Vandersteen, wow! - Page 22 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #631 of 880 Old 11-02-2010, 08:25 AM
Member
 
taam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
I would call vandersteen and ask. better safe than sorry.

taam
taam is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #632 of 880 Old 11-02-2010, 05:48 PM
Senior Member
 
dminches's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Cherry Hill, NJ
Posts: 449
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Does anyone have a WX-2 box they could lend me so I can calibrate my new amp? I will gladly pay for shipping both ways and will also be happy to throw in some CDs. Thanks.

David M.
dminches is offline  
post #633 of 880 Old 11-04-2010, 08:56 PM
Member
 
cachecoder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Bellevue, WA
Posts: 47
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by PioBeer View Post

for anyone "in the know" is there a big difference between the original model 2s SQ wise as compared to the latest version - 2CE signature 2s? I am really happy with my model 2s that I bought used (a pair with a SN from the late 1980s!). But I am wondering if upgrading would be worth it.

Hi,
I'm new to the thread and hope you don't mind another opinion. About a year ago, I seriously considered upgrading my 2C's to the new version, 2CE Sig II's. I purchased a pair and brought them home for A/B testing and two weeks of listening. While I found the new version marginally better, there wasn't enough of an improvement for me to justify spending about $2500 for the new version with stands. I also had a problem with one of the new speakers so that sealed their fate, a return to the store.
Also, I bi-amp my 2C's with 120x4 of power. I can't believe how much better this sounds!!! In my opinion, there's nothing under $15k that can touch the sound quality of these speakers when bi-amps are used. I use two Musical Fidelity amps, each amp being dual-mono, for a total of 240 watts per speaker (120 watts for the bass section, 120 watts for the mid/high section). Because the bass section gets separate power, it's like having a sub perfectly paired for the top end. I can't say enough good things about this - you've GOT to try it!
cachecoder is offline  
post #634 of 880 Old 11-05-2010, 11:22 PM
Senior Member
 
PioBeer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Willamette Valley, Oregon
Posts: 451
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by cachecoder View Post

Hi,
I'm new to the thread and hope you don't mind another opinion. About a year ago, I seriously considered upgrading my 2C's to the new version, 2CE Sig II's. I purchased a pair and brought them home for A/B testing and two weeks of listening. While I found the new version marginally better, there wasn't enough of an improvement for me to justify spending about $2500 for the new version with stands. I also had a problem with one of the new speakers so that sealed their fate, a return to the store.
Also, I bi-amp my 2C's with 120x4 of power. I can't believe how much better this sounds!!! In my opinion, there's nothing under $15k that can touch the sound quality of these speakers when bi-amps are used. I use two Musical Fidelity amps, each amp being dual-mono, for a total of 240 watts per speaker (120 watts for the bass section, 120 watts for the mid/high section). Because the bass section gets separate power, it's like having a sub perfectly paired for the top end. I can't say enough good things about this - you've GOT to try it!

Cool!, is bi-amping like getting a mono block amp for each speaker? Right now I am using a behringer ep2500 (up to 1200 x 2) but these are cheap (relatively) and are a good bang for the buck, so maybe I should get another one to fool around with my set-up?

9G KURO equipped.
PioBeer is offline  
post #635 of 880 Old 11-06-2010, 10:22 AM
Member
 
cachecoder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Bellevue, WA
Posts: 47
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by PioBeer View Post


Cool!, is bi-amping like getting a mono block amp for each speaker? Right now I am using a behringer ep2500 (up to 1200 x 2) but these are cheap (relatively) and are a good bang for the buck, so maybe I should get another one to fool around with my set-up?

Almost. My configuration is two mono amps per speaker. Think of it as "quad amping" because each speaker is using two amps. Each speaker has two inputs (high and low) and this configuration provides an amp for each input. I think the "magic" comes from the separation. The high and low frequency/power needs of each speaker seem to be met without one stealing current from the other. While I use some fairly nice amps, I don't think you need to spend a lot of money for amps. Just make sure you use four separate amps, or a pair of "dual mono" amps with separate power supplies for each channel. A multi-channel AV reciever/amp probably won't work because one power supply is used for all 5/7 channels.
cachecoder is offline  
post #636 of 880 Old 11-06-2010, 10:36 AM
Advanced Member
 
