If NACA5 was split at the end for LF and HF, is that equivalent to biwiring?

Use of four banana plugs at the speaker end allows folks with dual binding posts to eliminate the manufacturer's connector bars. Often the bars are not considered best for SQ. With four plugs you're effectively using the NACA5 as a jumper between dual posts. Biamping requires two amps and two sets of speaker wires, with only a single pair of posts useful on each run of wire (assuming you have two-way speakers).

No. The theory behind bi-wiring is that it relies on the current pulled over the full length of the cable to specific to the HF or LF terminals on the crossover. Just seperting the cable out at the last few inches doesn't acheive this.

That said, that assumes that bi-wiring is even desirable. Very few Naim users do it and AFIK, all Naim dealers will recommend against it. Some speaker manufactureres have recent moved away from it too. I find it does make a marginal difference on some lower end equipment but would never bother with a Naim amp unless actually Bi-amping, which again may not be required if the amp is powerful enough to drive the speakers properly in the first place.

What you are describing with splitting the NACA5 end & fitting 4 banana plugs is the Naim "F" configuration.   It's highly recommened - see FAQ on speaker wire

Just to clarify Conciousmess, what Mike-B is proposing is a connection method for bi-wirable speakers using a single length of A5. It is completely correct and does not contradict the position on actual bi-wiring itself. THis is how most of us single-wire our bi/tri-wireable speakers.

Mike-B posted:

What you are describing with splitting the NACA5 end & fitting 4 banana plugs is the Naim "F" configuration.   It's highly recommened - see FAQ on speaker wire

I don't think it is Mike - the OP seems to be suggesting adding two plugs to each side of the A5 by putting half of the strands in one plug and half in the other. It intuitively sounds wrong to me, and I've never seen it be done. The F connector is, of course, the ideal way to go. 

Just to add - the F-connection also allows for a drivers-first versus tweeters-first connection, and visa-versa. This drives the crossovers in different modes/directions and changes the sound. Different modes/directions? I seem to recall it has something to do with inductance versus conductance of the crossover, but now I'm talking way over my head. Maybe an engineer can clarify. For my part, I simply listen to the SQ between the two connections to decide which is best .

If you did manage to cut a length stripped back to the wire and separated to four, it wouldn't look very elegant, would probably corrode quickly and effect the value of resistance and capacitance.  Saying that Nordost used to supply their speaker cables with the option to biwire and separated to four bananas that had the same specifications as the shotgun (two bananas) version - although the wires were covered in a sleeve and airtight termination.

Consciousmess posted:

... but there are many speakers out there begging to be biwired as a minimum...

... but will splitting one end of the NACA5 cable into 4 quality banana plugs offer the benefit of biwiring?

 

Begging? Such as?

No this config. will not offer b-wiring. F-connection whilst abandoning the supplied links usually provides an audible benefit (usually because the speaker links are cheap).

Thanks for the replies.  So, to clarify, if I use the F-connector method, do I plug the speaker wire directly into the bass first then F connect to the treble, or vice-versa?  I am thinking which one requires the most 'power' and suspect that is the bass connectors.

Ahh I think there is misunderstanding here. The "F" simply comes from the shape of a single Naim plug which can only be used on Naim components. So you won't be using it on speakers unless they are Naim too and in that case, they would not support passive bi-wiring. By "Splitting" I assumed Mike-B referred to take a small length of the end to build a NAC-A5 jumper cable. You should not actually "split" the cable lengthwise at all.

If building a jumper, you have a short 15cm (or so) length of cable per speaker where one end is a banana and the other is something like a spade connector (never do bare wire). The spade connector goes onto the HF binding posts (leaving the 4mm banana socket free to accept the actual speaker cable banana plug. The other end with banana plugs then connects to the LF binding post's banana socket.

If that is all a bit of a hassle then using the links that your speakers comes with should be acceptable in the short term. Your dealer who sold the A5 should have sold it pre-made. It should be a modest cost to just ask them to make jumper cables to work with your speakers. Jumpers are available pre-made but not in A5. It is actually possible, using heavy duty wide bore banana plugs, to build the jumber into the speaker end of the cable but with A5 it can be a bit unwieldy.

Just do a search for pictures of bi-wire jumber cables and you will see what we mean. But honestly, keep life simple and let a dealer just provide it for you.

feeling_zen posted:

Ahh I think there is misunderstanding here. The "F" simply comes from the shape of a single Naim plug which can only be used..

No, F connector is one of these (similar pics exist) and not the classic 90 degree 'single pin per terminal' housing for Naim amp sockets.

https://forums.naimaudio.com/to...357#1566878607691357

If you have a three way speaker with tri-wire connections, you can go further to an E connector as shown here (thanks to Peter at Cymbiosis for the pic).

You can use F or E made with Naim cable and plugs quite happily with non Naim speakers; just remove the plastic casing if the pin spacing is different from the Naim standard. It worked very well with PMC speakers when I had some. 

