Wouldn't you just run the speaker wires from the amp to the inputs of subwoofer 1, then run speaker wires from the subwoofer 1 outputs to the inputs of subwoofer 2. Then run speaker wires from the outputs of subwoofer 2 to your speakers?
@carpathian , I am not a bright light when it comes to this stuff, but what the manual for my M&K sub indicates for one sub (using speaker wire mode) is L speaker wire from amp to L speaker wire IN in sub and then from L speaker wire OUT in sub to L speaker. And then repeat for the R speaker wire.
That’s with ONE sub.
But it makes me think that the way to go with two subs is: from amp/to L speaker wire to IN in L sub/R speaker wire out of amp to R speaker wire IN in R sub/and then from L speaker wire OUT in L sub/out to L main speaker/and from R speaker wire OUT in R sub/out to R main speaker.
And I believe that this is the way @grislybutter is presently up & running with.
|
Now, when it comes to this business, bulbs don't come much dimmer than me.
I'm talking night light here. But, wouldn't you just simply do this:
Wouldn't you just run the speaker wires from the amp to the inputs of subwoofer 1, then run speaker wires from the subwoofer 1 outputs to the inputs of subwoofer 2. Then run speaker wires from the outputs of subwoofer 2 to your speakers?
|
And overall, the "sound chaos" I sometimes had when I set the frequency on the sub too high is gone.
. . . hmmmm. Before you were using the speaker wire from amp out to sub and then speaker wire out to mains mode before, right? So maybe that shoots down my theory about crossover in sub to speaker wire from sub to mains theory making the frequency adjustment on back of the sub inactive.
|
It does sound "thinner" maybe because I am keeping the low frequency from the speakers and I should dial it down.
I am assuming from this comment above that you are using speaker level input at this time, and if the way I interpreted that quote is accurate, the quote that I provided in my last post, what would be going on in that mode is the crossover in the sub is determining at what frequency the signal makes it to your mains. (Which actually should provide better integration, I would think.) However, as I also typed in my last post, I may not be understanding that correctly.
If it’s sounding "thinner" I guess there are a few possibilities. Subwoofer break in, meaning the amp, the driver, the crossover, probably the whole shebang of the new sub, probably enters into it. I am assuming that now you have one sub that is well broken in and one that is brand spanking new. You could play with the ’level" adjustments (NOT the frequency adjustments, which I am still assuming is aka the low pass filter) on back of the subs and see if that changes anything to your liking, but I am assuming that you have already done that.
With everything I have just typed, I do not know if a sub would have both a low pass filter and a crossover or only one or the other. It seems to me, and as I always say--I could very well be wrong, that in order to be able to use the RCAs, in that mode, it would have to have a low pass filter. Because if you think about it, in that mode your sub is operating independent of the mains. Your mains are not directly connected to the sub when you are using RCAs, therefore, a crossover in the sub would have no effect on the mains. So in the RCAs mode, what you would want to do is figure out how low (at what frequency) your mains are going down to, and then use that as the basis to start playing with the frequency adjustment of the low pass filter on back of the sub.
So if I’ve got that part right, then if you were using the speaker wires-from-amp-to-sub-then-out-to-mains-mode, then in that scenario it would be the crossover in the sub that would determine where the frequency that arrived at the main speakers would be. It would no longer be a full frequency signal the mains are seeing.
And if I’ve got all that right, which it is quite possible that I don’t, in the speaker wire and crossover of sub mode, it almost seems as if the frequency adjustment on back of the sub (the low pass filter) would not be active?
But then again, I may have all of that completely wrong.
Incredible how simple minded I can be and clueless about such simple things. Until I am not!
You and me both.
One benefit would be, if the frequencies were split, for the bookshelf speakers to have to produce the sound in a smaller range - which then makes the sub placement even more important.
