Biwiring Question and driving RBH 4-ohm speakers on a Yamaha RX-V2600

[OttoMatic]

So what should I do with the RBH speakers?

Well, if you just want to use a single of your amp per speaker, I'd probably just wire them up as suggested by Seth=L in post 6 of this thread. Forget about the plate jumpers, unless you already replaced them.

How does one reattach a plate jumper anyways.

Unscrew the speaker wire jacks on the back of the speakers. There will be four of them. Place one plate jumper so that it's under both red jacks, and tighten the screws down such that plate jumper is securely fastened under the red terminals only. Do the same thing for the black terminals. You will now be able to see that you have connected the red to the red and the black to the black. That's it.

Most Stereo amps I see such as emotiva don't have biamping capability , they just have one red and black for each channel.

That's right, you can't bi-amp with a stereo amp; you can bi-wire though (not advocating bi-wiring, per se).

Well, the point of bi-amping is to assign a separate amplifier to each "part" of the speakers (sometimes referred to as "top" and "bottom" or "high" and "low"). Now, if you have an Emotiva five-channel amp, you can use four of those amplifier channels to do a bi-amp setup for your speakers. You can then use the remaining channel for the center. You will have to use another amp for your surrounds (unless you have a seven-channel amp, and then you're OK).

You will need to run two speaker cables to each speaker. Remove the plate jumpers or any wire that might be connecting the "top" and "bottom" of your speaker terminals.

Split your left input signal to two channels of the amp. Using a Y-splitter is fine, and the high input impedance of the amplifier will allow you to NOT realize a loss in the signal's power. So, now let's say that you have channels 1 and 2 on the amp fed with the left output from your preamp. Run the output of channel 1 on the amp to the "top" of your left speaker and the output of channel 2 to the "bottom" of your left speaker.

Now split the right output of your preamp and feed it to channels 3 and 4 on your amp. Connect channel 3 to the "top" of your right speaker and channel 4 to the "bottom" of your right speaker.

You are now passively biwired. Active bi-wiring is something different, and you won't want to do that unless you are ready for quite a bit more technical work, and buying more equipment. Don't worry about active bi-amping for now.

If you want to get it straight, maybe get out a piece of paper and pencil and methodically draw out what I've described above. It'll become more clear with a picture. My apologies if you are already hip to all this.

Good luck!

 

[Seth=L]

I'm not sure what you are saying "not really" to. In your post, which was hard to understand, exactly, what you were describing seemed to me to be bi-wiring a speaker off of the same amplifier which is not he same thing as passively bi-amping a speaker off of 2 different amplifiers.

I said that the only reason to replace them was if they were missing. I consider it a useless endeavor, because as I explained, replacing them woith speaker wire will provide no benefit. If the binding plates are vibrating, this is indicative of the binding post knobs simply not being screwed down tightly enough. Of course this problem can obviously be circumvented by replacing them with wires. It could also be alleviated by screwing the binding post knobs down more tightly.

Concerning the straps.

The binding posts where screwed down tightly, but the straps would still resonate, trust me, I was there and I know what happened.

Just for fun, I will explain this one last time. The link posted to the Cary amplifier rated for 200 watts x 5 likely has a modular design. Each module is going to be overbuilt to the extreme to be able to meet the full capacity of output of the entire amplifier on that one channel. If that isn't clear, sorry, but I will not continue to explain it after this.

Similar designs, though not modular, are found on most modern receivers. Each channel (it may be two transistors or four depending on the receiver) can deliver the full rated power of the receiver. Many receivers power ratings have been done with just one channel operating anyway.

 

[sivadselim]

Just for fun, I will explain this one last time. The link posted to the Cary amplifier rated for 200 watts x 5 likely has a modular design. Each module is going to be overbuilt to the extreme to be able to meet the full capacity of output of the entire amplifier on that one channel. If that isn't clear, sorry, but I will not continue to explain it after this.

Similar designs, though not modular, are found on most modern receivers. Each channel (it may be two transistors or four depending on the receiver) can deliver the full rated power of the receiver. Many receivers power ratings have been done with just one channel operating anyway.

Sorry, I don't know what you're trying to say or what its relevance is.

 

[Seth=L]

Sorry, I don't know what you're trying to say or what its relevance is.

OK, maybe I have missed something. What are you getting at?

My point would be using two sets of outputs on a receiver or amplifier would render the same results as bi-wiring, which is next to nill.

 

[HTHOLIC]

So using a speaker wire to connet the 2 terminals is the same as biwiring?

I am still confused as to wether I should use plate jumpers v. speaker wire- I don't have the plate jumpers, I think RBH can give me some.

What is the difference between an active/passive crossover, the RBH is 3 range (subwoofer,woofer,tweeter) , but it only has 2 terminals, so what do I HAVE?

 

[avaserfi]

I am still confused as to wether I should use plate jumpers v. speaker wire- I don't have the plate jumpers, I think RBH can give me some.

They will both carry the current equally. If you want a cleaner look see if you can get the plate jumpers. If you want it done quickly and you want to be done with it just use speaker wire. They will both perform equally.

 

[OttoMatic]

What is the difference between an active/passive crossover, the RBH is 3 range (subwoofer,woofer,tweeter) , but it only has 2 terminals, so what do I HAVE?

An active crossover requires powered electronics. The signal is separated (crossed over before it hits the amp).

You definitely have passive crossovers in your speakers; almost all are. The signal is crossed over after the amp.

