RE: What part of "shift focus from "viability" of the idea of passive biamping" did you not understand? - stehno

Tweakers' Asylum

Tweaks for systems, rooms and Do It Yourself (DIY) help. FAQ.

RE: What part of "shift focus from "viability" of the idea of passive biamping" did you not understand?

Fair enough, big guy. But just to ensure I'm not the dumbass you claim me to be, I checked my amps to ensure the internal fuses are still operational. They are.

You never mentioned what it was you were intending to achieve with this configuration. It would be nice to know.

You personally made sure there are sonic benefits? Great. I'd love to hear about them.

But while you're typing your response, I'd like to reiterate that the strategy "less is more" is IMO, a much more viable strategy than bi-amping. For a number of reasons:

1. That slogan is very true in perhaps every other performance-oriented industry. Why would you think "high-end" audio is any different?

2. If you have an awareness that we are all equally and grossly adversely affected by noisy AC coming in from the street, then surely you are aware that you must properly address that noise by one of several means. Otherwise, with one power supply verses 4 power supplies and hence the entire components' internals, surely you can start multiplying and see you now have potentially 4 times the amount of noisy AC potentially inducing sonic harm on your playback system. This is not a problem if you employ proper AC mgmt. Are you?

3. Essentially the same logic applies to proper vibration mgmt. Would you prefer to have 1 or 4 components being continuously bombarded by air-borne and internally-generated vibrations (e.g. 4 power supplies)? If you've not properly addressed this area (I know you haven't) you now have not just 1 but 4 chassis' loaded with resonant energy and nowhere to go but completely dissipate within.

Or perhaps your system is already so overloaded with these universal distortions that it doesn't matter how many more components and connections and cables you add, it's already fully saturated and can't sound any worse?

There are potentially several other concerns but one other worth noting might be:

4. I have no idea if you have dedicated circuits/lines for your amps, or if they are high-current drawing amps or not. But if per chance your amps are all 1 or 2 shared circuits/lines, I'd venture the chances are pretty good you're also squashing your system's dynamics during dynamic/complex passages. Not a problem if your amps aren't starving for juice, or if you listen at elevator music levels, or if you prefer flat lifeless music.

Anyway, just a thought from a random dumbass on the web.
--------------------------------------------------------
"Give me less!!! Then we'll finally hear more." -me

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Follow Ups Full Thread

Topic - Bi-amping issue - carcass93 12:22:51 01/14/15 (12)

RE: Bi-amping issue - Ryelands 02:52:56 01/15/15 (3)

Correct for phase - neolith 06:58:35 01/18/15 (1)

RE: Correct for phase - Ryelands 07:11:08 01/18/15 (0)

Yep, the pre is still Lampizator. - carcass93 09:04:39 01/15/15 (0)

RE: Bi-amping issue - stehno 17:05:33 01/14/15 (5)

I was hoping to avoid nonsensical lectures like this here. - carcass93 17:19:05 01/14/15 (4)

RE: I was hoping to avoid nonsensical lectures like this here. - stehno 17:40:54 01/14/15 (3)

What part of "shift focus from "viability" of the idea of passive biamping" did you not understand? - carcass93 20:07:58 01/14/15 (2)

RE: What part of "shift focus from "viability" of the idea of passive biamping" did you not understand? - stehno 20:52:47 01/14/15 (1)

Both of you, Chill out! - Jon Risch 21:32:36 01/14/15 (0)

RE: Bi-amping issue - 6bq5 13:10:09 01/14/15 (0)

RE: Bi-amping issue - 6bq5 13:09:46 01/14/15 (0)

Follow Ups

RE: What part of "shift focus from "viability" of the idea of passive biamping" did you not understand? - stehno 20:52:47 01/14/15 (1)

Both of you, Chill out! - Jon Risch 21:32:36 01/14/15 (0)

The moderators feel that allowing this thread to continue, even though it may hold useful information, will wind up creating more trouble than it solves, and thereby detract from the purpose of this forum.

This is not the appropriate venue for discussion of this matter, and we ask that those with an interest in the subject, take it elsewhere (e.g. private e-mail).

No further follow-ups will be considered.

Thank you for your support of the Asylum.