KrisRoberts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Sunny San Diego
Posts: 547
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I have a pair old W2 subs that I picked up second hand a few years ago and have been pretty happy. But I've always wondered about sending them back to Vandersteen to be upgraded to W2q's. Does anyone have input on whether that is worth while?
KrisRoberts is offline  
post #637 of 880 Old 11-09-2010, 08:52 AM
Member
 
taam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
I am curious as to how the old W2's work cause they can be gotten a lot cheaper than the new model. Did they have the same crossover thing? Is it just the adjustable Q that is lacking compared to the new model?
taam is offline  
post #638 of 880 Old 11-09-2010, 09:04 AM
Advanced Member
 
KrisRoberts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Sunny San Diego
Posts: 547
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
From what I can tell it is just the lack of adjustable q in the feature list. But I wouldn't be surprised if there were amp or driver updates over the years. They do use the same filter crossover setup. But they are so heavy boxing up and dealing with shipping seems like it's holding me back.
KrisRoberts is offline  
post #639 of 880 Old 11-20-2010, 05:11 PM
Member
 
C17FXR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Trenton, Canada
Posts: 66
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Has anyone used Audyssey to setup their HT? The reason I ask I run the 3A Signature' with a pair of 2Wq's. When using Audyssey to set up room corrections I have to run the 3A's with out the 2Wq's connected or Audyssey sets the 3A's as small, but when ran sans 2Wq's it sets the 3A's as large. Anyone having this similar problem. I use a Denon AVR 4308Ci routed thru a McCormack TLC-1 Ultra to a McCormack DNA-1 Dlx Gold if this make a difference.
C17FXR is offline  
post #640 of 880 Old 11-20-2010, 05:35 PM
Senior Member
 
oldtexasdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: out in the country north of Fort Worth Texas
Posts: 252
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
I auditioned those same speakers and wrote my impressions of them in my thread "for audiophiles only" I loved them but at the time my home had young children and CAT'S so unfortunitly I had to pass them over due to the outer construction. Still plan on getting a pair

There are two holes in Daddys head where all the money goes.
oldtexasdog is offline  
post #641 of 880 Old 11-21-2010, 02:30 AM
AVS Special Member
 
SoundofMind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: SE MI
Posts: 7,962
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by C17FXR View Post

Has anyone used Audyssey to setup their HT?...

I have experience with Audyssey, and have a Denon 2809. The way the Denon autosetup works is that when you do not have a sub connected to the AVR's sub preout, your speakers will be set to Large no matter what, as there is no sub to crossover to. Large is also called "full-band" as all freqs are sent to the speaker. If you do have a sub connected to the AVR's sub preout, when Autosetup measures the speaker's response in the room and the -3dB point is low enough (I believe in the Denon that is around 40 Hz), it will set that speaker to Large. If the -3 dB point is above that, it will set it to Small and assign a crossover. The freqs below the crossover point are sent to the sub channel and any LFE input is added in to the sub channel. BTW, during autosetup, the sub is pinged seperately and additional Audyssey filters are applied to the sub channel to correct the difficult low freqs. It is then output to the AVR sub preout.

BTW, normally when running 2 subs, they are connected to the AVR sub preout with an Y-RCA connector placed equidistant from the main listening position. They are level-matched using the volume knob on each sub prior to running autosetup together. There is an Audyssey setup guide and a handy Denon guide as well, should you wish more info.

Now, I am describing the standard sub setup. My local Vandy dealer could not coherently explain the recommended sub hookup, as he is more of a "2 Channel" guy. In a quick review of the website info, it seems to me that it is the 2W that is designed to be connected like a conventional sub and to utilize bass management (and the benefits of Audyssey's extra sub channel filters) in the AVR as described above. But the 2Wqs apparently have an outboard bass management preamp thingy and I don't know how you have them connected. Nor am I hip as to why you'd run another preamp off the Denon, but am interested to know more about that.

I recently have been shopping speakers in the $2K range and, "wow", really like the soundstage and clarity of the Model 2 CE sigII. I am fortunate to have the Salk factory nearby and was quite impressed with their SongTowerQWT for similar reasons. Decisions, decisions...

Yes, I still like playing with Dalis.

SoundofMind is offline  
post #642 of 880 Old 11-21-2010, 10:22 AM
Advanced Member
 
htcritic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 541
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by cachecoder View Post

...Also, I bi-amp my 2C's with 120x4 of power. I can't believe how much better this sounds!!!...Because the bass section gets separate power, it's like having a sub perfectly paired for the top end. I can't say enough good things about this - you've GOT to try it!

