In Reply to: Bi-AMPING posted by Christine Tham on November 20, 2006 at 16:43:22:
Christine.Right. You are indeed bi-amping. We're both bi-amping. You're doing passive (crossovers after the amps) bi-amping, I'm doing a variation of DSP active (crossovers before the amps) tri-amping. Active multi-amping can be done with analog filters that are passive, active/analog, active/digital, or DSP based.
We're both using "more than one amplifier" thus we're *multi-AMPING* and not *multi-WIRING*! :o)
As far as analog lovers go - I don't think the "mandate" of the Computer Audio Asylum is to convince all analog lovers to digitize their vinyl collections and get into DSP based crossover filters and room correction. The vast majority are concerned only with playback of sources that are already digital - and further to that, are accessible (precluding the use of SACD for example).
Then again, there are quite a few vinyl lovers who meticulously record their albums on the first play - be it an analog or digital recording. If record wear was not an issue, why would they go through all that trouble?
Hmmmmm....
Cheers,
Presto
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Oh yes, of course. - Presto 09:09:09 11/21/06 (11)
- "passive" vs "active" - Christine Tham 13:50:38 11/21/06 (10)
- Re: "passive" vs "active" - aljordan 05:45:50 11/22/06 (0)
- Re: "passive" vs "active" - Presto 17:15:03 11/21/06 (8)
- Re: "passive" vs "active" - Christine Tham 20:11:47 11/21/06 (7)
- Re: "passive" vs "active" - Presto 23:48:21 11/21/06 (6)
- Re: "passive" vs "active" - Christine Tham 12:11:41 11/22/06 (5)
- Thanks for the information on processing. :o) - Presto 12:50:08 11/22/06 (4)
- Check out the E-MU range of cards - Christine Tham 13:00:20 11/22/06 (3)
- You raise a good question - Presto 14:35:32 11/22/06 (2)
- Re: You raise a good question - Christine Tham 15:05:38 11/22/06 (1)
- One word comes to mind.... - Presto 16:03:45 11/22/06 (0)