|
|
Post by pmd918 on Feb 1, 2010 1:28:15 GMT -5
You may or may not have seen my posts going back and forth between XPA2/5 system and UPA1/2 system.
I've decided to go the XPA route even though I don't really need the power and the seven channels (for now). But I really like the idea of being future proofed. I'd like this system to last me for a while.
So for the time being, I'm going to run a 5.1 system. What should I do with the two unused channels:
1) Leave them unused;
2) Bi-amp the front L/R with the XPA-2 and two of the XPA-5 channels; or
3) Bi-amp the center channel with two of the XPA-5 channels and leave one channel unused?
I know that bi-amping is way overrated, but since I have the extra "amps", why not use them?
Probably doesn't matter much, but I hate the idea of leaving two channels idle.
|
|
|
|
Post by Porscheguy on Feb 1, 2010 7:26:03 GMT -5
You may or may not have seen my posts going back and forth between XPA2/5 system and UPA1/2 system. I've decided to go the XPA route even though I don't really need the power and the seven channels (for now). But I really like the idea of being future proofed. I'd like this system to last me for a while. So for the time being, I'm going to run a 5.1 system. What should I do with the two unused channels: 1) Leave them unused; 2) Bi-amp the front L/R with the XPA-2 and two of the XPA-5 channels; or 3) Bi-amp the center channel with two of the XPA-5 channels and leave one channel unused? I know that bi-amping is way overrated, but since I have the extra "amps", why not use them? Probably doesn't matter much, but I hate the idea of leaving two channels idle. There is really no right answer here. I agree, in my experience, bi-amping is a bit over rated, it really depends on your speakers. I've experimented quite a bit over the years and never found any sonic benefit, perhaps others have... You could also use the other channels to run speakers in another room if you have zone 2 capabilities. Letting them sit idle won't hurt a thing. |
|
|
|
Post by kenkurko on Feb 1, 2010 7:42:30 GMT -5
I'm no expert by any means but I don't think bi-amping your mains with the XPA-2 and XPA-5 is such a good idea. Not sure though...
|
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Ben on Feb 1, 2010 9:36:52 GMT -5
So you have a 5.1 setup with a XPA-2 running the fronts, and an XPA-5 running the center and two rears, correct?
I'd take this opportunity to experiment, and get your own impressions of the amps. You can remove the XPA-2 and try using all channels of the XPA-5 for a while, then go back to the XPA-2 to see how much of an improvement the XPA-2 is for your setup. After that, try using the XPA-2 for the rears, and then bi-amp your front main speakers with the XPA-5. This lets you see if bi-amping makes any difference in your setup. After all this, if you decide to keep the XPA-2 on the fronts and the XPA-5 running only the three remaining speakers, there's absolutely nothing wrong with that.
|
|
|
|
Post by wowfactor on Feb 1, 2010 9:53:49 GMT -5
So you have a 5.1 setup with a XPA-2 running the fronts, and an XPA-5 running the center and two rears, correct? I'd take this opportunity to experiment, and get your own impressions of the amps. You can remove the XPA-2 and try using all channels of the XPA-5 for a while, then go back to the XPA-2 to see how much of an improvement the XPA-2 is for your setup. After that, try using the XPA-2 for the rears, and then bi-amp your front main speakers with the XPA-5. This lets you see if bi-amping makes any difference in your setup. After all this, if you decide to keep the XPA-2 on the fronts and the XPA-5 running only the three remaining speakers, there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. I'm with Mr. Bean on this one...... I'd start with just using the XPA-5 to run the 5 speakers then experiment from there... Also, as said it won't hurt the XPA-5 if you don't use all it's channels... |
|
|
|
Post by pmd918 on Feb 1, 2010 10:31:54 GMT -5
Thanks for the ideas. Experimenting is fun, isn't it!
|
|
|
|
Post by guerillaw on Feb 4, 2010 20:37:17 GMT -5
I agree regarding experimenting, especially putting them up against each other two channel. Also, don't forget that the xpa-5 has different power ratings depending on the channels used, so it may sound better running that center channel and surround with less strain on it since only 3 channels are in use.
If you do test them out in two channel, please post your findings and let us know if the difference, if there is one, is worth the extra coin.
In your situation I would be interested to see if the xpa-2 earned its keep or whether the xpa-5 was enough for our needs alone.
|
|
|
|
Post by bourbonncigars on Feb 4, 2010 21:41:46 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by slbenz on Feb 4, 2010 21:59:24 GMT -5
I would also agree with Mr. Ben. Time to experiment. For me, I have my front mains actively biamped with my XPA-5 and for my Magnepan IIIa speakers, it makes a big difference in clarity, realism, and dynamics over using a single channel and the external crossover network that came with the speakers.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 5, 2010 0:00:33 GMT -5
I'm with Mr. Bean on this one...... Did Wowfactor say Mr. Bean?  (Sorry, if this is off topic) |
|
|
|
Post by moehoward on Feb 5, 2010 5:54:28 GMT -5
would it be viable to run the mains with an xpa2 and biamp with the unused two channels of an xpa5 to biamp the two main speakers?
|
|
|
|
Post by Porscheguy on Feb 5, 2010 7:02:27 GMT -5
would it be viable to run the mains with an xpa2 and biamp with the unused two channels of an xpa5 to biamp the two main speakers? Yes. |
|
|
|
Post by RightinLA on Feb 5, 2010 8:34:23 GMT -5
Run 2 XPA-5's divided left-right so that in two channel mode the front L and R speakers each have their own "mono" amp. Works nicely for me with a 4 ohm Polk LSi system.
|
|
ntrain42
Emo VIPs 
Smoke me a kipper, I'll be home before breakfast!
Posts: 2,969
|
Post by ntrain42 on Feb 5, 2010 8:41:28 GMT -5
would it be viable to run the mains with an xpa2 and biamp with the unused two channels of an xpa5 to biamp the two main speakers? Just to clarify here: Your looking at bi amping one set of main speakers with both an XPA-2 AND 2 of the unused channels of the XPA-5? If this is what your asking, then the answer would be no. You will throw off your speakers balance through the passive xover network as the XPA-2 has more power and handles varying speaker impedance curves in a different manner over the XPA-5. Unless you have some type of RTA, or mic and RTA software, and the ability to level set the individual amplifiers gains independently(and even an independent EQ for that matter), then I wouldnt advise this. Bi amping is really a waste of time unless you by pass the speakers internal xover and use a digital xover in the signal path before the amp section. When you biamp passively, the amps still run full range and you get no real benefit whatsoever, your basically running double the power in parallel and gain no appreciable headroom or even signal clarity, your at the mercy of the speakers passive xover network. If you want to bi amp, plan on spending some good money on a fully variable digital xover network and spending time pulling apart your speakers to bypass its xover network. |
|
virgil
Seeker Of Truth
Posts: 2
|
Post by virgil on Oct 12, 2010 11:17:58 GMT -5
Thanks for the ideas. Experimenting is fun, isn't it! So how would you stack rank the options after testing them? |
|
|
|
Post by shayking on Oct 12, 2010 12:47:56 GMT -5
if your speakers and the drivers are behind passive crossovers, it is pretty much pointless
Bi-amping is for EQ'd/ Active crossover drivers.
If you could adjust the gain on the individual amps, there maybe a little improvements but not much.
It's a waste to Biamp speakers already crossed over passively. Unless you "EQ" each amp and then you can pull evey bit of performance out of your drivers, but the passive crossover will still hold you back a little.
but if you have the amps and the speaker wire, go nuts.
|
|