I asssume that you have an active, external, crossover for each of those amplifiers right? Otherwise all you are really doing is passive bi-amping which is worth nothing as far as improving sq goes. But I'm sure you know that.

J Dunlavy:.. if you stop to think about it, no loudspeaker can sound more accurate than it measures ...
htcritic is offline  
post #643 of 880 Old 11-21-2010, 07:09 PM
Member
 
cachecoder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Bellevue, WA
Posts: 47
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by htcritic View Post


I asssume that you have an active, external, crossover for each of those amplifiers right? Otherwise all you are really doing is passive bi-amping which is worth nothing as far as improving sq goes. But I'm sure you know that.

I understand the concept you describe. However, I don't use an active, external crossover. My experience is that the technique I described provides sound quality improvements. Of course, ymmv.

I also thought this technique may be limited in use to my Vandersteen model 2A speakers. I've used the same technique on my Reference 3A speakers with even better results. I've owned several other high-end speakers and found the results to be very good. Using this technique, I find Vandersteens compare with some of the best speakers available at almost any price. This technique provides high-end sq for a very fair price.

The best advice I can give is to try it. Maybe it will work for your system - maybe not. It may be just a matter of personal taste.
cachecoder is offline  
post #644 of 880 Old 11-22-2010, 03:50 AM
AVS Special Member
 
SoundofMind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: SE MI
Posts: 7,962
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by cachecoder View Post

...I don't use an active, external crossover. My experience is that the technique I described provides tremendous sound quality improvements.... It may be just a matter of personal taste.

Not meaning to start an argument here, but in regards to this wiring setup, I have not seen such reports backed up convincingly. Without assuming anything about you, I have found such claims are most often from folks who do not understand, or do not take the trouble to do blind, level-matched A/B testing or who have extra cables and amps to sell you. The Vandy dealer did not use your technique but had the Model 2 CE sigII biwired. We didn't do any A/B on the wiring. Would you care to elaborate on your testing?

Yes, I still like playing with Dalis.

SoundofMind is offline  
post #645 of 880 Old 11-22-2010, 03:53 AM
Member
 
C17FXR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Trenton, Canada
Posts: 66
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundofMind View Post

I have experience with Audyssey, and have a Denon 2809. The way the Denon autosetup works is that when you do not have a sub connected to the AVR's sub preout, your speakers will be set to Large no matter what, as there is no sub to crossover to. Large is also called "full-band" as all freqs are sent to the speaker. If you do have a sub connected to the AVR's sub preout, when Autosetup measures the speaker's response in the room and the -3dB point is low enough (I believe in the Denon that is around 40 Hz), it will set that speaker to Large.

If I may clarify, I run a full 7.1 Vandersteen suite (3A Sig's, with a pair of 2Wq's, VCC-1, VSM-1 Signatures for surround and VLR's for back surrounds and a V2W). The 3A Sig/2Wq combo uses the Vandersteen M5-HP for the high pass filter that the 2Wq's require. The 2Wq's are not connected as regular subwoofers are, they are connected thru the main amplifier with the high pass filter connected before the amp input.

Anyway with the 2Wq's connected along with rest of the speaker, per the manufactures instructions, while running Audyssey the 3A Sig's/2Wq combo gets set as small, but when running Audyssey with just the 3A Sig's sans the 2Wq's and everything else connected the 3A's are set to large.

To circumvent this I run Audyssey with the 2Wq subs disconnected and then reconnect them. I was just looking to see if anyone else had seen this?

As for the separate preamp; my two channel system is also part of my home theater and the two channel system is a lot more resolving than the AVR 4308 could ever dream to be, I just set the TLC-1 to Video and turn the volume all the way up and it becomes a pass-thru. The TLC is a buffered passive pre.
C17FXR is offline  
post #646 of 880 Old 11-22-2010, 05:45 AM
Member
 
C17FXR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Trenton, Canada
Posts: 66
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by cachecoder View Post

Hi, Also, I bi-amp my 2C's with 120x4 of power. I can't believe how much better this sounds!!! In my opinion, there's nothing under $15k that can touch the sound quality of these speakers when bi-amps are used. I use two Musical Fidelity amps, each amp being dual-mono, for a total of 240 watts per speaker (120 watts for the bass section, 120 watts for the mid/high section). Because the bass section gets separate power, it's like having a sub perfectly paired for the top end. I can't say enough good things about this - you've GOT to try it!

