"Headroom" usually relates to the extra energy the amp has available to deal with (loud) transients in music without clipping.
Back to biamping --
a) I wouldn't have much to add to Sean's post above.
b) A quick reference of what you may expect with "passive" biamping is given by warjarret above. The result doesn't justify the cost -- esp. when compared to normal biamping (i.e. amp directly driving the drive units). That's a different level altogether.
...Unless you have a notoriously underpowered amp -- which you don't.
If V Scheik really means what he says about these spkrs having been designed for bi-amping, then he can provide you with the cross-over schematic, and you can take it from there. |
Macrojack
thank you, youve been most helpful with your input and experience both here and elsewhere with my queries. Really, though, is bi-amping ever truly a 'need'? for that matter little of what we do with Hi Fi gear is ever a need I suspect. Personally, I think it simple ego.
"Blindjim- Your interest in bi-amping seems to be driven by boredom or curiosity more than need."
...eg. above. But you are probably right.
"And, while bi-amping might be an available option, your speakers were not designed with that in mind."
... I beg to differ, the designer did say differently, and if optimum performance were to be achieved. As did at least one reviewer, who tried several combinations during his account of the JRs. Given the former's, more so than the latter's input, and the curiosity/.desire you hit upon, here we are.... for regardless their accounts, one personal, one public, Ive thought for some time now, to have a system with two amps
and I sort of do now, yet not in the classical sense, as my amp (s) share a single chassis.
I'm fast approaching the culmination of this exercise. three or four grand more and I should be near complete. Awaiting only a DAC to integrate my carosel (s) & PC.
Thus I'm pondering with some Enthusiasm, the notion of bi amping... so as to eek out that last bit or simply for the experience... I've never had a tube/tube set up. As the best sound I've yet to hear came from an ALL tubes rig, on the JRs, in fact, I'd like very much to attain that presentation to the degree I can afford. Ultimately. Though afforability looms large in this venture, narrowing the paths, and casting a brighter light upon the intricacies of each avenue seems only prudent to me. I'm sort of a belt and suspenders type. Measure two or three times, cut once. Knowing in advance and settting down the plan provides direction, and sets goals. Remaining flexible along the way is a must too. ...but that's me. That's just what I do. Research, therefore, is quite important when doing a new thing.
Thus whatever input I can obtain, from other's experience is of great import though not solely to myself, given these threads that increase all who are 'curious'. It's curiosity, remember, that drove us to folow our dreams and schemes down the Hi Fi Highway.
and thats one thoroughfare whose toll can weigh quite heavily if it is errantly pursued.
Which brings me to this.. a dealer once told me that bridging amps reduces headroom
and the deficits outweigh the advantages
were I to gain another vk500 and just go that way, though I know it not a prerequisite, would bridging both amps actually be a poor choice, given it a vertical biamping set up? (thats one amp per speaker, right?) . ?? AND Whats headroom, exactly? AND Whats headroom, exactly? |
I have passively biamped various speakers, with stunning results. I call it dual-amp biwiring, not "biamping", because traditionally biamping has ALWAYS meant an external active crossover. I have tried two identical McCormack amps and also two identical Music Reference amps. I would NOT mix different kinds of amps. One stereo amp devoted to the left channel, and one for the right is my favorite way to go. For speakers, I have compared 2-channels vs. 4-channels on Magnepan, Musical Fidelity, and Signet. Each of these speakers is set-up for bi-wiring, with two pair of inputs per speaker. In every case, the fine dynamics and liveliness of the music has increased significantly. In every other way, I hear no significant difference in sound, but increased liveliness is EXACTLY what differentiates a great system from a good one. |
Blindjim: Unless you're technically inclined with test equipment, stick to using identical amps that have been gain matched at the factory. Otherwise, it is easy to run into some strange situations that seem to vary from recording to recording.
Other than that, passively bi-amping is worth a small gain in terms of dynamic range and slightly smoothing things out. Unless one is using an under-powered amp for the specific speakers / desired listening levels, the associated costs aren't really worth the efforts in my opinion. Like you said, the extra amp, interconnects, speaker cabling, etc... can really add up quickly. If running big amps, another dedicated line might also have to be factored in.
When all is said and done, the money that you spent bi-amping could have probably been put to better use by either upgrading the speakers and / or amp. Adding a quantity of gear won't necessarily get you the quality of signal that you desire. Sean
> |
Electronics isn't magic and fairy dust. It's learning and experience. If something is made for a dollar, it can be made better for two dollars. Either that, or you can completely screw it up and call it a learning experience. |
I feel like the little devil on Blindjim´s shoulder....
Do biamplify It is great you wont regret it!!!
It is really not that difficult, I would not change the speakers a bit, leave alone the speakers Xover just get the amps to run better, active or passive line level Xover is good...
