Get an exclusive sneak peek into our new project. >>> Click Here
Our native mobile app has a new name: Fora Communities. Learn more.

Bi-wiring only

1908 Views 33 Replies 15 Participants Last post by psgcdn, Jul 26, 2009

rotel/b&k

Discussion Starter · Jul 22, 2009

Would this work?

Im planning on bi-wiring my speakers by doing this... using 2channels from my amp, I'll hook up my left front speaker. The other 2channels, for right front speaker. And remaining channel is for the center.

I have B&K avr5000 series II, 125wpc x 5. And B&K ref 20.

1 - 20 of 34 Posts

penngray

· #2 · Jul 22, 2009

2

Using two channels of an amp into one speakers is called Bi-amping NOT bi-wiring

Neither are going to improve you SQ but Im sure you will believe it does

See less See more

rotel/b&k

Discussion Starter · #3 · Jul 22, 2009

Quote:
Originally Posted by penngray /forum/post/16867984

Using two channels of an amp into one speakers is called Bi-amping NOT bi-wiring

Neither are going to improve you SQ but Im sure you will believe it does

Sorry for misunderstanding. Bi-amping it is.

But I dont unerstand. If I hook up my speaker this way, would I not get 150w on each speaker(125w+125w). Instead of 1channel driving 1speaker, now I have 2channels driving 1speaker. It is just like having 2separate amplifier driving 1speaker?

jzoz01

· #4 · Jul 22, 2009

You're still drawing off of the same power source, so the benefit may or may not be there, but it really also depends on the speaker. I've found that on my Martin Logans, that bi-amping has a pretty good effect, as the panel is much more difficult to drive properly than the driver. I've also played around with bi-amping Klipsch RF-7s, and Kef Reference 203s and not seen much of a difference. It's certainly worth trying, but I wouldn't expect the world.

penngray

· #5 · Jul 22, 2009

Quote:
Originally Posted by rotel/b&k /forum/post/16868050

Sorry for misunderstanding. Bi-amping it is.

But I dont unerstand. If I hook up my speaker this way, would I not get 150w on each speaker(125w+125w). Instead of 1channel driving 1speaker, now I have 2channels driving 1speaker. It is just like having 2separate amplifier driving 1speaker?

First, the difference between 125W and 250W is only 3 dB more output. 125W will give you close to +21dB already so if your speakers are 90dB sensitivity (average number), you are getting 111dBs from your speakers using 125W already...do you realize how loud that is.

Second, your tweeter most likely do not even handle 125W on their own.

In the end as I said before you probably will "think" there is an improvement because you have no way of objectively testing the changes and the numbers and measurements say there is not an improvement. Im tend to stick to what science tells me but you can choose whatever you want and enjoy what ever results you think you have.

penngray

· #6 · Jul 22, 2009

Quote:
I've found that on my Martin Logans, that bi-amping has a pretty good effect, as the panel is much more difficult to drive properly than the driver.

Does separating them create different impendance curve?

rotel/b&k

Discussion Starter · #7 · Jul 22, 2009

Quote:
Originally Posted by penngray /forum/post/16868123

First, the difference between 125W and 250W is only 3 dB more output. 125W will give you close to +21dB already so if your speakers are 90dB sensitivity (average number), you are getting 111dBs from your speakers using 125W already...do you realize how loud that is.

Second, your tweeter most likely do not even handle 125W on their own.

In the end as I said before you probably will "think" there is an improvement because you have no way of objectively testing the changes and the numbers and measurements say there is not an improvement. Im tend to stick to what science tells me but you can choose whatever you want and enjoy what ever results you think you have.

Please dont blame me for my curiosity. I thank for your detailed explanation about this subject. Its the speakers manufacturers fault. Why would they create speakers with bi-amp features anyway if its not necessary.

ccotenj

· #8 · Jul 22, 2009

Quote:
Originally Posted by rotel/b&k /forum/post/16868573

Please dont blame me for my curiosity. I thank for your detailed explanation about this subject. Its the speakers manufacturers fault. Why would they create speakers with bi-amp features anyway if its not necessary.

because there are many people out there who have dearly held beliefs, and it's never a bad idea when you are trying to sell something to those people to cater to those beliefs.

