Pogre Audioholic Slumlord Jul 29, 2016 16,146 0 113 56 Mesa, Arizona Feb 18, 2021 #21 ParleyW said: Not the only one spouting on nine year old thread? Suprised you took the time to converse with the little people. Click to expand... 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.
ParleyW said: Not the only one spouting on nine year old thread? Suprised you took the time to converse with the little people. Click to expand... 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 Audioholic Overlord Jan 8, 2017 12,005 0 113 52 Feb 18, 2021 #22 Pogre said: 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. Click to expand... King Pogey, your grace, thank you, for I am humbled. [emoji12] Reactions: Pogre
Pogre said: 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. Click to expand... King Pogey, your grace, thank you, for I am humbled. [emoji12]
lovinthehd Audioholic Jedi Sep 11, 2012 44,878 0 113 Oakridge, OR Feb 18, 2021 #23 @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? Reactions: Pogre
@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 Audioholic Spartan Aug 31, 2016 5,997 0 113 86 Montreal, Canada Feb 18, 2021 #24 lovinthehd said: @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? Click to expand... 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. Reactions: Pogre and lovinthehd
lovinthehd said: @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? Click to expand... 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.
P ParleyW Audioholic Sep 11, 2020 123 0 16 60 Feb 19, 2021 #25 Pogre said: 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. Click to expand... Quickly, someone else just started another thread on bi-amping. I’ll hold him and you can beat the poop out of him. Reactions: Pogre
Pogre said: 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. Click to expand... Quickly, someone else just started another thread on bi-amping. I’ll hold him and you can beat the poop out of him.
P ParleyW Audioholic Sep 11, 2020 123 0 16 60 Feb 20, 2021 #26 lovinthehd said: @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? Click to expand... 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. Last edited: Feb 20, 2021
lovinthehd said: @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? Click to expand... 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 Audioholic Jedi Sep 11, 2012 44,878 0 113 Oakridge, OR Feb 20, 2021 #27 ParleyW said: 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. Click to expand... 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.
ParleyW said: 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. Click to expand... 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 Audioholic Slumlord Jul 29, 2016 16,146 0 113 56 Mesa, Arizona Feb 20, 2021 #28 ParleyW said: Quickly, someone else just started another thread on bi-amping. I’ll hold him and you can beat the poop out of him. Click to expand... 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.
ParleyW said: Quickly, someone else just started another thread on bi-amping. I’ll hold him and you can beat the poop out of him. Click to expand... 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 Audioholic Slumlord Jul 29, 2016 16,146 0 113 56 Mesa, Arizona Feb 20, 2021 #29 lovinthehd said: 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. Click to expand... 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... Reactions: lovinthehd
lovinthehd said: 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. Click to expand... 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 Audioholic Spartan Aug 31, 2016 5,997 0 113 86 Montreal, Canada Feb 20, 2021 #30 lovinthehd said: 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. Click to expand... 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. Last edited: Feb 20, 2021
lovinthehd said: 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. Click to expand... 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 Audioholic Jedi Sep 11, 2012 44,878 0 113 Oakridge, OR Feb 20, 2021 #31 Verdinut said: 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. Click to expand... 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 said: 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. Click to expand... 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 Audioholic Spartan Aug 31, 2016 5,997 0 113 86 Montreal, Canada Feb 20, 2021 #32 lovinthehd said: 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. Click to expand... 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. Reactions: lovinthehd
lovinthehd said: 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. Click to expand... 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 Audioholic Jedi Sep 11, 2012 44,878 0 113 Oakridge, OR Feb 20, 2021 #33 Verdinut said: 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. Click to expand... 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 said: 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. Click to expand... 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 Audioholic Spartan Aug 31, 2016 5,997 0 113 86 Montreal, Canada Feb 20, 2021 #34 lovinthehd said: 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? Click to expand... 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. Reactions: lovinthehd
lovinthehd said: 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? Click to expand... 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.
