While it seems I am in the minority, I do believe that bi-wire and bi-amp solutions can make noticeable improvements to the reproduction of music. While I watch movies on the same system, I would expect the benefits for movies to be far less evident, and in my case, less important.

B&W is a company with which I have a very long and satisfying experience. Over the past twenty years, I have owned numerous generations of their speakers. While visiting my in-laws in England two years ago, I had the opportunity to visit their headquarters in Worthing. We spoke to two of the engineers responsible for the development of the Nautilus line, and my respect for the philosophy of the company was significantly reinforced.

A large part of my affection for Outlaw Audio is based on what I perceive as a similar honesty and directness in their approach to the design and development of their product line. Case in point... B&W had some very functional, yet aesthetically challenged speaker designs throughout the early period of the company. The development of the drivers, crossovers, and cabinet/enclosures has all been reduced to the most detailed and fundamental analysis. At the time of my visit, I believe there were something like twenty Ph.D’s working on various elements of loudspeaker research and design.

The introduction of separate crossover boards in the B&W line is almost as old as the company itself. I believe bi-wire terminals were first included in the initial Matrix series release in 1987. B&W have an explanation of their reasons for providing the possibility for bi-wiring and bi-amping in the FAQ section of their website.

The engineers I spoke with at B&W said that they use a bi-amplified system configuration for their personal use, and that was sufficient enough for me to try it for myself. In my personal experience, playing well-recorded music, I believe there are significant sonic improvements to the bi-amplified system I have described in another Outlaw topic forum. It should be pointed out that because the B&W crossovers are designed to complement the specific drivers, it was not recommended to bypass the crossovers inside the speakers by using custom crossovers elsewhere in the signal path. This IS a valid solution for other speakers however.

While a significant number of prominent recording/mastering studios use B&W monitors, I do not know how many make use of the bi-wire terminal option. My guess it that it is mostly common. Since this subject has gotten so much mileage, I have promised myself to contact B&W, and perhaps some studios to hear their opinions and the list of supporting equipment.

Joshorr... The same US firm, located in Massachusetts distributes B&W and Rotel. If you look at some of the recent Rotel promotional video, B&W seem to be the only speakers connected. I believe that B&W 604’s are very capable speakers, so given the right recordings and supporting equipment, perhaps there will be some qualitative improvement to bi-wiring, but not easily noticeable. The B&W Nautilus technology speakers that incorporate the FST midrange unit, have better rendering of the midrange frequencies where I believe the benefits are more easily perceived.

While I respectfully disagree with those who would place bi-wiring and/or bi-amping in the same kettle with so many limp fish, I will acknowledge that the differences are subtle, and dependant on very good supporting equipment to allow them to be noticed at all.

My affection for the B&W mark, and the people behind it, is something that I believe many Outlaws and Gunslingers can understand. I am confident that when they took the trouble to include this feature, they were not motivated solely by some marketing survey, but in evolving the potential of the speaker line. B&W and Outlaw Audio are among that rare breed of companies that simply care enough to do things well, but not waste.

[This message has been edited by AGAssarsson (edited June 22, 2003).]