but I'm not about to systematically go through all of the problems I have with this.

Instead, I'll put a challenge to you. Find me one documented case where anyone passed a double blind test with the outcome of a preference for a given cable, especially a bi-wire setup.

Hey guys I am not bringing up this sore topic for the sake of disproving the EXPERTS or testing there patience.
I have just brought to you my findings because some of you have scrutinized my past comments on this very subject. You ask me to show some evidence of tests and I brought to you some links for information.
I ask you directly Semi, show me proof yourself that there is a document case that FAILS a double blind test. Have you tried different wires? One being a 16 gauge zip cord vs a Nordost Vahalla Cable? Well with bi-wire thats a little harder but I have had times where I "thought" I heard a difference. This is all speculative because music to me is an art not a scientific method. If I had the means to record anolog wave patterns and store data digitally and show you a breakdown of octaves before and after a wire swap or a bi-wire setup I would just to find out myself. For those who have lost there patience maybe it its time to get of your high horse and open you ears.

"Your a legend in your own mind"


ps: As there are many experts I find in this forum. I have learned many a things from people here. I do value there keen insights and expertise. I applaud you all.

In reply to:

---

I ask you directly Semi, show me proof yourself that there is a document case that FAILS a double blind test.

---

If memory serves, Alan Lofft has posted the results of their tests with the "experts" in double blind tests at the Canadian research center at this very site. They're findings were that no one was able to consistently pick one speaker wire over another as sounding better.

If I can get the search working at Ars, I'll try to find the links posted there that also detail this same failure on behalf of the "experts" in many double blind tests.

In reply to:

---

One being a 16 gauge zip cord vs a Nordost Vahalla Cable? Well with bi-wire thats a little harder but I have had times where I "thought" I heard a difference.

---

A scientific approach would be to recognize that there are potentially very powerful psychological reasons for this as well. To simply assume it's true would be fallacy to those of us that approach the world in a scientific manner.

In reply to:

---

This is all speculative because music to me is an art not a scientific method.

---

This is a strawman.

Music is art.

The technology used to reproduce that music is science and very well understood science at that.

In reply to:

---

If I had the means to record anolog wave patterns and store data digitally and show you a breakdown of octaves before and after a wire swap or a bi-wire setup I would just to find out myself.

---

I've posted links to just that in the past. The result is that there are measureable differences between various transfer methods. The problem is that those that support the conjecture that expensive cables offer a better solution fail to address whether or not this difference is audible. The human ear is far less precise than the $250k oscilloscope in my lab. I can measure the difference. Whether you will hear it or not is another matter entirely.

I will submit to you that the jitter and skew in the actual electronic components used in the construction of much of this hardware isn't even specified by the manufacturers because, at the speeds this technology opperates, they do not result in a practical difference. We worry about it in our products here because we opperate at upwards of 12GHz where these issues finally matter in the real world.

Some additional reading material:

Alan's thoughts:
http://www.axiomaudio.com/boards/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Board=Advice&Number=1437&page=&view=&sb=&o=

Here's the thoughts on speaker wire from the engineers at National that design many of the components in your hardware:
http://www.national.com/rap/Story/0,1562,3,00.html

Here are the thoughts of John Dunlavy:
http://www.verber.com/mark/cables.html

And this from Rane:
http://www.rane.com/note126.html

http://www.passlabs.com/pdf/spkrcabl.pdf

Here's another:
http://home.earthlink.net/~rogerr7/wire.htm

OGS,
Mr. Risch is probably not bending facts as he honestly believes the conclusions that he has drawn.
However, he presents very little evidence of his findings except to say "believe me, i'm a pro, i've done some testing".

He has at least provided a paper that he published in AES on a user friendly method of subjective listening tests (although such a paper should really be titled "user friendly method for objectivity in subjective listening tests"). I have not read this paper, perhaps Alan has. If i have the time i will certainly pick it up from the local university library to review.

One big problem with scientists, we can also get caught up in our own expectations and bias even before starting experiments. This is why so many audiophiles perceive there will be differences even before being tested in an unbiased way.
Has anyone ever read the book "Wonderful Life" by Steven J. Gould on the history of evolution based on fossils from the Burgess Shale?
He very thoroughly describes a scientist (Walcott) who mis-identified many fossils and represented a very different view on the history of life based primarily on the classical mindset of how these fossils HAVE to fit into modern phyla. Walcott was biased as to how the fossils needed to be placed within taxonomy before even looking at them.
This was the ACCEPTED taxonomy for over 50 years!!

Okey Okey I stand corrected. Many a times.

What I heard is what I heard. Maybe psychologically I willed myself to believe a change. SO be it.

Thanks for some good interesting reading.

Again I applaud you guys for your knowledge.

I still will keep my Kimber.

Kimbers aren't THAT expensive and are pretty. If you have already dropped a couple grand on speakers and likely a couple more on your hardware, it's not unreasonable to spend some cash on your wires as the economies of scale all play out. At the very least, they look cool.

I don't think it's as much a matter of willing yourself to perceive a change as much as expecting one. Same idea as the placebo effect.

Saturn,
Its very possible that your nine year old Monster cables had some oxidized ends or sections or possibly were not a completely copper material that could make a difference in sound between the newer Kimbers. I would say this is somewhat possible but i cannot judge as to how large the effect would be.