There's more detail than that, but that's the basics.

 

[PENG]

Having seen enough of Seth's posts, I bet he might do more research and would then realize he was incorrect (I mean technically/electrically) this time.

 

[mtrycrafts]

I am still confused as to wether I should use plate jumpers v. speaker wire- I don't have the plate jumpers, I think RBH can give me some.

Since you don't have the plate jumpers as it would normally come with, you can use short wires instead as the picture showed above. Very simple and the company doesn't have to waste its money sending the plates. It both accomplishes the same task.

What is the difference between an active/passive crossover, the RBH is 3 range (subwoofer,woofer,tweeter) , but it only has 2 terminals, so what do I HAVE?

As was posted about the active/passive. Your low driver goes to one terminal. The other two drivers are on the second terminal.
If you went active, you would need to go to all 3 drivers and use 3 amps, one for each driver, and bypassing the passive crossover.

 

[zumbo]

SethL provided the perfect picture, for mtrycrafts perfect solution.

All of the other debating should be ignored by the OP.

 

[kfalls]

Instead of splitting the R and L channels with a 'Y' cable to bi-amp, why not use the subwoofer output for the sub portion of the speaker? Of course if you want to still use the internal amplifiers you will need to run the sub out to the input of the specific amplifier.

I have a pair of Legacy Focus configured this way. I have the receiver's L & R channels driving the high/midrange portion of the speaker and a Yamaha M-65 driving the 3 12"/ch woofers using an input from the sub-out.

I believe what Seth? was trying to say earlier is he believes bi-amping using the same amplifier isn't true bi-amping because of the shared electrical charasteristics of the amp. The reason behind bi-wire, moreso than bi-amp is to isolate the effects of the woofer and tweeter circuits on each other. If you separate them at the speaker then connect them electrically at the amplifier with shared electrical characteristics, you don't gain anything.

On many AV receivers the power supplies are shared amoung all channels, unless you have true multi-mono designs. Most recervers share a transformer with multiple output windings, shared regulators and filter caps. An example of a multi-mono desigh is the Marantz which shares only the incoming AC in their multi-channel configurations of M-500 and M-700 amplifiers. Each amp can be standalone and each has a separate on-board power supplies. They are grouped in a single case with configurable from 1 - 5 channels for convenience.

Bi-amping in my system allows better control of the bass and allows for better mid/highs by freeing up additional power.

 

[OttoMatic]

Instead of splitting the R and L channels with a 'Y' cable to bi-amp, why not use the subwoofer output for the sub portion of the speaker? Of course if you want to still use the internal amplifiers you will need to run the sub out to the input of the specific amplifier.

I have a pair of Legacy Focus configured this way. I have the receiver's L & R channels driving the high/midrange portion of the speaker and a Yamaha M-65 driving the 3 12"/ch woofers using an input from the sub-out.

You can do that as long as you're not applying bass managment and on top of any passive crossovers that might be in the speakers themselves.

 

[Seth=L]

Having seen enough of Seth's posts, I bet he might do more research and would then realize he was incorrect (I mean technically/electrically) this time.

Funny you said that, because I have no clue on how to research this exactly. I don't think that doing a google search for "receivers and bi-wiring" is going to give me the results I am looking for. I would like to add I have no electrical engineering background, so mistakes should be expected from me.

I made those posts assuming that the OP would not be using active x-overs. What was it I missed, impedance?

 

[mtrycrafts]

Funny you said that, because I have no clue on how to research this exactly. I don't think that doing a google search for "receivers and bi-wiring" is going to give me the results I am looking for. I would like to add I have no electrical engineering background, so mistakes should be expected from me.

I made those posts assuming that the OP would not be using active x-overs. What was it I missed, impedance?

Electrically speaking, nothing audible mind you, there is something going on, what Jneutron called the 2ab current product in the single wire,
Power= I^2R; P=(a+b)^2 R; (a+b)^2 is a^2+2ab+b^2.

If you want more, ask him or read his explanation message someplace in the archives

 

[PENG]

I made those posts assuming that the OP would not be using active x-overs. What was it I missed, impedance?

Its mostly about your suggestion that any channel of a multichannel modular amp should be able to output the amp's full output (ok I assume you meant the multichannel total output) of the amplifier as though such amps are mainly power supply limited but not amp limited. That's what I took exception, no big deal.

 

[Seth=L]

Its mostly about your suggestion that any channel of a multichannel modular amp should be able to output the amp's full output (ok I assume you meant the multichannel total output) of the amplifier as though such amps are mainly power supply limited but not amp limited. That's what I took exception, no big deal.

I am all straightened out now, aside from the science and math (not my major, and can't say I will ever get the math and physics of all of it)

 

[PENG]

Electrically speaking, nothing audible mind you, there is something going on, what Jneutron called the 2ab current product in the single wire,
Power= I^2R; P=(a+b)^2 R; (a+b)^2 is a^2+2ab+b^2.

If you want more, ask him or read his explanation message someplace in the archives

Thank you for mentioning the presumed dead horse, without actually bringing it back.

 

[mtrycrafts]

Thank you for mentioning the presumed dead horse, without actually bringing it back.

A Dead horse? In audio? LOL

 

[mtrycrafts]

...and can't say I will ever get the math and physics of all of it)

We are not asking for all of it just some of it

 

[Seth=L]

We are not asking for all of it just some of it

You can't make me, at least if you don't know where I am.