You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
For my low-ish end Marantz/Mission separates.
Thanks in advance.
this is what I use mainly<br /><br /> https://www.richersounds.com/qed-classic-42-white.html
I've used that Amazon basics stuff (or an equivalent of), also basic electrical cable, also twin and earth.
I now use Van Damme studio 4mm^2 just because it needed replacing due to moving house and new room setup etc - it wasn't much more expensive and it looks nice.
It all works just the same, and I can't hear any difference. Twin and earth is a complete b*&**&*d to work with and also looks ugly, so I don't recommend that but otherwise don't over-think it.
As above. I use some Gale XL315 (315 strand apparently) for my 'big' speakers, but XL189 on my smaller TV speakers. Both are totally overkill anyway. The stuff Tjagain links to is perfect for your needs. You only need thicker gauge cables if you are going to use very long runs to speakers, 20m or more. And even then, that 42 strand stuff would probably work ok. Thicker gauge cables offer less resistance, but this only comes into play for very long runs really. Very thin cables can lose a bit due to higher resistance, and be a bit weak if there's risk of damage. Decent cable will be more robust. That said; I once wired up some speakers in a workshop, miles of the stuff, with some cheap thin cable, and it all worked fine.
QED Silver
That Amazon stuff is fine, just got some today and wired up my basic system up. Sounds ok and it has marking so you know which wire goes in which channel.
I'm still using the QED silver I bought with my Marantz & Mission kit I got in the 90's
Depends where it is being used.
If it is to be run inside walls, cavity I would go for a low smoke cable, also how long?
That Amazon reel is hard to beat for the price. It looks identical to what I have, and I paid... more, 20 years ago. For long runs I'd want some separation between the two wires but that's probably a measurable rather than audible difference.
As above, I've been told more than once that the absolute best speaker cable you can get is domestic mains cable.
also how long?
"I'd like some speaker cable please."
"How long do you want it?"
"I want to keep it!"
As above, that Amazon reel is good if you want loads of the stuff @57p a meter, equally for shorter/custom legnths, i.e. you only want 3 or 4 meteres or something, Richer sounds has 4 or 5 different options for £1.20 per meter.
Or if you want to tuck it under carpet or something, you can get 'flat' cable.. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Fisual-Profile-Flat-Speaker-Cable/dp/B0013ND42O?th=1
QED Silver anniversary can be had for £6.50 a metre, at that price in the sweet spot where it's not worth buying anything cheaper and anything significantly better is a lot more.
Some great suggestions thanks, I knew you lot would see me right.
I’m still using the QED silver I bought with my Marantz & Mission kit I got in the 90’s
I'm still using whatever cable I got when I bought it in the 90s, but the plastic sheathing has gone brittle and is starting to crack all the time.
also how long?
Dunno, about 1.5m each side maybe. Just running from amp to speakers on stands.
Assuming a regular living room install,
at that price in the sweet spot where it’s not worth buying anything cheaper
Nonsense.
Your £6/metre cable might be better than Amazon's 60p/metre. But ten times better? I highly doubt it.
anything significantly better
Doesn't exist?
It's wire. In the analogue arena you're trying to minimise signal degradation. Once you hit "good enough" it's not going to get any better.
Just in case anyone needs closure, I think I'm gonna get the shorter roll (50ft) of Amazon cable.
Then I'll have plenty if I ever get round to setting the other system up.
🙂
I have some QED silver anniversary stuff that I've had almost 20 years and if I give it wipe with a cloth to get the dust off it still looks new.
Always worth getting a bit extra in case of rearranging the room so for 4 metres you'll be paying £26. If you decide to upgrade your speakers down the line you'll be able to re-use them as you'll have to to be dropping serious cash to have a system where the QED Silver Anni is holding it back.
I once read about Quad demoing their latest electrostatics to the audiophile world at some audio show, the journo noticed the speaker cables were bright orange and asked the engineer what they were, he replied that it was cable off a flymo, he said it was just really good thick gauge copper cable and was as good as anything else you could use.