This is a hobbie right? We do crazy things to achieve better sound..So get your hands dirty and work on it!!
Trust me it is great!
Cheers |
Blindjim- Your interest in bi-amping seems to be driven by boredom or curiosity more than need. And, while bi-amping might be an available option, your speakers were not designed with that in mind. I believe that the Vandy and VS speakers mentioned above have proprieary inboard amplification designed specifically for the woofers they are driving. In your application, the matching would be by chance.
If you are unhappy with what your speakers provide, consider replacing them with something more satisfying. If you like what you have, then consider hiring Rives to upgrade your listening environment or buy a Magic Clock.
Otherwise just sit back and enjoy. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. |
Maineiac, your confusing something, those are Active Sub systems in the DB99.. Not really a biamp, its basically a seperate electronic crossed over system. Yes Active bi-amping can be effective like the db99, however we are talking about a passive standard 3 way type crossover with 2 amps hooked up. Different application in the end. |
I have been thinking about the same thing as I own VSA-4JRs and have run them with 200W SS and 80W tube amp. There are compromises with each of these. It is interesting that a couple of well respected speaker designs are essentially bi-amped, the Vandy 5A and Von Schweikert 99DB. I think that it could be worth it on the 4JRs. |
Undertow
Sage advice. Thanks.
|
That speaker is not that large, and may not need tons of current for very satisfying listening levels.. The advantage of bi-amp is too balance out a top heavy speaker for the most part, loaning an entire channel to take on the bass drivers to relieve that saturation to the highs and mids.. It will be very dependent on the amps, and speakers reaction to it whether it will be worth it.
Honestly its tuff to find Biamping always better, but in some situation it could sound better. It would not probably hurt at all if using 4 exact same channels, however might not have enough advance for you to keep the investment into it. However definatley ACTIVE bi-amping, which will be at least removing your passive Crossovers from the Woofer section can be a whole different thing, and yes if you active the whole speaker you can juice more out of the finer points of discrete channels.
However again the cost and the needed equipment, Tuning, and Time can outweigh the the "Is it worth it factor". Try it first with 2 identicle amps simply hooked thru the passive crossovers. see if you wish to proceed, its the only way, you have to hear the investment or forget it. |
Sorry PLLXO:
http://www.t-linespeakers.org/tech/filters/passiveHLxo.html |
http://www.marchandelec.com/ |
This is a pretty famous Active Xover I guess High End though I never used it myself:
http://www.marchandelec.com/xovers.html
This is Passive option:
http://www.t-linespeakers.org/tech/filters/passiveHLxo.html
All the Best |
Ozzy
Good question. Hope there is an answer forthcoming. |
It seems to me that an Electronic Crossover is the way to go. I remember years back I had 4 Carver M500 Amps that I used a Furnam Electronic crossover. It was a Pro type with 1/4 " phone plugs. With adapters I was able to make it work quite well. It had variable croosover, db slopes adjustments and Main and single level controls. I sold it and all the Carver Amps, when I thought I needed "better quality Equipment". (Still searching after all these years)
After reading this thread, I want to ask,
Is there any type of Audiophile Electronic Cross over today? |
Blindjim, Do not let it go so fast, Biamping does work and to very good extent. I really like tube mids.
Just use the Xover in your speakers, they were designed with them and you should keep them, just add a tubed amp in the mids and highs, and an SS on the bottom, use a passive preamp like the EVS attenuators or the Luminous Audio preamp on the bass amp and let the tubed amp run free. The speaker xover will allow your speakers to do their job properly. You will win much more definition and dynamics on both bass and mids, you will get the "tubed" sound on the mids.
Since the power needed for mids and highs is much less you can do with a simpler push pull amp with a coule of power tubes per side, these have better definition to my ears that huge monster tube amps with 6 or 8 tubes per side, wich is what you will need if you decide to go tubes without biamping (these are much more expensive also!)
So finally from the preamp add a "Y" connector to the tube amp on one side and to the mids and highs; on the other connector to the passive preamp and the bass SS amp, that way you can adjust the volume needed on the bass amp.
Once you get the hang of it you can add a passive line level Xover (PLLXO) on the tube amp to avoid getting low freq. into it (say from 100hz up) that will help the amps a lot, more definiftion and dinamics again.
If you like symphonic music this is the best way to go!
If you are into girl with guitar music you dont really need biamping.
I am not biamping right now since my new speakers wont let me, and I miss it, I am thinking on adding a pair of subwoofers and a PLLXO on my tube amps....
