Question on bi-amping - Page 7 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #181 of 1044 Old 10-01-2013, 12:17 PM - Thread Starter
 
OllieS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 251
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
What I've learned so far :

Bi-amping is about driving the highs and lows independently using an active crossover. With this set up you can use appropriate amplification for both highs and lows for improved efficiency, and less wasted power since the woofer can be driven with an adequately sized amp and an smaller amp can be used for the tweeter.

Passive bi-amping is sending full range signals to the highs and lows and so isn't technically bi-amping. What I've learned is that using identical amplifiers will result in worse efficiency as the amplifiers will limit available power to the woofer by driving the tweeter signal, robbing it, as it were. Since tweeters do not need nearly as much power as the woofer it is a waste of headroom as I understand it.

So it is a very inefficient connection scheme. That is what I've learned about bi-amping. I'm no expert and I've probably left out some details, but for a laymen like me, this is about as far as I'm going to get without cracking open a text book. tongue.gif

Edit : I looked up a few articles on the power distribution of audio signals for the highs and lows and that has given me an even clearer understanding about the whole tweeter/woofer power and why power is wasted with passive bi-amping.
mtbdudex likes this.
OllieS is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #182 of 1044 Old 10-01-2013, 01:11 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
sivadselim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: CO
Posts: 16,085
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 53 Post(s)
Liked: 68
OllieS,

If someone already owns 2 (or 4, as the case may be) identical external amps and wants to passively biamp their speakers, there is really no (good) reason to advise against doing so. If someone was considering purchasing multiple amps just to passively biamp, though, the better option would be to buy 1/2 as many more powerful amps and wire the speakers conventionally.

"All men are frauds. The only difference between them is that some admit it. I myself deny it."
sivadselim is offline  
post #183 of 1044 Old 10-01-2013, 01:22 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,381
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 747 Post(s)
Liked: 1162
Quote:
Originally Posted by sivadselim View Post

OllieS,

If someone already owns 2 (or 4, as the case may be) identical external amps and wants to passively biamp their speakers, there is really no (good) reason to advise against doing so.

There is also no good reason to advise them to do so. They could always sell them on the used equipment market, or they could do what I do with my old separates, and store them in a nice closet.
Quote:
If someone was considering purchasing multiple amps just to passively biamp, though, the better option would be to buy 1/2 as many more powerful amps and wire the speakers conventionally.

I can see biamping to make your audio system to look more impressive or to obtain bragging rights. Some how I don't have enough time to waste to do that.
arnyk is offline  
post #184 of 1044 Old 10-01-2013, 03:51 PM
Senior Member
 
kraut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 378
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 60
Quote:
there is really no (good) reason to advise against doing so.
Quote:
There is also no good reason to advise them to do so.

I take the latter advice for 10$.
The other offer sounds like hogwash to me.
kraut is offline  
post #185 of 1044 Old 10-02-2013, 04:30 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mtbdudex's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: SE Michigan
Posts: 4,359
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 77 Post(s)
Liked: 218
Quote:
Originally Posted by OllieS View Post

What I've learned so far :

Bi-amping is about driving the highs and lows independently using an active crossover. With this set up you can use appropriate amplification for both highs and lows for improved efficiency, and less wasted power since the woofer can be driven with an adequately sized amp and an smaller amp can be used for the tweeter.

Passive bi-amping is sending full range signals to the highs and lows and so isn't technically bi-amping. What I've learned is that using identical amplifiers will result in worse efficiency as the amplifiers will limit available power to the woofer by driving the tweeter signal, robbing it, as it were. Since tweeters do not need nearly as much power as the woofer it is a waste of headroom as I understand it.

So it is a very inefficient connection scheme. That is what I've learned about bi-amping. I'm no expert and I've probably left out some details, but for a laymen like me, this is about as far as I'm going to get without cracking open a text book. tongue.gif

Edit : I looked up a few articles on the power distribution of audio signals for the highs and lows and that has given me an even clearer understanding about the whole tweeter/woofer power and why power is wasted with passive bi-amping.