Just in case anyone needs closure
Spoil sport...this thread had 10 page+ & multiple suspensions potential!
simondbarnes
I’m still using the QED silver I bought with my Marantz & Mission kit I got in the 90’s
Exactly this ('cept mine was all Marantz) - it doesn't wear out. 😁
I used to buy it on a big roll from RS. The QED 42 or 79 stuff is fine.
@cha****ng, how old are you? If you're 50 or above, your top end will be going and I'd be very surprised if you can tell the difference between Amazon basics and some decent cable.
I once read about Quad demoing their latest electrostatics to the audiophile world at some audio show, the journo noticed the speaker cables were bright orange and asked the engineer what they were, he replied that it was cable off a flymo, he said it was just really good thick gauge copper cable and was as good as anything else you could use.
yeah, the problem with that is that I've had some Quad amps that have dramatically changed their performance because of speaker cable - not just subtle audiophile 'tweak' level change.
First was a Quad 306, into Rogers LS3/5a speakers. Initially I just wired it up with the standard 79 strand because I am a cable sceptic, but my mate had some thick Cable Talk stuff which I tried and the sound became much more solid and extended.
So I bought some Quad cable that was of similar type (4mm stranded), but cheaper as I am a cable sceptic..., and got the same result.
Then when I added some AB-1 subwoofers, which go inline with the LS3/5a, the sound became muffled, and I ended up using some Nodost Flatline that set it back to normal.
I then had some similar shenanigans with a Quad 707, buy this time with some external crossovers.
So I think it was down to impedance loads seen by the amp.
I know the guy who used to run Spendor and he said that they used to have problems with Quad 405s becoming unstable into certain speaker loads.
So Quad amps aren't perfect and they are affected by speaker cables and that story might be true but it is BS, although with the speakers they used maybe their amps were always OK.
I now use some 2.5mm stranded Van Damme cable as this is fairly cheap (£8.60 p/m now it seems) and seem to always give good results : https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B00URNW50S/?th=1
I did once mess around with different types of mains cable (solid, etc, twisted) but it never seemed to even work decently compared to what I had.
I once read about Quad demoing their latest electrostatics to the audiophile world at some audio show, the journo noticed the speaker cables were bright orange and asked the engineer what they were, he replied that it was cable off a flymo, he said it was just really good thick gauge copper cable and was as good as anything else you could use.<br /><br />
I wouldn’t, under any circumstances, argue the toss with the Quad crew! If anyone is going to know what cable works with high-end kit, they will.
Plus the bright orange will show up and help stop people tripping over it! 😁
I wouldn’t, under any circumstances, argue the toss with the Quad crew! If anyone is going to know what cable works with high-end kit, they will.
I don't get that, as Quad gear is mid-range stuff in the hifi sphere of pricing, and people that buy it are generally not the audiophile cable/tube rolling types of people.
Many, many moons ago I read a What HiFi listening board article. They assembled their team of trained ears, and played them the same music using the same kit, just changing the speaker cables. They went from basic cheap unbranded stuff up to to gold-plated O2 free unobtainium £££ a cm stuff. Obviously not saying which was which along the way.
The results were absolutely clear: different wires produced different sound on otherwise the same kit. But they were unable to agree on which was "best"... apparently a sizable number liked the cheapest wires best!
So I promptly stopped worrying to much about it all 🙂
Just some reasonable quality cable, nothing fancy is necessary. Solid core mains is fine if you can handle the lack of user friendliness, and the interface at the terminals is good. As long as runs aren’t that long, it really doesn’t matter. <br /><br />
Go to gearspace, people with systems that cost a fortune, and listen to the discussion on this- snake oil territory. You’ll have more impact by toe-ing in your tweeters by 0.05 mm than this stuff claims. You’ll gain a million times more if you add a ceiling cloud above your speakers first reflection point but that’s not cool and your mrs doesn’t like it😁
If you take off the lid of your prized hifi, look inside it and see what cables are being used to shunt the signal around, see what they look like, it’s often very standard. They’re dealing with an awful lot less signal than the strength of your average speaker feed aren’t they, and they seem to do ok. Well you think they do because you spent a lot of money on it. <br /><br />
Expectation bias is what’s going on in speaker cable juju land I think, possibly hifi in general too .<br /><br />
Anything good for around or under a tenner a meter is all you need, probably less than that in the majority of cases.
