|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
108.209.49.136
and what amps are you using to drive what speakers?For the mancave I'm using two Belles Model I amps biamping a pair of Infinity Modulus backed up by the Modulus servo subwoofer.
Edits: 05/22/17Follow Ups:
I do both with electronic XO's so each amp channel only sees 1/2 of the frequency spectrum and each stereo amp has it's own dedicated 20 amp home run circuit.I like the idea of getting rid of the speaker cables and 100% channel separation with vertical biamping. Check out the linked article about Dampening Factors.
Active biamping makes the music sound effortless when driving larger panels. It also appears to increase the dynamic range.
Speakers: Magnepan 3.6's and 20.1's.
Electronic XO's: Bryston 10B Sub (3.6's) and Marchand XM-44 (20.1's)
Vertical Amplifiers: 2 x W4S ST-1000 amps.
Horizontal Amplifiers: Mark Levinson, Jeffrey Rowland, MagTech
Edits: 07/02/17 07/02/17
I know there are several people doing the horizontal bop.
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong" H. L. Mencken
Edits: 05/26/17
I am too as often as possible lol
In order to vertically biamp, dont you need a preamp with two line outputs that has an A+B Output selector switch, so that both power amps can be driven simultaneously? (one power amp drives left speaker, other power amp drives right speaker, and the volume level is controlled by the preamp)
There are some preamps that have two output jacks, but unless I overlooked something, without an A+B selector knob, it would appear that you could only select either output 1 or output 2, but not both simultaneously.
One amp connects to the left channel output with a Y adapter, the other to the right channel output, unless your preamp is mono you should be good to go.
Martin
The Parasound A23 / A21 amps have a couple interesting add-on features making biamp EASY.
First:
Each channel is single ended OR balanced in. That's not unusual
What IS unusual?
Each channel has a single ended OUTPUT, too
I take the single ended output from the input channel (left or right) and loop over to the OTHER input on the same amp.
NO Y-SPLITTER needed and input impedance is preserved.
Each channel ALSO has a level control, so if one driver is a little 'hot', you can tone it down a little.
At some point you may want to replace the OK potentiometer with a fixed resistor bridge OR maybe even a single-gang stepper of 1% or better film resistors.
Too much is never enough
> I take the single ended output from the input channel (left or right) and loop over to the OTHER input on the same amp.
>
> NO Y-SPLITTER needed and input impedance is preserved.
Electrically, this is exactly the same as using a Y-adapter. Therefore, input impedance is cut in half just as it would be when using a Y-adapter. There's really no difference at all.
Best regards,
John Elison
You sure? Not buffered in any way? (opamp is what I'm thinking)
Any circuit diagrams available? I would also like to know the value of the attenuator for possible replacement by a couple resistors OR a single gang stepped attenuator.
Even IF impedance is 'cut in half', just like using a 'Y' adaptor, the Parasound solution is easier. I needed only to use a short single ended jumper. Maybe 18" or so, and could have used less.
It also couples to the Balanced out, but I'm not sure how that is worked.
Too much is never enough
Yes, I'm sure it's the same, but it shouldn't be a problem unless you're preamp has unusually high output impedance. The input impedance of my Parasound Halo A21 is 33k-ohms per channel unbalanced. Therefore, connecting both channels in parallel would yield an input impedance of 16.5k-ohms. I don't think that should be a problem. I'm currently connecting my subs in parallel with my Parasound and my Vacuum Tube Audio SP14 preamp handles it just fine.
Best regards,
John Elison
You are 100% on that. The preamp in use, a Parasound P5 has vanishinglly low output impedance and would be somewhere North of unlikely to have a problem with the halved input impedance of the A21 / 23 series amps.
Do you know how much SPACE is around the attenuator? On my 'dream list' would be replacing it with a stepped attenuator. I know I can fit in a pair of fixed resistors, but would like to preserve full adjustability.