That certainly seems as if it would be a benefit IF I have got that right about the speaker wire mode and the crossover. And yes, I can absolutely see that in either mode (RCAs/lowpaass or speaker wire/crossover) placement of the subwoofer is going to make a difference. But now I think I just realized what you are saying about that? If there is a crossover that lets frequency cross over from the sub to the mains at a fixed point, if you have your sub placed badly and there is a "hole" up around the crossover point of the frequency that the sub should be reproducing, then you are going to hear that hole as a bass deficit? Versus if you were using RCAs and the adjustable low pass on the back of the sub to adjust frequencies, that "hole" would be less likely to occur with your mains getting a full frequency signal?
|
@immathewj
OK. that would make sense. I will check out the manual for the PSW10 if indeed it matches the crossover. (I also might just open up the beast and see if there is a crossover). It does sound "thinner" maybe because I am keeping the low frequency from the speakers and I should dial it down. And overall, the "sound chaos" I sometimes had when I set the frequency on the sub too high is gone. Incredible how simple minded I can be and clueless about such simple things. Until I am not!
Thanks for figuring out my limitations  and educating me.
One benefit would be, if the frequencies were split, for the bookshelf speakers to have to produce the sound in a smaller range - which then makes the sub placement even more important.
|
Are you saying the in and out connections on my subs have a crossover in between them? What I am curious if it’s a filter actually, filtering anything out that maybe shouldn’t be
@grisly: hopefully someone will chime in and offer an explanation I can wrap my head around. For the time being I will say that it is my understanding that the dial on back of your sub where you adjust frequencies is the low pass filter, and that this adjustable low pass filter is what determines at what frequency the subwoofer starts trying to reproduce bass. In other words, if you set the low pass filter at, for an example, 60, theoretically your sub would reproduce 60 hZ and LOWER. In a perfect world your main left and right speakers, and this is just a hypothetical example, would reproduce bass down to 60 hZ and then quit, and in that same perfect world, your sub would reproduce NOTHING higher than 60 hZ, and this would be perfect sub/speakers integration (as I understand that when the sub and speakers start reproducing the same range of certain frequencies, using another hypothetical example: sub and speakers overlapping from 50 to 70 hZ this OVERLAP is when bass gets "muddy").
(So to "muddy" the waters some more, remember when I was attempting to explain the high pass filter? Using my high pass filter as an example, it is preset to pass on frequencies of 80 hZ and HIGHER to the main speakers. In the perfect world that I understand does not actually exist, if one was using a high pass filter that was passing on frequencies of 80 hZ and HIGHER to the mains, , then setting the lowpass filter on the sub to 80 hZ would mean that the sub is going to make bass from 80 hZ and LOWER. Perfect integration. But I understand room acoustics and other variables usually prevent frequencies from being lopped off EXACTLY where the filters are set.)
I did a search using does a subwoofer have a crossover for a search engine. Found a forum where someone provided this answer:
"Does a subwoofer have a crossover or a lowpass filter?
within the context of a sub. Same thing. However the crossover is designed to also feed the non-sub speaker.
A crossover separates the signal. Over the point goes one way, under goes another. Only the under would get used on a sub. The rest are used on the non-sub speakers of a system.
A low pass just removes and throws away stuff over the point."
So if I understand that correctly, and it seems quite possible that I do not, if the sub does have a crossover, it would come into play if and when one was using speaker wire from L and R speaker posts in amp out to L & R speaker inputs in subs, and then speaker wires out of subs into main speakers. And the crossover would determine at what frequency the signal would cross over to the main speakers.
Don’t take that last paragraph I just typed to the bank yet. Let’s hope some one who is knowledgeable on this subject weighs in and clarifies how this works..
|
@mitch2
sub’s crossover as a high-pass filter
Are you saying the in and out connections on my subs have a crossover in between them? What I am curious if it's a filter actually, filtering anything out that maybe shouldn't be
|
Sorry I didn't follow everything going on here. Y splitters on the RCA low level signal are ok.
|
@immatthewj
Your Klipsch link is the most applicable to what the OP is doing. The person on that link who suggested running the line level connectors to the subs first and then a second line level connection from the subs to the amps, was using the sub’s crossover as a high-pass filter. That does have its benefits but the trade-off is essentially adding additional crossover parts in the signal path. I have a fairly high-end, balanced Marchand passive high-pass filter here and, with my speakers, I like running them without the filter better than with it, so it sits in a box. The level of benefit from using a high-pass filter will depend on the bass capabilities and roll-off characteristics of the specific main speakers being used as well as the behavior of the amplifier powering the main speakers. However, since the main speakers are intended to be run full out normally, the benefits of a high-pass filter can be subtle or perhaps not audible or, in some cases, may even make things sound worse.
|
thanks for the links @immathewj I am diving into it
|
previous Y connector discussion
Klipsch forum discussion of Y connectors from preamp
AVS Y splitter from preamp discussion
AV forums discussion on Y splitters from preamp
I feel like a kid with a new toy with this url thing that @Dill showed me how to use!