Richard Dane posted:

If you have a three way speaker with tri-wire connections, you can go further to an E connector as shown here (thanks to Peter at Cymbiosis for the pic).

Certainly not easy to achieve!

There are many ways to do it - just Google images of Naim F connector and you'll see - the picture from Peter shown above is a particularly neat job where the speaker connector shells have been retained and the tops have been cut out.  Looks like a really good job, but iso long as you can solder properly then you (or your dealer) could achieve something just as good.

There's no consensus which gets the first feed and run off to the treble or bass, speakers differ and vary wildly on what drivers need a cleaner feed untainted by additional solder and cable that might compromise.  If you have a speaker that has a classy expensive tweeter you would be wise to have the main input to treble with a secondary to the bass. If you had a speaker with a big bass driver coupled to a big crossover you'd be wise to visa versa.

Biwire speakers really are the work of the devil.   Inconsistencies in how they are installed with different systems means that there is a big chance they won't sound anything like the original designer intended. Put single wire terminals on a speaker and there's better chance of hearing them at best - unless you run them properly with bi - amping.

Hungryhalibut posted:

I don't think it is Mike - the OP seems to be suggesting adding two plugs to each side of the A5 by putting half of the strands in one plug and half in the other.

OK,  I might have misunderstood,  but the following posts should have made it clear to the OP

I believe I'm correct in saying that the cable is not broken between the speaker plugs in Peter's (Cymbiosis) cables, rather, simply "stripped back" as it passes through each plug. (or not so simply!)

feeling_zen posted:

By "Splitting" I assumed Mike-B referred to take a small length of the end to build a NAC-A5 jumper cable.

Not Guilty yer Zen'ness,  I only mentioned splitting 'cause its wot Consciousness wrote.    My F connection wires are unbroken with stripped back insulation to expose the wire & soldered - like the pics in the previous posts.  

NB I use Chord Odyssey & wire the same way, unbroken run soldered into the 1st banana & on to the 2nd.   This is how it was with my old Naim plugs & then as it is now with the Deltron's   

Great picture, Mike, but I was just thinking... power goes to bass first (or LF), then treble (or HF).  I originally thought that to be the best way, due to power requirements powering a larger speaker cone, but have noticed other forum posts saying a higher quality amp should be on treble as that is the frequency range of 'detail'.

Therefore, as negligible as the distance is (for electrons), would it not be better powering the treble first - then branching off for bass?

Mike-B posted:

feeling_zen posted:

By "Splitting" I assumed Mike-B referred to take a small length of the end to build a NAC-A5 jumper cable.

Not Guilty yer Zen'ness,  I only mentioned splitting 'cause its wot Consciousness wrote.    My F connection wires are unbroken with stripped back insulation to expose the wire & soldered - like the pics in the previous posts.  

NB I use Chord Odyssey & wire the same way, unbroken run soldered into the 1st banana & on to the 2nd.   This is how it was with my old Naim plugs & then as it is now with the Deltron's   

 

No worries Mike. The second picture is a configuration I am very familiar with but it takes bug buckets to do with A5, not to mention some constant lateral preassure on the binding posts exerted from the A5 itself. The F-plugs used in series with the tops cut out as shown here and by HH and Richard is a new one on me but I suppose the trough shaped buckets in the F-plug pins do lend themselves to that rather well. I just find too many speakers these days have posts that are very unaccomodating (such as positive and negative posts mounted at right angles to each other). For this reason I just find dedicated jumper cables simpler - especially if speakers change you know that the cable/jumper combo will still work.

I still think the OP may be better off just asking his dealer to use their judgement to either modify his existing cable or provide A5 jumpers that will work with his speakers.

Whether connecting HF to LF or LF to HF makes very little difference (if any). I tend to do the HF first just out of some obsessive compulsion and because it pulls the man cable further off the floor. I really would not get too hung up about the order.

Consciousmess,

I think the HF or LF first has more to do with the how the crossovers are driven. The speakers get required power either way.

It's simple enough to try both alternatives and let your ears decide which sounds better or if you can even hear a difference.

Consciousmess posted:

Great picture, Mike, but I was just thinking... power goes to bass first (or LF), then treble (or HF).  I originally thought that to be the best way, due to power requirements powering a larger speaker cone, but have noticed other forum posts saying a higher quality amp should be on treble as that is the frequency range of 'detail'.

Therefore, as negligible as the distance is (for electrons), would it not be better powering the treble first - then branching off for bass?

I've tried it every which way & TBH there is diddly squat difference in SQ & now opt for the tidiest = both into bass first (2nd pic).

Plus its easy with the flexibility of a cable such as I use & with the (common to many speakers) Monacor terminal posts.  Trying to do it with NACA5 & making it tidy in the angled Monacor terminals is next to impossible.