Help Me set-up Bi-amp for Yammy RX-V659

Z

zumbo

Audioholic Spartan
hi wire,

not trying to put words into the OP's or OttoMatic's mouth, but i believe we share the same, if not similiar view, from the beginning. Zumbo is of different view. basically i feel a multi-ch amp can be used for bi-amp, albeit passively. while Zumbo's implying that ONLY two (or more) amps can be considered (active) bi-amp-ing. is not like Zumbo and i are choking each other over this matter, just differing views, no biggie (i hope so!).
cheers,
wps
If I was misunderstood, let me clarify. I think trying to bi-amp a low to mid-fi receiver is a waste of cash, and wiring. A flagship receiver, or a multi-channel amp is just fine. In order to bi-amp a receiver, such as the one in this thread, I believe an external amp is needed.

Then, there is the issue of the speakers in use. I thought it would be a good idea to use the 12" woofers in those speakers for the LFE, since there was not going to be a sub in use. Add an external amp to drive the 12's, and set the crossover in the receiver to split the two. This way, 5.1 could be selected on a dvd to yield the better track, or whatever the technical term for the 5.1 track may be.

Then, it was mentioned there would be a problem using the crossover in the receiver, and the crossovers in the speakers. But, don't we use the crossover in the receiver for 5.1 anyway? I know I send a crossed-over signal to my mains.

I feel I was correct the whole way through. Keep in mind, I tried to keep the thread directed to the OP's situation. This thread had nothing to do with how another system was defined, or connected. I kept falling into that trap, and got tired of digging my way out.

My first response shouldve been my only one.

I would buy a separate amp for the LFE. Run the LFE out from the receiver to the amp. Run to the 12's in the mains. Set all speakers to SMALL in the receiver. Set crossover to 80, 60 if your center channel makes it to 40. Set the receiver to send LFE to the sub only(12's in the mains);)
 
Last edited:
1

100r1

Junior Audioholic
Amazing 60+ post on what I thought would have been a simple set-up. But then again there were some excellent thoughts and debate of various theories.

So what I thought I could be done on the RX-V659 of re-routing channels 6&7 to the mains can not be done (only for multi-zone configuration).

I will proceed with using the 659's pre-outs and external amplification. Just watched a ebay auction for a new Behringer EP-1500 closeout at $ 166.66. Add a couple of those puppys.........
 
OttoMatic

OttoMatic

Senior Audioholic
I will proceed with using the 659's pre-outs and external amplification. Just watched a ebay auction for a new Behringer EP-1500 closeout at $ 166.66. Add a couple of those puppys.........
That would then properly do what you want. And then we can get into the pro- vs. consumer-amp debate...

Check these out:

http://cls.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?ampsmult&1190772290
http://cls.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?ampsmult&1190503599
http://cls.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?ampsmult&1190432800
http://cls.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?ampsmult&1189722821

Just some ideas.

Good luck!
 
Z

zumbo

Audioholic Spartan
If it is believed that my original idea is not the best way to go, then I have another suggestion.

Use a separate 5-channel amp.
Utilize the pre-outs for the f-l, f-r, and c.
Use Y-splitters on the f-l and f-r pre-outs from the receiver.
Connect to the f-r, f-l, r-r, and r-l of the amp.
Run the top off of the f or r, and the bottom off the other two.
Connect the center pre-out from the receiver to the center on the amp.
Connect the center speaker.
Set the receiver to send the LFE to the mains. This should make it where you can utilize the 5.1 track of a dvd.
 
OttoMatic

OttoMatic

Senior Audioholic
If it is believed that my original idea is not the best way to go, then I have another suggestion.

Use a separate 5-channel amp.
Utilize the pre-outs for the f-l, f-r, and c.
Use Y-splitters on the f-l and f-r pre-outs from the receiver.
Connect to the f-r, f-l, r-r, and r-l of the amp.
Run the top off of the f or r, and the bottom off the other two.
Connect the center pre-out from the receiver to the center on the amp.
Connect the center speaker.
Set the receiver to send the LFE to the mains. This should make it where you can utilize the 5.1 track of a dvd.
Agreed! That's a correct passive bi-amp configuration, and would work just fine.
 