I know what you mean about the bi-amping and glad to see you are getting outstanding results. I prefer to run a pair of McCormack 0.5 Deluxe as to the DNA-1 Deluxe Gold, there is a difference between the two, not to say one is better than the other they both have their strengths I just prefer the pair of 0.5 Deluxe. I'm also scared about frying the midrange driver as Mr Vandersteen comments on this in his Q&A section on the Vandersteen site. The reason I'm running the DNA-1 Dlx is I'm currently reworking my set to get better sound and about to send the 0.5's off to SMc Audio to get them upgraded and monoblocked. Plus I need to look into getting longer interconnects for the new set up. Also as an option when running the Vandersteens in a bi-amped configuration, if you decide to run one of the Vandy 2W sub's you have the option of running the highs and mids at full range and only high passing the lower portion of the speaker. I did this and preferred the out come a lot more. YMMV. Anyway good luck with the set up.
C17FXR is offline  
post #647 of 880 Old 11-22-2010, 05:56 AM
Advanced Member
 
htcritic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 541
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by cachecoder View Post

I understand the theory you describe and had a similar misconception for many years. However, I don't use an active, external crossover. My experience is that the technique I described provides tremendous sound quality improvements..

I don't remember stating any theory. I said that when bi-amping (true bi-amping) one needed to have active, external, crossovers. That's not theory.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cachecoder View Post

...I also had the misconception that this technique may be limited in use to my Vandersteen model 2A speakers. I was wrong to assume this without testing it first. I've used the same technique on my Reference 3A speakers with even better results. I've owned several other high-end speakers and found the results to be very good. Using this technique, I find Vandersteens compare with some of the best speakers available at almost any price. This technique provides high-end sq for a very fair price.

The best advice I can give is to try it. Maybe it will work for your system - maybe not. It may be just a matter of personal taste.

The technique you describe, passive bi-ampflification, offers no real benefits regardless of speakers being used. As as to your request for me to "try it" How do you know I have not? My Vandersteen 2CE's do not sound any different when passivly bi-amped. And that's a claim that I can state as fact as it has been validated by ABX. I'm not saying that what you hear when you passivly bi-amp speakers are not: "tremendous sound quality improvements" I'm saying those improvments are in your head and not due to any sonic improvement you actually get from running seperate wires to different amps. Let's just keep it real. At least we can agree that Vandersteen offers outstanding value and sound. For shites and giggles some day you should try level matching stuff and doing some DBT's. Even without an ABX, level matched, DBT's will open your eyes and add to your knowledge.

J Dunlavy:.. if you stop to think about it, no loudspeaker can sound more accurate than it measures ...
htcritic is offline  
post #648 of 880 Old 11-22-2010, 06:26 AM
Advanced Member
 
htcritic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 541
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by C17FXR View Post

I know what you mean about the bi-amping and glad to see you are getting outstanding results. I prefer to run a pair of McCormack 0.5 Deluxe as to the DNA-1 Deluxe Gold, there is a difference between the two, not to say one is better than the other they both have their strengths I just prefer the pair of 0.5 Deluxe. I'm also scared about frying the midrange driver as Mr Vandersteen comments on this in his Q&A section on the Vandersteen site. The reason I'm running the DNA-1 Dlx is I'm currently reworking my set to get better sound and about to send the 0.5's off to SMc Audio to get them upgraded and monoblocked. Plus I need to look into getting longer interconnects for the new set up. Also as an option when running the Vandersteens in a bi-amped configuration, if you decide to run one of the Vandy 2W sub's you have the option of running the highs and mids at full range and only high passing the lower portion of the speaker. I did this and preferred the out come a lot more. YMMV. Anyway good luck with the set up.

I have no doubt that anybody who can claim to hear differences in sound between two well constructed amps, when drivin in spec, also claims to hear sq differences between the same speaker when passivly bi-amped and not passivly bi-amped.

