I am Not hurting anything right ??

Most manufacturers put bi-wire options in because it's good marketing. I've talked to many top engineers at speaker companies and most agree biwiring is just a gimick. If you analyze the circuit, biwiring just makes the sound worse.

I do not agree with you bluesman. I always had better results with bi-wiring (with 6 sets of different speaker brands).

Vandersteen 2Ces, 3As, and 3A sigs. all sound better bi-wired, and Richard Vandersteen recommends bi-wiring. His speakers were designed for bi-wiring. Cheers. Craig

KennyT is right. I mis-stated what I meant to say: bi-wiring feeds full-range signals to both crossovers, but having 2 X-overs allows the X-over design to be optimized: 1 for the low freq's, and 1 for the mid and upper freq's.

Bi-wire or not depends on how your speaker crossover is designed. A well designed speaker crossover does not benefit from bi-wiring.

A not so well designed crossover feeds back EMF to the amplifier thus splitting the crossover into 2 or more sections REDUCES this effect. A well design gets this phenomena correct thus bi-wiring mokes little or NO difference.

Just an example, Dunlavy does not recommend bi-wiring but puts 2 sets of binding posts on his speakers so not to piss his customers away.

On the other hand if you open up a Thiel speaker, there are 2 or 3 boards inside, one for each of the low, mid, high frequencies and still the speaker is not bi/tri wireble.

I have personally had experienced on certain speakers, bi-wiring DOES make a hell lot of difference and on some hardly any.

One word of advice.....get rid of those jumpers. Make your own using the cable of your choice. Jumpers they provide are usually crappy. Bi-wire or not, you have to deceide. I have not much experience on SF speakers but heard that they are not recommended (correct me if I'm wrong) for bi-wiring.

Hope it helps.