Should I bi-amp with Yamaha RX-A3000?

[mrceolla]

Hi all,

I am running a 5.1 setup and was wondering if it was worth the little bit of extra wire to bi-amp with my new RX-A3000.

With the amps set to 5.1 mode, are the other two channels and their wattage going unused? Or does the receiver allocate more power to the other speakers?

I believe my front speakers will end up being Boston Acoustics VS 336...if that matters.

Thanks for any input.

 

[XEagleDriver]

I am running a 5.1 setup and was wondering if it was worth the little bit of extra wire to bi-amp with my new RX-A3000.

With the amps set to 5.1 mode, are the other two channels and their wattage going unused? Or does the receiver allocate more power to the other speakers?

With most Yamaha receivers, when powering multiple channels (more than 2 or 3) they run out of power supply capability before tapping out the individual amplifier capability. This results in a lower per/channel power availability. There will be a bit more power available for the remaining channels if you do not use (i.e. bi-amp) the last two channels.

Even with the decrease in per/channel power availablity, bi-amping would still provide a net increase (albeit small) in power to the two front speakers.

That said, the difference (either way) is small and probably not audible.

The good news is, the cost to experiment is cheap, so if you are curious, it would cost little to give it a go.

XEagleDriver

P.S. The power performance of the RX-A3000 is quite impressive as reported in this Audioholics review

To summarize, for an 8 ohm load it powered one channel at 217 Watts, for two channels 205 Watts/channel and for all seven 153 Watts/channel. These tests rarely compare 5 versus 7 channels and this review did not either.

 

[mrceolla]

Thanks for that input XEagleDriver. So, what would you do?

Yes, I know I could try it out easily and cheaply. But I'm not sure I would notice any audible difference. My concern mostly lies with what's best for the receiver and speakers.

Would bi-amping strain the receiver anymore than NOT bi-amping?

Will the speakers perform better with bi-amping? Will bi-amping put more strain on the speakers?

Sorry if these are noob questions. I like to try to research certain things as much as possible and act on solid information only once and stick with it...vs. wasting time on trial and error.

Thanks again!

 

[mrceolla]

One more question. If bi-amping is proven to be the way to go, should I also bi-amp the center channel with this receiver? Is it even possible? In re-reading the review you linked to I noticed it said that you can utilize all 11.2 channels as you wish.

Thanks.

 

[XEagleDriver]

Thanks for that input XEagleDriver. So, what would you do?

I would not bother with the bi-amp, if I felt I needed more power I would add an external 2 or 3 channel amp of at least twice the 2-channel power rating of the AVR.

Yes, I know I could try it out easily and cheaply. But I'm not sure I would notice any audible difference. My concern mostly lies with what's best for the receiver and speakers.

Would bi-amping strain the receiver anymore than NOT bi-amping?

In theory, bi-amping the receiver would on average slightly increase the average temperature the receiver operates at, since you are using more amplfiiers more of the time. This may (??) over the VERY long term reduce its service life. In reality, you would never notice the difference and would have enjoyed the equipment the way you saw fit.

Will the speakers perform better with bi-amping? Will bi-amping put more strain on the speakers?

Unlikely and no. Unless you are routinely trying to damage your hearing, then you could be pushing the receiver so hard as to induce more speaker damaging distortion.

Sorry if these are noob questions. I like to try to research certain things as much as possible and act on solid information only once and stick with it...vs. wasting time on trial and error.

Thanks again!

No apologies necessary, these type questions are the purpose of the forum and its discussions. You are very welcome.

XEagleDriver

 

[Theresa]

a waste of money

You will be largely wasting money on cables for perhaps a db or two of additional output, if both cables are connected to woofers which is unlikely. True biamping involves separate active crossovers for each driver and disconnecting the passive crossovers. I do this but my speakers are do-it-yourself and so it was easy just not using any passives. It costs a lot more, requiring amp channels for each driver and an electronic crossover (miniDSPs). Its a myth that "bi-wiring" actually does anything as what it is supposed to do is not in keeping with how electricity works. But it's your money to spend as you wish.

 

[PENG]

as what it is supposed to do is not in keeping with how electricity works.

I would respect that as an opinion and I don't biamp either, but I hope people won't take such opinions as facts.

 

[jeannot]

Hi all,
With the amps set to 5.1 mode, are the other two channels and their wattage going unused? Or does the receiver allocate more power to the other speakers?
Thanks for any input.

The posts explaining that the real source of power is your power supply, which is normally shared between all the channels are correct. However, with difficult speakers, they may run into high current situations and that is where bi-amp would be beneficial.

BUT, the only purpose of bi-amping is not only power. It is also that by not having to drive woofers hard, the mid-high amplifier works at a more comfortable power level, thus more linear and less distortion. Also, any clipping/current issues encounter by the low-freq amp would not impact the mid-high sound.

 

[mrceolla]

Thanks for all of your input. It is much appreciated.

So it seems that most people think bi-amping is not worth it when using a single AVR and brand name speakers. Would you be willing to bet that this is the general concensus of most other people as well?

Is there anyone out there that could argue that it IS worth it?

jeannot, I cannot tell if you are for or against bi-amping in my situation. I will be using Boston Acoustics VS 336 as my fronts and a Yamaha RX-A3000 for the amp. Do you think those speakers would bennefit from bi-amping?

