In Reply to: RE: I think Richard Vandersteen got it right posted by Daverz on July 13, 2015 at 20:28:48:
The magnetic field established at right angles to a current flowing in a conductorf is the Hall effect. But the inverse is also true: a changing magnetic field can cause a current to flow in a conductor. *That* is what he proposes: the strong magnetic field from the high-current low-freq wires smears/overrides the very small current flowing in the wires carrying the highs.
It makes sense to my ears. With bi-wiring, I hear greatly improved low-level detail and harmonics, which are most welcome with my old Spica TC-50s. John Bau, seeing a pic of his hacked-up crossovers, commented that he expected a big improvement, and that he wished he knew then what he knows now about ground plane interactions. Maybe someone can fill me in on what he was referring to. (He has been out of the Spica world for many years, and I don't bother him with questions.)
WW
"Put on your high heeled sneakers. Baby, we''re goin'' out tonight.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: I think Richard Vandersteen got it right - Bill Way 07/14/1505:12:58 07/14/15 (39)
- RE: I think Richard Vandersteen got it right - Dave_K 14:05:48 07/14/15 (38)
- RE: I think Richard Vandersteen got it right - Presto 12:43:44 07/16/15 (5)
- RE: I think Richard Vandersteen got it right - Dave_K 19:39:49 07/16/15 (4)
- Your own loudspeaker manufacturer recommends bi-wiring - Craiger56 19:44:36 07/18/15 (2)
- I've bi-wired about 50% of the speakers I've owned - Dave_K 16:09:43 07/19/15 (1)
- "content" is not an electrical term - Craiger56 17:54:57 07/19/15 (0)
- RE: I think Richard Vandersteen got it right - Craiger56 00:34:03 07/18/15 (0)
- Your explanation doesn't work - Craiger56 08:15:12 07/15/15 (30)
- Seems like you agree with me - Dave_K 10:58:51 07/15/15 (29)
- RE: Seems like you agree with me - Craiger56 12:26:06 07/15/15 (28)
- RE: Seems like you agree with me - Dave_K 03:53:24 07/16/15 (27)
- You "don't see" - Craiger56 05:56:22 07/16/15 (26)
- Oops mistake my bad - Craiger56 23:33:55 07/17/15 (0)
- You're not making sense - Dave_K 07:04:10 07/16/15 (24)
- Without knowledge it won't make sense - Craiger56 10:22:04 07/16/15 (23)
- RE: Without knowledge it won't make sense - JaroTheWise 21:54:59 07/21/15 (6)
- RE: Without knowledge it won't make sense - Craiger56 09:47:45 07/22/15 (1)
- Yeah, we agree on something :) (nt) - Dave_K 06:36:32 07/24/15 (0)
- RE: Without knowledge it won't make sense - Dave_K 05:13:55 07/22/15 (3)
- RE: Without knowledge it won't make sense - JaroTheWise 14:36:01 07/22/15 (2)
- RV never said the Hall effect was responsible - Dave_K 06:54:40 07/24/15 (1)
- RE: RV never said the Hall effect was responsible - JaroTheWise 14:20:44 07/24/15 (0)
- RE: Without knowledge it won't make sense - Dave_K 11:22:38 07/16/15 (15)
- RE: Without knowledge it won't make sense - Craiger56 17:00:08 07/16/15 (3)
- RE: Without knowledge it won't make sense - Dave_K 17:13:06 07/16/15 (2)
- RE: Without knowledge it won't make sense - Craiger56 21:45:14 07/16/15 (1)
- RE: Without knowledge it won't make sense - Presto 09:54:01 07/17/15 (0)
- RE: Without knowledge it won't make sense - Presto 12:52:06 07/16/15 (10)
- RE: Without knowledge it won't make sense - Presto 22:30:53 07/16/15 (0)
- Oh boy, more - Dave_K 18:24:11 07/16/15 (1)
- RE: Oh boy, more - Presto 22:25:46 07/16/15 (0)
- I mean voltage, more precisely EMF - Dave_K 16:48:39 07/16/15 (6)
- RE: I mean voltage, more precisely EMF - Presto 22:29:50 07/16/15 (5)
- RE: I mean voltage, more precisely EMF - Dave_K 03:45:08 07/20/15 (4)
- RE: I mean voltage, more precisely EMF - Presto 10:03:45 07/20/15 (3)
- RE: I mean voltage, more precisely EMF - Dave_K 17:24:07 07/21/15 (2)
- RE: I mean voltage, more precisely EMF - Presto 08:59:22 07/22/15 (1)
- RE: I mean voltage, more precisely EMF - Dave_K 06:57:16 07/24/15 (0)
- Wow. - genungo 14:36:47 07/14/15 (0)