Why would bi-amping help SQ
10-19-2006, 06:40 PM
#21
By the words "Bi-amping" I was refering to using a passive crossover in a Bi-amp mode rather then a sigle input. But this still has little to do with output power. Your amplifiers 4ohm power rating will not change weather your using passive or active crossovers. Yes there will be some losses from the parts in the passive crossovers but in most cases it pretty minor. I have 10 channels of amplification in my car and it's totally acticve (ecah speaker has it own channel). I know about the advantages of using individual channels to drive each woofer, but power is still not really one of them. If you have a 50 watt per channel amp, it's going to be 50 watts regardless of frequency (basically). Yes, a sub is harder to drive then a tweeter, but there are obviously reasons for that.
Bi-amping (from my understanding of the meaning) is simply another means to an end. If you have the channels available and have the electronics to back them up, then it should be an obvious choice. There is more work required because there are more variables to consider when tunning.
As far as distortion goes, I don't see any reall world advantages to bi-amping as you call it ( if you had mentioned crossover distortion (which has nothing to do with an amps hi/low pass filter) I might have agreed with you).
Bi-amping (from my understanding of the meaning) is simply another means to an end. If you have the channels available and have the electronics to back them up, then it should be an obvious choice. There is more work required because there are more variables to consider when tunning.
As far as distortion goes, I don't see any reall world advantages to bi-amping as you call it ( if you had mentioned crossover distortion (which has nothing to do with an amps hi/low pass filter) I might have agreed with you).
10-19-2006, 07:05 PM
#23
Fozzz
Did you read the article in the link? If you did, then there is no further need for this thread...Every reason for bi amping with electronic crossovers is there!
Bi-amping with passive crossovers does allow individual level control, but does not offer all the other advantages of an electronic crossover setup.
If there are parts or the article that anyone does not understand, I would be happy to help explain them.
Did you read the article in the link? If you did, then there is no further need for this thread...Every reason for bi amping with electronic crossovers is there!
Bi-amping with passive crossovers does allow individual level control, but does not offer all the other advantages of an electronic crossover setup.
If there are parts or the article that anyone does not understand, I would be happy to help explain them.
10-20-2006, 10:45 AM
#26
did read it.
Just a little back ground on me here. I own a custom loudspeaker company. I build high end home speakers. I build and design the crossovers as well as the cabinets. So I do understand what the article states. I'm just trying to relate the article to caraudio in general. My guess is that I'm interrupting some of the information incorrectly or ?????
Can I get a synopsis for someone????
Just a little back ground on me here. I own a custom loudspeaker company. I build high end home speakers. I build and design the crossovers as well as the cabinets. So I do understand what the article states. I'm just trying to relate the article to caraudio in general. My guess is that I'm interrupting some of the information incorrectly or ?????
Can I get a synopsis for someone????
10-20-2006, 11:52 AM
#27
my synopsis is:
electronic xovers are accurate, adjustable, don't change points as the coil heats, or suffer from power loss....
as far as just biamping its easier to adjust levels between speakers not to mention the 3db gain in effective power....
electronic xovers are accurate, adjustable, don't change points as the coil heats, or suffer from power loss....
as far as just biamping its easier to adjust levels between speakers not to mention the 3db gain in effective power....
Last edited by Haunz; 10-20-2006 at 11:56 AM.
10-20-2006, 11:58 AM
#28
Originally Posted by fozzz
did read it.
Just a little back ground on me here. I own a custom loudspeaker company. I build high end home speakers. I build and design the crossovers as well as the cabinets. So I do understand what the article states. I'm just trying to relate the article to caraudio in general. My guess is that I'm interrupting some of the information incorrectly or ?????
Can I get a synopsis for someone????
Just a little back ground on me here. I own a custom loudspeaker company. I build high end home speakers. I build and design the crossovers as well as the cabinets. So I do understand what the article states. I'm just trying to relate the article to caraudio in general. My guess is that I'm interrupting some of the information incorrectly or ?????
Can I get a synopsis for someone????
but can i ask you who makes the best home speakers?
i like linn but i would like to see what you have to say about it
10-20-2006, 12:10 PM
#29
Originally Posted by Haunz
my synopsis is:
electronic xovers are accurate, adjustable, don't change points as the coil heats, or suffer from power loss....
as far as just biamping its easier to adjust levels between speakers not to mention the 3db gain in effective power....
electronic xovers are accurate, adjustable, don't change points as the coil heats, or suffer from power loss....
as far as just biamping its easier to adjust levels between speakers not to mention the 3db gain in effective power....
Totally agree, and I would say for the price of power(amps) and processors(electronic cross-overs)...tri-amping is the way to go. It made a huge difference in the clarity and overall quality of my system, not to mention the endless tweak-ability...if you like that!
10-20-2006, 12:38 PM
#30
I should add that as far as the 3db gain in effective power (before everyone gets wet in the pants).... is that it comes with a trade off...
the duty cycle of music drops at approximatly 6db/octave, and although high frequencies superimposed on a lower frequency will be the first to distort, they don't make up a whole lot of the signal (and there is also a certain acceptable limit of clipping).... lastly its generally true that tweeters are more efficient and require less power to make loud....
So the real downside is by cutting our amp in half to power the highs and lows seperatly, is that we put a limit on what can come out at the lower frequencies......
This is most true with an amp under load as a small decrease in duty cyle at lower frequencies will allow for greater short term peaks at the higher end of the spectrum.....
(also true is that you will loose power if you go from 4ohms x 2 bridged to 4ohms x 4 biamped with a 4channel amp which some may be thinking of doing)
IMO it makes more sense to use say, 60watts for the lows and 40 for the highs... (or some varation like that)....
that said my aim might be to look for a pair of matching 60/40 4ch amps and bridge em down for a killer 2way biamped system...
the duty cycle of music drops at approximatly 6db/octave, and although high frequencies superimposed on a lower frequency will be the first to distort, they don't make up a whole lot of the signal (and there is also a certain acceptable limit of clipping).... lastly its generally true that tweeters are more efficient and require less power to make loud....
So the real downside is by cutting our amp in half to power the highs and lows seperatly, is that we put a limit on what can come out at the lower frequencies......
This is most true with an amp under load as a small decrease in duty cyle at lower frequencies will allow for greater short term peaks at the higher end of the spectrum.....
(also true is that you will loose power if you go from 4ohms x 2 bridged to 4ohms x 4 biamped with a 4channel amp which some may be thinking of doing)
IMO it makes more sense to use say, 60watts for the lows and 40 for the highs... (or some varation like that)....
that said my aim might be to look for a pair of matching 60/40 4ch amps and bridge em down for a killer 2way biamped system...
Last edited by Haunz; 10-20-2006 at 01:02 PM.
