Bi-Amping, how and what changes are needed to the processor?

[Old Dog/New Tricks]

I have a new UMC-200, UPA-700 and a set of XRT 5.2 speakers on the way. I would like to bi-amp the main XRT speakers. I am wondering what changes I have to make from a software perspective to set up those 2 amplifier channels to "front" from another assignment (such as surround rear), as well as what must I do to change the equalization to direct only the lows from one amp and hi's from another. I understand the physical connections that I must make but need some advice on the UMC-200 software side. Or does the setup menu assist with this? Thanks for your help.

[geebo]

Oct 22, 2013 9:23:29 GMT -5 Old Dog/New Tricks said:

I have a new UMC-200, UPA-700 and a set of XRT 5.2 speakers on the way. I would like to bi-amp the main XRT speakers. I am wondering what changes I have to make from a software perspective to set up those 2 amplifier channels to "front" from another assignment (such as surround rear), as well as what must I do to change the equalization to direct only the lows from one amp and hi's from another. I understand the physical connections that I must make but need some advice on the UMC-200 software side. Or does the setup menu assist with this? Thanks for your help.

I don't think there is any way to re-assign the outputs on a UMC-200. You'll probably have to use splitters from the front L & R outputs to the different amp channels. Are you going to keep the speakers' internal crossovers or will you be using an external active crossover?

[Old Dog/New Tricks]

You ask a very good question! I thought that when bi-amping, that by taking out the buss bar between the terminals on the speaker that you essentially remove the crossover, but that may be an incorrect assumption. From what I read I think it is better to digitally crossover rather than use the speakers crossover, so ideally that is what I would like to do unless I am incorrect. And on the amp assignment issue, now I am confused, if you could provide a little more detail on that I would appreciate it. I don't understand if I got a splitter where I could connect the other side of the y cable to. Sorry for the stupid questions, but that is why I am in the Newb forum. Thanks

[geebo]

Oct 22, 2013 10:11:29 GMT -5 Old Dog/New Tricks said:

You ask a very good question! I thought that when bi-amping, that by taking out the buss bar between the terminals on the speaker that you essentially remove the crossover, but that may be an incorrect assumption. From what I read I think it is better to digitally crossover rather than use the speakers crossover, so ideally that is what I would like to do unless I am incorrect. And on the amp assignment issue, now I am confused, if you could provide a little more detail on that I would appreciate it. I don't understand if I got a splitter where I could connect the other side of the y cable to. Sorry for the stupid questions, but that is why I am in the Newb forum. Thanks

Passive bi-amping is leaving the speakers crossovers in place and removing the jumpers. That not take the crossovers out of the signal path. It really just separates the high and low inputs to them. Active bi-amping would require an electronic crossover and you would then have to bypass the speakers' internal crossovers to do it right. Now when you remove those internal crossovers, you may also be removing other components that do things like level matching and EQ'ing of the individual drivers.

For the Y connectors, just plug them into the L & R front outputs on the UMC and feed the outputs to two different amp channels. Then from the amps outputs to the high and low speaker inputs.

[bootman]

I personally would not bother with active Bi-amping unless you are doing DIY speakers.
Why actively bi-amp a commercial design and change the speaker's sound characteristics unless you have the proper speaker measuring tools to do so?


Passive bi-amp may or may not have a positive effect.
You are just sending a full range signal to both terminals and the internal crossover is still active.
I would just send more power to the speaker myself if I had the choice.
If you don't have a choice and you have two unused speaker channels then I would see how this would be a cheap way of adding more power to the speaker.

[geebo]

Oct 22, 2013 10:32:38 GMT -5 bootman said:

I personally would not bother with active Bi-amping unless you are doing DIY speakers.
Why actively bi-amp a commercial design and change the speaker's sound characteristics unless you have the proper speaker measuring tools to do so?


Passive bi-amp may or may not have a positive effect.
You are just sending a full range signal to both terminals and the internal crossover is still active.
I would just send more power to the speaker myself if I had the choice.
If you don't have a choice and you have two unused speaker channels then I would see how this would be a cheap way of adding more power to the speaker.

+1. Just go the passive route if you want to put your unused channels to work. Keep in mind that those channels will all be pulling from the same power supply so it won't be the same as bi-amping with separate amps.

[Old Dog/New Tricks]

Thanks everyone for your insights!  Looks like I will be passively bi-amping, and the clarification on the cabling was most helpful. I'll be going out today to purchase some passive splitters. My equipment is due to arrive tomorrow so I want to be ready! Thanks for all your help!!!!!!

[bootman]

So you haven't tried just powering the speakers normally yet?
I would do that first before messing with splitters.
If it sounds good, you are done.

[Old Dog/New Tricks]

I am positive that I will try the set up without bi-amping first, but I do realize the achilles heel of my system is power. And if I can improve the sound short of purchasing a larger amp I would prefer to go that route. So my plan is to get the set up going without, listen, then switch to a bi-amped config and see what differences I experience. Obviously I would hope for some improvement. I am really on the fence about this amp, thinking that I will need more power but I have to give it a fair chance. There are a lot of things I like about the UPA 700, (size, 7 channels etc.) but especially after surfing the various forum topics here I just have a sneaking suspicion that a XPA-5 may be in order. But until I get to listen to the system I won't know for sure.

[bootman]

I honestly think you will be fine.
Only one power supply in the multichannel amp.
Power will not go unused if you only use say 5 out of the 7.
The Emotiva amps are conservatively rated and if not all channels are used will actually put out more power per channel.

Keep it simple.

[Old Dog/New Tricks]

Just thought I'd give a quick update. I received the Emo gear and am very pleased with the set up. I was all geared up to bi-amp  the fronts or potentially replace the UPA-700 with a XPA-5, but I think I am just fine with the 700 running things simply. If in the future I have a change of heart or change speakers I may want to upgrade to a larger amp, but for now the 700 does a nice job. Thanks for all your help!