Do try it! |
Mark has given a great
My system was passively bi-amped for a few years. At first I used a pair of SS amps, one on each speaker. Then, just like Blindjim, I wanted to add tube amps to the mix since I was enjoying having a tubed preamp. So, I sold off one SS amp and then added a pair of tubed mono-blocks that drove the mid and high freq. and let the SS handle the woofers on both. A horizontal configuration. The gains where within 1 dB, not perfect but a pretty good match. Now I was getting closer to what I wanted to hear, but there was still something missing. I could not put my finger on exactly what it was. Music sounded better, but still there was some lack of even delivery across the spectrum.
I kept listen and also kept researching. It finally occured to me that what I was really trying to do was compensate for the short-comings of the cross-over circuitry and in-efficiency of the speakers. I have sinced moved to a single, high quality single amp and a much more efficient 2-way speaker. The dynamics, clarity, speed, timbre, pretty much everything is much, much better. I can play the sweetest chamber music or the hardest rock or the fastest jazz and hear so much more musically.
Our listening preferences and system goals may be quite different, but I offer my experiences since it sounds like you may be looking for what I was looking for. Hopefully, you can find something useful in what I've written hear.
Best of luck in your search,
Dan |
I'm using a hybrid on top and a SS amp on the bottom of my Vmps Rm 40's. Many people will tell you that at least with planar/electrostats that some tube magic on top can be magic. They were right!
I think the main advantage is to take the best qualities of two amps and use them there as I have. Another benefit however is reducing the amount of crossover components you're using. In the end experiementation is key. With our VS's I don't know as I've not heard them. You could also try various tube preamps. Please remember different tube preamps will sound widely different. Some not very euphonic like Audio Research to somewhat more, Conrad Johnson, to syrupy.
Biamping in my experience in my system has been the best way to go. If you haven't owned any tube gear it's a must try. A hybrid amp like the Van Alstine Fetvalves are excellent. The Blue Circle I had also was an outstanding amp, although quite expensive for the money. On the bass using this Rotel 991 is excellent. The bass quality is outstanding and I'm picky in that department. For under 500 bucks there's a few amps that will work well for the bass.
Best of luck and have fun! |
Ngjockey
... got it. Thank you.
Markphd
Got it. As I was listening to the input you posted it started coming back to me... the vertical thing was the way I initially thought to go... with the same VK500 w/BP amps. Possibly bridged... though not at first. then I thought better of that deal and figured on the tube + SS. Given the refresher/reminder course you were so kind to post, I see a bit more clearly that 'dream' could well become the 'nightmare'... and pricey. Thanks for the reality check. Another thing VK had told me about was the 'gain' issues. Even two 500's wouldn't be entirely matched exactly... and it was very doubtful that BAT could match them perfectly.
Well, gee. that's a drag. Oh, well... it was a nice dream while it lasted. I'm still dead set on trying tubed amps though.
'preciate the input on using the Sony rec., I've already got one, yet never thought to use it that way... mine puts out a bit more power than the suggested one, but i'm too disappointed now to give it a shot.
Bi amping given the info posted here, at least for me, seems way more involved than I had thought. But being an audionut, I thought the "bi-amping path" to really be the 'end all be all' in audio.
I more than appreciate the efforts, knowledge and experiences you have provided me. Thank you very much. |
An interesting thing to try is to get the panasonic Sa-xr57 digital receiver. Which is a 100 watts x 7 and has a biamp function built into the unit. When biamped in stereo mode, it uses 4 of its internal amps for the bass section and one each to the highs. So it uses 6 of its internal amps when in biamp mode. All you have to do is run your speaker wire and push the biwire function and you are good to go for 300 bucks. It also has a great sound and has suprisingly great bass tone and slam and never gets hot.
You can also increase or lower the gain to the bass or treble, independant of tone controls if one seems hot to you. I know it is not expensive and no tubes are glowing, but you might find it interesting. |
Okay. Your amp is fine.
Doctor Mark's reply, though considerate and correct, is just the tip of the iceberg. Feel free to experiment, learn and have fun. |
Keep in mind when you bi-amp the Vr-4 Jr's you will still be using all the componants of the crossover just seprated. There for there will NOT be a gaint gain diffrence.
The important part is will you be able to detect where the low end leaves off and the mids/highs start.Also level matching and you will never be 100% sure if the correct levels are right. Put the money in a great single amp and bi-wire. I have Large von schweikerts and biamping wasnt the end all. |
Jtinn and Brrgrr, you do not need to use the same amps top and bottom. Many people mix and match when biamping horizontally precisely because they want each amps' distinctive characteristics, tubes on top and solid state on the bottom for example. The amps do need to have the same gain however. If they don't, then whatever is connected to the higher gain amp will sound louder for a given volume setting. So you could have woofers that sound louder than tweeters, or vice versa. It would be like having a vetical balance control within a speaker. If the amps don't have the same gain, some will have an internal setting for gain adjustment. Others would require a technician to adjust one to match the other. |
"Curious why you need to use the same amps for the 4jr's ?"
