watchnerd
Grand Contributor
Do you think an Audio Control white paper / tech marketing piece qualifies as peer reviewed objective research?
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Bi amping
- Thread starter Thomas savage
- Start date
Do you think an Audio Control white paper / tech marketing piece qualifies as peer reviewed objective research?
watchnerd
Grand Contributor
I mean, I like my vinyl, too.
But I don't claim it's objectively better than digital.
If you want to bi-amp to introduce euphony, go for it.
But that doesn't mean it's objectively better.
watchnerd
Grand Contributor
The articles/papers you referenced are for active bi-amping, not passive. This is a clip from "tech-paper-104".
And this is a clip from Linkwitz's paper in "semanticscholar.org".
watchnerd
Grand Contributor
In a passive bi-amp speaker:
1. The crossover network is the same components and slopes, whether bi-amped or not
2. Any differences in performance will thus be due to differences in amplifier behavior
3. Most modern amps, when operated below their redlines, have distortion characteristics way below that of the speakers themselves, so audibility is questionable unless the amps are misbehaving
4. Any argument that passive bi-amping allows for "more power" can be countered with "get a bigger amp"
1. The crossover network is the same components and slopes, whether bi-amped or not
2. Any differences in performance will thus be due to differences in amplifier behavior
3. Most modern amps, when operated below their redlines, have distortion characteristics way below that of the speakers themselves, so audibility is questionable unless the amps are misbehaving
4. Any argument that passive bi-amping allows for "more power" can be countered with "get a bigger amp"
Last edited:
What is done in the speaker you showed is NOT biamping. Both amps run full range which is really stupid because you buy and pay for two amps and the power to run them, but thow out , for no good reason many of the advantages of actual biamping. It should be called something else. It is more akin to "bi-wiring". I don't know why anyone would do either "technique". Audio professionals actually biamp. Audiophiles do whatever those two techniques are.
Radio Electronics is not a peer reviewed journal. I work in academia and there is a technique that carries my name from a paper I co-authored in 1977. It has been cited 35 times. I do know about peer reviewed , scientific journals. The purpose of linking to those was to answer the question "why is biamping better" which you asked. Those papers answer it correctly.
When I think of passive bi-amping I think of a passive dividing network BEFORE the power amps , where they belong and nothing between the drivers (or less if you are biamping a three way) and amp output.
It's not surprising that you didn't notice a difference because you weren't really biamping. I wouldn't bother doing it that way either.
You shouldn't call it bi amping cause it isn't.
The use of the speaker level crossover means that the impedance will gyrate (in the high direction as opposed to speakers like some of the five and six way Infinitys that went very low) The internal crossovers should be bypassed.
Radio Electronics is not a peer reviewed journal. I work in academia and there is a technique that carries my name from a paper I co-authored in 1977. It has been cited 35 times. I do know about peer reviewed , scientific journals. The purpose of linking to those was to answer the question "why is biamping better" which you asked. Those papers answer it correctly.
When I think of passive bi-amping I think of a passive dividing network BEFORE the power amps , where they belong and nothing between the drivers (or less if you are biamping a three way) and amp output.
It's not surprising that you didn't notice a difference because you weren't really biamping. I wouldn't bother doing it that way either.
You shouldn't call it bi amping cause it isn't.
The use of the speaker level crossover means that the impedance will gyrate (in the high direction as opposed to speakers like some of the five and six way Infinitys that went very low) The internal crossovers should be bypassed.
Last edited:
I think the term "passive bi-amping" is pretty well understood (see for example an Audioholics article).
https://www.audioholics.com/frequent-questions/the-difference-between-biamping-vs-biwiring
I also don't think there is any disagreement between you, me, and plenty of other ASR members, that passive bi-amping is, borrowing the term mentioned in the Audioholics article, "fool's bi-amping".
To convert normal passive speakers into an actively crossovered system will require major surgeries to the speakers to remove the crossovers and add connections directly to the drivers. Then the active crossover system needs to be designed and optimized. The expertise required is well beyond the average consumer. Many also have their strong favorite speakers and aren't willing to have them modified. Unfortunately, some were led to believe, by spending more money on more amplifiers, they can get "significant" improvements by "passively bi-amping" their speakers.
https://www.audioholics.com/frequent-questions/the-difference-between-biamping-vs-biwiring
I also don't think there is any disagreement between you, me, and plenty of other ASR members, that passive bi-amping is, borrowing the term mentioned in the Audioholics article, "fool's bi-amping".
To convert normal passive speakers into an actively crossovered system will require major surgeries to the speakers to remove the crossovers and add connections directly to the drivers. Then the active crossover system needs to be designed and optimized. The expertise required is well beyond the average consumer. Many also have their strong favorite speakers and aren't willing to have them modified. Unfortunately, some were led to believe, by spending more money on more amplifiers, they can get "significant" improvements by "passively bi-amping" their speakers.
watchnerd
Grand Contributor
Maybe it should be called something else, but passive bi-amping is a common term.
If you read the opening of the thread, it's also what @Thomas savage did at the top of the thread, and what @Martin and @CMB seem to be describing upthread.
And, yes, I tend to agree it's kind of silly.
True bi-amping with external crossovers that you're talking about is a totally different animal.
But that's not what this thread is about.
Last edited:
watchnerd
Grand Contributor
I did not read the entire thread before my first post.