Thx for sharing your lessons learned!
I've bookmarked this for future Q's on bi-amping.

Mike R,P.E. clickable DIY hot links:

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
..
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
..
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
..
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
..
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
..
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
mtbdudex is online now  
post #186 of 1044 Old 10-02-2013, 05:31 PM
AVS Special Member
 
whoaru99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,960
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by OllieS View Post

Edit : I looked up a few articles on the power distribution of audio signals for the highs and lows and that has given me an even clearer understanding about the whole tweeter/woofer power and why power is wasted with passive bi-amping.

I have what is just one small quibble. Power isn't really wasted, just not utilized. Perhaps it might be said that power amp capability is wasted, but not the power itself.

Just because there is a knob doesn't mean you should turn it.
whoaru99 is offline  
post #187 of 1044 Old 10-02-2013, 05:51 PM
Senior Member
 
UndersAVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 259
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 35
Quote:
However the amplifier powering the woofer was still amplifying the full audio spectrum. It might have been isolated from the tweeter (which means nothing since the tweeter is not a signal source) but it was not isolated from the tweeter's signal.

Neither was the woofer amplifier isolated from the tweeter's signal. >

That's a lose-lose.

Quote:
The disadvantage to passively biamping is still sending a full range signal to both sets of binding posts. >

Exactly, and that is a significant loss. The power amp's ability to drive the woofer is diminished by having to amplify the tweeter's signal. The loss can be upwards of half its power capability.

Quote:
Removing the speakers passive crossover and adding an active crossover before the speakers allows you to manipulate the frequencies going to each set of binding posts. >

Exactly, and that can be a significant advantage.


I think it would be prudent to point out that the crossover should be placed between the Receiver/Pre-amp and the AMP. That may have been obvious to most, but the last quote "adding the crossover before the speaker" could be confusing to others.
UndersAVS is offline  
post #188 of 1044 Old 10-02-2013, 11:20 PM
 
goneten's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: South Africa
Posts: 3,681
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by whoaru99 
I have what is just one small quibble. Power isn't really wasted, just not utilized. Perhaps it might be said that power amp capability is wasted, but not the power itself.

The power itself is not utiilised, which is another way of saying that it has been wasted. The power isn't dumped into a vacuum and hence wasted in that way, but it might as well have been. If the woofer or tweeter don't "see" the power and never will then for all intents and purposes that power has been wasted. Just a wasted opportunity, wasted potential.....

...wasted power.

wink.gif
goneten is offline  
post #189 of 1044 Old 10-03-2013, 01:13 AM - Thread Starter
 
OllieS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 251
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
So anyways, I understand some of passive bi-amping but not all of it.

Why exactly are the full range signals routed to the highs and lows in this configuration? Can someone explain it in laymens terms? I know it has something to do with the passive crossover, but I don't know much about that.
OllieS is offline  
post #190 of 1044 Old 10-03-2013, 01:29 AM - Thread Starter
 
OllieS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 251
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Have you guys ever heard of vertical bi-amping? Is that the same thing as just using separate amps to handle each speaker?
OllieS is offline  
post #191 of 1044 Old 10-03-2013, 01:52 AM
Advanced Member
 
mtn-tech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Nevada
Posts: 962
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 163 Post(s)
Liked: 140
Quote:
Originally Posted by OllieS View Post

Have you guys ever heard of vertical bi-amping? Is that the same thing as just using separate amps to handle each speaker?

Yes, passive vertical bi-amping would be a separate amp for each speaker - one channel for the high frequency driver and the other for the low frequency driver(s). One advantage over passive horizontal bi-amping with different sized amps would be that there would be identical gain for both drivers (probably a real problem for horizontal bi-amping). Another might be better stereo separation though most modern amps have around -100dB crosstalk. Disadvantage would be that you would be "wasting" even more power on the tweeter and that you would need two identical more powerful / more expensive amps (advantage for retailers).