Many amps from different manufacturers have different gain which will affect loudness of one driver in relation to another, eg. you could end up with a really loud tweeter! |
I've stayed away from biamping with different types of amps because of coherency issues. Even with steep slope crossovers you have some mixing of dissimilar amplifier characteristics. |
Jtinn,
Curious why you need to use the same amps for the 4jr's ? |
When you passively biamp, you continue to use the crossover network in the speaker. The signal comes out of the pre-amp and you feed two power amps. If power amp number one feeds the tweeter and woofer of speaker number one, and power amp number two feeds the tweeter and woofer of speaker number two, it is called vertical biamping. On the other hand, If power amp number one feeds the tweeters of both speaker number one and speaker number two, and power amp number two feeds the woofers of both speaker number one and speaker number two, it is called horizontal biamping. In both cases, however, it is "passive" because you continue to use the crossover in the speaker.
Because of inefficiencies in speaker crossovers, another type of biamping is "active" biamping. With this, the signal comes out of the preamp into an electronic crossover, which separates frequencies into high and low frequencies. The high frequencies then go to power amp number one and then to the tweeter terminals of both speakers. The low frequencies go from the electronic crossover to power amp number two and then to the woofer terminals of both speakers. Since the separation of the signal into high and low frequencies has already occurred, you do not need the speaker crossover to do the job, so it must be disconnected.
With a precise separation of the signal by the electronic crossover (which does not occur with a speaker crossover), active biamping eliminates a whole bunch of various distortions which can otherwise occur. It also increases your apparent amplifier power, which helps with dynamics, because passive speaker crossovers suck up about 90% of your signal.
In active biamping, not only do you need to buy another amp, but you need to buy the electronic crossover, so it is a bit more expensive to implement. In addition, you need to perform surgery on your speaker by disconnecting the crossover.
It is extremely important to note that going active presumes that the speaker can be modified in this fashion. Many speaker designers don't envision their speaker crossovers being eliminated for active operation, so they are not desgined to be modified in this fashion. It then becomes a crap shoot as to whether it will be an improvement or not. Unless you know for sure that your speakers are meant to be upgraded in this fashion, you probably should not even attempt to go active. |
Markphd
Passive? Active? Mind clarifying the diffs from one to the other?
My VK5i preamp has two sets of active outs for amps... BAT probably figured on two same amps (bridged and/or unbridged) with gain controls for each ch./side... and that's it... oh, and a line out... all balanced. So same - same seems the least troublesome path... but I simply don't know. It's that darn tube sound that gets me to want to do this....
Ngjockey
.. Sorry, man, I don't get what you're saying. I need to change my amp? ... and I was just getting to like it... or maybe you meant don't bi amp as the amp is fine... sorry, that statement was too open ended for me. |
Based on my experience with Linn equipment, which is meant to be upgraded by multi-amping, I would say that passive biamping is a small, but noticeable improvement. However, I question its cost effectiveness. On the other hand, active biamping is a huge upgrade. My opinion is that passive biamping is just an intermediary step, for budgetary reason, on the way to an active system. If a person was going to stop at the passive biamping point, I would say that you could probably get a bigger return for the investment by upgrading elsewhere. |
You do not need the same amp for top and bottom, you can have SS for the woofer and tube for the top or 2 ss amps that dont match, as long as atleast one has gain control that will allow you to match output to your taste, I am Bi-Amping my VMPS (wich is designed to be Bi-Amped, I also Bi-Amped my Innersound Eros (both use an outboard cross-over.
Although there is alot to be said about keeping it simple Bi-Amping allows you to get the sound you want in the Mid and treble regions that one amp may not provide, ofcourse one great killer amp will provide great results.
I use a high power Carver for the woofer and an Aragon for the mids and tweeters. I also like the gain on the bass amp because it gives you some bass adjustment for various recordings and moods. |
With those speakers, as with most speakers in general, you will see a greater return for your money by going tube preamp instead of biamping with tube/ss. Everyone will eventually try to biamp and many will go back to single amp of high quality. The JR's would sound just fine with a good biamp configuration but the money spent on that upgrade would be better spent going to the SR version. Night and day difference between the two.
Good luck! |
Not with your system.
If you had an amp that wasn't up to the speakers, that would be a different story. Biamping is rarely as easy as plugging in another amp and wires. Unless you have another amp hidden in the closet or a friend willing to loan for a trial, there are too many variables. |
It has been a long time since I have bi amped but I have found that I like keeping it simple with the highest quality components I can afford. Currently I am using a pair of McCormack DNA-1 monoblocks with all of SMCs mods and enjoy them more than anything else I have had on the Essence 10A speakers. Hope this helps. From my expierence more is not always better. Will follow this thread to see what you decide. |
If you are going to bi-amp the VR4JR's, you will need the same amps on the top as you have on the bottom. |
