|
|
Post by PoloOle on Jun 4, 2015 13:14:49 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 cheapthryl on Jun 4, 2015 13:48:30 GMT -5
Vertical. It will operate as a mono block. Horizontal will not.
|
|
|
|
Post by tslack on Jun 4, 2015 18:16:40 GMT -5
Also vertical. Shortest length of amplified signal (speaker wire) vs. interconnects (balanced if possible), assuming you locate amps close to the speakers.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Jun 4, 2015 18:18:45 GMT -5
The only difference I see is if you bi amp horizontally you will have longer speaker wire runs than if you do it vertically. With each amp located next to its relevant speaker the wiring can be very short, which many see as an advantage of having monoblocks.
Cheers
Gary
|
|
|
|
Post by generalkorrd on Jun 4, 2015 19:37:40 GMT -5
Lets be serious here, no one will be able to measure the difference in arrival time for an electron in 2 feet of wire vs ten feet of wire. That kind of reasoning is what snake oil salesmen will use to sell megabuck wires.
Plus, I would rather have short interconnects than short speaker wires, less chance to pick up noise. For the doubters its because the interconnects carry only a couple volts while speaker wire can carry 50-100 volts or more.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Jun 4, 2015 20:44:34 GMT -5
I would use balanced interconnects for input to the monoblocks, eliminating induced noise.
All speaker cable has resistance, impedance and some capacitance, the longer the cable the more it can have.
Speaker cable by its very nature is susceptible to external interference, particularly 50/60 hz hum, the longer the cable the more likely it is.
The damping factor of the amplifier is affected by the impedance/resistance of speaker cable, a lower damping factor can result in less driver control.
So there are some very good reasons for my personal preference for longer balanced interconnects and shorter speaker cables.
Cheers
Gary
|
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Jun 4, 2015 21:34:55 GMT -5
Agree with the other proponents of vertical, for the reasons stated. Only time I'd go horizontal is if the amps weren't matched, maybe optimized for highs and lows.
|
|
|
|
Post by tslack on Jun 4, 2015 21:54:14 GMT -5
The shorter speaker wire/longer balanced interconnect option also has a cost advantage. I'm using Monoprice XLR cables and heavy-gauge speaker wire jumpers, and unless you're happy with give-away RCA interconnects and zip cord, that may be the cheapest cabling solution there is. I'm a horrible snake oil salesman.
|
|
|
|
Post by linvincible on Jun 5, 2015 2:11:48 GMT -5
Vertical : power drawn from one speaker will not affect the power to the other one
in case of loud bass, as they most often come from both speakers, you will have *twice* the power reserve you would have in horizontal mode
in the way I see it ;o)
|
|
|
|
Post by generalkorrd on Jun 18, 2015 16:28:29 GMT -5
Vertical. It will operate as a mono block. Horizontal will not. I am going to eat a little crow in this thread, only because of this statement. I completely agree with the monoblock. Channel separation is of course much better in this configuration. The reason I'm eating crow is because I just got my second Carver TFM 55x to biamp my Kappa 9's with, and decided to try vertical. It does seem as if the sound is slightly more spacious and open this way. Not because of any wire nonsense though. The crow is eaten and it tastes good! |
|
|
|
Post by repeetavx on Jun 18, 2015 16:39:42 GMT -5
Vertical. It will operate as a mono block. Horizontal will not. I am going to eat a little crow in this thread, only because of this statement. I completely agree with the monoblock. Channel separation is of course much better in this configuration. The reason I'm eating crow is because I just got my second Carver TFM 55x to biamp my Kappa 9's with, and decided to try vertical. It does seem as if the sound is slightly more spacious and open this way. Not because of any wire nonsense though. The crow is eaten and it tastes good! Yup. I came to the same conclusion. Glad you're enjoying your system. |
|
|
|
Post by jackpine on Jun 18, 2015 18:58:26 GMT -5
I would use balanced interconnects for input to the monoblocks, eliminating induced noise. All speaker cable has resistance, impedance and some capacitance, the longer the cable the more it can have. Speaker cable by its very nature is susceptible to external interference, particularly 50/60 hz hum, the longer the cable the more likely it is. The damping factor of the amplifier is affected by the impedance/resistance of speaker cable, a lower damping factor can result in less driver control. So there are some very good reasons for my personal preference for longer balanced interconnects and shorter speaker cables. Cheers Gary Speaker wire is not very susceptible to 50/60Hz hum. Very little speaker wire is even designed to reject EMI/RFI. Canare 4S is if hooked up in a star quad configuration. Most people buy it because it's easy to make bi-wired cables with though. It's also more likely to be used to keep the speaker wire from causing EMI transfer to an interconnect than a power cable transferring EMI into a speaker cable. |
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Jun 18, 2015 19:17:00 GMT -5
