|
Post by orthikon on May 29, 2015 14:42:48 GMT -5
Headroom is the main reason I want to bi-amp. I like to turn it up sometimes I am running 85db inneficient Magnepan speakers and I measured my XPA-1s to clip at around 110db peak. Initially, I will be using the same XO points as the passive crossover and eventually will tweak to my liking. This is a hobby afterall DYohn, see link below for advantages of active vs passive crossovers. audioundone.com/8-advantages-of-active-crossovers-douglas-selfHere's my utterly biased opinion. Bi-amping (or tri-amping or any other flavor of using multiple amplifier channels per loudspeaker array) is an absolutely necessary and important technique when the application requires extreme dbSPL levels, such as for live sound or in certain car audio applications. But in the home there is no point. And anyone who thinks they are achieving increased SQ levels because if it are fooling themselves. Also, any home user who thinks they can better cross over a loudspeaker system using active Xovers than what the OEM designer determined was appropriate for their system had better know what they are doing and have all the proper test equipment to verify unless they don't care about fried drivers over the long term. If you want to play with your system, sure. Go for it. That's why some manufacturers pander to the tweak crowd by using multiple binding post speaker connections. It's for fun if that's what you think is fun. Best approach IMO: Buy the speakers you like. Buy a large enough amplifier to get the dbSPL levels you need in your home. Hook them up with a single speaker wire set and enjoy the music.
|
|
|
Post by orthikon on May 29, 2015 15:01:38 GMT -5
Keith, I understand the flexibility of a dedicated XO but, since I am getting an XSP-1 for it being quieter and at the same time being able to use a sub, I just thought of trying out bi-amping with it since the crossover specs of my speakers from bass to mid/tweet (200 HP 6db and 250 LP 18 db) are within the range of the XSP-1 so I guess it is doable but not ideal because of the lack of slope adjustment. Yes - and no. Bass management is a sort of subset of an active crossover. While the bass management options technically are an active crossover, you have a very limited number of options available. This is because bass management is specifically intended to be used to provide a crossover between "regular speakers" and a subwoofer. (The range of crossover frequencies you can pick is limited; you can't choose different types of filters, and you can't individually control the level of each output.) In contrast, a "full up active crossover" will usually allow you to choose between several different types of filters, will let you set whatever crossover frequency you like, and provide controls for adjusting the level (and possibly the phase) of each output. If you need a relatively simple line level crossover (and don't have an XSP), you can use something like this: www.hlabs.com/products/crossovers/index_files/Page384.htmIt's PASSIVE, so is somewhat limited in options, but it also shouldn't add significant noise or distortion.... And it's cheap - so it's easy to try for yourself. The miniDSP can be programmed as an active crossover, and "pro" companies like Behringer and Rane make VERY flexible and configurable active crossover units (the kind with knobs, and display screens, and programming manuals). The Behringer model lets you pick filter types from a menu, and actually shows you the filter slopes you've selected on a little built-in video screen. (This makes life a lot easier if you're not very good at "seeing in your head what the numbers mean".) If you're planning to "really get into active crossover design", it may also make sense to buy a unit like the Behringer for prototyping. It lets you try different settings and options very easily, and also allows you to see exactly what you have set. Then, when you find the settings that work perfectly for a particular project, you can build a simple (and non-adjustable) analog filter that duplicates those particular filter settings and options. I have 3.6R and thinking of using the XSP-1 to biamp. Is this possible using the bass management option? Thinking of using 4x XPA-1s as I already have two or 4x XPA-1Ls if I can find a deal on them. The stock 3.6R passive crossover settings are 200 HP 6db and 250 LP 18 db. know the XSP only does 12db so that issue aside is this doable? If not, what active crossover are you guys using?
|
|
DYohn
Emo VIPs
Posts: 18,359
|
Post by DYohn on May 29, 2015 15:05:12 GMT -5
Would you like me to debunk that article?
|
|
novisnick
EmoPhile
CEO Secret Monoblock Society
Posts: 27,230
|
Post by novisnick on May 29, 2015 15:16:38 GMT -5
Would you like me to debunk that article? NOOooooooooo!!!!!!!!!
