I guess I’ve been lucky in that all the speakers I’ve owned have had simple single wire options (Royd, Naim, Kudos, Shahinian) but it would be a shame to exclude what might turn out to be the ideal speaker just because you don’t like the connectors. It’s hard enough to find speakers that match your room well as it is, without adding further limits to your shortlist.
Or would that be the other way around?
Well, this does appear to be for some but not for others. In the speaker market we’re all overwhelmingly spoilt for choice. There’re literally hundreds to choose from. Fortunately for me, i don’t have a difficult room to drive, i reckon i could just about get most contemporary speaker designs to work, without too much effort.
Also i have recently noticed that a lot of manufacturers who used to support bi-wire terminals are now ditching them and are reverting back to good old single wired designs. There are plenty to choose from out there, i’m not fazed about any lack of choice. Bi-wired sir? No thank you!
I do agree that biwire terminals are best avoided (unless you go all the way and have an active setup). You have a point that a forgiving room will allow a wider choice of speakers, although I do think there are some very good speakers out there that happen to have biwire terminals. Personally if I found the right speakers and they happened to have biwire terminals I would just put up with it.
Looking at your system I’d say you are due a speaker upgrade, so perhaps this is playing on your mind?! I believe Neat now offer some of their speakers with biwire sockets as an option only, so you can specify single wire when you order.
Indeed. A large number of speaker manufacturers do that, including very good ones, because it was what the public demanded/expected - and in reality if connected properly they need have no negative effect on sound.
Of all manufacturers I have to say I’d be surprised at ATC bowing to a hifi fashion such as biwiring capability - but perhaps as with PMC it is also a means of enabling active bi- (or tri-) amping without bastardising the enclosure, with PMC the passive XO being on the rear of the connector panel - remove the panel, take out the crossover, refit the panel and the connectors are there ready for the feed from the amps…
Biwire terminals are in general an unnecessary complication and best avoided, I feel. PMC told me once that they are there because it’s the fashion. My ProAcs have them and I asked if it were possible to order them single wired. It’s not, unfortunately, due to their construction. They told me that biwiring is really popular in some of their export markets, Japan in particular. Once I’d tried the speakers they were so good that the biwire terminals weren’t really an issue. I could stand in principle and reject some good speakers, which I decided would be silly. So I bought some jumper leads, which took me all of two minutes to attach, and that was that really. I’d still rather not have them, but such is life.
Actually it is possible to bi-wire and receive a good improvement in sound quality.
But like most things not all combinations work. Look at the variables , amplifier , cables , speakers.
I bi-wire my PMC MB2se with very good results. In fact i have tried a few times to go back to single wiring , but that always brings a degradation in the sound.
Interestingly i tried a PMC COR amp and that did not like bi-wiring , result was a worse sound.
There are a few hi-end amp and cable manufactures who do recommend bi-wire and give a technical reason for doing so.
Maybe, but still slightly annoying that what seems to be the majority who don’t use it needs to go to extra lengths. (Though apparently different in some markets according to what HH was told)
There are only upsides for them
Just because the majority do not use it , doesn’t mean it doesn’t work.
Bi - wiring does not have to cost twice the price of single wiring. I know of one hi-end cable manufacturer selling a biwire cable at very little extra about single cable.
I did not say that it does not work, I don’t know from own experimentation because I didn’t. What I said was that what seems 99.x% of customers who don’t use it are forced to deal with it. Not the end of the world, but slightly annoying. (Unless one wants SuperLumina jumpers, then it becomes very annoying 
)
Bi - wiring does not have to cost twice the price of single wiring.
It does not have to, obviously, but we all know what is likely to happen. I am pretty confident that speaker cable manufacturers would not promote it much if it was bad for their bottom line. In any case they might not be the most objective source
Your speakers are 3-way. Are you in fact tri-wiring? If not which two of the three pairs of terminals are you sharing with one cable, and how did the 3 permutations compare?
From your commentary I take it you have compared the doubled up cables in the bi-wired setup you use with a single cable feeding the linked speaker terminals, concluding that the bi-wire was better. Did you also compare the cables doubled up but with the links in place at the speaker, giving different cable characteristic due to the simple parallel connection? If not it would be interesting to know how that compares…
I’ve got same message when ordered Tab 10 Sig, not possible to deliver in singlewire, I consequently cancelled order.
Ophidian got my money instead.
Nice speakers.
So why not a Naim loudspeaker range built by Focal ?
I could make a guess - probably to underline the idea of each company being specialists in their field; Focal for speakers, Naim for electronics. Of course, I really couldn’t answer here for either company, so probably more a question for @Naim.Marketing, I feel.
However, do note that there are already a couple of Naim speakers that are available to buy new with a good deal of Focal knowhow applied to make them even better than before - the Mu-So2 and Mu-So Qb2. So, who knows what the future may hold…?
As @Richard.Dane correctly points out, it’s about the two brands focussing on their key strengths. Focal has been making speaker drivers and speakers for more than 40 years; Naim has almost 50 years experience in hi-fi separates and systems.
The ‘Focal Powered by Naim’ store concept rolling out across the world is the embodiment of that.
2 Likes
Most likely is that the mid/tweeter crossover is on one board and the bass on another. As with my three way. So only two sets of terminals.
Edit. Forgive me, that speaker does have three sets of terminals so he must be using jumpers.
I recently purchased new speakers and when they where installed I asked the if they couldn’t be moved closer to the walls. The dealer then told me that they get this question from practically all their customers. Most people want their speaker to be unobtrusive. As one of the few companies making boundary designs this makes it more difficult to understand why Naim speakers where not more successfull.
Hans
4 Likes
What’s so bad about Naim Speakers?
They’re not made anymore.
.sjb
9 Likes
I have owned or demoed at home n-Sats, SBLs, Allaes, Arivas, Credos and S-400s. I actually owned 5 pairs of n-Sats, two pairs of SBLs and two pairs of S-400 - obviously not simultaneously. So I think I can be ranked among those who do not dislike Naim speakers.
To my ears Naim speakers - up to the Ovator era - embodied the Naim sound as accurately as their electronics. The Sats are the ones I loved most viscerally, besides being the prettiest speakers I’ve ever seen; the SBLs can be amazingly neutral when properly driven; the Arivas, quite surprisingly, were in my opinion the most timbre-wise accurate; the Credo pleasant and unassuming, the Allaes my least loved speaker ever along with the NBL. The S-400 is a fine performer but I couldn’t make them sound properly here until I used a Nait XS2.
I believe that someday Naim will be acknowledged as a great and important loudspeaker maker; unfortunately, sales have proven otherwise. I also believe that Naim is behind some Focal design and that is the reason why some Focal models are listenable, a huge accomplishment in itself.
3 Likes
Hi Per, nice to find you back here.
Max