I have been reading one of the other forums dealing with bi-wiring and there seems to be a healthy difference of opinion about the merits of doing this.

I recently purchased some Paradigm Monitor 5's to use as front L/R's, very nice sounding speakers and a great value indeed. they can be b-wired, while my old speakers could not.

The front mains are currently connected directly to the 1050, set to small, and crossed at 60 Hz. The sub is connected to the LFE channel only, but also has speaker level inputs and outputs.

My thought is to bi-wire with the low frequency signal sent through the speaker level in/out of the subwoofer and then to the Paradigms. Now telling the 1050 that the front speakers are 'large' will let the sub's crossover handle the Paradigms at whatever point proves to work best, while I can then change the crossover frequency on the 1050 to something more suitable for the rear and center surrounds (which are not totally happy with the 60 Hz crossover that best suited the fronts).

One concern is whether the main benefit of bi-wiring, i.e. a cleaner signal and better response, will be negated by sending this signal through another crossover network before it gets to the crossover in the Paradigms. I think that I will just have to try it out and see what the results are but I am looking for any thoughts or insights others could offer before I give it a shot.

I am sure that ultimately the quality of the crossover in the sub will affect the quality of the signal that the woofers in the Paradigms end up receiving. The sub is home built using an Adire Audio driver (Shiva) and amp (AVA-250).

Thanks.

Curtis

Curtis, my opinion is that there will certainly be no harm in using the bi-wiring method to allow the high frequencies to bypass the sub's crossover. That is where distortion (if any added) would be the most audible.

As for 'cascading' crossovers, the way you intend to do it will not be a problem. Also, the idea of having different crossover frequency points for the mains and the rest is a good benefit. I think your idea is a good one.

Edit: Don't forget to set 'sub' to 'no sub' in bass management.

------------------
Larry Fine
www.fineelectricco.com
My system

[This message has been edited by Larry Fine (edited June 17, 2003).]

Instead of bi-wiring your system, why not just send me the extra money and I'll hypnotize you into thinking your system sounds better. Same effect, and this way, you make me happy to boot.

Jeff

Do I detect a note of cynicism?

------------------
Larry Fine
www.fineelectricco.com
My system

"Do I detect a note of cynicism? "

No, a symphony.

Paul

------------------
the 1derful1

alas, no further money to be wasted as I also ascribe to the philosophy of buying more than I need, because, well you just never know when you might want an extra 50' of copper wire (...or perhaps I could use that roll of Romex that's not fully used up yet and save a few more dimes...)

anyway, Larry, thanks for your reply and for getting the point about enhancing the bass management possiblities without throwing a negative into the system. I can guarantee that whatever the cost of the wire, I will hear an improvement over what occasionally grunts out of the surrounds with things cranked up and the 1050's crossover set at 60 hz.

Curtis

No, it's a note of skepticism. To the gullible, they're often indistinguishable.

Jeff

Curtis:

As I understand it, you are attempting to work around the single sub x-over limit of the 1050 by this proposal. Is this correct? If so it is very a interesting concept for those of us with large gaps between the capabilities of our fronts and center/surrounds.

My concern, is that the only way I can understand what you are proposing will work is if your home built sub can simultaneously handle both line and and speaker level inputs and correctly sum them. Is this actually the case? How do you plan on setting the hipass x-over on your sub? For example if you have set the 1050 to xover the surrounds and center at 100hz, and you set the hipass x-over to 60. Do you expect that your fronts will get the surround signal between 60 and 100? How will you test to make sure this works?

Do you know if all subs that are capable of handling both line and speaker level inputs work this way? If so, then I would also be interested in doing this with my Velodyne which has similar connections.

Jeff: I don't understand your comments, in this case. I can understand a general feeling that biwiring is snake oil, but I don't think Curtis is doing this for the traditional reasons.

You raise some good questions, and I will contact the folks at Adire Audio to make sure that the sub will handle this setup.

I did audition a small Velo sub prior to building my current one, and I seem to recall the manual saying not to use both line and speaker level inputs at the same time (although this method was suggested to me by Outlaw tech support when I asked whether line level or speaker inputs were superior). You should check Velo's tech support because the model I auditioned was at the low end of their product line so perhaps they won't frown on this scheme with your sub.

As far as the coordination of the multiple x-overs, I don't currently have a center channel and use phantom mode for HT viewing, so I am assuming that the 1050 is already extrapolating the center channel to the mains, which will receive the full range signal.

As far as the potential missing signal from the rear surrounds (i.e. the gap between 60 and 100 in your example) - I'm not sure if the 1050 will redirect this to the mains, although I am assuming that it will (Outlaw's - any help here?). Even if this does not happen, I feel that losing some low end from the rear surrounds will be better than overdriving them as happens now.

Thanks for the replies - I had a feeling that y'all would raise some questions that I had not considered. I'll post a note when I hear from Adire about hooking up their sub-amp in this fashion.

Curtis:

I wasn't thinking that the 1050 would send the signal from 60 to 100 to the fronts. I assumed that since you had the fronts set to large that they would get a complete signal. I further assumed that setting the 1050 to 100 (my example) for the speakers set to small would result in the 1050 adding the portions of all but the front speakers below 100 with whatever LFE signal was present.

The result would be that you would feed the sub both your front signals (via the speaker level inputs) and the line in (lfe and surround from the 1050).

My question about the hi-pass being set at 60hz had to do with what the sub would do with both signals and this setting, which is what you need for your fronts. As I have thought about this a little more I see there being three possibilities (ignoring x-over curves) which I have listed in order of probability. Note: In all three cases, the sub would play the portion of the front signal under 60hz and send the fronts the portion of the speaker signal over 60.

1) The sub would drop the line in over 60hz because of the hi-pass setting. This seems to tie to my untested recollection of what happens on my velodyne when I play with the hi-pass setting.

2) In addition to the under 60hz signal from the fronts, the sub would play the entire signal from the line in.

3) The sub would play only signals under 60hz. Line in signal between 60 and 100hz would get sent over the speaker out to the fronts. However, this would be an unamplified signal and be lost.

Consequently, I see only the 2nd as having a solid benefit. Either the first or the third would result no benefit.

[This message has been edited by 73Bruin (edited June 18, 2003).]