|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
64.74.212.1
In Reply to: Re: Bi-wire vs. single run. posted by Willis on January 15, 2007 at 08:12:38:
...where on Vandersteen's site this is located?
Follow Ups:
Try this.Answer 7 of the FAQ.
Willis
Vandersteen's explanation has no real accuracy. It's just supposition supported by the use of one hall probe to measure field outside a wire pair.Just because the explanation is without merit doesn't mean biwiring is invalid...just the explanation.
That's what happens when people try to explain what they hear without the benefit of support from the science or engineering community.
IMHO, that sucks. (not the creation of fictional "science", but the lack of support from the scientific community)
Hi.Vendors' offers, snake oils or not, once they are in the right direction of scienftic principles, deserve our consideration with open minds.
Like a $500 wooden knob, which the vendors claim they improves the sound. It could be dismissed as a money-quest joke.
But second thought on its claim basing on lowering the resonance frequency of the overall volume control tracking movement would deserve more skeptical thinking.
I go for Vandersteen's explanation of bi-wring can reduce the hi/lo audio frequency intermoduation along the same common conductors.
His explanation, scientifically PROVEN or not, could be a matter of time. Who can definetely say no todate?I've proven this is true to many audiophiles' golden ears, including my rusted pair, with my own speaker systems along with quite a few
expensive brandname makes which I upgraded from single-wired to bi-wired & tri-wired in these years. Bi-wiring or tri-wiring sound better than single wiring. This is my hands-on experience.Of course, I rebuilt the cross-over networks involved from standard factory single-wired to bi/tri-wired to provide genuine multi-wiring instead of quasi-bi-wiring using a jumper.
c-J
cj: ""
Vendors' offers, snake oils or not, once they are in the right direction of scienftic principles, deserve our consideration with open minds.""Anecdotal accounts of audibility deserve the consideration. Explanations without scientific foundation deserve only scrutiny. If the explanation wanders out of reality at the jump, it deserves only to be trashed, as acceptance of ridiculous explanations leads us away from reality.
For example, the use of a hall probe to detect the external magnetic field of a wire, while impressive to the layman, does nothing to float my boat.. The external magnetic field of a wire pair is easily calculated out ten decimal places, and has been for half a century now. Mention of a hall probe is floobydust, meant to impress.
Once the actual mag field is understood, then the next thing I see..the recommendation to keep the second wire pair a foot away, becomes just trivially silly. Twisting one of them negates that, as does using a star quad configuration correctly, where the magnetic fields are orthogonal and not coupling.
The explanation given is useless, and in fact is worse than that, as it misleads. (not the consumer, they don't really know enough of this tech garbage to care, but for V-man himself, it eliminates the forward path).
cj: ""
I go for Vandersteen's explanation of bi-wring can reduce the hi/lo audio frequency intermoduation along the same common conductors.
His explanation, scientifically PROVEN or not, could be a matter of time. Who can definetely say no todate?""His explanation of fields and interaction with the wires is easily proven incorrect, even by simple thought experiments. The explanation only serves to redirect analysis away from what is really going on. So I can easily say it is incorrect.
cj: ""
I've proven this is true to many audiophiles' golden ears, including my rusted pair, with my own speaker systems along with quite a few
expensive brandname makes which I upgraded from single-wired to bi-wired & tri-wired in these years. Bi-wiring or tri-wiring sound better than single wiring. This is my hands-on experience""I value the anecdotal experience and accounts of people such as yourself far more than I do a scientifically unsupported and misguided "tech note" or "white paper". Those are the bane to advancement.
Cheers, John
This would call for a true shotgun wire that is separable. Is there such a cable? There are a few shotgun cables, but they are mostly fastened together in some way I believe. And considering the cost, most don't buy them when they think they can get similar performance from a single biwire cable which is a little over half the cost
I only use my gun whenever kindness fails
Here is the quote from the FAQ:http://www.vandersteen.com/pages/Answr7.htm
With the high-current signal (Bass) separated from the low-current signal (Treble) this small signal modulation was eliminated as long as the cables were separated by at least an inch or two. (To keep the treble cable out of the field surrounding the bass cable.)
Willis: ""
Here is the quote from the FAQ:
http://www.vandersteen.com/pages/Answr7.htm
With the high-current signal (Bass) separated from the low-current signal (Treble) this small signal modulation was eliminated as long as the cables were separated by at least an inch or two. (To keep the treble cable out of the field surrounding the bass cable.)""
The statement you quote gives the appearance that there actually is merit to their assertion. That is unsupported by their site. What they did say is this:
""We believe that this dynamic field modulates the smaller signals, especially the very low level treble frequencies.""No proof, just one hall probe measurement..
It's all just supposition without measurement.
They are, of course, somewhat in the correct direction. But the explanation is off base, leading to incorrect conclusions.
You can take your discussion about the lack of scientific rigor to Mr. Vandersteen at the following:http://www.vandersteen.com/pages/Techpage1.html
Why do I feel that you have a plastic pocket protector?
willis: ""
You can take your discussion about the lack of scientific rigor to Mr. Vandersteen at the following:
http://www.vandersteen.com/pages/Techpage1.html""And what would that serve? I've handed rigorously accurate derivations of this stuff to vendors like him, to application and design engineers at some of the biggest audio companies around, and the end result?? pfffft.
Vendors such as Vandersteen do not care. And, WHY SHOULD THEY? The verbage on his site is full of theoretical holes big enough to drive a truck through...What market advantage would be gained by fixing it? Reality is rarely sexy, and doesn't feed the kids.. I cannot blame him, nor any other high end vendors for ignoring the rigorously accurate equations and the ramifications to their product lines.. If the equations clearly explain what is going on with respect to biwiring, and COMPLETELY AGREE WITH AUDIBILITY EXPERIENCE reported by the vendor, it lacks a certain, shall we say, "curb appeal".
I've posted the correct equations and discussion at many different forums, with the expectation that any vendor who really cares, can pick it up and use it to better their product, while dispelling ridiculous myths. Unfortunately, the myths are far sexier to the customer.
willis: ""
Why do I feel that you have a plastic pocket protector?""Why do you say it with disdain?
I was geeky long before it was socially acceptable to be so. Now, with all the hacker kids, the bluetooth stuff, the mp3, the internet, being a geek isn't so special...:-(
Understanding e/m field theory doesn't make one a social outcast. Accusing me of owning a "pocket protector" appears as just a defense mechanism of yours..besides, I've never owned one..and kidded my friends in grad school for using them.. called em "poindexters", don't think anybody here remembers that term...
Bottom line: discussion with the vendors has proven useless, they don't think it will help their bottom line, and I agree with them..the consumer needs to change first. The vendors will provide a technical explanation commensurate with their customer's expectations.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: