Ideally , Bi-amping should have identical pair of stereoamplifiers or 4 mono-blocks, as most audiophiles know. different amplifiers or monoblocks , can work as well , if you insert volume control just before the more powerful amplifier. this volume control can be passive volume control using resistors & you can find this in DIY Audiophile oulets, e,g. Hificollective, Uk or similar. or, Transformer based Volume attenuator, which is not dissimlar from some passive preamps , which is based on transformer , but, this one has only 1 input & 1 output. I have this setup in one of my systems. T/T; Rui Borges , Arm; Safir9, Cartridge; Goldfinger, PhonoStage; The master groove Signature, Preamplifier; Wafac PRT modified , 4 mono blocks driving Vivid Giya 2. Valve Amp, Audio Music 833 Ultima Siver transformers Monos , deliver around 150 Watt to High & mid part of the speakers straight from preamp to the monoblocks using 3 meter IC. The bottom end Using SS Acoustic Art III MKII, which deliver over 800 watt. IC from the premp is 2 meter to volume attenuator, which is specially made silver transformer in pretty box by Audio Music ( china) , then 1 meter IC from the volume control box to the SS Mono. The sound is simply glorious as you match the output of the stronger Amplifier to the other one through volume control. you don`t have to make a special volume control box. Any good passive premp will do ( Resistor or transformer based) Obviously, better quality will be more desirable. chose the one with one input preferably. Happy listening
Bi amping with two different pairs of monoblocks
I'm wanting to bi-amp my Canton 1K speakers with my Triode TRX M845 monos doing the LF and borrowed Vacuum State 300B monos doing the highs.
The speakers each have 4 binding posts with links between them which I'll remove which will separate the H & L frequencies
My source is an Oppo 203. I'm thinking of using rca Y splitters like these AudioQuest - Hard Y-Adapter RCA Splitter (1x Male to 2x Female) - Music Direct
Will this layout work for me or does it need tweaking?
Ideally , Bi-amping should have identical pair of stereoamplifiers or 4 mono-blocks, as most audiophiles know. different amplifiers or monoblocks , can work as well , if you insert volume control just before the more powerful amplifier. this volume control can be passive volume control using resistors & you can find this in DIY Audiophile oulets, e,g. Hificollective, Uk or similar. or, Transformer based Volume attenuator, which is not dissimlar from some passive preamps , which is based on transformer , but, this one has only 1 input & 1 output. I have this setup in one of my systems. T/T; Rui Borges , Arm; Safir9, Cartridge; Goldfinger, PhonoStage; The master groove Signature, Preamplifier; Wafac PRT modified , 4 mono blocks driving Vivid Giya 2. Valve Amp, Audio Music 833 Ultima Siver transformers Monos , deliver around 150 Watt to High & mid part of the speakers straight from preamp to the monoblocks using 3 meter IC. The bottom end Using SS Acoustic Art III MKII, which deliver over 800 watt. IC from the premp is 2 meter to volume attenuator, which is specially made silver transformer in pretty box by Audio Music ( china) , then 1 meter IC from the volume control box to the SS Mono. The sound is simply glorious as you match the output of the stronger Amplifier to the other one through volume control. you don`t have to make a special volume control box. Any good passive premp will do ( Resistor or transformer based) Obviously, better quality will be more desirable. chose the one with one input preferably. Happy listening |
Bi-amping isn’t something you do half-baked. Y cables will attenuate the signal somewhat, but the real point has been made above. If you are going to biamp, you should be using an active crossover between your preamp and the power amps. That is the correct "Y cable." I have tried the method above and it may sound cool at first but you will soon realize the imbalance in power between the monoblock pairs unless they are identical. Good crossovers have gain adjustment to get it right. I would look for a good analog crossover. Marchand makes some decent ones without being too budget-crippling and Phil will answer your questions directly. I should also say that bi-amping really only makes sense if you can bypass the crossover in the speakers. |
(Knotscott) My suggestion eases the BASS Burden of the high pass amplifier relying on the speakers existing crossover to fill the Original Designers aural goals. Most definitely if going full active crossover, I would go DSP crossover to allow all manners of parameters to adjust |
Active crossovers have been mentioned, and can have several benefits if the circumstances are right. In most cases it requires bypassing the stock passive crossovers, which is a fairly big change to a set of speakers....certainly doable for many, but if the crossovers employ corrections, baffle steps, impedance compensations, zobel networks, etc.,the plot thickens. Just swapping in a simple active crossover may have a very different effect than the passive crossover. More advanced active crossovers could probably accommodate all of those, but it’s wise to not assume it’s a straight forward swap. Plus some passive crossovers are excellent and are really fine tuned. Food for thought if anyone is contemplating similar. |
