The only possible audible upgrade available from either bi-amping-bi-wiring is if the speakers were under-powered or using too thin of wire in the first place. Nothing more to be gained otherwise.
Bi Amping
- Thread starter kap'n krunch
- Start date
Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:
Bi-wiring is really just a means to sell more speaker cable, there is no scientific or engineering theory behind it.
Bi-amping from an engineering perspective is if the speaker cross-over filtering is before the amps (as is done in large PA systems). It leads to less intermodulation distortion and can improve performance. However, it is unlikely that any AV Receivers do this, though with the amount of DSP inside they could! My Pioneer SCLX-86 doesn't. I was going to do it but decided there was no point as the amp didn't add in the necessary cross-over filters before the amps. It might make an improvement as each amplifier now sees a less complex load, but I doubt I'd hear the difference.
Active speakers where each amplifier is post the cross-over filter, and drives its own speaker (so woofer, mid, tweeter or more depending on band splits) and is optimised for each speaker range is undoubtedly the best from an engineering view, but it is expensive.
Bi-amping from an engineering perspective is if the speaker cross-over filtering is before the amps (as is done in large PA systems). It leads to less intermodulation distortion and can improve performance. However, it is unlikely that any AV Receivers do this, though with the amount of DSP inside they could! My Pioneer SCLX-86 doesn't. I was going to do it but decided there was no point as the amp didn't add in the necessary cross-over filters before the amps. It might make an improvement as each amplifier now sees a less complex load, but I doubt I'd hear the difference.
Active speakers where each amplifier is post the cross-over filter, and drives its own speaker (so woofer, mid, tweeter or more depending on band splits) and is optimised for each speaker range is undoubtedly the best from an engineering view, but it is expensive.
The expense and complexity are some of the cons. But bi-amping (correctly done with a crossover network before the power amps AND no damping destroying elements in the speaker box) is actually the most economical way to greatly improve the sound you listen to. You can now buy the DSP 408 from Parts Express for $160
https://www.parts-express.com/Dayto...gnal-Processor-for-Home-and-Car-Audio-230-500That and one or more extra power amp (which also are available cheaply now) allow for a lot of experimentation.
But like everything worth doing it requires effort , care and some expense. But it usually ends up costing less than many over priced larger speakers and power amps.
Before the pestilence hit I was at Axpona 2019. I was tired and dozing off in Bryston's suite when I was startled awake by a familiar sound. An effortless sforzando. It was their triamped system. $45,000. It can be done for much less.
https://www.parts-express.com/Dayto...gnal-Processor-for-Home-and-Car-Audio-230-500That and one or more extra power amp (which also are available cheaply now) allow for a lot of experimentation.
But like everything worth doing it requires effort , care and some expense. But it usually ends up costing less than many over priced larger speakers and power amps.
Before the pestilence hit I was at Axpona 2019. I was tired and dozing off in Bryston's suite when I was startled awake by a familiar sound. An effortless sforzando. It was their triamped system. $45,000. It can be done for much less.
Sure but that's a whole different kettle of fish. Anything can occur from the change in crossover, etc.
Thats an interesting unit at a fun price. These from MiniDSP seem worthy too. They may offer better DACs for not much more $$. The only down side is the extra digital conversion thats occurs if you feed them an analog signal. Im pretty convinced that the next time i need to repair, replace or otherwise upgrade either the speakers or amps in my system I'm jumping to a powered monitor. Some of them look really nice. They need a grille cloth option though to capture more home market.[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
Last edited:
Yes... and its mostly all good. Not only does it reduce all the crossover duties to a line level component, but the crossovers can now be digital instead of analog to boot. And they are using faster processors and higher bit rates and the technology is trickeling down into even some of the less costly gear, more so all the time. That can all translate into more precise crossover points with selectable adjustment ranges for optimization. No ties to discreet component tolerances like caps, coils, and resistors found in those load level passive crossovers. There is virtually no phase shift, even for steep filters. All that solves a lot of problems that audio designers have been dealing with since audio has been around. There is great potential to yield real measurable improvements in audio gear.Sure but that's a whole different kettle of fish. Anything can occur from the change in crossover, etc.
kap'n krunch
2K Club - QQ Super Nova
yeah, call me a troll, no problem, I just don´t get the attitude that "it's no good" or "it's a waste of time " when in the pro world monitors get one amp for the HF and one amp for the LF, cause that is what I THINK I am doing by biamping...
Potential being the key word I would say.
It's all in the hands of the owner.
It could just as easily be made to sound horrid.
The average user has no business designing a crossover, that belongs in the hands of professionals.
kap'n krunch
2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Listen guys, I admire all of you, even the one I don´t like, I know you guys don´t mean ill and consequently I don't either...
When I said the whole "Flat Earther" thing I meant it as a joke! Do not take it personally...