Z

zumbo

Audioholic Spartan
Agreed! That's a correct passive bi-amp configuration, and would work just fine.
But, this would cost a great deal more than a mono, or 2-channel amp for the 12's.

The good thing is, a 5-channel amp could be used in any of the suggestions in this thread, along with any future system configuration.;)

'Tis why I use a 5-channel Adcom, along with my Yamaha HT receiver for my 5.1 set-up.
 
OttoMatic

OttoMatic

Senior Audioholic
But, this would cost a great deal more than a mono, or 2-channel amp for the 12's.
True. However, my original complaint to that is 1) it's not technically bi-amping (the mono signal is the problem there), 2) you can't use a receiver's bass management in conjuction with the internal passive crossover, and 3) even if you did remove the internal crossover components, you can't arbitrarily assing a crossover point (via receiver's bass management) to cross the 12" driver and the rest of the speaker -- how do we know the current crossover point? Should we use 80, 100, 120 Hz? Actually I would guess that the crossover point between the 12" driver and the rest of the speaker is on the order of 200 Hz, but that's just a guess...

The good thing is, a 5-channel amp could be used in any of the suggestions in this thread, along with any future system configuration.;)
Agreed -- a 5-ch amp is definitely a nice thing to have.

'Tis why I use a 5-channel Adcom, along with my Yamaha HT receiver for my 5.1 set-up.
Hey, this is not about YOU! ;)
 
Z

zumbo

Audioholic Spartan
True. However, my original complaint to that is 1) it's not technically bi-amping (the mono signal is the problem there), 2) you can't use a receiver's bass management in conjuction with the internal passive crossover, and 3) even if you did remove the internal crossover components, you can't arbitrarily assing a crossover point (via receiver's bass management) to cross the 12" driver and the rest of the speaker -- how do we know the current crossover point? Should we use 80, 100, 120 Hz? Actually I would guess that the crossover point between the 12" driver and the rest of the speaker is on the order of 200 Hz, but that's just a guess...
So, while it would work, I see the point of a lacking frequency between 60-200. I guess it all depends on the speaker design. If the speakers in question used a 150 point, and we choose a 150 point in the receiver, there wouldn't be anything missing. It depends on the speaker design, and the options in the receiver.

Other than saying it wouldn't work, because it would, you might should point-out the frequencies that would've been missed. If the speakers are sent a signal, they are gonna play.


Hey, this is not about YOU! ;)
You got me there.:eek:
 
OttoMatic

OttoMatic

Senior Audioholic
I see the point of a lacking frequency between 60-200. I guess it all depends on the speaker design. If the speakers in question used a 150 point, and we choose a 150 point in the receiver, there wouldn't be anything missing. It depends on the speaker design, and the options in the receiver.
That's getting closer -- intentionally choosing a crossover point is better. However, now there's the matter of crossover slope -- would these be the same in the receiver and the original crossover network? Maybe, but I'd guess "probably not."

Other than saying it wouldn't work, because it would,
Yeah, here's what I put in my first response...

OttoMatic said:
I think it would "work"
you might should point-out the frequencies that would've been missed.
Yeah, I didn't really address that point originally, but I did bring up at least three other points that were valid as to why I wouldn't think it's a good path to go, especially as applied to bi-amping. I especially pointed out the doubling up of crossovers when using bass managment prior to the internal crossover network. You did later agree that we need to bypass that internal crossover, so I'm OK with that.

If the speakers are sent a signal, they are gonna play.
Yes, I agree that they will make a sound. Whether or not it's "right" or you or I "like it" is a nother matter.

All the best.
 
Z

zumbo

Audioholic Spartan
That's getting closer -- intentionally choosing a crossover point is better. However, now there's the matter of crossover slope -- would these be the same in the receiver and the original crossover network? Maybe, but I'd guess "probably not."

Wouldn't the speaker crossover networks determine the slope, whether it be 12, 18, 24, or whatever dB? I have never read this spec for any crossover in a HT receiver. As I mentioned before, most HT receivers are crossed-over before being sent to the mains anyway.

So, in a powered sub system, there is no way the slope in the receiver matches the slope in the mains.