|
I find this thread interesting as I'm about to embark upon a biamping expedition myself. I have two beautifully refurbished Yamaha m2s. I plan on building a electronic crossover with burson op-amp replacements. This crossover will cross over at the mid-base mid-range crossover point of 400 cycles which is exactly what my speakers use. That way the amps will work in their sweet spots, my preamp is an anthem str and will automatically cross over to the crossover to the two amps running my founder 100s and to my sub xr13. I think the external crossover is the answer to this problem for the original poster. Someone mentioned a Dayton DSP which I believe is just a rebranded mini DSP which would do the trick because it would create a crossover point. Allow you to adjust the timing and allow you to adjust the levels for each amplifier that has a good chance of succeeding. If each amp has level controls this is definitely a must try. All the people that say this is a fruitless proposition. Forget that as audio files everything we do is a an experiment in our constant search for audio perfection. No experiment is fruitless if it increases the knowledge that you have about reproducing sound in modern systems, that is just the journey that we take. I've been doing this since I was 16 and could drive myself to my local audio store and set up a friendship that lasted through my teenage years. Go ahead and hook them up. And balance them and see where you stand. You can always unhook them and go back to the old way. Try them forwards and backwards. You never know what you're going to hear. Have fun!
|
When mixing brands your answer is maybe. Physical it’s possible, but you probably won’t get the synergy you’re looking for. The biggest obstacle is that every company has a specific sound and finding two companies that sound the same isn’t going to be easy, especially with there being less and less brick and mortars willing to lend equipment. All the best. |
Instead of this method of bi-amping that you are considering, how about a different "bi-amping" approach that might yield as good if not better results? You don’t mention in your post if you have any subwoofers but here is an alternative approach, given that your Triode TRX M845 tube monos have a low damping factor relative solid state and thus controlling bass drivers is not their forte (but musicality is is - in particular - the midrange): High-pass the signal out of your preamp at, say 80 Hz, and let your tube amps and main speakers handle everything from 80 Hz and up. Tap the lineout from your preamp and send it to two very good subwoofers that take care of the duties from 80 Hz and down. This way you’re using the DSP in high-quality subwoofers paired with their solid-state amplifiers, and designated woofers for the bass, which should yield you a better and tighter bass response. You also have more freedom in where you place your subs to get a more even frequency response throughout your listening room. So, instead of spending money on the second set of monoblocks for your mid and high frequencies, spend the money on high-quality subwoofers instead. Yes, your main speakers are very good but they can’t touch the bass reach and response of high-quality subwoofers, not least since the subwoofers will be powered by solid-state amps with a significantly better ability to control the drivers than what tube amps can. |
Every case is different. I don’t agree that it’s a ridiculous proposition. It depends on several variables. |
You do need some sort of gain control to balance the amps .some amps have the gain control on them. I have systems that are tri amp and quad amped. These are line arrays have many speakers like infinity irs v ect.make sure you check on manufacture max wattage per channel. Match that with your amps.enjoy the hunt. |
The whole proposition is ridiculous. Does anyone really expect two $5k speaker cables to sound better than one $10k one? The amp powering the tweeter needs to deliver a miniscule load, it's not worth it. I researched this subject extensively and unless you have exhausted every other option to squeeze out the last drop of resolution, forget it. |
@knotscott You nailed it! All you need is one! |
@lordmelton How about using two of them for a total of $100.00? That would work. If not please explain why! |
Monoblocks fall into the vertical bi-amp camp. You’re looking to add second set of monoblocks in a horizontal bi-amp scenario. Level matching between amps will likely be an issue unless both amps have the same gain or a method to adjust gain. As mentioned, that’s a potential issue that will need a solution before proceeding. The splitters should be fine. I successfully use similar splitter to what you linked in a horizontal bi-amp setup connected to a preamp, but my second amp has gain adjustment. |