The sub output of the P5 is too good to pass up, so no additional connections needed. Or splitting.
Too much is never enough
Even IF impedance is 'cut in half', just like using a 'Y' adaptor, the Parasound solution is easier. I needed only to use a short single ended jumper. Maybe 18" or so, and could have used less.
Why would you think the Y adapter is any harder, just one RCA cable from pre to amp with the Y splitter at the amplifier end, the splitter is only 12" so I guess if you think these last few inches are of great importance then 12" beats 18"?
Martin
If you've followed the output of these threads, you know a school of thought exists which says everything from number of connections to insulation type makes a difference.
Using the built-in facility of the Parasound for 'splitting', cuts down on the number of external connections from 5 to 3. Those short jumpers I'm using might later be useful in the rack to connect another piece into the system. Never know.
Go ahead and use your 'Y' adaptor. The inbuilt version on the Parasound saves me buying some more stuff that'll end up in the 'save for later' pile.
Why this is an issue I'll never know.
Too much is never enough
Why this is an issue I'll never know
Exactly, so why bring it up in the first place? And why continue to attempt to point out "your way" is better then make the above statement?
And as for the number of connections, insulation type, etc, you do know they manufacture Y splitters in various lengths, IE long enough to reach from the pre to wherever the amp is without any additional connections, sub users have been using these for yrs.
Martin
For me? Easier IS better.
No additional connections. Saves time at my annual dissassembly / cleaning / DeOxit.
Tune in to some of the arguements / Discussions about cables. Length? Insulation? Silver? Silver Plated? Connector type and material? On that scale, I'm a piker. I'll bet a bunch of persons think 'Y' connectors are not to be used. Or would spend some outrageous sum on Cardas or whatever.
The list is endless.
And of course, do as you see fit.
If / When I go to an active crossover, unneeded 'Y' connectors will just be something NOT in the Use It Later box. I think Parasound did well including such a connection option.
Too much is never enough
Must be fuzzy math, 3 connections = 3 connections in my book. If you're 3 connections are somehow easier to connect than my 3 connections please enlighten me.Martin
Again you seem to feel the need to be superior, there's no contest here, six of one, half a dozen of another as it were. With your amp the Y split is internal rather than external, if this is important to you then great.
My preamp has multiple pairs of main outputs, one pair designed to simulate the sound of a high end tube pre for powering the high frequency driver's amplifier, the other a high end SS which it is for the bass driver's amplfier to facilitate horizontal biamping, does that make it better than yours?
As you said easier is always better.
Edits: 05/28/17 05/28/17
I was thinking the Y connector was female RCA and you needed an additional RCA from IT to the amp.
If the Y had male outs, and was long enough (still not very) the connection number would than be 3.
Some would, at that point, begin objecting to whatever cable and connectors were used in its construction.
I'm not on that particular list.
But, for those who ARE concerned? I'd figure DIY should answer most objections.
The Parasound approach is simply Cleaner and entails no additional expense. My original plan with a pair of 'em in biamp mode was to eventually go to an active crossover. At that point? The MiniDSP would act as such and I'd be back to multiple longer cable runs, unless I were to run ONE crossover in back of each speaker and continue with a single run to each as now.
The least expensive Y connectors go 5$ or maybe 10$, you'll need 2. I don't know how much such a connnector would run if you went to all-Cardas material. A lot more, for sure. Some would probably NOT want the cheapest Y based on listening experience.
For more biamp stuff, look at my 'Noodle' thread with the block diagram of a proposed amp, using a pair of nCore400 modules and SMPS. The included MiniDSP makes it easy for to use a a biamp. All the splitting is 'internal' to the amp and it would be adjusted by connection to a computer. I've already spec'd internal balanced cable as Mogami.
Too much is never enough
I've been biamping, triamping, active/passive, horizontal or vertical since the very early eighties, it is what it is. Have fun in your journey, and keep in mind simple is usually best.