See less See more

rotel/b&k

Discussion Starter · #9 · Jul 22, 2009

Quote:
Originally Posted by penngray /forum/post/16868123

First, the difference between 125W and 250W is only 3 dB more output. 125W will give you close to +21dB already so if your speakers are 90dB sensitivity (average number), you are getting 111dBs from your speakers using 125W already...do you realize how loud that is.

Second, your tweeter most likely do not even handle 125W on their own.

In the end as I said before you probably will "think" there is an improvement because you have no way of objectively testing the changes and the numbers and measurements say there is not an improvement. Im tend to stick to what science tells me but you can choose whatever you want and enjoy what ever results you think you have.

Thank you for this. Can I ask you about where can you find the amplifiers db information? Is this db that makes an amplifier more efficient? I always thought its the high current. I know its not the wattage, its more like the current that plays a big role.

quadriverfalls

· #10 · Jul 22, 2009

Quote:
Originally Posted by rotel/b&k /forum/post/16869139

Thank you for this. Can I ask you about where can you find the amplifiers db information? Is this db that makes an amplifier more efficient? I always thought its the high current. I know its not the wattage, its more like the current that plays a big role.

The dB rating is the sensitivity of the speaker. It is typically measured applying one single watt of power and the sound output is measured from one meter away. You will see the dB rating on the specs of every single speaker. It's got nothing to do with the amplifier.

For example, using my friend penngray's example of speakers being 90 dB efficient.... here is what would happen with regards to sound SPL's (sound pressure levels or volume) on the output of those speakers connected to ANY amplifier:

1 watt = 90 dB

2 watts = 93 dB

4 watts = 96 dB

8 watts = 99 dB

16 watts = 102 dB

32 watts = 105 dB

64 watts = 108 dB

128 watts = 111 dB

256 watts = 114 dB

512 watts = 117 dB

1024 watts = 120 dB

So IOW.... a pair of 90 dB speakers fed one single watt of power would play at a loudness level of 90 dB's measured one meter away. Since it takes DOUBLE the power to raise output by 3 dB's (this is a physics and mathimatical standard that doesn't change) You would be beyond hearing loss long before you ever reached 250 watts of power.

Even taking into consideration the fact that you may be sitting three meters away rather than one. You would still be at risk for permanent hearing damage at those volume levels for any extended period of time.

See less See more

psgcdn

· #11 · Jul 22, 2009

And... When penngray was mentioning that going from 125W to 250W is only a 3 dB increase, what that means is that increase in power doesn't matter in a linear fashion. You may think that 1W and 2W are similar small minuscule amounts of power on your volume dial, but the difference in loudness is the same as between 100W and 200W: 3 dB in each case. You may think that you listen to music softly at 50W per channel and loudly at 100W per channel, but the difference is only 3 dB. You likely listen softly to music at 0.01W per channel. It takes very little power sometimes. If your receiver has a dB volume dial, then you can take a guess at the power you are feeding the speakers during peak moments:

0 dB on a 100W receiver: 100W

-10 dB yields 10W

-20 dB yields 1W

-30 dB yields 0.1W

-40 dB yields 0.01W

Kal Rubinson

· #12 · Jul 22, 2009

Quote:
Originally Posted by rotel/b&k /forum/post/16868573

Why would they create speakers with bi-amp features anyway if its not necessary.

To enable their dealers to sell additional cables to their customers.

Ethenolas

· #13 · Jul 22, 2009

For all interested...and more importantly for skeptics...

The best explanation of bi-amping i have found.

http://www.sound.westhost.com/bi-amp.htm

I have personally seen (heard) significant improvement from true bi-amping. It is much more complicated than just hooking up extra channels from the same amp...you probably will see no noticeable difference as the power is essentially from the same source.

jmichaelf

· #14 · Jul 22, 2009

I just wish I could bi-amp and use an external crossover. Bi-amping would make sense.

ccotenj

· #15 · Jul 22, 2009

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ethenolas /forum/post/16869802

For all interested...and more importantly for skeptics...