he,,,,,,,,he,,,,,,he,,,,,,,,,
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on May 29, 2015 15:26:58 GMT -5
Would you like me to debunk that article? Gee, I bet you also go around telling kids there's no Santa Claus.
|
|
|
Post by tchaik on May 29, 2015 15:36:31 GMT -5
oh my…. i thought you were talking about the buy-amp experience i do that one a lot………… tchaik……..
|
|
|
Post by leonski on May 30, 2015 3:45:44 GMT -5
A GOOD active crossover for Magnepan is Marchand. A friend has one on his 20s with emo amps x 4. One HECK of a system. You have many options and can order a selection of crossover frequencies on plug in modules. Nice setup with reasonable flexibility in a 'traditional' crossover. Balanced and single ended options for I/O, too.
I saw the MiniDSP today at THE newport, finally got some reasonable explanation and heard the PRICE of OVER 5500$ for a simple 2-way crossover. Only it WASN'T just a crossover. It had DAC and a whole bunch of OTHER stuff I had no interest in. And the guy lost me when he told me it was better than the Pass crossover.
|
|
|
Post by bluemeanies on May 30, 2015 10:05:41 GMT -5
More and more speaker manufacturers are getting away from the biwiring/biamping connections. I personally like it, but the speaker manufacturers seem to think that the way they're engineering it (their crossovers) that a single power source is the best way to go. Most of us (in this thread) would disagree. Not me, I agree with the speaker manufacturers. Especially with the ready availability of hugely powerful amplifiers at reasonable prices, well reasonable compared to past prices. Seriously does anybody really think that they need more power than the 1KW that an XPR-1 can deliver into an 8 ohm home stereo set up? Not me that's for sure, the relatively puny 275 WPC from an XPA-5 is way more grunt than I ever use for 2.1 stereo listening. We are also well past the time when passive cross overs used to be lossy, inaccurate and inconsistent. Or when those that weren't lossy, inaccurate and inconsistent were grossly expensive. High quality componentry these days is only mildly more costly than the average. I've tried bi amping many times over the years, even tri amping once. With Class A, Class AB and Class D amps and all combinations of them. I haven't found it to be remotely close to being worth the time, money and effort required. There are simply more benefits to be gained from other items in the set up. Cheers Gary I agree with your statement in regards to power needed. I will say to each his own when it comes to this hobby b/c there are so many venues out there. So many opportunities are afforded us to be able to attain our personal nirvana. I currently have B&W 804S speakers...rated at 200watts. My 7700 amplifier is rated at 200watts per channel and I use it now strictly for HT. However in the past and it is spoken on this forum quite a bit is the use of the word POWER. It seems that you can never have enough headroom. My search for my own personal nirvana came with that idea in mine. The more power, more headroom more definition and clarity. My experiment with purchasing two XPA's1gen 2 resulted in achieving plenty of headroom but nothing else changed. I still was not getting the soundstage I wanted to achieve nor the clarity. Taken back I started to look into replacing my 804's with B&W diamonds or perhaps Focal. Costly, and I did not like how the store I was thinking about purchasing these speakers from handled or answered my questions. I became frustrated and decided to call it quits for now and enjoy what I have and save my money. Ran into Bill who is a member of this forum and he invited me into his home to give a listen to his Dynaudio Gemini speakers that I found out are 20 years old being power by tube amplifiers putting out no more than 35watts of power. I was pleasantly surprised. Actually I was astonished that with so little power the volume level that was there to be had and more important to me and Bill was the clarity and depth, and soundstage. Another part of the equation which is not spoken about that often but is important is the proper alignment of speakers in relation to the sweet spot. I since invested in a similar system as my mentor. Purchasing two m125 tube amplifiers from Dynaco and the Grace Design 920 processor DAC monitoring system. These tube amplifiers are pushing my B&W's rated at 200watts with 35watts and the sound is so so sweet! Just additional proof that more does not mean better.
|
|
|
Post by qdtjni on May 30, 2015 10:22:44 GMT -5
Well built tube amps do indeed sound good.
