Bi-Wire Speaker Cable Question - Can They Be Used As Standard Speaker Cables Without A Problem?

[TubeLover]

I believe I know the likely answer to this, but just want to be certain. There are a used pair of speaker cables that just appeared for sale which I have been trying to find for nearly a year. They were reported by a quality audio reviewer to have special synergy with my upstairs system. The only issue is that the pair for sale are bi-wired. I have no means to use them bi-wired since my speakers cannot accommodate that. Can I use them as a standard pair of speaker cables without a problem? And what would be the proper means of connecting the ends with two pairs of wires? I strongly suspect it shouldn't be an issue, but I've simply never come across this specific situation before. 

Thanks for any assistance with this.

 

JC

[Allan F]

On 10/6/2019 at 9:53 PM, TubeLover said:

Thanks for the suggestion, Nikhil. The stacking feature would be ideal, but In reading the description, they seem to be designed for bare wire, though?

 

JC

 

There are numerous spade to banana adapters available to allow you to "stack" and connect bi-wire cables with spades to single speaker terminations. Audioquest and Vampire are two options, the latter likely to provide a more robust connection. You may want to Google "spade to banana adapters" for other possibilities.

[The Computer Audiophile]

I’ve seen manufacturers do what you want to do by connecting all four ends of the wire to the two available binding posts. 
 

I’m guessing it would work with just two of the four as well because I don’t believe there’s a crossover in the cable. Thus all frequencies go through to all wires. 

[TubeLover]

Thanks Chris. I just, however, realized that the Maggie .7 speakers that I would be connecting them to do not accept spades (only banana's). That would mean no possible way of connecting all four wires to the speaker binding posts. And, as you mentioned that is how I've seen manufacturers connect them.

 

I would clearly  rather have a standard pair, but am only considering purchasing these since they are the first pair in over a year that I've seen for sale of this particular model of speaker cable. 

 

JC

[The Computer Audiophile]

Can you have them re-terminated?

[TubeLover]

As I'm sure you know,Chris, having re-termination done by the original cable manufacturer can be a bit pricey, and these are already expensive, even used. My thought was to use these for the speaker ends:

 

https://www.musicdirect.com/store/audioquest-1002-banana-adapter-set-of-4

 

JC

 

 

[Nikhil]

JC,

 

I would recommend the Vampire Wire SB Banana Connectors.

They can be "stacked" to accommodate bi-wire cables.

 

The Cable Company seems to have the best prices on these for some reason

https://www.thecableco.com/vampire-wires-sb-banana-pair.html

 

I would call them to check before ordering.

 

Regards

 

 

.

 

 

[TubeLover]

16 hours ago, Nikhil said:

JC,

 

I would recommend the Vampire Wire SB Banana Connectors.

They can be "stacked" to accommodate bi-wire cables.

 

The Cable Company seems to have the best prices on these for some reason

https://www.thecableco.com/vampire-wires-sb-banana-pair.html

 

I would call them to check before ordering.

 

Regards

 

 

.

 

 

Thanks for the suggestion, Nikhil. The stacking feature would be ideal, but In reading the description, they seem to be designed for bare wire, though?

 

JC

[Nikhil]

They will accept bare wire and spades.

 

Regards 

 

 

.

[Shimei]

I bi-wired my Tektons just because I had the wire laying around. Before I installed my system I ordered a few rolls of KnuKonceptz Kord Kable 10 Gauge Copper Speaker Wire [heavy].  I spliced two pairs of wire at the amp and soldered using high content silver solder so there's one positive and one negative on one end and then four on the opposite. Then just to be cool and go overkill I installed a bridge at the end [essentially bridged at both ends]. Should be more than I'll ever need to drive 600 watts rms for six feet of length.

 

I do recommend this wire if anyone is interested: www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0076SFE9Q/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o03_s01?ie=UTF8&psc=1

 

[Kal Rubinson]

1 hour ago, Shimei said:

Then just to be cool and go overkill I installed a bridge at the end [essentially bridged at both ends].

So you have effectively doubled-up on the wiregauge and negated the "bi-wire" paradigm.  What was your intent?

[Shimei]

3 hours ago, Kal Rubinson said:

So you have effectively doubled-up on the wiregauge and negated the "bi-wire" paradigm.  What was your intent?

 

Yes, that is correct, I essentially doubled up on the wire gauge. As far as straying from the "bi-wire" paradigm does it matter on what end the bridge exists or if two bridges exists one on either end? I don't think so and noticed no difference using the bi-wire configuration. Since I had the extra wire laying around I decided to use it. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

Technically bi-wire means two separate runs of wires. By connecting the binding posts at your speaker, you are negating the bi-wire. 

 

 

You should have two connections at the amp and two connections at the speaker, with nothing connecting the two separate connections. 

[Shimei]

7 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Technically bi-wire means two separate runs of wires. By connecting the binding posts at your speaker, you are negating the bi-wire. 

 

 

You should have two connections at the amp and two connections at the speaker, with nothing connecting the two separate connections. 

Should, but eh, consider it the path to least resistance should some occur. The sound is much "warmer" now with the jumper, I can hear the difference!!! J/king, I'm not serious at all. I agree that with the jumper this is no longer a bi-wire setup. Two separate runs of wire whether connected at the same binding post of the amp or at the speaker...... given the gauge of the wire is sufficient with one pair in contrasts to half as sufficient which necessitates two pair I really don't think it makes a difference. 