J Dunlavy:.. if you stop to think about it, no loudspeaker can sound more accurate than it measures ...
htcritic is offline  
post #649 of 880 Old 11-22-2010, 06:32 AM
Advanced Member
 
htcritic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 541
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by C17FXR View Post

If I may clarify, I run a full 7.1 Vandersteen suite (3A Sig's, with a pair of 2Wq's, VCC-1, VSM-1 Signatures for surround and VLR's for back surrounds and a V2W). The 3A Sig/2Wq combo uses the Vandersteen M5-HP for the high pass filter that the 2Wq's require. The 2Wq's are not connected as regular subwoofers are, they are connected thru the main amplifier with the high pass filter connected before the amp input.

Anyway with the 2Wq's connected along with rest of the speaker, per the manufactures instructions, while running Audyssey the 3A Sig's/2Wq combo gets set as small, but when running Audyssey with just the 3A Sig's sans the 2Wq's and everything else connected the 3A's are set to large.

To circumvent this I run Audyssey with the 2Wq subs disconnected and then reconnect them. I was just looking to see if anyone else had seen this?

As for the separate preamp; my two channel system is also part of my home theater and the two channel system is a lot more resolving than the AVR 4308 could ever dream to be, I just set the TLC-1 to Video and turn the volume all the way up and it becomes a pass-thru. The TLC is a buffered passive pre.

Nice setup. With those subs, Audyssey should be setting your mains to small. Did you listen to it this way for a while to see if it sounded better than when the mains were set to large?

J Dunlavy:.. if you stop to think about it, no loudspeaker can sound more accurate than it measures ...
htcritic is offline  
post #650 of 880 Old 11-22-2010, 07:46 AM
AVS Special Member
 
SoundofMind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: SE MI
Posts: 7,962
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by C17FXR View Post
If I may clarify, I run a full 7.1 Vandersteen suite ... while running Audyssey the 3A Sig's/2Wq combo gets set as small, but when running Audyssey with just the 3A Sig's sans the 2Wq's and everything else connected the 3A's are set to large.
To circumvent this I run Audyssey with the 2Wq subs disconnected and then reconnect them....
Well if speakers are set to small by autosetup, you can manually change the crossover and in fact you can change them to large as well. But speakers would not be set to small unless autosetup detects a sub, and I don't understand how it is doing that. Personally, I would not try to "outsmart" Audyssey in this way, as you are later introducing freqs and sources of freqs that are completely uncorrected. This may be a good question for your model or higher level Denon thread as I would be surprised to find that Vandy owners are running Audyssey. I found posts on the Audyssey thread Here and here, you could PM those guys too.

Yes, I still like playing with Dalis.

SoundofMind is offline  
post #651 of 880 Old 11-22-2010, 09:26 AM
Member
 
cachecoder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Bellevue, WA
Posts: 47
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundofMind
Not meaning to start an argument here, but in regards to this wiring setup, I have not seen such reports backed up convincingly. Without assuming anything about you, I have found such claims are most often from folks who do not understand, or do not take the trouble to do blind, level-matched A/B testing or who have extra cables and amps to sell you. The Vandy dealer did not use your technique but had the Model 2 CE sigII biwired. We didn't do any A/B on the wiring. Would you care to elaborate on your testing?
No worries. I don't consider your questions an argument

I find measurements interesting and useful. I use my ears to find gear and configurations I prefer. If measurements were the definitive answer, all we'd need to do is buy the best specifications we can afford - no auditions required.

To answer your question, yes, I have taken some modest measurements and they helped explain what I heard, but good measurements are not my goal. I have also completed some a/b sessions but don't find them to provide the ultimate experience. I want my overall experience to be optimized so my impressions tend to be formed after days or weeks of listening as I work through different music and circumstances.

For example, we can probably agree on speaker placement and turntable setup. I "measure" things such as toe-in angle and cartridge position with my ears.

Given these examples, do you have ideas regarding how to measure things such as dynamics, attack, clarity, detail, soundstage, etc.?