I'm with gravedigger
- Van Damme Blue Series Studio Grade 2.5mm
compass-audio-uk on ebay sell it terminated (well). It's the best budget cable I've used.
I've got Quad kit funnily enough, a 99/909 system. Did have a 5.1 set up with PMC monitors and all Quad amps but couldn't justify buying a replacement processor when the Arcam died for the third time. I've got a mate that works in a HiFi shop which sells everything up to high end stuff (giant Classe amps, and who would pay £12,000 for a Chord cd player anyhow?)
I mention it as I had as long as I liked in very relaxed surroundings, including taking stuff home, to audition a variety of interconnects, cable, and amps. Came to the conclusion that fancy interconnects are a complete waste of money, ones that cost thousands sound the same as the red & white ones that come free with a stereo. Harder to tell with speaker cable, fairly subtle but I think I heard differences- or did I. Amps you can definitely hear a big difference. Auditioning can send you slightly mad as you play the same section of music for the 200th time and your mind is playing tricks, and you're getting tired of the whole idea, so what you think you hear is obviously very subjective.
Auditioning can send you slightly mad as you play the same section of music for the 200th time and your mind is playing tricks, and you’re getting tired of the whole idea, so what you think you hear is obviously very subjective.
Yeah, auditioning is very difficult, it's very much like going to 'the perfume shop' and sampling 15 different types of 'Eau De toilet' ... your pallete is frazzled from sensory input after the second or third test sample, never mind the 10th.
Ground Noise Dissipation Technology (US Patent # 9,373,439)
Is that a fancy name for an earth/3 pin mains plug? 😀
You’ll gain a million times more if you add a ceiling cloud above your speakers first reflection point but that’s not cool and your
mrsmum doesn’t like
@csb your mum was actually quite impressed by my cable as it goes. Not sure why. Expectation bias probably…
I’ve had some Quad amps that have dramatically changed their performance because of speaker cable – not just subtle audiophile ‘tweak’ level change.
I would be -astonished- if you could tell the difference reliably in a double-blind test, unless the 79 was wired out of phase.
I had as long as I liked in very relaxed surroundings, including taking stuff home, to audition a variety of interconnects, cable, and amps. Came to the conclusion that fancy interconnects are a complete waste of money, ones that cost thousands sound the same as the red & white ones that come free with a stereo.
I spent an entire day in Richer doing the same thing and came to the opposite conclusion. There was little to no difference between (analogue) interconnect cables, except from the bundled 99p phono cables which were truly dogshit. Throw video into the mix and it's apparent to someone with cataracts.
First was a Quad 306, into Rogers LS3/5a speakers. Initially
There’s your issue, the LS3/5a was designed to a standard for on-site broadcasting vans, not home listening.
LS3/5A review and frequency response graph
That’s true but the Yamaha ns10 was originally designed as a low-mid cost hifi speaker and not the mixing tool they turned out to be…
Having said that, I tried some Ls4/a’s bitd (the rave speaker then) and was pretty underwhelmed.
Have you seen the price of the current Rogers LS3/5a? Crikey.
I’m running Amazon, Van Damme Blue, Van Damme Clear on different setups. All sounds fine, I like the look of the VD blue so use that on main system. Copper Vs Silver and there’s a debate to be had. Next, try opening up your speaker and see what it is wired with. If your speakers are under £500, for some brands more, you will be very disappointed and realise it just doesn’t matter. It’s harder to solder think cable in a small space. Plenty of VD cable runs to be had second hand from DJ’s and sound engineers at the usual places.
The results were absolutely clear: different wires produced different sound on otherwise the same kit. But they were unable to agree on which was “best”… apparently a sizable number liked the cheapest wires best!
I think solid state amps are more susceptible to influence from speaker cable 'topology'. Tube amps (and I thin Quad 303s/maybe 520s) use output transformers and aren't susceptible to speaker cables, I think.