I never thought the reason for passive bi-amping was more power or headroom. Not saying that I believe it, but I've heard that it was to separate the woofer (and its "back EMF" which might cause small changes in the voltage at the back of the speaker) from the high pass section of the crossover. These voltage changes are supposed to cause small audible high frequency components which can pass through to the tweeter. The manual for my speakers says this (they also sell amplifiers).

Funny that everyone is also bashing active bi-amping - especially since most people advocate active bi-amping for subs - using an active crossover between the preamp and the amps for main speakers and subwoofer. One post even said active crossovers are no longer available - not true, I just bought a brand new one earlier this year. Of course, adjusting and blending at a sub crossover frequency is much easier than the crossover between drivers in a single, previously optimized speaker.

2-Ch (HT L/R): Oppo BDP-105 BD, Adcom GFP-750 pre, Bryston 10B Sub Xover, Bryston 4BSST2, Paradigm Signature S4 v.2, (2) SVS SB12-NSD subs, AQ & Cardas XLR
Home Theater: Bryston 4BSST2 amp / Paradigm CC-590 (C), Outlaw 7700 amp / (4) Def Tech UIW-RSSII (LS/RS/LB/RB), Samsung 46” 3D LCD
mtn-tech is offline  
post #192 of 1044 Old 10-03-2013, 01:58 AM - Thread Starter
 
OllieS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 251
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
But how is that different from classic bi-amping? Wouldn't a monoblock be the same thing?

I read this here :

http://www.soundstage.com/synergize/synergize031998.htm
OllieS is offline  
post #193 of 1044 Old 10-03-2013, 04:32 AM - Thread Starter
 
OllieS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 251
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Sorry, one last question. In order to use an active crossover do you have to remove the passive crossover from the speaker? So there is some modification to be done?
OllieS is offline  
post #194 of 1044 Old 10-03-2013, 04:43 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 17,922
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1431 Post(s)
Liked: 1711
Quote:
Originally Posted by OllieS View Post

Sorry, one last question. In order to use an active crossover do you have to remove the passive crossover from the speaker? So there is some modification to be done?

 

Yes you do. This is not something to be undertaken lightly. It would also invalidate any warranty on the speakers of course.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
kbarnes701 is offline  
post #195 of 1044 Old 10-03-2013, 05:16 AM
AVS Special Member
 
whoaru99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,960
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by goneten View Post

The power itself is not utiilised, which is another way of saying that it has been wasted. The power isn't dumped into a vacuum and hence wasted in that way, but it might as well have been. If the woofer or tweeter don't "see" the power and never will then for all intents and purposes that power has been wasted. Just a wasted opportunity, wasted potential.....

...wasted power.

wink.gif



Power itself isn't wasted. Power that hasn't been produced can't really be wasted in the literal sense. You seem to agree with that.

If you want to talk figuratively you can call it whatever you like. wink.gif

Just because there is a knob doesn't mean you should turn it.
whoaru99 is offline  
post #196 of 1044 Old 10-03-2013, 05:29 AM
AVS Special Member
 
whoaru99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,960
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtn-tech View Post

Disadvantage would be that you would be "wasting" even more power on the tweeter and that you would need two identical more powerful / more expensive amps (advantage for retailers).

Yes and no.

Yes, inasmuch as most amps are built with the same power per channel so you're kind of stuck in that regard.

No, inasmuch as while people do sometimes use smaller amps on the HF section when doing a horizontal bi-amp, they're really hamstringing the caapbility of the system. Since the amp on the HF still tries to swing the full range signal voltage just as the amp on the LF, the HF amp will clip first if it is a smaller amp.

So, when you really get down to it, the power of the amps should be the same regardless if used in horizontal or vertical (passive) biamp. So, if done properly, as properly as you can do passive biamp that is, the higher cost factor of vertical biamping shouldn't be the case. Should be the same either way.

Just because there is a knob doesn't mean you should turn it.
whoaru99 is offline  
post #197 of 1044 Old 10-03-2013, 05:36 AM
AVS Special Member
 
whoaru99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,960
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

Yes you do. This is not something to be undertaken lightly. It would also invalidate any warranty on the speakers of course.