CHeers!
When I said the whole "Flat Earther" thing I meant it as a joke! Do not take it personally...
CHeers!
The difficulty in "designing" crossovers has been greatly overblown. When I got interested in this in 1969 it was very much DIY. The two articles I linked to by the late great Norman Crowhurst who wrote zillions of articles and also numerous books on audio tell exactly how to do it. I have had several advanced audiophiles who should all know better tell me there is "magic" in crossovers designed by certain designers (usually on stratospherically priced tallboy box speakers). But when asked for clarification there is nothing. Even the vaunted JBL M2 which Floyd Toole describes as "the best there is" (talking about frequency response) which IS biamped from the factory still has room for improvement due to some networks appearing between the power amp and the driver voice coils.
Multi Amping allows all sorts of tricks to be done that just aren't possible any other way. In the recent thread here where we were trying to help Edison Baggins multi amp his Infinities, examination of the crossover revealed what amounts to a six way parallel network that gyrates down to very low (less than 2 ohms) impedance. That network probably eats 80% of the amplifier power. No wonder amps struggle to drive it.
Sal I guess you don't believe in hot rodders modding their own engines nor people smithing their own guns.
BTW Marantz had a tube electronic crossover in its lineup that you could use with your 7C and tube power amps. In the early 60s.
JBL also sold "electronic crossovers" to use with their drivers.
It was always an advanced technique. But now you can buy a fourway stereo crossover for $160 that does tricks we only dreamed of back in the day.
Multi Amping allows all sorts of tricks to be done that just aren't possible any other way. In the recent thread here where we were trying to help Edison Baggins multi amp his Infinities, examination of the crossover revealed what amounts to a six way parallel network that gyrates down to very low (less than 2 ohms) impedance. That network probably eats 80% of the amplifier power. No wonder amps struggle to drive it.
Sal I guess you don't believe in hot rodders modding their own engines nor people smithing their own guns.
BTW Marantz had a tube electronic crossover in its lineup that you could use with your 7C and tube power amps. In the early 60s.
JBL also sold "electronic crossovers" to use with their drivers.
It was always an advanced technique. But now you can buy a fourway stereo crossover for $160 that does tricks we only dreamed of back in the day.
Last edited:
So you've got 52 years of experience, didn't take long to learn did it. LOL
Sure, but IME the majority do more wrong than right. Hate to tell you about the "Primitive Pete" work I've had to repair in both categories. I've wanted to break the fingers off most guys who attempt to "tune" their own carbs or do their own trigger jobs. LOL
Proper crossover design is only complicated by the electrical characteristics of the selected drivers. Using an active crossover and separate amps removes that uncertainty.Potential being the key word I would say.
It's all in the hands of the owner.
It could just as easily be made to sound horrid.
The average user has no business designing a crossover, that belongs in the hands of professionals.
I hope nobody tries this! Apart from the open loop problem, its is definitely a bad idea as it probably one of the easiest ways to produce a high power oscillator which would destroy the amplifier and speakers. If it worked all it would do would be compensate for the small voltage drop in the cable run, which is all the cable introduces. Getting the feedback loop correctly laid out on a PCB round the amplifier circuitry is not that trivial either. Yes we do use it in PSU design but we have very short connections, and some of the processor chips can easily take 30-40Amps at 0.9V giving unwanted voltage drops (and crashes) so we take the feedback from within the ball grid array of the processor, but it is of the order of 50mm/2" and we have a very low bandwidth, plus we have masses of decoupling capacitors. I have seen Power Supplies oscillate when we did a 'lash-up' for a prototype and had the feedback cables too long.
I agree that stability could be a problem, but it has been successfully implemented by some. And the technique is used a lot with power supplies, in industrial/commercial environment. Yes if anyone wants to try it please proceed with caution! You could make it safer by implementing a bit of feedback locally with the remainder fed back from the speaker.
I'm sure I would screw it up. I think I'll leave my Adcoms alone & operate them the way Nelson Pass intended.
Oh too late I just remembered. Years ago I made some mods to the power supply. No where near as tricky as using a speaker in the feedback loop.
Another idea would be to place the amplifier inside the speaker so that it would be connected via a very short piece of wire. That idea is often done with subwoofers.
It os often done with studio monitor speakers. See: Genelec
TVB
400 Club - QQ All-Star
I have a set of speakers with separate inputs for bi-amping, so I tried it. I used a powerful amp for the low range and a smaller amp for the highs. This never worked for me because all I was doing was getting up from my listening position to adjust the amps, sometimes several times during each song. Overall, I could never get the sound right. Now, I didn't use an adjustable crossover, but I could see myself getting up all the time to play with the crossover control in addition to the amps. What a hassell. Although I loved the idea, biamping and me was not to be.
Similar threads