Martin
Good background and I'll TRY to Keep It Simple (Stupid) = KISS.
I've tried to make my purchases 'forward compatible' with a goal in mind.
Too much is never enough
I just point out that a number of audiophiles do NOT like splitters and some also try to minimize the number of connections.
I have one input per amp and a jumper from the same cable. = 3 connections with others internal to the amp.
splitter with 1 in and 2 out potentially has the same number (3) while any additional cable adds junctions. The splitter, also, unless $$$ is made from some cable over which you have no control.
DIY is a viable option, in that case, too. That may be the best of all worlds. You can get some very premium cable and use good connectors.
Again, the Parasound 'solution' (not really a problem?) is very easy. And requires nothing not already in most persons parts box.
Too much is never enough
Well actually you started out slamming options other than your setup, but now we're finally on the same page, just more than one way to skin a cat. With the Y splitter internal from the manufacturer with the wire of their choice or external with the wire the customers choice, both with the pros and cons this brings.
Glad we could agree on this and hopefully the OP gleaned some insight.
Martin
I love simple.
Complexity always has problems. 4-way speakers almost always have problems to my ears while it would seem to be easier to get a 2-way right.
And No, i don't think I was 'slamming' Y connector system. Others MIGHT, however, based on what I read about cable / connector preferences.
The real fringe might balk at a 10$ Y while giving the nod to some DIY / Cardas type running 100$+ per side.
I merely like and appreciate the forward thinking of Parasound. When I bought the amps, I had NO idea I'd be heading the direction I am or that I would find the additional connection useful.
Too much is never enough
The use of a Y adapter into the amplifier isn't an issue, has no ill affect on impedance just as connecting a powered sub isn't an issue.
As for the gain controls adding flexibility, definitely. The older Kenwood integrated amps had an odd feature where the amp has a quasi pre out/main in where using the main in leaves the volume, balance, and tone controls in-line, this was to allow balancing with the main amp in a 4 channel setup. It also has its uses with both vertical and horizontal biamping.
The balance can be used in a similar fashion as your gain controls to balance the output of the high frequency drivers with the bass. It just so happens I happen to have two Kenwood KA-4006 integrated amps and set this up just for shits and giggles. I was also auditioning my new Kenny table and a second pair of Heresys, I must say stacked the dynamics were QUITE impressive lol.
Martin
I have a PAIR of Parasound A23 working into Magnepan MG1.6s
Pull jumpers and connect.
Intent is to go Active using a MiniDSP at some point.
Total output is the same or exceeds the prior amp, a PSAudio GCC250 which was an ICE 'D'' amp.
On paper the output is less, 400 per speaker as opposed to 500 for the GCC, but the Parasound feels stronger.
Given the 600hz crossover, which is near the 50:50 power point, I'm expecting big things when I go active. Theory tells me I could get as much as 3db additional 'juice'.
Too much is never enough
Been there..done it, moved on
Frankly it made small if Any differences on MY setup.
Subsequent replacement by a single low power Firstwatt Amp was an epiphany upgrade
Clearly doubling up on amps can make some differences,
under 2 basic scenarios though:
A) the Speakers used are an interesting load
B) the single amp is of erm Suspect performance (completely inadequate to needs)
.. Double amps essentially increase headroom ..On the other hand Line level crossovers (active or passive) coupled with an Amp per channel can make significant differences.
Far more than merely doubling up amps does.
Edits: 05/26/17
You're absolutely correct just as using two mono block amps have no advantage over using one stereo amp lol.And to think having the highs and mids not sharing the main filter cap with the bass driver doesn't make a difference ...............?
And to think all of those engineers, manufacturers, etc just wasted their time and money designing and building dual mono amps that apparently have absolutely no advantages over a typically designed stereo amp when all they needed to do was ask you and you could have set them straight.
Martin
Edits: 05/27/17
Rich
How far do you pull your MG1s from the wall?
