tmaung
Seeker Of Truth
Posts: 3
|
Post by tmaung on Nov 1, 2010 13:40:59 GMT -5
So here is the current setup:
Denon 3310ci UPA-5 Speakers: LSi9s/LSiC/LSi7s
I am bi-amping the 9s with the UPA-5 (Denon crossover) and Denon is taking care of the LSi7s.
My room is 12x13.
Should I get the XPA-5 and bi-amp ALL speakers? I imagine it would be LSi9s to the XPA-5 and 1 to LSiC and then LSi7s to the UPA-5 and 1 to the LSiC. I might do 7 channels later so UPA-5 can be used for the surrounds.
So is it worth bi-amping them all or is it over kill? Should I even get the XPA-5 or is my current setup okay?
I don't listen to it loud but would like to have the best sound possible. I am improving the room at the same time so please help asap so that I can order appropriate plenum cables (2 conductor vs 4 conductor).
|
|
|
Post by paintedklown on Nov 1, 2010 13:47:16 GMT -5
Bi-amping and bi-wiring have been discussed quite extensively here. The general consensus is that bi-wiring doesn't seem to make much of a difference. It is a "try it and see" kind of deal. Bi-amping, the way you are speaking of, would probably not make as much of a difference as one would think. From my understanding of true bi-amping, you would have to take an approach similar to car audio. This would involve an external crossover designed (or set up) for the drivers in your speakers. The signal out of the crossover network would then be sent to your amp(s). This process also includes altering the signal path inside your cabinets. (ie. removing the internal x-overs, fuses, ect.) DISCLOSURE:...I may not have a full understanding of this either...Others, with more knowledge and experience may be able to assist you further. Good luck with whatever you choose.
|
|
|
Post by razel on Nov 1, 2010 14:20:05 GMT -5
Hard-core XXX real active biamping... meaning crossover before amplifying then speaker wires direct to the speakers (bypassing the internal passive crossover) has the most benefits. Anything else begins to get into a gray area where people argue about how generally it's not worth the hassle or cost. It is much easier, cheaper, especially now in the car audio world to go active with an amplifier for each speaker. In the home world, it's getting there. The subwoofer is already active and can be run direct. It's just the speakers. We just need an pre-pro where can can choose the crossover cutoff and slope for the main speakers and RCA outs for tweeter, woofer. Maybe they can sacrifice rear-surround outs to be the extra RCA needed. Then we just need to connect to our speakers bypassing the internal crossover and we're there! If the XMC has this, shooooooooot.... I'll be all OVER that regardless of the bugs.
|
|
|
Post by jackfish on Nov 1, 2010 15:00:08 GMT -5
There are some advantages to passive biamping. The input impedance of the high frequency section of the loudspeaker increases as the frequency decreases, so that section draws less power from the amp as the frequency decreases. The amp that is driving the high frequency section of the loudspeaker is now doing a lot less work than when that amp was also driving the low frequency section of the loudspeaker, where most of the power is used. So, I guess it is rather intuitive that passive biamping is increasing the power available to each section of the loudspeaker (given equal amplifier channel power). The advantages of passive biamping are about the same as the advantages of active biamping, albeit a smaller improvement due to relative power loss and distortion in the passive filters of the loudspeaker. In active biamping the crossover is applied before amplification occurs which is its real advantage.
|
|