I would use balanced interconnects for input to the monoblocks, eliminating induced noise. All speaker cable has resistance, impedance and some capacitance, the longer the cable the more it can have. Speaker cable by its very nature is susceptible to external interference, particularly 50/60 hz hum, the longer the cable the more likely it is. The damping factor of the amplifier is affected by the impedance/resistance of speaker cable, a lower damping factor can result in less driver control. So there are some very good reasons for my personal preference for longer balanced interconnects and shorter speaker cables. Speaker wire is not very susceptible to 50/60Hz hum. Very little speaker wire is even designed to reject EMI/RFI. Canare 4S is if hooked up in a star quad configuration. Most people buy it because it's easy to make bi-wired cables with though. It's also more likely to be used to keep the speaker wire from causing EMI transfer to an interconnect than a power cable transferring EMI into a speaker cable. In a professional environment, live concerts etc, I always went to great effort to keep the speaker cables away from any others, interconnects, power, mic cables etc. Running them in proximity, especially parallel for any distance, never ended up well. It's a procedure that I have always carried over to home hifi, with 100% success. I'm sure that there are cables that overcome almost any interference problem, but my view is to not create the problem in the first place. Cheers Gary |
|
|
|
Post by generalkorrd on Jun 18, 2015 21:30:06 GMT -5
I would use balanced interconnects for input to the monoblocks, eliminating induced noise. All speaker cable has resistance, impedance and some capacitance, the longer the cable the more it can have. Speaker cable by its very nature is susceptible to external interference, particularly 50/60 hz hum, the longer the cable the more likely it is. The damping factor of the amplifier is affected by the impedance/resistance of speaker cable, a lower damping factor can result in less driver control. So there are some very good reasons for my personal preference for longer balanced interconnects and shorter speaker cables. Cheers Gary These problems you describe is what interconnects are most prone to, especially in a home environment. Speaker cable, not so much. Maybe in the pro side you're dealing with much higher voltages for much longer runs, and that is a problem for any cable, but most home stuff is going to be 15-20 feet or shorter. Even at low volumes, home amps output 10,20,30 volts from the speaker jacks. That's enough to reduce emi and rf induced noise in speaker cables to negligible levels. Now with interconnects, all those tips about not running alongside high voltage definitely applies. Cross a power cable if you have to, don't coil up near a power cable,outlet/power center, etc etc. |
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Jun 18, 2015 22:15:18 GMT -5
These problems you describe is what interconnects are most prone to, especially in a home environment. Speaker cable, not so much. Maybe in the pro side you're dealing with much higher voltages for much longer runs, and that is a problem for any cable, but most home stuff is going to be 15-20 feet or shorter. Even at low volumes, home amps output 10,20,30 volts from the speaker jacks. That's enough to reduce emi and rf induced noise in speaker cables to negligible levels. Now with interconnects, all those tips about not running alongside high voltage definitely applies. Cross a power cable if you have to, don't coil up near a power cable,outlet/power center, etc etc. For sure interconnects and mic cables can be more prone to interference, but interference from power cables to speaker cables is not unusual. BTW our standard home power is 220/240 volts in Australia but I doubt that makes enough difference to the power cable interference issues. Cheers Gary |
|
|
|
Post by guzz46 on Jun 18, 2015 22:47:21 GMT -5
I vote for vertical too, a long time ago I used to have a pair of NAD C272's in a horizontal biamp configuration driving some Paradigm Studio 100's, I tried vertical (using them like monoblocks) and it was much better, channel separation was better, and it was more dynamic too, like I had more power in reserve, which I put down to the fact that in horizontal one amp was taxed much more because it was driving six 7" woofers, but in vertical each amp only had three 7" woofers to deal with.
|
|
|
|
Post by generalkorrd on Jun 18, 2015 22:49:42 GMT -5
These problems you describe is what interconnects are most prone to, especially in a home environment. Speaker cable, not so much. Maybe in the pro side you're dealing with much higher voltages for much longer runs, and that is a problem for any cable, but most home stuff is going to be 15-20 feet or shorter. Even at low volumes, home amps output 10,20,30 volts from the speaker jacks. That's enough to reduce emi and rf induced noise in speaker cables to negligible levels. Now with interconnects, all those tips about not running alongside high voltage definitely applies. Cross a power cable if you have to, don't coil up near a power cable,outlet/power center, etc etc. For sure interconnects and mic cables can be more prone to interference, but interference from power cables to speaker cables is not unusual. BTW our standard home power is 220/240 volts in Australia but I doubt that makes enough difference to the power cable interference issues. Cheers Gary Yes, the 220 does make a difference and has a better chance of being an issue. |
|
|
|
Post by mgbpuff on Jun 19, 2015 3:57:55 GMT -5
Actually the lower US voltage of 110 to 120v would tend to cause more interference because for a given wattage load, the current is twice as much. Magnetic fields are caused by current especially when closely coupled. Also I fail to understand why people keep dissing the advantages of balanced wiring. These advantages are scientifically verifiable, not some audiophile hocus pocus. I vote for vertical for physical wiring purposes and for less instantaneously combined loading on a single shared power transformer in each of the units.
|
|
|
|
Post by vcautokid on Jun 19, 2015 6:30:38 GMT -5
Keep in mind that some planars and electrostats can see as low as a .75 ohm load. Martin Logan at least has one speaker that does that. Magneplanars can dip easily to 1.5 ohms. When bridging, your amp sees half those values. Something to keep in mind.
At louder volumes this could be interesting, or not.
|
|