I was also looking at Kimber cable many months ago when i was having trouble finding anything cheaper here in Canada (cheaper and yet stereo quality that is, since the Home Depot material, 12ga was still a buck fifty a foot and more stiff than clothes hangers).
As cables expense goes, i would agree with Semi in that Kimbers have a neat look and are a decent make but lower priced than most.
The biggest problem in buying such cables is the markup. I saw a 'standard' price for some Kimbers (can't remember the model offhand) at around $7 a foot and through a connection who sells the material, they were going to offer it for $4 a foot. Knowing that my connection was still going to make a profit, what does that tell you about the retail markup of these things?
Absolutely ridiculous.
It is the equivalent of paying $60,000 for a Honda Civic. No one would pay that much for such a vehicle but when it comes to cable, the logical approach goes out the door. Perhaps people have a better idea how to judge the value of a vehicle better than the value of home electronics and components.

In any event, as long as you don't post a detailed description of how your Kimbers changed your life by turning the upper frequencies yellow, made the mids make your morning toasts and the lows send the shuttle into space let alone sound great then i'm good with whatever you find makes a difference to you.

morning toasts.... hahahaha

point taken.

I thought i would post this link i came across while looking at the Hsu subwoofers pages:

Hsu sitepage

This is rarely seen but refreshing to see.
Hsu, the reknowned sub makers (sushi just bought one), are selling subwoofer cable for a whopping 50 cents a foot and even recommend/suggest using a plain old Radio Shack y-cable if you are splitting the signal.

Its not too often you see a speaker company selling or recommending the "cheap" or often called "low quality" speaker wire.

Ah... you found it, chess.

And I bought it! LOL

When you buy the cable with your subwoofer, you further save whopping $5 on the cable! Now it is 25 cents/ft.

You know, I bought the Axioms; I bought the Hsu... Do you see some behavioral patterns here? LOL

Ah... you found it, chess.

And I bought it! LOL

When you buy the cable with your subwoofer, you further save whopping $5 on the cable! Now it is 25 cents/ft.

In reply to:

---

Its not too often you see a speaker company selling or recommending the "cheap" or often called "low quality" speaker wire.

---

There's a link around here somewhere from the people at McIntosh that explain this phenomenon. They actually were at a trade show and were using lamp wire with their setup to demo their new units. They wound up having to go get expensive speaker wire because people were biasing themselves based on the fact they could see the cheap wire.

Every time they made people do blind listening, everyone failed, but as soon as they saw the wire, they heard all kinds of boogie men. It's an interesting read if you can find it.

I read that about the Macintosh owner as well, that he was not one to condone using expensive cable to increase sound quality.

Maybe they should have hid the cables under a rug and told people they were Cardost. I would bet money that you would have ppl come along and say "oh ya, those sound like Cardost cables".
Then perhaps you could tell the browser that you also have some MIT cables they could hear, walk around back and simply swap the lamp cord for another set of lamp cord.
Of course that is just being evil and playing with people's minds. You would offend way too many and then of course not sell your product all too well.

This may have been posted elsewhere, but for those that are interested, here is the link to "Speaker Wire - A History" by Roger Russell formally of McIntosh. Very interesting reading, expecially the part on wire gauge, blind testing, well actually all of it. Enjoy.

http://home.earthlink.net/~rogerr7/wire.htm

Saturn,

Man, you sure know how to liven up a lull in a message board. Here is yet another article concering "wire".
www.audioholics.com/FAQS/Audioquest.html.

mwc

That was a nifty discussion. A good take on marketing skill and scientific spin.

Thanks for the link mwc.

Yeah, its kind of amusing to watchum' do the hurkey-jurkey(propaganda) when someone asks the hard questions and hold their feet to the fire.

Your welcome on the link. I really like the way those guys at audioholics.com think.

Chess

Since I'm the resident cable expert (hehe) paying for obsene wire I would like to correct you in stating that it is not Cardost.. but you actually mean Cardas for Cardas Cross cables ($1050 a pair pretty cheap) or Nordost for Nordost Valhalla cables (1 meter bi-wire $4200)

Hey mwc:

I do it once in a while to get Semi_On's blood running a bit. It doesn't work with Chess though. He has too much patience.

Saturn,
I stand corrected.

Perhaps my mind muddled together the Nordost and Cardas to come up with Cardost.
Perhaps i was dreaming there was even a better cable if you could twine the two together (double the performance?).

Chess:

Wow I never thought about that ... lemme try...
goody gooody gooooody......

Here are some very good links to articles on cables:


http://audioholics.com/techtips/buyingguides/interconnects/cable_budget.php>http://audioholics.com/techtips/audioprinciples/cables.html

http://audioholics.com/techtips/buyingguides/interconnects/cable_budget.php

Take Jon Risch's info with a grain of salt. Most of what he posts is untrue. His cable receipts are laughable. Using a coax is the way he suggests adds very high capacitance and eliminates the benefit of the shield.

As for his agenda, rest assured he has one. He wouldn't be the moderator of the cable forum at Audioasylum, while also banning a DBT in only that forum where it would seem to be most applicable given the psychological aspects of cables.