Did you run your XPA-1s in class A or A/B?
|
|
|
Post by ttocs on May 30, 2015 11:01:59 GMT -5
My L/R speakers are Martin Logan Vista hybrids, electrostatic panel for mids and highs, aluminum cone woofer. Over the last few years my system has seen changes in amplifiers, preamps, interconnects, and speaker wiring. With each iteration of preamp/amp combination that allowed me to passively biamp there was an improvement is the sound. I believe that properly biamping actively would an improvement, but is more effort than I want to think about at the moment.
I believe the panels pose a different type of load to the amp than do the cone woofers. Putting each on its own amp channel cleans up the sound. Most of the current crop of Martin Logan stat speakers only have one set of wire connectors because they have a built-in amplifier for the woofer - so the user's amplifier powers the stat panel and the built-in amp powers the woofer - effectively biamped.
Currently, I'm passively biamping the Vistas using Y-XLR cables from the XMC-1 to the amp. It's musicalafragalisticexpialadoshus!
|
|
|
Post by leonski on May 30, 2015 21:40:44 GMT -5
I can't immediately link measurements of an Electrostat panel, but in general YES, 'Stats get weird and at higher frequencies, even MORE weird. An amplifier used for the highs should be stable into a very reactive load. I suspect the eletrical characteristics OF the HF panel is the reason they DO NOT recommend ACTIVE Bi-AMP which means a line level crossover and the ByPassing of the internal crossover. If the picture ML shows of the crossover is representitive, it is indeed a fairly complex item. You'd have to pretty much Re-Engineer the panel to go line level crossover.
|
|
|
Post by bluemeanies on May 30, 2015 22:19:08 GMT -5
Well built tube amps do indeed sound good. Did you run your XPA-1s in class A or A/B? B all of the time. After doing some comparing between a&b with a friend we determined there was no noticeable distinction between the two.
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on May 31, 2015 0:47:37 GMT -5
The reason for biamping electrostatic speakers is not that they benefit from the biamping itself, it's because they have such poor mid bass and bass performance that they need to be totally separated from the electrostatic driver and given to a normal cone driver/s. It's not a valid argument for biamping in general.
Cheers Gary
|
|
|
Post by leonski on May 31, 2015 19:39:45 GMT -5
I'm sorry gary, I TRIED to understand and failed. If this is what you mean? Yes, 'stats simply have poor bass. The integration of bass cone and 'stat panel IS a pain and not an easy task. Thus the whacky crossover. TRUE biamping with a line level crossover IS much easier on the amps and has the effect of netting almost 3db power compared with the not line level crossed version.
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on May 31, 2015 20:06:52 GMT -5
I'm sorry gary, I TRIED to understand and failed. If this is what you mean? Yes, 'stats simply have poor bass. The integration of bass cone and 'stat panel IS a pain and not an easy task. Thus the whacky crossover. TRUE biamping with a line level crossover IS much easier on the amps and has the effect of netting almost 3db power compared with the not line level crossed version. Yep, you got it. My view is that electrostatics benefit from bi amping just because they are electrostatics. The ones I have listened too never quite sound right to me in the mid bass and lower areas. Then combine that with the difficult loads electrostatics seem to present in the same frequency ranges. That's why an ever growing number of speaker manufacturers are using electrostatics for the upper mids and highs while using cone drivers for the mid bass and lower. Speakers with normal drivers don't suffer the same issues and as such I haven't heard any big improvements from bi amping. Except where there simply isn't enough amplifier power of course. But with the range of high power, low cost, high quality amps available these days that shouldn't happen. Way back I used to run a 25 watt Class A amp for the highs and a 100 watt Class AB amp for the lows which was a big improvement over just the one amp. But these days an XPA-1L walks all over that bi amping combination and any other I have tried over the years. Albeit I still have a sub woofer, which now uses an XPA-100 as the power amp. Cheers Gary
|
|
|
Post by leonski on Jun 1, 2015 11:08:44 GMT -5
I have a friend who just SOLD a pair of Parasound JC-1 mono blocs. These are Very Premium amps and cost a bundle new. He replaced them with a Manley TUBE amp. The speakers? Some of the NEW generation of Janszen Electrostatic floorstanders. Bad load? I don't think so. Wonderful system and combination. Awful room! If the speakers were as bad a load as 'traditional' stats, most tube amps would not be able to cope. Live and learn. The current man behind the company is the son of the INVENTOR of the modern 'stat. And the guy who originated such classics as the HLH 9, still sought after. www.janszenloudspeaker.comJust my Opin, but you may have simply been hearing bad cone / panel integration at the lower frequencies. Not an aspect of the weird loading from the 'stat'. That nonsense usually starts at higher frequencies where stats can be VERY reactive. enjoythemusic.com/magazine/manufacture/0702/index.htmlRoger Sanders makes a WONDERFUL amp which is guaranteed stable with electrostatic loads. Not to mention some 'stats which will make you want them badly. Always one of the best sounds at an audio show. And a simple system, too.