And for most, the mains, sub, and receiver are all of different brands.
 
OttoMatic

OttoMatic

Senior Audioholic
Wouldn't the speaker crossover networks determine the slope, whether it be 12, 18, 24, or whatever dB? I have never read this spec for any crossover in a HT receiver.
Yeah, whatever the internal crossover networks are would need to be matched by the digital filters that you would substitute for them (after removing them from the signal path).

Some receivers/pre/pros specify crossover slopes and some don't. Frequently, it's a second-order (12 dB per octave) for the HPF on the mains and a fourth-order (24 dB per octave) for the LPF on the mains. I would imagine that some receivers/pre/pros allow variable crossover slopes, though I don't have any first hand experience with any (something high-end like the Anthem D2 or the Lexicon stuff...). I know it was spec'd as a second-order HPF on the mains for my Outlaw 990, even though it was implemented as a fourth-order when I measured it. The sub out LPF was spec'd as a fourth-order, and measured as a fourth-order.

As I mentioned before, most HT receivers are crossed-over before being sent to the mains anyway.
Yeah, but that's a different crossover point. In that case, you're imposing a filter at the low end of the speaker's operating range, which is normally goverend by that speaker's bass driver's natural roll off. There wouldn't normally be a high-pass filter on the speaker's low end (although I wouldn't put it outside the realm of possibility).

So, in a powered sub system, there is no way the slope in the receiver matches the slope in the mains.
Well, there's generally no high-pass filter on the overall frequency response of a stand alone speaker. There are crossovers between each of the different drivers in a speaker system (e.g., between the 6.5" driver and the tweeter), but there's not a high-pass filter on the 6.5" driver at its low end.

If your speaker is naturally going to fall off at, say, 50 Hz, then you want to impose a crossover at something like 60 Hz. At that point, you have set the slope and the frequency of the crossover via bass management.

Same with the sub. If you turn the sub's built-in crossover to its maximum (basically take it out of the loop), and apply a low-passed signal (via bass management), the receiver has again decided the slope and the crossover point. If the receiver/pre/pro is well-designed, the mains and the sub will be crossed over correctly, the slopes will be correct and the integration between the sub and the mains can become somewhat seamless (with some work from the end user).

Bottom line -- the crossovers applied a receiver's bass management between mains and sub are controlled and defined by the bass managment circuitry. There's nothing else to get in the way of those crossovers (no other passive or active circuitry in either the sub or the mains). The passive crossovers inside the speaker cabinets deal with separating frequencies applied to each individual driver within the cabinet, and are totally indepedent of the bass management of the receiver.

And for most, the mains, sub, and receiver are all of different brands.
Yes, but it won't matter because you've defined crossover point and slope via bass management at points that are outside the operating range of any other crossovers in those mains and sub.
 
davidtwotrees

davidtwotrees

Audioholic General
I'm calling PETA

Man, you guys are beating this dead horse so hard I'm gonna call PETA in!

Then we'll have to listen to Buckeyenut go on and on about that....:):eek:
 
Z

zumbo

Audioholic Spartan
Man, you guys are beating this dead horse so hard I'm gonna call PETA in!

Then we'll have to listen to Buckeyenut go on and on about that....:):eek:

I believe there has been a good bit of information shared in this thread. And, it seems to be every ones opinion that bi-amping a 659(under it's own power) is not going to yield any perceived improvement.

So, my vote goes to this being a very informative, and popular, thread.

Any thread is better than; do you guys think I should get the Bose, or the Deaf Techs? I say flip a coin.
 
OttoMatic

OttoMatic

Senior Audioholic
I believe there has been a good bit of information shared in this thread. And, it seems to be every ones opinion that bi-amping a 659(under it's own power) is not going to yield any perceived improvement.
At this point, I do believe that I could argue that it's possible that someone, somewhere, might be able to hear a difference. ;)



So, my vote goes to this being a very informative, and popular, thread.
Me too!

Any thread is better than; do you guys think I should get the Bose, or the Deaf Techs? I say flip a coin.
I'll take the DTs any day. :D
 
wire

wire

Senior Audioholic
newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top