General SQ General discussion of Sound Quality related issues.

MLK165's to Bi-Amp or not to Bi-Amp

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 02-14-2011, 05:21 AM
  #21  
50 Watt CAFz'r
iTrader: (-1)
 
Allan74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 92
Originally Posted by PenThis
First impressions of bi-amping Hertz MLK-165's.

Installation. The HU Pioneer AVIC Z2 has like many HU's a fader for the back seat speakers. Ferdinand took advantage of these HU outputs to feed the woofers. He ran additional RCA's to the Audisson LRx4.1 from the HU to connect to Channel B. This gives the ability to better control the levels between the tweeters and woofers as the distance between them is about 18". He ran high quality speaker cable to the crossovers. I don't know what settings he has on the xovers (will find out later this week when the truck goes in for the install of the sub and its Hertz Amp).

As mentioned in a previous message, he rebuilt the woofer mounts and cleaned up a poor Dynamat install. He sealed the woofers with silicon. Not mentioned earlier was the lack of proper care taken in running cables through the metal support holding the amp. Ferdinand re-routered the holes and used grommets to protect the wires from chafing. He mounted the tweets into the A pillars angling with a slight preference for the driver. Very clean install of the tweets (to the point where they look total stock).

In essence a proper install.

Results after 14 hours on the road: This is definitely the way to get the most out of these fine speakers. Clarity is very first thing you will notice. Vocals come across beautifully - rich, responsive with tonality almost equaling/rivaling my DAW with its Focal Twin6Be's. The combination of the LRx4.1 with the MLK's provides a much warmer presentation (characterized by a good Class A tube amp). The initial brightness of the painful highs have been softened up (probably due in part to proper mounting in the pillars and proper angling - removing bounce off the front window).

Even with the woofers and tweets further apart than most would desire, there seems to be little if any phase or timing issues. They complement each other beautiful - seamlessly. Where one starts and the other ends is impossible to gauge. If there is any, these old ears haven't been able to sense it as of yet.

Some one commented on how these speakers can be power hungry - I totally agree. I would not recommend matching anything less than what the LrX4.1 amp delivers.

Looking forward to completing this install with the addition of the sub by the weekend. I will summarize up this adventure then.

Thank you everyone for your support and assistance.

Jim
It definately sounds like the re-installation and cleanup played a big part in the increase in SQ, or atleast driver/listener pleasure.

It's unfortunate about the 4.1k being your only choice, as there is still room to get more out of those drivers. Don't get me wrong, I am Hertz/Audison all the way. It would just be nice to be able to take 30-40w more away from each tweeter and 'magically' have it appear on each midbass channel
The Mille 6.5's definately love power.

Congrats on a sweet setup.
Allan74 is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
wasted911
General SQ
0
06-07-2010 09:22 PM



Quick Reply: MLK165's to Bi-Amp or not to Bi-Amp



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:51 PM.