|
|
|
Post by sme on Jun 4, 2015 14:47:03 GMT -5
I'm actually planning to bi-amp eventually. I see headroom increase as only a secondary benefit, one that may not be noticed. The real benefit to bi-amping is the ability to achieve a better crossover response than can be achieved using passive components.
For example, if the transducers aren't aligned so that they are the same distance from the ears, a digitally implemented active crossover can apply a delay to one of the transducers to bring them back into time alignment. This is significant for me since I use horn speakers, and the horn tweeter is set back quite a distance from the woofer. A digital active crossover that provides FIR filters (offered on the MiniDSP OpenDRC products) also fine adjustments to the phase response independent of the magnitude response over the crossover region. My goal is to maintain a response as close as possible to flat both on-axis and in terms of sound power throughout the crossover range. In reality, I may tweak this slightly to achieve what sounds best in my room by ear, because time-of-arrival of the energy also affects perception; hence, using a digital crossover will allow me to achieve far better sound quality than I could expect from any passive speaker.
Of course, I'll need another 5 channel amp to do this as I'm running a 5.1 system. My horn tweeters are super sensitive and in their passive configuration, there are resistors on the tweeters to bring their sensitivity down to be more in line with the woofers. I'd rather chuck the resistors and save some cash on the amp, since the tweeters will need very little power. What amp will I buy? Sadly, the UPA-500 would be an excellent fit, but it's not for sale anymore. So, I do hope that Emotiva will bring to market a 5 channel version of their class D amp that I can use for my tweeters.
|
|
|
Post by PoloOle on Jun 4, 2015 15:35:12 GMT -5
I am currently running my Martin Logan’s with two XPA-2 G1 in bridge mode. . I know everybody will tell me that I am crazy running the XPA-2 bridged with electrostatic speakers…..
I want to try out bi-amping, but I don’t know if I should go Vertical or Horizontal.
I lean more towards Horizontal as the load on the left and right channel of the amplifier will be equal for both amplifiers.
Let me hear your thoughts.
|
|
|
Post by leonski on Jun 8, 2015 16:16:18 GMT -5
I can never remember the difference between horizontal or vertical. ME? I run ONE amp per speaker which minimizes speaker cable length VS the line level cable length. Still and all, my longest line level cable is ONLY about 6 or 8 feet.
And yes, it's nuts, even as a general rule, to bridge amps. In the case of 'stats? That's just gonna make ANY instability worse.
I'd just stick one amp behind each speaker, and if your Input / Output impedance permits, get a splitter and either butcher or get NEW speaker wire and try it.
You'll need to know crossover point, too, to kind of get a handle on amp load. My system crosses near the 50:50 power point, so I don't worry about it. Others may want to periodically swap channels so the amp gets 'equal wear' on each channel. You sound somewhat concerned, about amp power, which I wouldn't be.
If the amps can take it, a LINE LEVEL crossover would be the way to go. Each amp would be connected directly to each driver. NO speaker crossover needed. You'll need to REALLY RESEARCH this before proceeding. If it were a box speaker or even a Magnepan, I could be of more actual help. But I'm not familiar with 'stats and the addition requirments, like the polarizing power supply and such. The woofer may also have its own amp?
|
|