I think optimally, probably yes, but it's not absolutely necessary. Running frequency limited signals though the amps should be more better ( wink.gif ) than running plain old full range signals. One thing you'd want to do is run the active crossover HPF and LPF a bit lower and higher, respectively than you probably would otherwise, so they didn't lay right on top of the speaker's HPF and LPFs.

Just because there is a knob doesn't mean you should turn it.
whoaru99 is offline  
post #198 of 1044 Old 10-03-2013, 05:43 AM
AVS Special Member
 
whoaru99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,960
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by OllieS View Post

But how is that different from classic bi-amping? Wouldn't a monoblock be the same thing?

I read this here :

http://www.soundstage.com/synergize/synergize031998.htm

Are you now mixing/confusing biamping and biwiring?


Or, what's the question..."Wouldn't a monoblock be the same thing?"

Same thing as what?

Just because there is a knob doesn't mean you should turn it.
whoaru99 is offline  
post #199 of 1044 Old 10-03-2013, 07:14 AM
 
goneten's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: South Africa
Posts: 3,681
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by whoaru99 
Power itself isn't wasted. Power that hasn't been produced can't really be wasted in the literal sense. You seem to agree with that.

You seem to enjoy semantic word games. biggrin.gif You either use the power that is available or you do not. If you don't need the power then it is redundant. It is physically there but not physically used. If it is not physically used then it is physically wasted.

Big deal. wink.gif
goneten is offline  
post #200 of 1044 Old 10-03-2013, 07:19 AM - Thread Starter
 
OllieS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 251
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by whoaru99 
Or, what's the question..."Wouldn't a monoblock be the same thing?"

Sorry, I wasn't thinking properly. I think all this talk of using one amp per speaker just confused me a little as with a monoblock you're using one per speaker too.
OllieS is offline  
post #201 of 1044 Old 10-03-2013, 08:26 AM
AVS Special Member
 
whoaru99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,960
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by goneten View Post

You seem to enjoy semantic word games. biggrin.gif

Perhaps you see it as semantics, I see it as an effort at being more technically correct.

The power isn't there because it hasn't been produced to any meaningfull degree in the out of band signal area. Vltage swing, yes, but no current due to the high impedance, hence no power produced there. So, it's not wasted power in the literal sense, it's simply wasted amplifier capability.

Just because there is a knob doesn't mean you should turn it.
whoaru99 is offline  
post #202 of 1044 Old 10-03-2013, 08:30 AM
AVS Special Member
 
whoaru99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,960
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by OllieS View Post

Sorry, I wasn't thinking properly. I think all this talk of using one amp per speaker just confused me a little as with a monoblock you're using one per speaker too.

If you were just biwiring then yes, one monoblock per speaker.

However, if you were going to biamp with monoblocks then you'd need two per speaker.

Just because there is a knob doesn't mean you should turn it.
whoaru99 is offline  
post #203 of 1044 Old 10-03-2013, 11:38 AM
AVS Special Member
 
DonH50's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Monument CO
Posts: 6,089
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 160 Post(s)
Liked: 262
IME vertical and horizontal bi-amping refers to the configuration of two stereo amplifiers used to bi-amplify a system:

Vertical = one stereo amp per speaker, with one channel for the lows and one for the highs.
Horizontal = one stereo amp drives the lows for each speaker, and the othe stereo amp drives the highs for each speaker.

Vertical allows you to place a single stereo amp near each speaker, reducing the length of speaker wire. Interconnect wiring is low-power and typically much less sensitive to length. However, you cannot choose say a higher-power amp for the bass and less for the treble, nor choose two different types of amps (e.g. SS bass, tube treble). The latter requires horizontal amping, but of course now you have longer speaker cables. The other trade is vertical amping eliminates crosstalk between stereo channels while horizontal eliminates crosstalk between bass and treble frequencies. You (I, anyone) could make a decent debate for either way. In practice I have done it both ways and can't say I have heard any difference with similar amplifiers. I did use a big SS amp for bass and smaller tube amp for treble for a long time in my system. Finding amps that blended well was a bit of a pain...