I would be -astonished- if you could tell the difference reliably in a double-blind test, unless the 79 was wired out of phase.
I don't really care - as I would like to be a cable sceptic and was dismayed that cables made a difference, I didn't go and buy some expensive cable expecting it to make a diffference, I expected it to make no difference and when it did spent ages switching back and forth trying to convince myself that there was no difference, or the difference was volumne related, etc.
With the Quad 707 and external crossover difference, the sound was very phasey, which wasn't anything to do with incorrect connections. Switch from the 4mm stranded (Quad branded) cable to something thinner (1.5mm stranded Kef branded to start with, but later 2.5mm Van Damme) and the sound was fine. Later tried with 4mm stranded Van Damme (which is PMC recommended I believe) and it went all phasey again.
I haven't tried to see if my 909 monos and QMPs are affected in the same way as I can't be arsed, the 2.5mm cables work well enough for me.
There’s your issue, the LS3/5a was designed to a standard for on-site broadcasting vans, not home listening.
Yeah, I know all about the history and what it was designed for - near field monitoring in compromised environments, which is typical of most UK living rooms, and also Asian rooms which is one of the reasons why they are so popular out there.
Not sure why you linked to an unlicensed clone version with compromised performance - there's another review recently showing much worse results from an old 15ohm Rogers version.
I use a modern, and licensed, version from Stirling Broadcast (so called V3), with their AB-2 bass extenders, so although the sound signature is basically the same plus bass, the speaker system is significantly better, certainly significantly better than any old 15ohm versions which will have drifted out of spec by now, mostly in the midrange (which makes them even more desirable for the Asian market...).
@somafunk that review/report is for some shite Chinese interpretation of the LS3/5a, which was simply a BBC specification taken by a load of makers. Some made/make amazing speakers to that spec. The BBC project to democratise good sound quality (so their broadcasts would sound good) is a great story.
The review and measurements correlate very well to other versions of the LS3/5A as tested by John Atkinson of Stereophile amongst others, the frequency response is trounced by a £500 set of Kali monitors
I'm pretty sure the LS3/5a was designed as a speech monitor so wide frequency range, bass response, dynamic range would not really be a requirement. I'm sure there are far better small bookshelf speakers for music. The AVI Neutrons I have are decent. I suspect the modern incarnations (like those Rogers I mentioned earlier at around £2.5k) have little in common with the original spec. If they do, they are way overpriced.
The review and measurements correlate very well to other versions of the LS3/5A
@somafunk not according to your link
I’m pretty sure the LS3/5a was designed as a speech monitor
you would be wrong then !
It was designed as a miniature two-way loudspeaker of adequate sound quality and loudness to serve as a monitor in conditions where larger existing designs would be unusable, where space was at a premum and where headphones would not be considered satisfactory, like TV production-control rooms as well as OB vans.
If you total up the expenditure on this design, and the acoustic scaling modelling work that it was based on, it's very probable that there hasn't been another speaker since that has cost so much!
It says 'adequate sound quality' but the original prototype versions built at Kingswood Warren were slightly different and achieved higher performance, using thinner walled cabinets with screwed on backs, more like other BBC monitors, where the cabinet was supposssed to be 'lossy' to help control resonances. They also had higher quality crossovers with careful component matching.
The versions I use are more akin to these, with modern drivers that are much more performant, and with much higher quality crossovers that achieve significantly lower THD levels, so whereas the LS3/5a was a grade 2 monitor, mine are more akin to a grade 1, especially with the AB-2 bass extenders.
I expected it to make no difference and when it did spent ages switching back and forth trying to convince myself that there was no difference
Which is why I said "double blind."
Get someone else to do the switching (or not switching) whilst you're blindfolded, see if you can still tell them apart reliably.
Yep, that’s the standard response I was expecting.
Do you perform double blind testing when you buy a new cartridge for your record deck, for example. Or any new component, like a DAC. How can you trust your ears that it does actually sound better, seeing that you spent more money on it and so have subconscious bias? Do you have a sound meter to ensure that comparisons are done at the same volume? When you go to a shop for a HiFi demo do you wear a blindfold and ban the sales person from speaking, lest his vocal inclinations hint at which component he has swapped in?