The best explanation of bi-amping i have found.

http://www.sound.westhost.com/bi-amp.htm

I have personally seen (heard) significant improvement from true bi-amping. It is much more complicated than just hooking up extra channels from the same amp...you probably will see no noticeable difference as the power is essentially from the same source.

i don't think anyone is debating the potential for improvement from an active crossover setup...

of course, the potential for making it worse exists as well...

See less See more

Kal Rubinson

· #16 · Jul 22, 2009

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ethenolas /forum/post/16869802

For all interested...and more importantly for skeptics...

The best explanation of bi-amping i have found.

http://www.sound.westhost.com/bi-amp.htm

I have personally seen (heard) significant improvement from true bi-amping. It is much more complicated than just hooking up extra channels from the same amp...you probably will see no noticeable difference as the power is essentially from the same source.

Of course but, since it is something so rarely done (except by pros and DIYers), it is not the reason why common speakers are offered with bi-wire terminals. In fact, providing bi-wire terminals to a securely installed built-in crossover only stymies anyone interested in actively filtered biamplified systems since one has to remove that built-in crossover anyway.

psgcdn

· #17 · Jul 22, 2009

Yeah, like the others have pointed out... using a crossover before amplification has little to do with using multiple binding posts on speakers.

swgiust

· #18 · Jul 22, 2009

Most consumer electronics are designed to operate in a wide range of situations. A reciever mfg knows there will be literally thousands of different speakers hooked up to their equiptment. So they design things middle of the road.

When you get into the ultra high end of audio. Some mfg start producing items that have VERY specific usage. Say a tube amp, designed for very high efficiency speakers or to drive just the upper end of a bi-amped speaker.

As well as large digital amps that are designed to drive the low end of a bi-amped speaker. This is all to produce the absolute best sound. It also cost

the absolute most money.

My point? Your reciever truly is not designed to offer any benefit of bi-amping. Nor will bi-wiring do you any good.

rotel/b&k

Discussion Starter · #19 · Jul 22, 2009

Quote:
Originally Posted by psgcdn /forum/post/16869506

And... When penngray was mentioning that going from 125W to 250W is only a 3 dB increase, what that means is that increase in power doesn't matter in a linear fashion. You may think that 1W and 2W are similar small minuscule amounts of power on your volume dial, but the difference in loudness is the same as between 100W and 200W: 3 dB in each case. You may think that you listen to music softly at 50W per channel and loudly at 100W per channel, but the difference is only 3 dB. You likely listen softly to music at 0.01W per channel. It takes very little power sometimes. If your receiver has a dB volume dial, then you can take a guess at the power you are feeding the speakers during peak moments:

0 dB on a 100W receiver: 100W

-10 dB yields 10W

-20 dB yields 1W

-30 dB yields 0.1W

-40 dB yields 0.01W

Yes! its shedding light now. so you are saying at -20db, Im telling my amp to produce 1w from its built in power. Setting my volume knob to -20db is loud, filling my small studio with audio. Any more setting from this would make my neighbors to come knocking on my door.

That said: the most power I used from my amp is 1w. In my case, I have a 125wpc x 5 amp, I rarely used majority of its power. In the future, If I ever replaced my amplifier, I dont really need to spend a whole lot of money for powerful amps for a better result.

Thank you for all these informations.

penngray

· #20 · Jul 23, 2009

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ethenolas /forum/post/16869802

For all interested...and more importantly for skeptics...

The best explanation of bi-amping i have found.

http://www.sound.westhost.com/bi-amp.htm

I have personally seen (heard) significant improvement from true bi-amping. It is much more complicated than just hooking up extra channels from the same amp...you probably will see no noticeable difference as the power is essentially from the same source.

If that was meant for me and you are calling me a skeptic, you should realize my mains are active designs and every driver has its own amp

See less See more

1 - 20 of 34 Posts

This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.