 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
180.200.141.50
In Reply to: RE: Biamping KEF 107/2s posted by hahax@verizon.net on August 04, 2012 at 21:02:11
hard in the bass. With a shared power supply bass signal demands can easily affect the entire sound, right up into the treble.
Indeed, horizontal is what KEF suggest/expect, and also what I found to be the case with spkrs of similar sensitivity but deeper unequalised bass, and of higher efficiency 91db/w/8ohm load. The Kefsr are 90db/w/4 ohm load
I don't recall if the 'conjugate impedance-Eq xover' on the Kef's also flattened the bass-port impedance peaks. But the bass signal demands wouldn't be much effected by that, anyway
I often wonder if those who went to a bigger amplifier instead and sold the matching power amp they'd bought ever tried horizontal bi-amping?
IMO the only value of vertical is that the wiring is tidier.
Of course if the two chassis had two separate power transformers, or split windings, then we're back with 4 mono-blocks anyway, and each PSU and amplifier channel is isolated.
Note that a post in response is preferred.
Warmest
Timothy Bailey
The Skyptical Mensurer and Audio Scrounger
And gladly would he learn and gladly teach - Chaucer. ;-)!
'Still not saluting.'
Follow Ups:
Excellent food for thought.
The vertical approach may have another advantage... by using two stereo amps, you change the WAY crosstalk affects the system. With horizontal, the crosstalk affects the CHANNELS. With vertical, if affects the BANDS. One could theorize that the detriment from crosstalk in the crossover region could be less important than removing inter-channel crosstalk and making imaging even more "precise". We're really switching certain advantages and disadvantages with the vert vs. horiz. arrangements. Which produces the overall subjectively better should could actually vary depending on strengths and weaknesses of the speakers involved - or even the general type of music the listener in question is into.
I still like "monoblock with it's own supply per channel per band" thinking.
It's so extreme it's GOT to be audiophile. It's GOT to be good.
Separate circuit from the panel, each with it's own power conditioner too!! Woo hoo!
Cheers,
Presto
with the actual nature of the signal, and acoustic results when we listen at home.
Even in a good say coincident even sound-field mike recording, the total signal even through n-speakers is STILL mostly mono. The difference signals are small and for us the critical factor is their mids and higher, in those channels so that we get a sound field. JBTW position is orthogonal to music. IE Phase, timing, and FR are aspects of the same signal not separate.
What I'm focussed on is how hard a system is working and how to make that as inaudible as possible.
This is a hobby about the small stuff, which is crucial, so maybe it's not 'small', eh?
Bass instruments still have overtones and they do more to tell us how they are played, and how they are being reproduced.
I bought the vertical argument and went with one channel of my modified LEAKS in triode mode. They have seriously large PSU's for baby valve amps at over 20 joules each. Then the designer of my speakers reminded me about how Linn/Naim systems were always done horizontally and that I should try it, even just bi-amped ones. S'nap.
Given their task and PSU reserves both amps were loafing (into an easy non-reactive highish/efficient and sensitive load.) Yet one way around the sound was a lot nicer! The only real difference is the task the PSU's faced. One had to work hard but we minimised its impact on the total sound. The other PSU whose impact on the total sound was empirically potentially far greater was having a very easy time.
The only valid distinction between vertical and horizontal as terms is that in one we ask each PSU to deal with the demands of a full range signal one supply per speaker, and the other we isolate each PSU to lows or to highs.
That is, a single PSU for each power amplifier is neither horizontal or vertical, no matter how many chassis we use or how they're wired, it just is multi-amped. yes/
Note that a post in response is preferred.
Warmest
Timothy Bailey
The Skyptical Mensurer and Audio Scrounger
And gladly would he learn and gladly teach - Chaucer. ;-)!
'Still not saluting.'
I'm not obsessing, I am speculating.
I fully agree that the division of bass currents between amps is beneficial. Actually, *channel* separation is improved as well. You have a completely separate amp for left and right channels all the way back to the wall plug. You could even go as far as to keep the circuits separate back to the panelboard (with one circuit per amp). Interchannel crosstalk is now moved between bands.
You get the benefits of bi-amping, the benefits of dividing up the bass current to both amps *and* the benefit of having what amounts to "dual channel monoblocks".
Horizontal is now the orientation that seems... silly!
Cheers,
Presto
Post a Followup:
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2013, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ Take5 ]