Using a multichannel amp to Bi-wire/Bi-amp

[Pogre]

Not the only one spouting on nine year old thread? Suprised you took the time to converse with the little people.

Did you come back just edit this last part in? Ha ha.

I said bumped a 9 year old thread, and I spout off in all kinds of threads. Not just the ones from 9 years ago that someone digs up out of the blue.

I always try to make time for the little folk.

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

Did you come back just edit this last part in? Ha ha.

I said bumped a 9 year old thread, and I spout off in all kinds of threads. Not just the ones from 9 years ago that someone digs up out of the blue.

I always try to make time for the little folk.

King Pogey, your grace, thank you, for I am humbled.

 

[lovinthehd]

@ParleyW got a source for that JBL quote? Sure it wasn't from the marketing department because by that time they'd put bi-terminals on the speakers? They were talking about passive bi-amping or real bi-amping, i.e. active bi-amping?

 

[Verdinut]

@ParleyW got a source for that JBL quote? Sure it wasn't from the marketing department because by that time they'd put bi-terminals on the speakers? They were talking about passive bi-amping or real bi-amping, i.e. active bi-amping?

I would bet that they were talking about active bi-amping. I've never heard of passive bi-amping in pro audio. That passive bi-amping idea must have been part of some bullshit marketing by an amplifier manufacturer aimed at audiophiles. Some AVR manufacturers have followed, not with the BS propaganda, but with the idea.

 

[ParleyW]

Did you come back just edit this last part in? Ha ha.

I said bumped a 9 year old thread, and I spout off in all kinds of threads. Not just the ones from 9 years ago that someone digs up out of the blue.

I always try to make time for the little folk.

Quickly, someone else just started another thread on bi-amping. I’ll hold him and you can beat the poop out of him.

 

[ParleyW]

@ParleyW got a source for that JBL quote? Sure it wasn't from the marketing department because by that time they'd put bi-terminals on the speakers? They were talking about passive bi-amping or real bi-amping, i.e. active bi-amping?

There is a three page addendum to the L series manual specific to the L7. It describes the various configurations of the L7 in great detail. I’ve been a technical writer/ escalation engineer for 20 years with Novell inc. I understand the mathematics behind their information in the manual. I know the differences are not significant for you guys , But it is the most efficient configuration possible by their documentation which is based on physical laws. I am certainly not harming my attached equipment, nor am I adding anything detrimental to the signal path. It’s a supported configuration by the designers of this speaker. Where this was the final us made, us designed series, I would anticipate there are some groundbreaking engineers along the lines of Timbers, involved. If it had absolutely no merit, it would not have been included.

 

[lovinthehd]

There is a three page addendum to the L series manual specific to the L7. It describes the various configurations of the L7 in great detail. I’ve been a technical writer/ escalation engineer for 20 years with Novell inc. I understand the mathematics behind their information in the manual. I know the differences are not significant for you guys , But it is the most efficient configuration possible by their documentation which is based on physical laws. I am certainly not harming my attached equipment, nor am I adding anything detrimental to the signal path. It’s a supported configuration by the designers of this speaker. Where this was the final us made, us designed series, I would anticipate there are some groundbreaking engineers along the lines of Timbers, involved.

How does the passive crossover element between the terminal and the woofer come into play? At least it looks that way in the schematic. I just don't see the point of passive bi-amping in general, not worth the extra amps or wire. Nothing about harm, just about it makes so little difference, if any. YMMV.

 

[Pogre]

Quickly, someone else just started another thread on bi-amping. I’ll hold him and you can beat the poop out of him.

Nah, looks like you're already all over it. Besides, it'll have more impact if I let it age 9 years and wait for someone else to bump it.

 

[Pogre]

How does the passive crossover element between the terminal and the woofer come into play? At least it looks that way in the schematic. I just don't see the point of passive bi-amping in general, not worth the extra amps or wire. Nothing about harm, just about it makes so little difference, if any. YMMV.

I'm looking at the manual right now reading about this reduced intermodulation, and they're also recommending "high quality speaker wire" and "audiophile interconnects", while invoking skin effect...

 

[Verdinut]

How does the passive crossover element between the terminal and the woofer come into play? At least it looks that way in the schematic. I just don't see the point of passive bi-amping in general, not worth the extra amps or wire. Nothing about harm, just about it makes so little difference, if any. YMMV.

The only situation when it could bring an improvement is when an amplifier is struggling to handle a speaker with a low sensitivity at higher than average SPL, at a greater than usual listening distance. With another amp driving the LF driver, this allows the other amp to adequately handle the HF portion of the audio signal without distorting. Of course, only one more powerful amp could do the job.

 

[lovinthehd]

The only situation when it could bring an improvement is when an amplifier is struggling to handle a speaker with a low sensitivity at higher than average SPL, at a greater than usual listening distance. With another amp driving the LF driver, this allows the other amp to adequately handle the HF portion of the audio signal without distorting. Of course, only one more powerful amp could do the job.

It's not driving the driver directly but thru a passive element from a glance at the schematics so I was more thinking of the argument about driver control as if the amp were directly connected to the woofer.

 

[Verdinut]

It's not driving the driver directly but thru a passive element from a glance at the schematics so I was more thinking of the argument about driver control as if the amp were directly connected to the woofer.

When you passively bi-amp, you have no choice but to use some filter on each driver, otherwise the woofer would get the full frequency spectrum, so would the tweeter which wouldn't as you know last long with low frequencies being driven into it.

 

[lovinthehd]

When you passively bi-amp, you have no choice but to use some filter on each driver, otherwise the woofer would get the full frequency spectrum, so would the tweeter which wouldn't as you know last long with low frequencies being driven into it.

LOL that of course is the sensible thing but I've seen arguments from the passive bi-amping folk that some bypass the passive network in the case of the woofer (but not for mid/tweets) for better driver control by the amp . The whole passive bi-amp thing is just marketing for the most part....selling more amps and speaker wires never hurt, right?

 

[Verdinut]

LOL that of course is the sensible thing but I've seen arguments from the passive bi-amping folk that some bypass the passive network in the case of the woofer (but not for mid/tweets) for better driver control by the amp . The whole passive bi-amp thing is just marketing for the most part....selling more amps and speaker wires never hurt, right?

Well, it hurts the wallet of a lot of people who believe the misleading info which they get on the internet and from some dishonest manufacturers and audiophool magazines.