Thoughts on bi-amping speakers.

[Ken61]

Hello,

I'm in the process of upgrading and just looking for some thoughts on bi amping. I picked up an Oppo bp-83 and grabbed a low end receiver to get the HDMI connections. I'm going to replace it probably next year. But in my reading I notice some av reciever offer the feature on their 7.x equipment to run a 5.x system and use the extra outputs for bi-amping.

I know on low end speakers the quality of componets are questionable, particualry the passive cross over. And bi amping can be a real improvement. But with the mid price ranged speakers where the quality is much higher is it much of an improvement?

Thanks,

Ken

 

[JonUrban]

I have a set of large Definative Technology speakers in my Home Video room for the fronts, and they are Bi-Amped. It seems to work well, as they have a large woofer in them to begin with. I prefer the way they sound this was as opposed to feeding them just the audio from the receiver output. It's a bit more full.

 

[Mr. Hookup]

Typically, Biamping & Triamping was used for relatively large & inefficient speakers. (needing lots of power). In the day, the Infinity Reference Speakers, The Wilson WAMM systems benefited from Biamping/ Triamping. They used large rack mounted power amps for this purpose. In the case of the Infinity Reference system, they had a 7' tall array of about 8 large polypropylene woofers; another 7' array of emmen midrange drivers , and a 7' array of emmit tweeters. At CES, they were powered in a triamped configuration. They were powered by 3 big power amps. I don't think I ever heard powerful bass like that. It was so strong that it hit you in the chest like a hammer. They used 2 pairs of these in the room. These speakers could absorb large amounts of power. This was a prime example of triamping. These speakers were expensive (in the neighborhood of $65,000.00 / pair). They did not fit in a normal size room. I know a guy here who has a pair of the Wilson WAMM system. This system overpowers your room in size and sound. His system is biamped They are a 2 piece system. They cost around $125,000.00 at the time. Using the side channels of a cheap 7.1 Receiver with cheap speakers is a waste of time IMHO.

 

[Ken61]

Thank you both for your feed back.

 

[filper]

I am waiting on a new Onkyo TX-NR585 and I am considering utilizing it to bi-amp a pair of Totem Mites.

Does anyone have any further thoughts on bi-amping ?

Totem Mite Specifications:

50 Hz – 20 kHz ± 3dB with correct positioning
Impedance: 8 ohms
Sensitivity: 87 dB/W/m. Maximum sound pressure 102 dB before dynamic compression
Minimum Power: 20 W Maximum Power: 80 W Crossover: 3.2 kHz electrical and mechanical Woofer: 5 1/2” granulated Tweeter: 1” soft dome Rear ported
Dimensions: 11 x 6 x 8.5” approx. side 270 x 152 x 227 mm
Volume: 5.6 litres (internal)
Weight: 4 kg (approx. 9 lbs)

 

[par4ken]

Bi-amping can be very worthwhile. I've Bi-amped since the late seventies, the only drawback is the number of power amps required when doing Quad (or more channels). I don't bother with subwoofers as my main speakers (all four) blow away most regular subwoofers anyway!

 

[bluelightning]

Hello,

I'm in the process of upgrading and just looking for some thoughts on bi amping. I picked up an Oppo bp-83 and grabbed a low end receiver to get the HDMI connections. I'm going to replace it probably next year. But in my reading I notice some av reciever offer the feature on their 7.x equipment to run a 5.x system and use the extra outputs for bi-amping.

I know on low end speakers the quality of componets are questionable, particualry the passive cross over. And bi amping can be a real improvement. But with the mid price ranged speakers where the quality is much higher is it much of an improvement?

Thanks,

Ken

Hello Ken61,
I think whether to bi-amp or not will depend very much on the speakers chosen , the receiver power, room size and SPL you are trying to achieve from them. With more modern receivers and relatively efficient speakers and so long as you are not trying to play it at very loud SPLs , I doubt bi-amping would be of much benefit. But again it will depend on the individual pieces. For speakers with larger woofers for reproducing frequencies below @25 Hz, bi amping could provide a benefit by allowing to equalize the signal separately. Most subs/speakers require some sort EQ at those frequencies due to the natural roll off.

 

[bluelightning]

Bi-amping can be very worthwhile. I've Bi-amped since the late seventies, the only drawback is the number of power amps required when doing Quad (or more channels). I don't bother with subwoofers as my main speakers (all four) blow away most regular subwoofers anyway!

You are perhaps forgetting that a lot of folks here don't have "regular sub woofers" but rather powerful beasts , which will in almost all cases put out way more power that passive speakers, but then again, I have no clue what you have

 

[bluelightning]

I should have looked at the bloody date before responding 2010!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[hobie1dog]

2010, now that's digging way back....lol

 

[par4ken]

Keep the thread alive, seems like 2010 was only yesterday it's still relevant today! Running a subwoofer is a bit like bi-amping (actually is a form of). The speakers I have in my basement rec room are ones that I built in the late seventies, running two 12 inch Phillips woofers in each of four towerlike speaker cabinets, so I really have no use for a subwoofer. Bi-amping allows you to really crank up the volume without distortion, not that I do that much anymore. Running tube amps for the mid and high frequencies gives you the best sound possible IMHO.

 

[furui_suterioo]

I was reading a user manual yesterday for the pioneer qx9900, has anyone here used a four corner speaker set up to bi-amp or is there a more ideal speaker configuration?

 

[salsdali]

I bi-amp my front B&W and they do sound better than my non-bi-amped side B&W's (same model speaker)

 

[fredblue]

i did it, i liked it, now i can't (my current avr can't do it and no space for extra amps anyway) but i wish i could! even though i have no idea if it truly made a difference i thought it did and gave everything more oomph! that could've been just placebo but its definitely worth trying if its not gonna break the bank i reckon!

 

[filper]

Maybe I'll just try out a Dolby Atmos 5.1.2 set up with the extra 2 channels since the ceiling is still unfinished.

 

[Beefalo]

Due to my addictive mental make up bi-ampable speakers meant only one thing to me....MORE.
I only have stereo amps. I tried many combinations but they all resulted in a 4ohm or less load. My favorite set up is this:
One stereo amp per speaker. The left channel powering woofer & right channel highs. I can crank it up and the amps never shut down.

 

[hobie1dog]

Do you feel it's better to use 4 channels and bi-amp 2 speakers, or bridge the 4 channels down to 2 channels and drive the speakers?

 

[Beefalo]

With my equipment bridging caused the amps to shut down at high volume. I acheived the same high volume with 4 channels bi-amping 2 speakers and the amps don't shut down.
2 mono amps for each 8 ohm speaker would be my dream set up. At that point maybe active crossovers...?

 

[hobie1dog]

I'm going to bridge mine into 2 channels and have 1400 watts on each speaker, which should be just about right. I'll still have 2 more channels to bridge and power the subwoofer.

Two greatest attributes : lots of power, lots of displacement.

 

[gene_stl]

I have been a biamping enthusiast since 1969. It is the single most efficient, and economical upgrade to the sound of a stereo system. I don't biamp I quad amp. Biamping is probably a better thing to do than bridging just to get more power.
Some of the reasons to bi amp have been lessened by the changing economics (ie amplifier power being "free" like computer memory and bandwidth) and high power being available.

But it is still and always will be very advantageous to eliminate the crossover network inside the speaker box. The crossover functions can be implemented much more accurately at line level. All the drivers get better damping. Each amplifier has reduced IM distortion because it is reproducing signals with narrower bandwidth. (in my case two to two and one half octaves versus ten full range)

Multiamping also makes it easier to tune your system to the room in the analog domain (Tweeter and Midrange "level controls" trash speaker damping) Hi level crossovers also eat a very large portion of your amplifier power. This is why you don't see very many four way systems without at least bi or tri amping.

Quote from a post at another forum Begin:
This is a nice dated piece from 1986 which I have been referring people to since I got onto the internet.

https://www.audiocontrol.com/downloads/tech-papers/tech-paper-102.pdf
https://www.audiocontrol.com/downloads/tech-papers/tech-paper-104.pdf

Also read the March 1969 issue of Radio Electronics which has an article by the Late Great Norman H Crowhurst and English audio engineer.
https://www.americanradiohistory.co...ronics/60s/1969/Radio-Electronics-1969-03.pdf
I feel that I became an audiophile exactly when I read the above mentioned article. It explains how active crossovers eliminate intermodulation.
starts on Page 32.

That was in March. In October he showed you how to build one:
https://www.americanradiohistory.co...ronics/60s/1969/Radio-Electronics-1969-10.pdf
Pages 42,43,44
Those two articles changed my life.

I was in the process of home building an electronic crossover using op amps based on info in Walt Jung and Don Lancaster books.
I had etched and was drilling a circuit board.

Then I ran into THIS:
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/f3...417.1160101081.1558408539-44099534.1558408539
The famous Linkwitz 1976 article on how to do it right.

https://www.xkitz.com/blogs/making-...g-the-case-for-active-crossovers-vs-passive-1
The Pioneer Series 20 (Pioneer Elite) D-23 was I believe the first commercial product to incorporate the Linkwitz criterion for preventing shift in the radiation pattern at the crossover. When the Pioneer came out I threw my project away.
I don't think the Pioneer engineers knew about Linkwitz. I think they figured it out independently.
https://www.hifiengine.com/manual_library/pioneer/d-23.shtml

I don't have a mini DSP yet. But it is likely just a matter of time. The more time has gone by since the above the more ways there are to skin the cat. You can buy kit or assembled circuit boards from all over. mini DSP. mini DSP even lower priced clones from Dayton audio and China
Lots of folks make crossovers now. The dbx drive rack and Behringer Ultras are great and reasonably priced and do LOTS of tricks.

In my opinion you should open the speaker box and wire straight to the drivers. You should include fuses and sometimes for tweeters series capacitors that don't affect the response in the drivers range. If you have more drivers than amplifiers (ie bi amping a three way) you need to leave part of the crossover in place. This may require careful examination of the speakers crossover network because engineers and manufacturers have gotten very sophisticated in that department. It really is better to remove the whole thing. In this day and age power amps and active crossovers are very inexpensive so if its a two way biamp it a three way tri amp and like I have done since 1977 quad amp a four way.
End Quote

Most of what I know about that is easy to access on the internet


BiAmping is technically more difficult and requires some reading and study so you don't blow up your speaker drivers. It is especially good if you are going to build DIY speakers. It is definitely not for everyone. But I believe strongly that all the best sounding systems incorporate it.