I usually don't listen to anything super loud so I'm not looking for an increase in volume. I just want things to sound as good as possible and keep the equipment as happy as possible.

Thanks.

 

[PENG]

Is there anyone out there that could argue that it IS worth it?
Thanks.

As an extreme example, if you are using a 7.1 channel AVR to run a 2.1 or 3.1 speaker system then it may worth it. In that case, you are doing true biamping and the power supply of a mid range 7 channel AVR should be quite capable of feeding only 2 or even 3 channel. Again, I don't believe you can hear improved SQ, but the theory behind it is sound. IMHO we cannot hear the difference because our hearing/discerning capability is limited.

Using external/separate crossovers and bypass/removing/disabling the speakers internal ones may or may not be a good idea. There are two (or more) schools of thoughts, and I tend to believe in what at least one well regarded manufacturers recommendations that using the OEM crossovers is the way to go. I would add that there is always exceptions, so it really depends but in general biamping with two identical amps using OEM crossovers is good in theory and in practice, but the system will still sound the same to you.

 

[3db]

I would respect that as an opinion and I don't biamp either, but I hope people won't take such opinions as facts.

I concur with Teresa on this. Why the doubt?

 

[3db]

Do you want to bi-amp or biwire your speakers?

 

[mrceolla]

Do you want to bi-amp or biwire your speakers?

Bi-amp. 2 speaker wires would go to each speaker from 4 different outputs(channels) on the amp. The speakers have 2 sets of positive and negative terminals. One for the low end and one for the mid/high.

From what I understand, strictly bi-wiring is somewhat pointless.

 

[3db]

Bi-amp. 2 speaker wires would go to each speaker from 4 different outputs(channels) on the amp. The speakers have 2 sets of positive and negative terminals. One for the low end and one for the mid/high.

From what I understand, strictly bi-wiring is somewhat pointless.

Bi-amping is the wiring of one amp to drive the highs/midrange and another seperat amp to drive the low end. I don't consider using channel A and channel B from the same receiver/amplifier biamping.

 

[mrceolla]

The receiver's manual calls it bi-amping. And it's not using channel A and B. It's using the unused 6th and 7th channel of a 7.1 channel amplifier.

 

[3db]

The receiver's manual calls it bi-amping. And it's not using channel A and B. It's using the unused 6th and 7th channel of a 7.1 channel amplifier.

Correct. However its still being fed from the same power supply which is the limiting factor.

 

[PENG]

I concur with Teresa on this. Why the doubt?

Facts need proof. Theoretically passive bi-amp should work as stated by those who promote it. I provided a link to Anthem FAQ in another post. You and I both should know enough electrical theory to understand what bi-amp and bi-wire do and I do not understand why you are confused. I have always been clear that I personally do not believe the average person (me anyway) can hear/discern SQ difference due to bi-amp but I will not tell people that unless they use an external active crossover they are not truly biamping. I will also not tell people bi-amp or even bi-wire same as using thicker wires, not without qualifications. Again, let me repeat an example I cited, we likely cannot discern the difference between 0.001% and 0.05% THD even though one is 50 times higher. That does not mean there is no difference, it only means a normal person cannot tell the difference.

Again, pay a visit to Anthem FAQ to find out what they refer to as myth. You can visit the Paradigm site and they have link to each other's site. I don't know better than them and what they said make sense to me.

 

[3db]

Facts need proof. Theoretically passive bi-amp should work as stated by those who promote it. I provided a link to Anthem FAQ in another post. You and I both should know enough electrical theory to understand what bi-amp and bi-wire do and I do not understand why you are confused. I have always been clear that I personally do not believe the average person (me anyway) can hear/discern SQ difference due to bi-amp but I will not tell people that unless they use an external active crossover they are not truly biamping. I will also not tell people bi-amp or even bi-amp same as using thicker wires, not without qualifications. Again, let me repeat an example I cited, we likely cannot discern the difference between 0.001% and 0.05% THD even though one is 50 times higher. That does not mean there is no difference, it only means a normal person cannot tell the difference. .

I agree from a sound perspective and thats the point I missed when I said I was confused.

 

[mrceolla]

The manual seems to claim that bi-amping will produce a higher quality sound. Check out pages 18 and 21 of the Yamaha RX-A3000 manual...if you can find it on their site. Tried to upload it but it's too big.

I struggle with the fact that the manufacturer appears to claim it is worthwhile. And the speakers I will be using offer that capability. Yet many seem to say it is pointless.

So let me get this straight. In order for it to be worthwhile, I need 2 physically separate amps (unused channels in one AVR don't count) and then I need to disconnect the speaker's internal crossovers? Is there anything else I'm missing?

I know I could simply try it. But as I sit here waiting for the speakers to arrive, I'd rather determine if it's worth it then either do it or don't and leave it be. I've also got cable molds/tracks that I'd need to run wire through and the back of the reciever isn't easily accessible. So I'd like to do it once and do it right. Know what I mean?

Thanks.

 

[mrceolla]

I provided a link to Anthem FAQ in another post.

Thanks for the info. It is much appreciated. Was that link you speak of in this thread or another? I couldn't find it in this thread. Could you post it again?

Thanks.