At Axpona 2019 I was dozing off in the Bryston suite when I heard a sforzando that you only hear in multi amped systems. It was triamped with Brystons and their crossover. A sound I hear at home but did not hear much at Axpona.
The more ways your system is the more improvement there will be by using multi amping.
You could still gain some improvement even with those goofy connections if you put a dividing network ahead of the amps. It could be a simple passive or a Parts Express DSP for less than $200 or a mini DSP or any number of things. Leaving the manufacturer's network in would not be optimum but I have yet to see where it does not improve the sound (Subjectively I know. I have helped many people start with multiamping and nobody ever goes back unless there is a budget or WAF problem. Most become evangelizers)
At Axpona 2019 I was dozing off in the Bryston suite when I heard a sforzando that you only hear in multi amped systems. It was triamped with Brystons and their crossover. A sound I hear at home but did not hear much at Axpona.
The more ways your system is the more improvement there will be by using multi amping.
You could still gain some improvement even with those goofy connections if you put a dividing network ahead of the amps. It could be a simple passive or a Parts Express DSP for less than $200 or a mini DSP or any number of things. Leaving the manufacturer's network in would not be optimum but I have yet to see where it does not improve the sound (Subjectively I know. I have helped many people start with multiamping and nobody ever goes back unless there is a budget or WAF problem. Most become evangelizers)
watchnerd
Grand Contributor
Sure...lots of folks on ASR are doing MiniDSP + Class D amps for a cheaper version.
But, again, that's a completely different animal.
valerianf
Addicted to Fun and Learning
"The myth also continues to be given some whiff of cred by makers like Revel and Klipsch who continue to include multiple binding posts on some of their passive speakers."
For FR and FL speakers I will only buy 3 ways units with dual binding.
Experience proved me that it sound better.
It is not the price of the dual binding that is an issue!
For FR and FL speakers I will only buy 3 ways units with dual binding.
Experience proved me that it sound better.
It is not the price of the dual binding that is an issue!
This story is probably15 years old. I asked the VP marketing of an established speaker company why they offered dual binding posts. He admitted that bi-wiring was pointless but that they had implemented the dual binding posts because their dealers demanded them.
watchnerd
Grand Contributor
So let me get this straight....
You're saying the simple act of converting from a single pair of binding posts to a dual pair of binding posts makes a given speaker sound better?
watchnerd
Grand Contributor
Well, sure their dealers would.....it's the hook to sell the extra amp.
"To really get the most out of this speaker, you really need to bi-amp them.....and obviously, since they included those extra posts, the maker thinks so, too."
valerianf
Addicted to Fun and Learning
As discussed in other forums, you need to bi-amp to isolate the back emf coming from the low frequency drivers.
And for sure you need to remove the big jumpers that connect the speaker bindings.
With my tower speakers and my AVR it was night and day.
I only regret not trying it before (because I did not believe it will improve the sound)!
The result may vary depending of the speaker and amplifier design.
And for sure you need to remove the big jumpers that connect the speaker bindings.
With my tower speakers and my AVR it was night and day.
I only regret not trying it before (because I did not believe it will improve the sound)!
The result may vary depending of the speaker and amplifier design.
Actually, I think it was just to sell extra speaker cable.
watchnerd
Grand Contributor
Actually, I think it was just to sell extra speaker cable.
Oh that's way worse.
At least 2 amps really do something.
watchnerd
Grand Contributor
That's what high damping factor amps do, bi-amped or not.
Conversely, bi-amping with a low damping factor amp doesn't turn it into a high one.
Also:
The inductors in a passive crossover convert much of the back EMF to heat, bi-amped or not.
Even a low damping factor amp is swamped by the impedance of the speaker level crossover network. Amplifier damping factor is almost completely irrelevant if there is a three way crossover between it and the drivers. In addition to inductors speaker level crossovers almost always have power resistors which convert your amps power directly into heat.
The point about multi amping not being for the average consumer is well taken. It's not for everyone. It requires learning a very few things and having a clear picture in your mind of what it is you are attempting to do. It is easy to blow up drivers if one is not careful.
I have evangelized about it because there is a lot of pent up enthusiasm people have for their systems and instead of wasting money on very overpriced components and accessories(and breathtakingly overpriced loudspeakers!) one can really improve matters with multi amping. It is economical in this day and age with componentry being frequently overpriced.
One other thing occurs to me reqarding this discussion. If you were a dealer and you wanted to sell extry spikker cable and maybe an extry amp.
Wouldn't you also want to sell a low level active crossover network??? Even if you don't open the box and bypass the speakers network you can still gain some advantage and improvement. Just not all the ones that are available. For some people proceeding slowly stepwise can be a good approach.
The point about multi amping not being for the average consumer is well taken. It's not for everyone. It requires learning a very few things and having a clear picture in your mind of what it is you are attempting to do. It is easy to blow up drivers if one is not careful.
I have evangelized about it because there is a lot of pent up enthusiasm people have for their systems and instead of wasting money on very overpriced components and accessories(and breathtakingly overpriced loudspeakers!) one can really improve matters with multi amping. It is economical in this day and age with componentry being frequently overpriced.
One other thing occurs to me reqarding this discussion. If you were a dealer and you wanted to sell extry spikker cable and maybe an extry amp.
Wouldn't you also want to sell a low level active crossover network??? Even if you don't open the box and bypass the speakers network you can still gain some advantage and improvement. Just not all the ones that are available. For some people proceeding slowly stepwise can be a good approach.
Last edited:
