Originally Posted by AJinFLA
The lack of audibility evidence isn't theory, it's fact. What you call "theory" is known as "speculation". Lot's of "theorists" in audio. Maybe more than cyber EEs.
And why stop at one "theory" because it suits your beliefs? Why not other esoteric "theories"? Like RF affecting 2 instead of 1 wire? Or sunspots. Or airborne mechanical vibrations. Or a thousand other "theories" in the audiophile disorder symptoms. All "measurable" effects.
You are throwing ridiculous statements out there and distorting my position. I suppose I need to make it more clear what I am stating because you and possibly other people are not understanding.
Originally Posted by AJinFLA
I saw no such thing. Nothing whatsoever related to buywiring audible "tonal quality" effects under controlled conditions. That is just your imagination that such evidence exists in any link.
Let me take you through the process. I presented a case for interaction of magnetic fields causing distortion. This is no concept based in speculation. It is indeed grounded in science. If anyone wants to claim that magnetic fields do no interact then the burden of proof is them. Ampere and Maxwell proved this quite some time ago. I then found data and referenced a paper that quantified the intermodulation distortion with and without bi-wiring. It showed a measurable difference. My conclusion from this is that bi-wiring can have a measurable difference in terms of intermodulation distortion. Nothing less, nothing more. What this doesn't mean is that I believe everything this guy has ever said or printed. I made it a clear point that this is NOT conclusive to say that an audible difference is present. I linked the authors opinions for the possible interest of other people to see his analysis. Some of his analysis is based in data from his measurements and some is generic statements based in opinion. It is an interesting read. Picking out the latter, attacking a person, or throwing other nonsense into the situation is off topic and has nothing to do with what I am putting forward.
What remains is will any of this matter from an audible point of view? I don't have the data and can't calculate the exact % of intermodulation distortion from the aforementioned test (I contacted the author seeking this information and will update when/if I can get it), however, I linked a paper that studied in depth with testing 68 subjects in a method that is scientifically sound. The conclusion was that around 0.5% intermodulation distortion or greater the effects are heard as audible distortion and anything >0.003% intermodulation distortion was heard by the subjects as a tonal change. This is not my imagination. This is not pseudo science. Go read the paper.
My inference from all of this is that under some conditions of bi-wiring, more specifically where intermodulation distortion is lowered, it can be audible. This is grounded in the measurement based testing with/without bi-wires (showing intermodulcation distortion is lowered with bi-wiring) and the testing showing the audible sensitivity to intermodulation distortion (audible at >0.003%). This is all rooted in theory, measurement based testing, and testing of human subjects. What it all boils down to is that in some instances bi-wiring could make a difference, under the specific conditions, test equipment, song, etc. Assuming the distortion is low to begin with, in other words your system is not so bad/improperly, set up that there is audible distortion to begin with, the only perceivable change, if any, is a tonal quality change. The limit of hearing this change is based on the human audible perception of intermodulation distortion. This will vary person to person a bit and setup to setup. That is why you will only hear a difference in some cases.
If you search for people's opinions after trying both (bi-wiring and single wiring) you will hear numerous opinions on both side of the fence. Some swear they heard a difference and others swear they didn't. Many of these were done by a single enthusiast and others double blind. What I have presented explains an explanation rooted in theory and supported by testing that explains why exactly someone would hear a difference in some cases and not in others.
I think all of this is interesting and pertinent to the discussion here. I've made my point, justified my position.