As I say the changes weren’t subtle and I had no expectation bias other than expecting there to be no difference - which is the opposite of normal ‘expectation bias’.
I spent time trying to prove that I was experiencing a bias and that there was no actual difference, and was dismayed at the prospect that my sensible and well engineered Quad amps where actually not as good as I hoped they might be.
My first job was at BBC Research Department, where I bought my first LS3/5as with my staff discount, so I had been exposed to ‘planted’ engineers that also didn’t believe in cables and speaker stands, and I had read many of the BBC papers on loudspeaker design that were in the library there. So that’s the viewpoint I was coming from.
The Quad 707 problem was similar to a bad case of wiring speakers out of phase - as I was using external crossovers there were multiple places I could make mistakes so obviously I took care. Are you telling me that hearing speakers out of phase is not something that is immediately apparent?
All of the changes I described weren’t subtle. In contrast if I change my 2.5mm stranded cable for the Nordost flatline cable the sound seems sharper to me - this is a subtle change and not something I would swear to without a double blind test. That could easily be expectation bias.
you would be wrong then !
I stand corrected. It seems to be a common misunderstanding, perhaps based on the spec (wasn't the frequency response required something like 400-20kHz?).
I might have missed it, but there's one reason that I wouldn't use the Amazon basics cable; It's Copper Coated Aluminium (CCA), not copper. It's measurably less conductive, so might not give the same output as a copper cable.
In reality, as has been said over and over, you'll probably never notice. FWIW, I use 'Kabeldirect' cable from Amazon, which is OFC, true to size and well priced.
When you go to a shop for a HiFi demo do you wear a blindfold and ban the sales person from speaking, lest his vocal inclinations hint at which component he has swapped in?
When I bought my last stack I took a mate and, as I mentioned earlier, we spent several hours with a stack of kit in their audition room. We'd take turns to swap kit around whilst the other wasn't watching. Some changes were noticeable as you say, some not. Technics/Marantz DVD drives sounded noticeably 'bright' to a point of being harsh, for reasons I cannot logically explain. We could both reliably detect when the in-the-box phono cables were used, but couldn't tell any difference between any of the upgraded interconnects regardless of price points.
I might have missed it, but there’s one reason that I wouldn’t use the Amazon basics cable; It’s Copper Coated Aluminium (CCA), not copper. It’s measurably less conductive, so might not give the same output as a copper cable.
AIUI electricity flows down the outside of a wire, not through its core. It shouldn't matter I don't think.
AIUI electricity flows down the outside of a wire, not through its core. It shouldn’t matter I don’t think.
Indeed, but that doesn't change the fact that CCA cables have significantly lower conductivity than OFC. Especially as the lengths get longer. proper conductors are made of copper, not aluminium.
Will you ever notice a difference? Unlikely, unless you're using long runs and undersized wire, but it cannot carry the same current as OFC for the same cross section, and could result in less power to your speakers.
Indeed, but that doesn’t change the fact that CCA cables have significantly lower conductivity than OFC.
I generally buy what I would call 'proper' OFC speaker cable... but the price difference is negligible, so the amazon stuff, is maybe technically sub-standard at 60p per meter.
You can buy pure copper cable with maybe better sheathing & strand count for twice the price, at a staggering £1-2 per meter.
I'd draw the line at much more 'per meter' than that though.
I certainly wouldn'y buy speaker cable for £6 or more per meter.
Will you ever notice a difference? Unlikely
There we go then. 😁
I generally buy what I would call ‘proper’ OFC speaker cable… but the price difference is negligible, so the amazon stuff, is maybe technically sub-standard at 60p per meter.
You can buy pure copper cable with maybe better sheathing & strand count for twice the price, at a staggering £1-2 per meter.
I’d draw the line at much more ‘per meter’ than that though.
I certainly wouldn’y buy speaker cable for £6 or more per meter.
