Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 1 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Bi-amplification?
#217011 08/01/08 07:32 PM
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 60
old hand
OP Offline
old hand
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 60
My Yamaha RXv1800 supports bi-amping, which appears to mean connecting the "surround back" terminals on the AVR to a second set of front speaker terminals (removing the shorting bridges on those front speakers), and turning on the bi-amp feature in the AVR.

Is this worth doing with my M60s? If so, what's the advantage?

Thanks and regards,
David

Re: Bi-amplification?
coldrick #217013 08/01/08 07:34 PM
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 18,044
shareholder in the making
Offline
shareholder in the making
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 18,044
Not really, no. You're still pulling off of one power supply in the Yamaha, losing your surround back/zone2 amps, and--since you're not changing the crossover in the M60--not seeing any actual theoretical benefit from bi-amping.


I am the Doctor, and THIS... is my SPOON!
Re: Bi-amplification?
Ken.C #217016 08/01/08 07:48 PM
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 60
old hand
OP Offline
old hand
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 60
Ah. But the doco for the yammie says (wrt bi-amping): "Remove the shorting bars or bridges of your speakers to separate the low pass filter and high pass filter crossovers"

Whazzat mean?

Regards,
David

Re: Bi-amplification?
coldrick #217021 08/01/08 08:23 PM
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 18,044
shareholder in the making
Offline
shareholder in the making
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 18,044
Not a whole lot. True bi-amping has the crossovers between the preamps and the amps.


I am the Doctor, and THIS... is my SPOON!
Re: Bi-amplification?
coldrick #217040 08/02/08 01:53 AM
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 10,654
shareholder in the making
Offline
shareholder in the making
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 10,654
David, this has been discussed at some length here several times. Although some manufacturers include a so-called "biamp" feature in their receivers, this is a misnomer, isn't true biamping and has no advantages. Biamping requires two separate amplifiers(as the term implies)and a separate external crossover before the amplifiers so that each amplifier gets only the appropriate frequency to amplify. The "feature" in question here simply feeds the same amount of maximum voltage that the receiver power supply section can deliver(and the same full frequency range)through two sets of output transistors(one previously unused for back surround speakers)rather than one; maximum power available isn't doubled, as is sometimes claimed, or increased by any amount.


-----------------------------------

Enjoy the music, not the equipment.


Re: Bi-amplification?
JohnK #217053 08/02/08 06:49 AM
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 60
old hand
OP Offline
old hand
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 60
Sorry for the duplication, John: I searched on bi-amp (0 results), bi-amplification (too many to count), but didn't think of biamp.

Anyway, thanks for the info.

Regards,
David

Re: Bi-amplification?
coldrick #217055 08/02/08 07:19 AM
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 10,654
shareholder in the making
Offline
shareholder in the making
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 10,654
No criticism was meant, David; searching can be difficult(impossible?)at times. Another comment that can be added is that, contrary to the statement quoted from the manual, removing the connecting bars doesn't make the high and low sections of the crossover separate; they already are separate and have to be to send the high and low frequency drivers the right frequencies in normal operation. The reason for removing the connectors is that the power doesn't know that it's supposed to go only into the speaker, and if the connector was still there when "biamping" it would also go through the connector, up the other speaker wire and into the opposite channel, probably damaging the output transistors there.


-----------------------------------

Enjoy the music, not the equipment.


Re: Bi-amplification? subject hijack
JohnK #217059 08/02/08 01:49 PM
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 5,745
Likes: 17
axiomite
Offline
axiomite
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 5,745
Likes: 17
 Originally Posted By: JohnK
No criticism was meant, David; searching can be difficult(impossible?)at times.


The 'new' search engine that came with the site changes really doesn't work.
The old search engine was far more effective.
Mind you, even the Google version that Peter posted some time back i don't find very effective. I had more luck manually scrolling through my own posts, using a relative time frame of mind and recall of subject headers to find posts that clearly still exist, but that the search engines cannot find.

Maybe they have not been allowed to access the archived text.


"Those who preach the myths of audio are ignorant of truth."
Re: Bi-amplification? subject hijack
chesseroo #217060 08/02/08 02:11 PM
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 6,833
W
Wid Offline
axiomite
Offline
axiomite
W
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 6,833

I'm glad to see I'm not he only one that thinks the search function is below par.


Rick


"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity." Sigmund Freud

Re: Bi-amplification? subject hijack
Wid #217061 08/02/08 02:41 PM
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 11,458
shareholder in the making
Offline
shareholder in the making
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 11,458
There's a search function?

j/k...

\:\)


::::::: No disrespect to Axiom, but my favorite woofer is my yellow lab :::::::
Page 1 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Moderated by  alan, Amie, Andrew, axiomadmin, Brent, Debbie, Ian, Jc 

Link Copied to Clipboard

Need Help Graphic

Forum Statistics
Forums16
Topics24,945
Posts442,484
Members15,617
Most Online2,082
Jan 22nd, 2020
Top Posters
Ken.C 18,044
pmbuko 16,441
SirQuack 13,840
CV 12,077
MarkSJohnson 11,458
Who's Online Now
1 members (rrlev), 687 guests, and 3 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newsletter Signup
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.4