 

I consider it a conversation piece now! 

 

Enjoy,

William

[The Computer Audiophile]

4 minutes ago, Shimei said:

I consider it a conversation piece now! 

All good. it's about the journey as much as the destination :~)

[ericuco]

19 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

You should have two connections at the amp and two connections at the speaker, with nothing connecting the two separate connections. 

 I think this is called bi-amping - two connections at the amp(s) and speaker.
 

Bi-wiring is one connection at amp and two at speaker.

 

In my system, I have one set of connections at amp (+ & -) and two sets of connections at speaker, so four wires in total.

[Kal Rubinson]

21 minutes ago, Shimei said:

I consider it a conversation piece now! 

It sure is.

[The Computer Audiophile]

Just now, Kal Rubinson said:

It sure is.

Thanks for the laugh Kal. I needed it today :~)

[Shimei]

I had truly used a bi-wire setup at first with these pictured cables. The Tekton towers, however, are not internally configured at the binding posts of the towers [2 pair] for bi-amp but bi-wire. I kid you not, I went backwards using the below pictured cables. The wire gauge is thin [14 or 16 gauge] in comparison to the two pairs of 10 gauge wire I cut, soldered, and used in their place. 

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

4 minutes ago, ericuco said:

 I think this is called bi-amping - two connections at the amp(s) and speaker.
 

Bi-wiring is one connection at amp and two at speaker.

 

In my system, I have one set of connections at amp (+ & -) and two sets of connections at speaker, so four wires in total.

Absolutely correct.

[Kal Rubinson]

3 minutes ago, ericuco said:

 I think this is called bi-amping - two connections at the amp(s) and speaker.
 

Bi-wiring is one connection at amp and two at speaker.

Bi-wiring is two paired cables with common connections at the (single) amp with each going to a different pair of terminals on the speaker.

Bi-amping uses two paired cables each connected to a separate amp and with each going to a different pair of terminals on the speaker.

[Shimei]

13 minutes ago, Kal Rubinson said:

It sure is.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

2 hours ago, Shimei said:

 

Need we say more?

[audiobomber]

17 hours ago, Shimei said:

 

Yes, that is correct, I essentially doubled up on the wire gauge. As far as straying from the "bi-wire" paradigm does it matter on what end the bridge exists or if two bridges exists one on either end? I don't think so and noticed no difference using the bi-wire configuration. Since I had the extra wire laying around I decided to use it. 

With biwiring, the high and low frequency signal paths are separated. This is claimed to reduce Intermodulation Distortion. I've also heard biwiring prevents high powered lows from swamping delicate highs, which sounds to me like a layman description of IM.

 

If you can't hear the difference, I guess it's academic. I have never tried your unusual connection method. I do hear differences between biwire and single run. 

[Shimei]

15 minutes ago, audiobomber said:

With biwiring, the high and low frequency signal paths are separated. This is claimed to reduce Intermodulation Distortion. I've also heard biwiring prevents high powered lows from swamping delicate highs, which sounds to me like a layman description of IM.

 

If you can't hear the difference, I guess it's academic. I have never tried your unusual connection method. I do hear differences between biwire and single run. 

 

As a conversation piece I'm actually curious about a hypothetical scenario pertaining to the bridge at the speaker binding post. Say, the wiring of one pair ends up becoming "overloaded" and the resulting resistance increases more than that of the jumper or bridge leading to the other pair of wires. Would there be an undesirable "oscillation" between the pairs of speaker wires because of the jumper? Or might that be actually desirable? I guess this scenario assumes that one pair of wires might increase in resistance over the other and of course exceeding the resistance of the bridge. Just wondering whether oscillation might ever be a concern?

 

I personally do not think the bridge is a concern and the resistance of the bridge itself probably prevents itself from being the path taken. That is, if electrical current takes the path of least resistance the very jumper probably acts to keep the pairs of wires segregated unless the above scenario were to occur. Electricity acting like water taking the path of least resistance or seeking out the lowest level. 

[audiobomber]

17 minutes ago, Shimei said:

As a conversation piece I'm actually curious about a hypothetical scenario pertaining to the bridge at the speaker binding post. Say, the wiring of one pair ends up becoming "overloaded" and the resulting resistance increases more than that of the jumper or bridge leading to the other pair of wires. Would there be an undesirable "oscillation" between the pairs of speaker wires because of the jumper? Or might that be actually desirable? I guess this scenario assumes that one pair of wires might increase in resistance over the other and of course exceeding the resistance of the bridge. Just wondering whether oscillation might ever be a concern?

I don't know the answer, but I would not be comfortable connecting this way. I've never heard it recommended, and never heard of anyone wiring their system like this. It may be perfectly benign, but on the possibility that there is some reason not to do it, I would stay with the tried and true biwire connection. 

 

Quote

I personally do not think the bridge is a concern and the resistance of the bridge itself probably prevents itself from being the path taken. That is, if electrical current takes the path of least resistance. 

 

Current always takes the path of least resistance, but in proportion to the resistance. IOW, some current will flow in each leg according to the formula for parallel resistances:

R_T = 1/R₁ + 1/R_R2

 

I_T = I_R1 + I_R2