2. cables
  3. 1212198195

Creative Cabling for Bass Quality

I originally posted this in a thread about improving the bass quality of Legacy Classic speakers, but I suspect other speaker owners might benefit from what eventually worked best for bass with the Classics.

It all began with me feeling the bass of my Legacy Classics lacked a bit of definition. Tightening loose screws on the woofers, tilting the speakers back a few degrees, and playing with room placement all helped, but not enough (I also tried plugging the ports, as one Audiogoner suggested, but thought the bass sounded terribly constipated). I biwired, and that helped too, but not enough.

I next tried biamping and found that tubes so sweetened the top end I didn't care for awhile about low end imperfections. As luck would have it, my Proceed preamp offered stereo sub output, and allowed a setting of 120hz -- thus matching the Classics’ low crossover point. Assigning my McCormack power amp to driving the woofers alone helped tighten the bass too, yet I still wasn't happy.

Next I wondered if bass-specific wiring might help. I had been using high end MIT cables for all, but now decided to use it only for the mid and upper ranges. After some experimentation I reasoned that speedy silver for the bass end might help tighten things, so I tried Signal Cable’s Silver Resolutions, and wala! . . . bass did indeed tighten significantly; further, despite warnings from some, I noticed absolutely no synch problems from using different cables for lows and mid/highs. Thinking a cable with more silver might work even better, I tried 12g pure silver, but lost the quickness (and then some) the Signals provided. I surmised that the skin effect rendered those particular thick silver cables sluggish.

I put the Signal Cable Silver Resolutions back in, and for a time lived happily with that set up (i.e., Silver Resolutions on bottom, MIT on mid/top). But being an avid jazz listener, in due course I missed the bass "weight" that the Silver Resolutions sacrifice to get bass quickness.

Hmmmmmm, what to try. I wondered if thick, flat copper like that found in Analysis Plus cables might help, and since a pair of Oval 9s were selling cheap here at Audiogon, I tried them. Sure enough, they added major bass weight, but completely annulled the quickness of the Silver Resolutions! Grrrrrrrrrr.

And here's when the best thing happened.

I had ordered the Silver Resolutions terminated with banana plugs, while the Analysis Plus Oval 9s sported spades; the posts for bass on the Classics, of course, allow for both spades and bananas, so I hooked BOTH the Signals and Analysis Plus cables to the bass-end set of posts, and then to my McCormack.

All I could do was sigh with satisfaction when I heard it. Exactly the effortlessly quick and weighty bass I'd imagined possible from the Legacys. And now many hours of listening later, I am still unreservedly content with that cabling arrangement. The only tweaking thoughts I've had is trying Oval 8s if I ever see a bargain, and possibly trying silver ICs between the preamp and McCormack someday (I’m using Audio Metallurgy GA-0 ICs now . . . actually I wish AM would make some silver GA-0s, I think their magnetic technology is a very effective concept).
les3547
les3547 OP
22 posts
 
Palerider,

I think you either forgot to read my opening post or, since this thread features a three-part idea, maybe I didn't explain it clearly.

The first part of the idea is, in a biwired or biamped situation, to use the bass side of your biwirable speakers' binding posts to connect TWO separate wires TO THE SAME POST, one wire using spade connecters, and a second wire using the binding post's banana plug connection (of course, it is possible to connect two spades to one post, or with a banana plug adapter to connect two bananas to one post).

The second part of the idea is to recognize that wiring can affect bass in two major ways: bass "weight," or that ability to cause a listener to feel the umph of a note; and bass "definition,' or the ability of a woofer to generate distinct notes with each clearly defined from the note before and after it.

The third part of the idea was that the two connections to the bass side of biwirable speakers allows one to use specific wires for each bass aspect. That is, as I said in my opening post, I found that connecting 9g copper (using spades) generated weighty bass, and a relatively small amount of silver (using the banana connection) added definition . . . thus giving a method for improving bass by wiring for BOTH bass aspects.
2chnlben
595 posts
 
Les:

That's interesting. Say I want to run an additional (different) run to the bass end of the speaker's posts. I am utilizing one amplifier. I am already running multiple pairs of the same cable type in a bi-wire configuration (double "shotgun" on both top and bottom). If I were to add an additional run to the "bass end", I would have to increase the number of wires at the amplifier. Do you suggest utilizing both spades AND bananas at the amp as well? Is it possible to overdue the "doubling-up" of cables at the amp end (degrading the signal flow in any way)?? Of course, I can experiment. I could remove the current double runs at the bass end and include just the Silver Solutions (or similar). Currently, I have all four runs per speaker terminated with one spade connector at the amp end. Would there be any real benefit to terminating everything (all different type runs/cables with one connector at the amp end).
les3547 OP
22 posts
 
Hi 2chnlben,

Yes, you have to double up at the amp too. I just realized that people already biwiring might have a space problem (at the amp) if they are using two cables instead of a single one prepared for biwiring. (Since I BIAMP I therefore have plenty of room for using my SS amp for the bass cabling arrangement I'm talking about.)