If you use four monoblocks then horizontal vs. vertical does not apply in this (my) scenario.

"After silence, that which best expresses the inexpressible, is music" - Aldous Huxley
DonH50 is online now  
post #204 of 1044 Old 11-06-2013, 11:57 AM
Newbie
 
Avalon East's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10

In the Pursuit of excellent sound and I have achieve it with these Components:

Asus Essence STX sound card connected to Yamaha RX-A720 Bi Amped...B&W 684 tower speakers + B&W ASW608 subwoofer.

Spent 2700.00 and matched the sound of a 25000.00 system. I been at this a long time in the pursuit of a better sounding system

and before you guys present your argruments I suggest you obtain these Components. I'm no longer in pursuit of a better sounding

system because I have it. I did this solely for Music.

Avalon East is offline  
post #205 of 1044 Old 11-06-2013, 12:14 PM
AVS Special Member
 
DonH50's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Monument CO
Posts: 6,089
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 160 Post(s)
Liked: 262
Congratulations! I shall stick with my system, however, despite whatever flaws it may have with respect to your reference system. smile.gif
kbarnes701 likes this.

"After silence, that which best expresses the inexpressible, is music" - Aldous Huxley
DonH50 is online now  
post #206 of 1044 Old 11-06-2013, 04:16 PM
AVS Special Member
 
grasshoppers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: aridzona
Posts: 1,519
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 66 Post(s)
Liked: 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by Avalon East View Post

In the Pursuit of excellent sound and I have achieve it with these Components:
Asus Essence STX sound card connected to Yamaha RX-A720 Bi Amped...B&W 684 tower speakers + B&W ASW608 subwoofer.
Spent 2700.00 and matched the sound of a 25000.00 system. I been at this a long time in the pursuit of a better sounding system
and before you guys present your argruments I suggest you obtain these Components. I'm no longer in pursuit of a better sounding
system because I have it. I did this solely for Music.

What/Which $25000 system??? Inquiring minds want to know! wink.gif
grasshoppers is online now  
post #207 of 1044 Old 11-06-2013, 09:20 PM
Newbie
 
Avalon East's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10

You want an example " Martin & Logan". The Asus Essence STX with its 124dB SNR makes all the difference connected to a good receiver with bi amp, tower speakers with bi amp terminals and a good subwoofer.

Avalon East is offline  
post #208 of 1044 Old 11-07-2013, 04:05 AM
FMW
AVS Special Member
 
FMW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 4,865
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 276 Post(s)
Liked: 713
Quote:
Originally Posted by Avalon East View Post

You want an example " Martin & Logan". The Asus Essence STX with its 124dB SNR makes all the difference connected to a good receiver with bi amp, tower speakers with bi amp terminals and a good subwoofer.

Perhaps so but it would sound the same if you were to remove the passive biamplification.
FMW is online now  
post #209 of 1044 Old 11-07-2013, 05:11 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,381
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 747 Post(s)
Liked: 1162
Quote:
Originally Posted by Avalon East View Post

You want an example " Martin & Logan". The Asus Essence STX with its 124dB SNR makes all the difference connected to a good receiver with bi amp, tower speakers with bi amp terminals and a good subwoofer.

Got any idea what happens to the audio interfaces 124 dB SNR when the recording only has 75 dB SNR, the AVR has 100 dB SNR and the listening room only has about 70 dB SNR?
arnyk is offline  
post #210 of 1044 Old 11-07-2013, 05:52 AM
Senior Member
 
kraut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 378
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 60
Quote:
Got any idea what happens to the audio interfaces 124 dB SNR when the recording only has 75 dB SNR, the AVR has 100 dB SNR and the listening room only has about 70 dB SNR?

Those questions of practicality do not matter in the pursuit of audiophile purity.
MarkHotchkiss likes this.
kraut is offline  
Reply Audio theory, Setup and Chat

Tags
Marantz Sr5007 Home Theater Av Receiver
Gear in this thread - Sr5007 by PriceGrabber.com

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