My point here is not to imply measurements don't matter. You asked some good questions and they are a subset of the things I consider when shopping for audio gear and then placing it in my home.
cachecoder is offline  
post #652 of 880 Old 11-22-2010, 09:43 AM
Member
 
cachecoder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Bellevue, WA
Posts: 47
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by C17FXR

I know what you mean about the bi-amping and glad to see you are getting outstanding results. I prefer to run a pair of McCormack 0.5 Deluxe as to the DNA-1 Deluxe Gold, there is a difference between the two, not to say one is better than the other they both have their strengths I just prefer the pair of 0.5 Deluxe. I'm also scared about frying the midrange driver as Mr Vandersteen comments on this in his Q&A section on the Vandersteen site. The reason I'm running the DNA-1 Dlx is I'm currently reworking my set to get better sound and about to send the 0.5's off to SMc Audio to get them upgraded and monoblocked. Plus I need to look into getting longer interconnects for the new set up. Also as an option when running the Vandersteens in a bi-amped configuration, if you decide to run one of the Vandy 2W sub's you have the option of running the highs and mids at full range and only high passing the lower portion of the speaker. I did this and preferred the out come a lot more. YMMV. Anyway good luck with the set up.
Thanks for sharing your experience. I once used the McCormack TLC-1 with a pair of DNA-1's and really enjoyed their sound.

Like you, I was also worried about frying the mid/high section as you describe. I suspect the passive crossovers are protecting the speakers from "current overload" much like they do when using a single amp per speaker. I'm also careful not to play at levels that clip - this can kill any driver.

Please keep us updated on the upgrade/monoblocks and let us know how you like the results. I met Steve last year and he's a very interesting guy, very nice to talk with.

And thank you for the suggestion for sub configuration. Another unique approach others may be able to use and enjoy. These ideas are where audio bliss is born. Very cool!
cachecoder is offline  
post #653 of 880 Old 11-22-2010, 09:54 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
ccotenj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: the toxic waste dumps of new jersey
Posts: 21,915
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by cachecoder View Post
Almost. My configuration is two mono amps per speaker. Think of it as "quad amping" because each speaker is using two amps. Each speaker has two inputs (high and low) and this configuration provides an amp for each input. I think the "magic" comes from the separation. The high and low frequency/power needs of each speaker are met without one stealing current from the other. While I use some fairly nice amps, I don't think you need to spend a lot of money for amps. Just make sure you use four separate amps, or a pair of "dual mono" amps with separate power supplies for each channel. A multi-channel AV reciever/amp probably won't work because one power supply is used for all 5/7 channels.
this is just SO wrong...

- chris

 

my build thread - updated 8-20-12 - new seating installed and projector isolation solution

 

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1332917/ccotenj-finally-gets-a-projector

ccotenj is offline  
post #654 of 880 Old 11-22-2010, 09:55 AM
Member
 
cachecoder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Bellevue, WA
Posts: 47
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by htcritic

I don't remember stating any theory. I said that when bi-amping (true bi-amping) one needed to have active, external, crossovers. That's not theory.

The technique you describe, passive bi-ampflification, offers no real benefits regardless of speakers being used. As as to your request for me to "try it" How do you know I have not? My Vandersteen 2CE's do not sound any different when passivly bi-amped. And that's a claim that I can state as fact as it has been validated by ABX. I'm not saying that what you hear when you passivly bi-amp speakers are not: "tremendous sound quality improvements" I'm saying those improvments are in your head and not due to any sonic improvement you actually get from running seperate wires to different amps. Let's just keep it real. At least we can agree that Vandersteen offers outstanding value and sound. For shites and giggles some day you should try level matching stuff and doing some DBT's. Even without an ABX, level matched, DBT's will open your eyes and add to your knowledge.
Good grief, htcritic. Take a deep breath and relax.
cachecoder is offline  
post #655 of 880 Old 11-22-2010, 10:22 AM
Advanced Member
 
htcritic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 541
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by cachecoder View Post

Good grief, htcritic. Take a deep breath. I guess we can end the thread now because you know everything. We bow to you from now on.

Despite your sarcasm and attack against me personally rather than what I posted. (attack the post, not the poster is how the rules read) No, I don't know everything. I just know what bi-amping is and what it is not. I also own ABX equipment and have used it. So can you share with us how, exactly, you came to your position of tremedous sound improvements?

J Dunlavy:.. if you stop to think about it, no loudspeaker can sound more accurate than it measures ...
htcritic is offline  
post #656 of 880 Old 11-22-2010, 10:23 AM
Advanced Member
 
htcritic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 541
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by ccotenj View Post

this is just SO wrong...

Be careful. If you disagree you'll be instructed to "take a breath" and accused of being a "know it all"

J Dunlavy:.. if you stop to think about it, no loudspeaker can sound more accurate than it measures ...
htcritic is offline  
post #657 of 880 Old 11-22-2010, 10:47 AM
Member
 
cachecoder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Bellevue, WA
Posts: 47
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by htcritic View Post


Despite your sarcasm and attack against me personally rather than what I posted. (attack the post, not the poster is how the rules read) No, I don't know everything. I just know what bi-amping is and what it is not. I also own ABX equipment and have used it. So can you share with us how, exactly, you came to your position of tremedous sound improvements?