Agreed with all of that. I'd probably buy the same. But really it's splitting hairs over the sorts of distances we're talking about across a living room. People are dropping hundreds if not thousands on A/V components and then we're agonising over a differential of ten quid on a cable reel?
Here's a thought. There's a psychological benefit to not buying the cheapest, it gives you a nice fuzzy feeling that you're using something "good." But if we're budgeting say £1.20/m rather than 60p/m on an upgraded cable, is that money better spent on OFC or a thicker gauge CCA cable? If the argument is it being nicer to work with at a practical level then OFC is 100% a no-brainer; if the reasoning is that there will be impaired audio reproduction quality due to the cable's impedance then it's a nonsense, they're all going to sound identical.
I agree.
There we go then. 😁
???
I even said that in my first post? You tried to pick holes in a fact, and then went on to agree with my point, after implying that you disagreed with me? I even gave a recommendation for a cable at £1.50/m.
Odd.
You said you'd reject a cable for no practical reason other than a belief that another was somehow 'better' for no practical reason.
I probably would - and indeed have - done the same. But it's difficult to defend.
Then read my posts again.
" It’s measurably less conductive, so might not give the same output as a copper cable."
"...the fact that CCA cables have significantly lower conductivity than OFC. Especially as the lengths get longer...
...unless you’re using long runs and undersized wire, but it cannot carry the same current as OFC for the same cross section, and could result in less power to your speakers."
The caveats ^^^ are relating to the cross section or cable and amplifier power, but speakers are low impedance so you want your cable to be as low as possible so as not to waste power. There is no 'Somehow' and there is a practical reason - power loss.
Cambridge Audio have a balanced view on this; https://www.cambridgeaudio.com/usa/en/blog/speaker-cables
It seems to be a common misunderstanding, perhaps based on the spec (wasn’t the frequency response required something like 400-20kHz?).
yes, here's a link to the design paper :
It says that they found that the response was actually fairly uniform down to 100Hz.
At the heart of it, the REAL pleasure of HiFi, is arguing with people on the internet who are wrong!
I would have thought an 'argument' is a disagreement between two different opinions on something. A lot of claims about hi-fi stuff, especially cables and interconnects, are simply nonsense, So stating facts correcting such claims isn't actually 'arguing', I'd argue.
I learned many years ago, that fretting about things like bits of wire is pointless as it makes (generally) absolutely no difference to the actual quality of sound. And having actually done some proper blind tests, I have concluded that it is really not worth me spending more than a few quid on any wires. But I tend to listen to people like sound engineers, and real scientists, rather than audiophiles.
I might have missed it, but there’s one reason that I wouldn’t use the Amazon basics cable; It’s Copper Coated Aluminium (CCA), not copper. It’s measurably less conductive, so might not give the same output as a copper cable.
In reality, as has been said over and over, you’ll probably never notice
I don't think the OP is all that bothered. That cable will be fine for a few metres; there won't be any real noticeable loss power or signal with such cable. If anything; actual cheap copper wire might even be better in that regard. As before; I used many metres of 'bell wire' as Richer sounds call it, to wire up some speakers in a large workshop. Just so we could have some sounds while we all worked. I wasn't going to be spending pounds per metre; would have ended up costing more than what the actual stereo equipment was worth! It was fine; we could crank it up enough to 'party levels' whenever we wanted.
Silver cable? A waste of silver. Better off using it for jewellery.
spent an entire day in Richer doing the same thing and came to the opposite conclusion. There was little to no difference between (analogue) interconnect cables, except from the bundled 99p phono cables which were truly dogshit.
Some of the cheapo bundled cables can be really poor quality. But more for the connection to the connector bit than the actual wire itself. But others are ok. I discovered the other day that the interconnect between by streamer DAC and the amp, is just the bundled black wire interconnect I got with it. I've swapped it for one of my old Cambridge Audio posh ones, but I've noticed no difference in sound quality. And my optical cable from my CD player is just the thin thing that came with a MiniDisc player or something many years ago. The only difference between that and posh ones is thicker plastic sheathing.
It's not like higher frequency /lower power signals where you need coax or twisted pairs, but you still want to avoid separating the wires. But you still want to avoid the chance that you can induce a signal into one of the wires, not both. If both are together (coax/twisted pair) then anything you induce in one is in both and won't be heard at the speaker.
You can get some nice looking speaker cables already terminated on AliExpress.
Some of their RCA cables are decent too for the price.
I'm still using the What HIFI winning cable from.... Think it was '97. Cable Talk - Talk3.1 in both my systems though.
Then read my posts again.
None of that matters if it sounds the same. Does it sound the same? You said yourself "Will you ever notice a difference? Unlikely, unless you’re using long runs and undersized wire"
Normal speakers have an impedance of 8 Ohms (I once had some Pro Logic era surrounds which were 16). That Amazon Basics cable is 16 AWG which Cambridge's chart you linked to lists as 14.8m max cable run. How big is your living room?
You might well be technically correct, but if you're sitting listening to music whilst worrying that your 100W speakers might only be capable of delivering 99.9999W due to cable impedance then I'd respectfully suggest that you reconsider your priorities here. Besides, absolutely no-one other than a shit pub DJ drives gear anywhere near its limits anyway.
Well - this is jolly - I do hope the OP just ended up using Door Bell Wire! 🙂
Unbelievably, this thread has turned up about a week before I need to buy new speaker cable. Hurrah! Sounds like Amazon Basic is good enough, QED silver if I want to go upmarket with unclear benefits.
My question: my speakers are bi-wired (Kef Q1s, nothing special) at the speaker end and single-wired at the amp end. Tbh at this point the speakers are biwired cause I've lost the bit that bridged the terminals, not because I actually believe it's better.
Is there a 4-wire version of the Amazon Basic/ QED silver?
Cheers
You can just use speaker cable to bridge the terminals.
Yeah do that.
You can buy bi wire cable (4 into 2) or just 4 stuck together but it's a bit of a rip off.
None of that matters if it sounds the same. Does it sound the same? You said yourself <em style="box-sizing: border-box; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000;">“Will you ever notice a difference? Unlikely, unless you’re using long runs and undersized wire”
Normal speakers have an impedance of 8 Ohms (I once had some Pro Logic era surrounds which were 16). That Amazon Basics cable is 16 AWG which Cambridge’s chart you linked to lists as 14.8m max cable run. How big is your living room?
You might well be <em style="box-sizing: border-box; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000;">technically correct, but if you’re sitting listening to music whilst worrying that your 100W speakers might only be capable of delivering 99.9999W due to cable impedance then I’d respectfully suggest that you reconsider your priorities here. Besides, absolutely no-one other than a shit pub DJ drives gear anywhere near its limits anyway.
This is all just common sense, and ignoring it is pretty foolish really. I'm glad to see such common sense in a discussion about hi-fi, it's often something that's missing. That Cambridge Audio chart is interesting; apparently 'bell wire' would be fine for up to 3.6m into standard 8 Ohm speakers. I used something like 16 awg for long, 10m+ runs without any issue. So spending more than a quid or two on speaker cable for the average home, is pointless.
Unbelievably, this thread has turned up about a week before I need to buy new speaker cable. Hurrah! Sounds like Amazon Basic is good enough, QED silver if I want to go upmarket with unclear benefits.<br style="box-sizing: border-box; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; caret-color: #000000; color: #000000; font-family: Roboto, 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, 'Noto Sans', sans-serif, -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Noto Color Emoji';" />My question: my speakers are bi-wired (Kef Q1s, nothing special) at the speaker end and single-wired at the amp end. Tbh at this point the speakers are biwired cause I’ve lost the bit that bridged the terminals, not because I actually believe it’s better.<br style="box-sizing: border-box; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; caret-color: #000000; color: #000000; font-family: Roboto, 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, 'Noto Sans', sans-serif, -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Noto Color Emoji';" />Is there a 4-wire version of the Amazon Basic/ QED silver?
