|
Bronze Member Username: Rick_rTucson, AZ USA Post Number: 96 Registered: Mar-08 | I have speakers with three binding posts (treble/mid/bass) that support both banana and spade connections. I have a set of bi-wire cables enroute that have spades on both ends and are equally split (same # and type of conductors in each leg of the bi-wire - 2x8AWG split into 4x11AWG). I'm going to need a jumper to connect to one of the posts and plan on making it DIY. 1) Which posts should I hook the bi-wire cable ends to and which posts should the jumper go between. 2) What connectors should I use on the jumpers. I could use bananas or I could double up one post with two spade connectors. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13596 Registered: May-04 | . Rick, it's hard for me to understand how you could post the reply you did in the "Speaker Cables?" thread and then ask this question. What gives? . |
|
Bronze Member Username: Rick_rTucson, AZ USA Post Number: 98 Registered: Mar-08 | Ok JV - I probably should have been a little more specific. Per other thread - none of this should matter electrically. Conductors are conductors. Audio systems are all lumped impedences. Bi-wiring is a waste of time. etc. However, I've seen advice that if you have speakers with two posts and have a single cable, you should connect to the treble directly and jumper to the bass. Perhaps since human hearing is more sensitive to any phase anomilies in high frequencies, its best to get the signal to the tweeter first and then jumper to the bass. Though if you buy that skin effect causes phase delay on the order of a few hundred picoseconds on the low end, its curious that you wouldn't exploit the delay in the jumper to buy back some of that skew by hooking to the bass first and then jumping to the treble. I've got a tri-wired speaker. If I extend the above logic for a single cable, it would likely say hook to the tweeter then jump from there to both the mid and the bass. (sourcing from one post keeps the jumper delay to the other two posts about equal). Or maybe the mid range is more important than the tweeter?? Just FYI - my crossovers are at 690 and at 3300. Since I've got a bi-wired cable coming, I think the above logic would say hook the bi-wire to the treble and mid and jump to the bass. So this is the answer I'm expecting someone to give me for my configuration. From your experience, would this be your recommendation and do you think it should make a difference? Or is there really no rule of thumb here I and should try all permutations and pick the one I think sounds best (which theory would say there shouldn't be any audible difference). On a much more practical matter. I've heard you say banana connectors are not great. I don't have much experience with spade or banana connectors or with binding posts - all my old (cheap) speakers took raw wire. Mechanically looking at the posts I have, I'm not sure whether two spades will work well and I'm almost postive that three spades would not work. I think they are what are referred to as 5 way binding posts - hole in the center of the top for the banana with a threaded cylinder to cam down on the pin and a second threaded cylinder that cam's down a top flat plate to a bottom flat plate. There is an opening on two sides for the spades to go between the plates and a post in the middle to line the spade throat on. The spades I have (RS cheap) on the interrim cabling I made are not long enough to get to the post before the wire crimp starts to get in the way so the plate is just cam'ed down holding the spade. The plate also 'tilts' so that the side that has the spade is higher and the other side is lower. This would seem to say that the top of the spade is not making very good contact with the top plate and that a second spade on the other side might actually help to level the top plate so that the top sides of the spades would make better connections with the top plate. (assuming the spades are about the same height - but certainly no worse than it is now). Someone (at "The Cable Company") told me that I shouldn't try to get two spades on one post and that I should use banana's for the jumper if I had spades on the cable. Same person told me that if I have gold plated binding posts I should use gold plated spades. I was considering Furutech Rhodium plated vs Gold Plated. Probably doesn't make any difference sonically. What about from a corrusion or contact stand point. Any thoughts there. Most of this is mechanical issues and could try it after I have the gear in hand - but since I need to buy the connectors (8 for four jumpers) and they're not cheap - wanted to get a second opinion. I was headed for using spades on the jumpers with Rhodium plating and jumping from the mid to the bass since they are closest. What's your favorite contact enhancer and would you put it on the conductors before crimping them in the spade as well as on the spade afterwards? I'm not planning on soldering them and will enclose the jumper in heat shrink down to below the spade crimp to keep the conductors away from air. |