I think my approach has been clear: listening. I also think I've presented information as an opinion, a personal experience, something for others to read, possibly try.
cachecoder is offline  
post #658 of 880 Old 11-22-2010, 10:58 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
ccotenj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: the toxic waste dumps of new jersey
Posts: 21,915
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 89
his statements aren't "opinion"... they are "fact"...

your initial post (that i quoted) shows that you don't have a basic understanding of "how things work"...

- chris

 

my build thread - updated 8-20-12 - new seating installed and projector isolation solution

 

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1332917/ccotenj-finally-gets-a-projector

ccotenj is offline  
post #659 of 880 Old 11-22-2010, 11:08 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Chu Gai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: NYC area
Posts: 14,762
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 152 Post(s)
Liked: 449
What two amps are you using for biamping, cachecoder?

"I've found that when you want to know the truth about someone that someone is probably the last person you should ask." - Gregory House
Chu Gai is offline  
post #660 of 880 Old 11-22-2010, 11:13 AM
Advanced Member
 
htcritic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 541
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by cachecoder View Post

I think my approach has been clear: listening. I also think I've presented information as an opinion, a personal experience, something for others to read, possibly try..


OK. I simply started by asking if you had utilized active crossovers in your bi-amping. You didn't.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cachecoder View Post

...You seem to think your opinions are always fact - you "know" what bi-amping is. You "know" what it is not...


And what exactly is your problem with this? Are you somehow threatened by the fact that I happen to understand the factual definition of the terms passive and active bi-amping? What data do you use to extrapolate my understanding of the terms passive and active bi-amping to somehow state that I think my opinions are always fact?


Quote:
Originally Posted by cachecoder View Post

. You "own" ABX equipment and you present yourself an an expert in using it....


Um, no, I didn't. I haven't presented myself as anything other than somebody who knows the definitions of bi-amping, somebody who has access to testing equipment, and what that equipment shows. You interpreted all the rest yourself and use terms that I never used in any of my posts.


Quote:
Originally Posted by cachecoder View Post

. Really? You think everyone who uses ABX would agree you're an expert?...

Of course I don't. And I never said I do. Your arguments seem to indicate a very insecure person who feels the need to defend themselves by attempting to ridicule others, even to the point of actually fabricating quotes never made and then attacking your own posts.



Quote:
Originally Posted by cachecoder View Post

. You may have taken some very good measurements....

You show almost as much knowledge here of ABX equipment as you do about what bi-amping is. ABX equipment doesn't "measure" anything. It facilitates "listening" tests.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cachecoder View Post

. You may have experience or data that supports your opinion very well. I don't doubt any of those things. But are these facts, or simply an opinion based on your measurements and experience? There's a difference....

Gee, ya think? As I mentioned ABX doesn't measure. And, before you offer up any more of your well thought out arguments perhaps you might want to actually find out a litle more about what it is your attacking?

See what you have is experience. "I listened and there was a tremendous difference" Did you level match? No. Did you do even an unsighted test. No. Is there any data or test, even done by others that supports the claim that passive bi-amping can made a tremendous sq difference. No. I, at least, ran a few tests.


Quote:
Originally Posted by cachecoder View Post

As you can see, I have not expressed any doubt regarding your experience. I would never tell you your opinion is wrong. .

If it was, I'd hope that not only would you tell me but that you'd give me a reasoned explanation as to why. How can anybody ever grow if nobody ever tells them they are wrong. I guess this tells a lot about why you don't seem to be open minded to learning.


Quote:
Originally Posted by cachecoder View Post

But I don't understand why you think you are the opinion/experience police. Is your opinion the only valid one on this thread.

Again, I don't. Only you seem to see it that way. If I was to make a statement about how sq has been tremendously improved by some technique I'd expect others to attack that position forcing me to post supporting data. It's kinda how science works. You know, science. As in the name of this site. AVS. You do know that the S stands for science, right?

J Dunlavy:.. if you stop to think about it, no loudspeaker can sound more accurate than it measures ...
htcritic is offline  
Reply Speakers

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off