I have a Denon 2310CI on the way and am looking forward to connecting to it to my Polk RTi10 mains (along with the rest of my 5.1 speakers). My plan was to use the rear surround outputs to bi-amp the fronts. A few people tell me that would only be bi-wiring because I am just making a 2nd connection to the same amp. I could understand that if I was just using the A/B outputs on a 5.1 receiver but in my case I have 7 channels. I realize ideal bi-amping requires electronic crossovers and discreet amps but I have spent what I want to spend on this setup. It seems to me that by connecting two channels to each speaker I am at the very least doubling the power to each which would hopefully lead to stronger more full lows tones. I figure I am better off using the rear outputs for this than nothing at all. Am I wrong?
Bi-Amp with 7.1 reciever
-
Now Available: Tech Talk Podcast with Scott Wilkinson, Episode 19 Click here for details.
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
One would think it would make a difference since the woofers and tweeters are running off of separate channels and power, but I tried the same thing using a marantz sr5002 and a pair of monitor audio rx6's and as far as I can tell there was no difference at all. If I keep it this was for a while and then switch to just a regular setup I might notice something but honestly there was nothing different to me
![]()
in fact it seems I was able to get the speakers to play louder with a lower volume number on the receiver than I can now. I seem to have to go to -15 or so to get the same as I was getting with -25.
It won't hurt to try just see if it makes a difference to you and if it doesn't then you know you can at least take those 2 channels and make them surrounds eventually if you want to, and if now you will be saving your amp some work anyways :O
It won't hurt to try just see if it makes a difference to you and if it doesn't then you know you can at least take those 2 channels and make them surrounds eventually if you want to, and if now you will be saving your amp some work anyways :O
7 channel avr's put less and less power out as more channels are driven. 110w x 7 may put out 2x140w, 5x110w, 7x100w, for example. Some lower end avr's are noticeably worse, and may truly be limited by the power supply such that biamping really doesn't provide any extra power at all due to this behavior.
Another reason it isn't plainly noticeable in many cases is just a simple by product of how power aligns with sound levels... 2x as much power is required to get 3db increase, which is the threshold of notice for most people. Not to mention most power is taken by bass, and since you are not raising the power output of any channel, bass spikes are still going to be the limiting factor before clipping.
Add those factors together and and it should make sense that bi-amping from the same AVR commonly results in a very small benefit, if any. Now if the technology built into avr's were to advance to the point that the front two low end channels could be given priority, and active crossovers were built into the high and low bi-amp channels, then there would be a much more favorable situation. But this is not the case except in very rare AVR's.
Panasonic had a digital model (maybe several, I have a XR-70? in my workshop) that would actually use 6 total amps (2 lf / 1 hf per side) for stereo bi-amping. In that case the difference is fairly obvious.
Having said that, all it costs is an extra set of wires, and if you routinely listen at very high volume levels, there is no reason not to do it. That extra 1-2 db of headroom may just take the edge off.
On a different note, Bi-wiring, imho, is a complete waste of time. Though there is some merit in making speaker wire jumpers instead of the normal jumper plates that come with most biamp capable speakers.
Another reason it isn't plainly noticeable in many cases is just a simple by product of how power aligns with sound levels... 2x as much power is required to get 3db increase, which is the threshold of notice for most people. Not to mention most power is taken by bass, and since you are not raising the power output of any channel, bass spikes are still going to be the limiting factor before clipping.
Add those factors together and and it should make sense that bi-amping from the same AVR commonly results in a very small benefit, if any. Now if the technology built into avr's were to advance to the point that the front two low end channels could be given priority, and active crossovers were built into the high and low bi-amp channels, then there would be a much more favorable situation. But this is not the case except in very rare AVR's.
Panasonic had a digital model (maybe several, I have a XR-70? in my workshop) that would actually use 6 total amps (2 lf / 1 hf per side) for stereo bi-amping. In that case the difference is fairly obvious.
Having said that, all it costs is an extra set of wires, and if you routinely listen at very high volume levels, there is no reason not to do it. That extra 1-2 db of headroom may just take the edge off.
On a different note, Bi-wiring, imho, is a complete waste of time. Though there is some merit in making speaker wire jumpers instead of the normal jumper plates that come with most biamp capable speakers.
Thanks for all the imput. As it turns out my zone-2 amp just died so I am now faced with being able to use those rear outs to power my zone-2 speakers directly or spending anohter ~$200 on a new amp. I think I'll stick with what I have and skip bi-amping.
Once the second set of drivers is hooked up, you cant control its level independently of the top set?
I would think you could adjust the bottom with a higher level or a lower level and alter the tone just by doing that.
What about bass management? once the receiver is set to "bi-amp" mode cant you control the cross over sections of the new set of drivers?
I would think you could set the top set to say 80 or 100 then the bottom one to somthing lower
If your just setting everything to large then you may have no independent control over anything.
I would think being able to do this would benifit the most over being any louder.
My cabnets have 2 different chambers, the top is built like a small bookshelf but the bottom is quite large and ported with alot larger longer port i guess for a deeper sound. If i were to bi-amp these, ide set the bottom alot lower and bump its level more then the top section.
As i increase the total volume the bottom would then be getting slightly more power then the top.
I would think you could adjust the bottom with a higher level or a lower level and alter the tone just by doing that.
What about bass management? once the receiver is set to "bi-amp" mode cant you control the cross over sections of the new set of drivers?
I would think you could set the top set to say 80 or 100 then the bottom one to somthing lower
If your just setting everything to large then you may have no independent control over anything.
I would think being able to do this would benifit the most over being any louder.
My cabnets have 2 different chambers, the top is built like a small bookshelf but the bottom is quite large and ported with alot larger longer port i guess for a deeper sound. If i were to bi-amp these, ide set the bottom alot lower and bump its level more then the top section.
As i increase the total volume the bottom would then be getting slightly more power then the top.
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