|
Platinum Member Username: NuckPost Number: 12359 Registered: Dec-04 | My money is on connecting bass and mid, jump to high. The high jumper can be done in test stages with maybe)?) the most immediate change noted? Just go bare wire, Rick. You can terminate later, but fresh wire is as good as it gets while testing, etc. De-oxit on the terminals if required. Which speakers are these BTW? |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 9549 Registered: Feb-05 | I'd go the opposite way Nuck. In my experience I get more detail and a more coherent musical presentation that way. My speakers have sounded a little more like they do when biwired connected at the hi end and jumped down. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13598 Registered: May-04 | . I don't believe there is a right answer for your speakers, RR, at least not in your scheme of things. For one thing I would tell you trying to "buy back" a few picoseconds of delay through jumpers is an unrealistic goal. You don't have the knowledge of how the crossover has been designed or laid out to make such a guess and the assumption that a few picoseconds makes any real difference when the crossover filters result in much, much larger time and phase shifts which are then compensated by reversing absolute phase of the connections at each driver - the assumption a few picoseconds will make audible changes after all that is IMO not being realistic. If the speakers systems are not strictly time aligned and you are sitting exactly at the corrrect propogation point for all drivers, what are you possibly going to accomplish should you actually gain back your few picoseconds? Experiment and use the bi-wiring as a means of separating the larger amounts of back EMF coming from the woofer from the two smaller, more fragile drivers. Connect to the bass posts and determine whether the other side of the cable works best on either the mid or high frequency posts. I would avoid bananas if at all possible. The hole in the center pin of the five-ways is for bare wire. . |
|
Bronze Member Username: Rick_rTucson, AZ USA Post Number: 100 Registered: Mar-08 | Nuck - these are Dail Euphonia MS5's. http://www.dali-speakers.com/display_content.php/INT/speakers.html/161/1120 |
|
Silver Member Username: Rick_rTucson, AZ USA Post Number: 101 Registered: Mar-08 | JV - I mispoke in my other post and here. According to: http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/audio/skineffect/page2.html The dispersion variance for a generic 3 meter speaker cable between 20 and 20Khz is on the order of 80 ns - not ps. So even if one were tuning with the jumper - it would take a really long one to get to 80 ns. I was sorta kidding about that. Given the fact that this should be a lumped impedance system, the back EMF should just go up one leg and back down the other with a bi-wire. But again I'm trying to run the experiment and listen to it rather than predict the outcome. Thanks for the suggestions. |
|
Silver Member Username: Rick_rTucson, AZ USA Post Number: 102 Registered: Mar-08 | I didn't bother to figure out how many permutations of contection paths there are in this case, but I with the set of comments above, I'm not sure that any have been eliminated. Lol Thanks for all the input. I'll let you know how this all turns out in a month or two. The cables are on a slow boat from New Zealand. OMG - I just went silver. Guess I can log off now. |
|
Gold Member Username: StryvnWisconsin Post Number: 1124 Registered: Dec-06 | Stick around, man. Once you go Gold Phelps' brings out the bong. Mike, were you bi-wiring the Gallos with magnet wire on the 7300? |
|
Gold Member Username: Mike3Wylie, Tx USA Post Number: 1945 Registered: May-06 | stryvn, not exactly. I had two DIY runs of speaker wire with previous amps but found that the MIT Shotgun 2's performed better with the 7300 output. When I initially had the two DIY I was utilizing the Carver, then the MAC 6200. One was for the amp and the other was for the Gallo sub-amp. With the 7300 I had the aforementioned MITs and Goertz for the sub amp. With the 240s the MITs were moved to the sub-amp and the DIYs together service the amps. Keep in mind that the 2nd binding posts on the Gallos are not for bi-wiring but for driving the 2nd coil of the woofer where you move the bottom end from 35 Hz to 22 Hz. |