I've used a type of banana plug adapter thingy like this . . . http://www.speakerrepair.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Product_Code=32-076-10&Category_Code=all_plugs . . . to hook up more wires than the amp has space for. I think there are better quality ones than at that site as well. But I do use spades and bananas at both the amp end and speaker end since it is the least messy and easiest to install.

Regarding degrading the signal, I have no way to know if using multiple wires are less efficient than a single wire made up with the same copper-silver mix as described in the two-wire approach. I have only heard improvements by doing what I am doing. But if I had to guess, I suspect a single connection would be at least a little better, it's just that all bass-dedicated wiring I've seen is REALLY expensive, and I wonder if they use as much copper, along with silver, as I have in my set up.

The great thing about Audiogon is opportunity to grab up stuff owners don't want anymore, plus the cottage industries that service here. Balanced Power Technology, Audio Metallurgy, Signal Cable . . . all these people make great stuff at a price that is fair.

So for under $400 you can put together some used Analysis Plus Oval 9s, and Silver Resolutions (cheaper if you can ever find them used), and have a great dedicated bass cable system.
undertow
1,033 posts
 
I have a question for the Pros out there... Fact is a speaker cable is only 2 poles, each of which might be as important as the other..

Positive, feeding the speaker, and the Negative coming back from the speaker to the amp.. I suppose that the Speed and recovery coming back is as critical, as you will see some specialty companies use an even larger gauge cable coming back off the negative tap to the amp.

Why? Because the ground should be a larger and more current capable device to keep the system damped correctly?

And this leads to the question, since all you guys are going as far as mixing cables of types to double up and feed the acoustic devices "speakers" and finding they have effect overall with the Gauge type, metal choice, and each can add or detract certain character...

Why would it be far out of league to make a speaker cable and interconnects for that matter, and maybe even power cords, that Utilize for example a POSITIVE leg of Copper with small content of silver at a fair sized gauge of like 12 or 11 gauge, and a bigger return cable NEGATIVE leg made up of a Speed cable pure silver such as 10 or 9 gauge? Or the opposite effect switching this config could be better? Big silver feedint the speaker and copper coming back? Who knows maybe this is a part of the secrete in these 4000 dollar cables and its as simple as that vs. all these off the wall geometries and things that they market..

Trade secret? 2 different wires completely separate feeding the positive and negative? Why not? Who says this would not alter the wants and the not so much wants of a speaker signal going in and having a different delivery method of metal or geometry coming back?

I suggest trying now A different cable on the input and output of the speaker vs. mixing them going in and coming out, as it would seem somebody could pinpoint this way what is really gaining the type of performance character desired on which side of the fence, and possibly debunk or verify if each leg is as important as the other and what is best used in and out, which could be completely different metals or gauge..

Now the other issue here is that I am sure most will say now your using cables as Tone controls running a Silver on one side of the signal and a Copper on the other altering its response to gain overall balance, but what I love in this argument is if you were not using a Cable as a tone control to an extent than what in the world would you be spending so much money on cables in the first place if you did not expect them to change the sound to your liking!! ?
les3547 OP
22 posts
 
". . . . is if you were not using a Cable as a tone control to an extent than what in the world would you be spending so much money on cables in the first place if you did not expect them to change the sound to your liking!"

Hi Undertow,

I can't answer your positive and negative wire route question, but I can answer what you ask in the above quote. For me, the number one, primary, main thing I'm after is to have the signal transferred from the CD to my speakers as close as possible to the way it was recorded. So I, for the most part, do not want tone control.

Now, I say "for the most part" because there are a couple of exceptions to tonal control, but even there I want the control somewhere besides through my cables. What are the exceptions?

One is the fact that since I exclusively use CDs, and therefore a digital signal, I want to sweeten the digital edge on high and midrange frequencies. That I've been able to achieve by biamping and using tube amplification for the upper/mids.

A second reason I attempt some degree of tonal control is because of the excesses of some CDs. For example, an album I like is "Nature" by Dave's True Story. The bass on that album is too strong, but because I run my woofers as "stereo subs" out of my preamp, I can easily moderate the excessive bass.

As for the bass in general, I don't see that as much of a "tonal" issue . . . what I want is for the woofers to respond just as tight and strong as the originating signal is calling for. As I detailed in my above posts, I found my wiring was singling out bass weight or definition at the expense of other, so my cabling efforts were meant to bring out the full range of the originating signal rather than "add" something tonal to the signal.
More to discover