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong" H. L. Mencken
Panels sound best when 4 feet or more from the front wall. This timing gives the ear / brain a full chance to distinguish the first arrival from the reflection.
Too much is never enough
Hi ,
I'm doing vertical Biamping as well but am using an active crossover . A pair of ARC D79B's w/ ARC EC 21 electronic crossover driving Magnepan MG 3A
Mondial
I just finshed bi amping my setup this past weekend but Horizonal. Now I am looking to tri amp...
Saw your post looking for advice about an amp for your tweeters.Martin
Edits: 05/22/17
As I understand it you must have two identical amps to vertical bi amp...
You are correct. It's basically the same as using two mono block amps with all of the benefits that implies, but instead using two stereo amps with one channel driving the woofer and the other channel driving the midrange and or tweeter with all of the added benefits that implies. The increased soundstage is not subtle.
Martin
Better to run in bridged mode than use the amplifiers for vertical bi-amping. If Bi-amping horizontal is better IMO, better seperation of bass/mids, due to seperate loading of the amplifier PSU, this means bass drive does not affect the mid/highs on sustained drive or dynamic peaks , it will when vertical bi amping ..
Regards
Again, more than one way to skin a cat. With horizontal biamping you still have the left and right channels sharing the same power supply, better separation can be achieved with vertical, just as with a mono block setup. Another advantage is speaker wires only 18" long eliminating most of the issues with cabling, again a much better more musical sound can be acheived.As mentioned, I've tried every kind of multiple amp setups beginning with car audio back in my youth transitioning to home audio once having my home.
Active biamping can be fun, a very deep rabbit hole it is if you want to go there. But I've found keeping it simple is just that, simple, and it simply gives the most musical response to my experienced ears.
Martin
Edits: 05/29/17
Yes many ways to skin the cat..
It is this sharing of PSU Imo is why vertical bi-amping is less of , found the same when designing car audio systems in the 70's the best was always horizontal , even then we played with vertical and horizontial bi - amping. These kind of setups were experimented with extensively , as it was during the time we were designing seperates for auto's and also to the best of knowledge the first subwoofer enclosure system for them (1976 ).Fosgate (before rockford) Was the first with all in one bi amping setup to my knowledge , (keep three utterly unreliable) this was later exceeded by others using seperate everything including soundstream, Zapco and Audio mobile , Soundstream had decided to use Nelson Pass designed( 84) fully biased class-a amps, ( prolly the best sounding mobile amps ever.)
In our original Bi/ tri-amp setups, we used heils and a lower line used Phillips soft domes for tweeters. ( originally this setup ran (78) with Fosgates) ..
Over the years and many development stages ( Home and studio audio ) along the way we had experimented with every conceivable setup many with bespoke and off the self xovers built for bi-amping and at no time did we find vertical to be superior ..My 2c ..
Regards
Edits: 05/29/17
Well, I didn't really want to get into a pissing match over experience, but as early as 1972 I was cutting the leads to the tweeters in Jensen 6X9 coaxes to biamp using home built crossovers, I was taking electronics in high school.It's been a long journey, but when talking musicality over ultimate slam, simpler is always better.
Question, have you ever tried vertical biamping with a true dual mono designed amplifier? Absolutely no sharing of anything other than a power cord. In essence four mono blocks, still allowing the use of extremely short speaker cables unlike horizontal. Still allows active crossovers etc, again all the benefits you claim for horizontal without any of the negatives, plus all of the advantages of placing the amps closer to the speakers.
Martin.
Edits: 05/29/17
Yes ....
We tried many , some like audire had separate psu down to seperate power switches. Its the same for Monoblocs vs dual sharing the same chassis , always found monoblocs seperate and apart to be sonically superior to any sharing the same chassis..
Cant say why for sure , but they did , there is a lot of flexabilty with monoblocs , pertaining to speaker leads , interconnects , etc ...
Regards
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: