Bi-Amping .. Wow what a difference

[Reorx]

Well I was bored last night, and realized I had a extra Yamaha 75wpc stereo amp just laying around not being used.
So I decided to bi-amp my JBL Pro speaker.
Previously a bridged Ashly FTX 2100 was pushing it. Both woofers and tweeter.

To make a long story short. I have wired, from my receiver's powered center -> L-Pad -> 2 bridged amps -> NL4 connector on speaker. 1 amp for tweeter, 1 for woofers.

It sounds AWESOME. I couldnt believe how much better it sounded. I plugged back and forth between full range and bi-amped NL4 connectors on the speaker, It's a night a day difference. And I havent even properly balanced the amps yet.

Is anybody else bi-amping their speakers, and have heard a just as big difference?

Reorx

 

[mtrycrafts]

Well I was bored last night, and realized I had a extra Yamaha 75wpc stereo amp just laying around not being used.
So I decided to bi-amp my JBL Pro speaker.
Previously a bridged Ashly FTX 2100 was pushing it. Both woofers and tweeter.

To make a long story short. I have wired, from my receiver's powered center -> L-Pad -> 2 bridged amps -> NL4 connector on speaker. 1 amp for tweeter, 1 for woofers.

It sounds AWESOME. I couldnt believe how much better it sounded. I plugged back and forth between full range and bi-amped NL4 connectors on the speaker, It's a night a day difference. And I havent even properly balanced the amps yet.

Is anybody else bi-amping their speakers, and have heard a just as big difference?

Reorx

I have reservations about your protocol in comparing.
Maybe that has something to do with what your perception is?

 

[Reorx]

I have reservations about your protocol in comparing.
Maybe that has something to do with what your perception is?

lol so true. To bad I dont have a SPL meter to measure things properly and give exact readings with nice pretty graphs.

The biggest difference I noticed was in the clarity. The treble sounded clearer and less muddied. The bass sounded deeper, and had a little extra umphh to it. And it stayed this way when I turned up the volume to almost unbearable levels.

Reo

 

[annunaki]

You probably are hearing a difference. Most likely due to a gain in dynamic capability. At least, from your description, that is what it seems to be.

 

[Duffinator]

Is anybody else bi-amping their speakers, and have heard a just as big difference?

Reorx

I'm using the 6th and 7th channels on my Denon 3805 to bi-amp by Monitor Audio S6 speakers (previously my Mirage 595is speakers). When I originally bi-amped my Mirage speakers I had a musician friend over and we spent several hours going back and forth with the bi-amping using several selections of music and we couldn't tell much difference. About the only thing we could detect on a somewhat consistent basis was a bit tighter midrange and upper bass. This was a very minor difference and I would not take that to the bank! I have the receiver crossover set at 80 hz. In the end I left it bi-amped but it really didn't make much of a difference. I personally would not go out and spend money (other than the $10 I spent on the 12 ga. speaker wire) on a seperate amp just to bi-amp. If you have an itch to spend more money I'd go with new speakers. But since you had the amp lying around it's probably a fun experiment and a good way to blow some time.

 

[Reorx]

Duffinator,
From my understanding, woofers need the most amount of power, and tweeters the least. So with the xover set to 80, the midrange and upper bass is where you would hear it.
If you set your speakers to large, and didnt use the xover, I bet you'd hear more of a difference, expecially at higher spl's.


I think there are also different levels of bi-amping.
1. At the receiver level.
2. At the amplifier level.
3. At the speaker level.

In Duffinator case, he did it at the receiver lvl to boost his overall wattage going to the speakers.
In my case, I seperated out the signal before the amps, and they never link back up. So, the amplified signals stay seperate from each other all the way to the drivers. Thus when the spl increases, and the woofers demand more power, they do not take away from the tweeters.

edit: Well it does a tiny bit, because I'm using the receivers powered center channel and a L-pad. If I used the receivers pre-out, it would be better.

Reorx

 

[Duffinator]

We did try it with just the fronts set to large at first and didn't notice much of a difference either way. But this setup in for my HT and while I listen to a lot of music, and music is more important to me than HT, I'm too lazy to switch back and forth plus my speakers are not 3-way full range and sound better with the sub.

Some call using the unused channels in a receiver for bi-amping "ghetto amping" but hey, they are there so why not put them to use.

You don't really boost the overall wattage (and I don't think that's what you meant to say), it's not 120 + 120 wpc = 240, but put two seperate amplification sources to the highs and lows.

 

[RMK!]

Ghetto Amping

I agree with Duffinator. I tried the 3805 bi-amping experiment and had similar results. I ended up adding a separate power amp and am now using the ever popular bi-wiring configuration for my main speakers. This pointless experimenting/tweaking is half the fun of this expensive hobby.

 

[mtrycrafts]

lol so true. To bad I dont have a SPL meter to measure things properly and give exact readings with nice pretty graphs.

The biggest difference I noticed was in the clarity. The treble sounded clearer and less muddied. The bass sounded deeper, and had a little extra umphh to it. And it stayed this way when I turned up the volume to almost unbearable levels.

Reo

Don't need an spl meter but you do need a voltmeter to level match the two setups to withing .03V at the speaker terminals, do the comparison under DBT conditions, operate withing the design limits of the two systems and be able to correctly guess which was which so the results are statistically significant. Anything less, is just hearsay evidence, not replicable and unreliable to anyone else.

 

[AndrewLyles]

So if I have a 5.1 pioneer receiver, and a 7.1 multi channel amp... can I use the extra two channels to Bi-amp my mains by splitting the Main channels comming from the preouts into the Amp? It would seem like for this I would need to use an external EQ to seperate the signal before it reached the amp.

 

[Duffinator]

So if I have a 5.1 pioneer receiver, and a 7.1 multi channel amp... can I use the extra two channels to Bi-amp my mains by splitting the Main channels comming from the preouts into the Amp? It would seem like for this I would need to use an external EQ to seperate the signal before it reached the amp.

If you have an external 7 channel amp that will work. Be sure to take the straps off of your speakers before you connect the speaker wires.

 

[RMK!]

So if I have a 5.1 pioneer receiver, and a 7.1 multi channel amp... can I use the extra two channels to Bi-amp my mains by splitting the Main channels comming from the preouts into the Amp? It would seem like for this I would need to use an external EQ to seperate the signal before it reached the amp.

Andrew,
When I was looking at bi-amping my mains, I was told I would need to disable the internal crossover on my mains and install an external crossover. This would have voided my speakers warranty plus, it was something I was incapable of doing without professional help.
Unless your mains have an external or configurable crossover, you won't see much benifit from the bi-amping. My understanding is that an EQ will not split the low high frequency signal, that is a function of the speakers crossover.

 

[mtrycrafts]

Andrew,
When I was looking at bi-amping my mains, I was told I would need to disable the internal crossover on my mains and install an external crossover. This would have voided my speakers warranty plus, it was someting I was incapable of doing with out professional help.
Unless your mains have an external or configurable crossover, you won't see much benifit from the bi-amping. My understanding is that an EQ will not split the low high frequency signal, that is a function of the speakers crossover.

You are correct. An EQ will not do crossover functions. But, the built in passive crossovers should do the trick as they do in normal operation. And, you are also correct in that using the passive, built in crossover will not benefit much from buy-amping
You would need an external electronic crossover, a good one at that.

 

[AndrewLyles]

And, you are also correct in that using the passive, built in crossover will not benefit much from buy-amping
You would need an external electronic crossover, a good one at that.

That sounds expensive.

 

[mtrycrafts]

That sounds expensive.

Well, when one starts to play audio designer, it gets expensive in a hurry, especially when the designing is beyond them

 

[RMK!]

Well, when one starts to play audio designer, it gets expensive in a hurry, especially when the designing is beyond them

Pretty condescending tone to this post….oh that’s right, you’re an audio samurai.

 

[Irvrobinson]

you are also correct in that using the passive, built in crossover will not benefit much from buy-amping

For the most part I've got to agree, and I suppose one could say I'm a super-serious bi-amp'er.

Frankly, for most simple two or three driver speakers I've never heard a difference from bi-amping, regardless of whether the speakers were expensive or cheap, or the amps expensive or cheap. I bet I've helped over a dozen people set up their systems over the past few years, and every one that has bi-wire capable speakers and an extra amp lying around or some extra channels wants to try bi-amping. Since the voltage applied to both sets of terminals will likely be identical the mostly likely outcome is just a waste of electrical power.

Nonetheless, over the years I have found two cases in which bi-amping does seem (note the use of the word "seem") to produce audible differences. Well, in the first case I'm going to discuss I suppose seem is the wrong word, it does. This is the case of using amps for the woofer sections of the speakers that have level controls. Obviously, AV receivers aren't going to allow this, but many separate power amps do. In this scenario you can use the level controls on the power amp to adjust the relative loudness of the bass frequencies, and because you're using the passive crossover this can result in some very pleasing effects - moreso than I've ever heard with any equalization, short of a old Cello Audio Pallet. In some rooms just a smidgen of bass boost or back-off is just what the ear orders. (This effect can also be noticed by using amps with different input sensitivities, even inadvertently.)

The other case in which I think I've heard improvement is when using very complex multi-driver loudspeakers, especially those that use differing driver technologies for different frequency ranges. Some manufacturers that parallel a bunch of woofers together for the low frequencies can present some pretty annoying loads to an amp (like a <2 ohm load, for example), while the mid-range and tweeter sections present entirely different loads. This is case with my current speakers. When I've directly compared single amping versus biamping in a single blind test I can't tell the difference during the test. What I have noticed is that over longer periods with my system I often detect a greater "sense of ease" with various types of music, but I can't put my finger on it. What I have noticed is that with the bi-amp configuration I listen longer without fatigue. Once I noticed the effect, that I could listen longer, I made the decision to stick with bi-amping for these speakers and I've stuck with it for years. That doesn't necessarily mean I recommend bi-amping to everyone, just that I've noticed a situation in which I've felt I'm receiving enough benefit to spend the money for another stereo amp.

 

[RMK!]

For the most part I've got to agree, and I suppose one could say I'm a super-serious bi-amp'er.

Frankly, for most simple two or three driver speakers I've never heard a difference from bi-amping, regardless of whether the speakers were expensive or cheap, or the amps expensive or cheap. I bet I've helped over a dozen people set up their systems over the past few years, and every one that has bi-wire capable speakers and an extra amp lying around or some extra channels wants to try bi-amping. Since the voltage applied to both sets of terminals will likely be identical the mostly likely outcome is just a waste of electrical power.

Nonetheless, over the years I have found two cases in which bi-amps does seem (note the use of the word "seem") to produce audible differences. Well, in the first case I'm going to discuss I suppose seem is the wrong word, it does. This is the case of using amps for the woofer sections of the speakers that have level controls. Obviously, AV receivers aren't going to allow this, but many separate power amps do. In this scenario you can use the level controls on the power amp to adjust the relative loudness of the bass frequencies, and because you're using the passive crossover this can result in some very pleasing effects - moreso than I've ever heard with any equalization, short of a old Cello Audio Pallet. In some rooms just a smidgen of bass boost or back-off is just what the ear orders. (This effect can also be noticed by using amps with difference input sensitivities, even inadvertently.)

The other case in which I think I've heard improvement is when using very complex multi-driver loudspeakers, especially those that use differing driver technologies for different frequency ranges. Some manufacturers that parallel a bunch of woofers together for the low frequencies can present some pretty annoying loads to an amp (like a <2 ohm load, for example), while the mid-range and tweeter sections present entirely different loads. This is case with my current speakers. When I've directly compared single amping versus biamping in a single blind test I can't tell the difference during the test. What I have noticed is that over longer periods with my system I often detect a greater "sense of ease" with various types of music, but I can't put my finger on it. I have noticed is that with the bi-amp configuration I listen longer without fatigue. Once I noticed the effect, that I could listen longer, I made the decision to stick with bi-amping for these speakers and I've stuck with it for years. That doesn't necessarily mean I recommend bi-amping to everyone, just that I've noticed a situation in which I've felt I'm receiving enough benefit to spend the money for another stereo amp.

Good post Irv,

The Audioholics review of the Denon 3805 and Bi-amping suggests using the Zone three amp section to control the Bass section volume of main speakers with separate binding posts (jumpers removed). This volume control would seem to accomplish the same thing you describe in your first example. Am I wrong on this?

Duffinator has his Monitor Audio S6’s (passive crossover) bi-amped with the 3805. I wonder if he has played with the amp volume control of the bass/treble sections to achive the "pleasing effects" you describe?

 

[Irvrobinson]

Good post Irv,

The Audioholics review of the Denon 3805 and Bi-amping suggests using the Zone three amp section to control the Bass section volume of main speakers with separate binding posts (jumpers removed). This volume control would seem to accomplish the same thing you describe in your first example. Am I wrong on this?

I don't know, as I'm not familiar with the 3805. (I am an audioholic, but only with old-fashioned two-channel stereo. Mea Culpa!)

 

[Duffinator]

Duffinator has his Monitor Audio S6’s (passive crossover) bi-amped with the 3805. I wonder if he has played with the amp volume control of the bass/treble sections to achive the "pleasing effects" you describe?

I did when I first setup the bi-amping over a year ago with my Mirage speakers. I found the +2 on the control (or whatever the recommendation was) to be spot on. My thought was the speakers would open up with the seperate wattage to each section. But there wasn't much of a difference. But like hidog said you can adjust the gain on the bass to be lower or higher than the treble. Not sure if that is any different than using the EQ though.

It's fun to play with this stuff and pretty harmless not to mention a lot less expensive than some other hobbies I've had in the past. I remain skeptical of many of the claims made from changing cables, amps, players, etc. and have a hard time hearing differences, other than volume which always sounds better when louder. One thing I've really enjoyed about this site is the attempt to debunk many of these claims. One area I can tell a difference is speakers but the law of diminishing returns seems to be present here although I haven't figured out what that price point is. Whatever it is it's above my budget. But I've heard some nice systems with seperate amps and seperates that sound much better than my system. One area that pays off quickly is a good sub. If you want to improve your system start there!