I've personally found bi-wiring pointless if you're coming from the same amp; perhaps if you have some really high end exotic speakers, you might hear a difference. I don't know. I tried it on some B+W DM601s, and it made no noticeable (to me) difference. So you're fine just wring up both sets of terminals with a bit of spare cable as suggested. Where bi-wiring does come into its own, is with bi-amping. My tests with the same set of speakers proved this theory. More clearly defined separation of frequencies. But my current speakers are not bi-wireable, and still sound better. It's all about how good the speaker crossovers and your amps are.
As for cable; the Amazon basics stuff is fine, unless you want pure copper cable, then something around a quid a metre will be more than adequate. As for silver; see my comment above regarding jewellery.
Is there a 4-wire version of the Amazon Basic
Yes, just buy twice as much. 😁
As per the previous respondents, I wouldn't bother. Certainly if your amp output is only single-wired, you're effectively bridging the poles using two really long pieces of wire rather than short ones.
It’s all about how good the speaker crossovers and your amps are.
That's just jogged my memory. The whole point of bi-wiring - aside from selling yet more expensive shit - as that you're moving the crossover. Ie, you're offloading the role of hi/lo signal separation to your amp(s) rather than your speakers. It's not a world apart from the external DAC argument or even having DVD/BD players doing upscaling rather than the TV. So in this specific instance there's absolutely no reason to bi-wire. (Could it provide a larger footprint for interference even?)
That aside, I don't know about anyone else but I'd have thought that the people best positioned to work out optimal speaker crossover settings is the speaker manufacturer.
The whole point of bi-wiring – aside from selling yet more expensive shit – as that you’re moving the crossover. Ie, you’re offloading the role of hi/lo signal separation to your amp(s) rather than your speakers
bi-wiring does not do that. There is a single output from the amp, fed over 2 pairs of cables to the speaker.
bi-amping provides 2 signals to the speaker, but it still does not move the crossover. Both signals are theoretically identical, and certainly have the full range of signal. The speaker then runs both through separate crossovers and filters which bit of the signal goes to which driver
That Spendor guy did tell me once what the technical difference was that occurred with biwiring.
I’ve forgotten what he said it was, but he also said that it was extremely unlikely that the speaker designer had ‘voiced’ the speaker with it biwired, so if biwiring makes a sonic difference (I heard it on some Roger’s LS7ts once), then it is likely to be the less correct solution sonically anyway.
Bi-wiring 🤣🤣🤣
Another pile of ‘HiFi’ nonsense.
Given the connections on my 2 pairs of speakers with bi-wiring options it looks like removing the bar between the terminals and doubling up on speaker cable would connect 1 pair of speaker cables to the high filter and the other pair of cables to the low filter.
So I replace a couple of bars that carry the signal between the H-L terminals with long lengths of cable. 🤔
This is likely to result in … no difference at all.
Similar with bi-amping. Only reason to do that would be to get more power into the speakers. But just get a bigger amp, or two if you want separate left and right amps?
at this point the speakers are biwired cause I’ve lost the bit that bridged the terminals, not because I actually believe it’s better.
Er, rather than using entire extra lengths of cable why didn’t you just stick a core of 2.5mm CSA mains cable between them? Or a short length of speaker cable?
How would you come to lose them, even? The only reason to undo both pairs of terminals, thus making loss of the connecting clip physically possible at all, is if you were bi-wiring in the first place.
I do hope the OP just ended up using Door Bell Wire
If it’s solid core bell wire it does OK. 50V 3A? Worked fine on surround speakers and simple integrated stereo systems for me. Not as ‘cool’ as magic oxygen-free ukicorn hair cable. Carries a signal fine.
Though the silvered multi-strand does maintain signal integrity well. Especially in dissonant classical pieces 😏
1
prettygreenparrot
Full Member
at this point the speakers are biwired cause I’ve lost the bit that bridged the terminals, not because I actually believe it’s better.Er, rather than using entire extra lengths of cable why didn’t you just stick a core of 2.5mm CSA mains cable between them? Or a short length of speaker cable?
Because I didn't think of it, alright! I'm a numpty!! 😀
They were originally biwired cause the hifi store (somewhere in Chalk Farm IIRC) suggested it when I bought the system some 20 years ago