Anyway, @griz, I don't know enough about this stuff to say you can or cannot safely do this, but I do know that back in my days of HT I called Cary Audio and asked the tech guy whether it would be okay to split the signal from pre with a 'Y' splitter, and the tech guy was okay with it. What I was doing is not the same as what you are doing, however, I wanted to try (and did actually do this for a while) splitting the center channel signal from my HT preamp and sending 1/2 to one side of my Cary tube amp, and then sending the other half to the other side of that same Cary amp, and then basically using that to biamp (so to speak) my center speaker.
Which is not what you are doing, as you are wanting to send one signal to two different amps, and do that two times (signal split to main amp L RCA in and also to L sub RCA in and then the same for the R side).
Maybe post that question on amps and preamps forum and maybe @atmasphere may see it and provide an answer.
|
Y splitters hook 2 sets of drivers in parallel, which halves the inductance. So the amp current doubles going into the low impedene load and it trips. You are lucky your amp has a breaker and does’t just fail from the high current.
Never hook 2 loads up in parallel to one set of speaker outputs.
But the ’Y’ splitters are not going to be connected to the amp, they are going to be used in the RCA outs of the preamp in order to send a full frequency signal to the subs and then also the RCA ins of the amp?
|
thanks @carlsbad2! I didn't know this. Also noting the parallel - serial difference, I am a slow learner but I don't forget :)
|
I would stay away from y splitters. Y splitters hook 2 sets of drivers in parallel, which halves the inductance. So the amp current doubles going into the low impedene load and it trips. You are lucky your amp has a breaker and does't just fail from the high current.
Never hook 2 loads up in parallel to one set of speaker outputs.
Jerry
|
@immatthewj I need to find the right gain but they sound good. A bit shaky/buzzy on their flimsy legs so I should find a better platform.
I listened to a pair of $60 Celestion F3s for 6 weeks and I just switched back to my Evoke 20s, they sound extremely bright, suddenly.
I like the Celestions overall better but I am going to give them a week.
What I like about the subwoofers is that they very subtle. (Unlike others I tried they wanted to crack the ceiling.) I don't need a lot of bass, just that little extra the bookshelf speakers can't fill.
|
Okay, that’s as described previously and what i was thinking and looks like pic 2 of your picture post (except that you didn’t have the speakers in that diagram)::
speaker wire out of L speaker post in amp into L sub and speaker wire out of L sub out to L speaker & repeat for R side.
But, MORE IMPORTANTLY: how do TWO subs sound?
|
@immathewj I have the splitter arriving tomorrow so yes, I will try it out.
This is the carlsbad2 method:
|
. . . sorry about this, but one last thing: I just did some cursory searches, and apparently it was "subliminal messaging" related to coke (the cola kind) and popcorn that may or may not have been successfully done back in ’57 to get people at the movie to subconsciously crave coke and popcorn. Whether or not that experiment was truly performed as claimed, I still believe that a lot of my hearing works in that manner--I do not consciously realize all that I, personally, am hearing, although I believe that it may register in my subconscious and have a positive or negative long term affect on my listening experiences.
Sorry about that, but I did feel the need to type a correction to that post. Now, back to your regularly scheduled programming. . . .
|
We are in this hobby because we look for the perfect sound.
. . . nope; I came to realize long ago that this achievement would be way beyond my capabilities. But there are nights and/or afternoons that I am quite pleased with what my system does do, and I can live with that.
|
Update:
I implemented the @carlsbad2 method and it works nicely
Which is picture #2 of the pictures you posted, correct?
Are you still going to try out a pair of "Y" splitters from Amazon just to see if you like RCAs to subs better? For what those splitters (probably?) cost, I would.
And, more importantly, how is the sound of (now having) TWO subs (count ’em!) sounding? Kickass?
|
@sgordoxyz thank you, it is balanced
Update:
I implemented the @carlsbad2 method and it works nicely
|
@immatthewj
I think your ear can train your brain, and your brain can work with your ears to look for more details. But it truly only matters with discerning systems, "anyone" can hear the difference between a bluetooth pill and and car radio. We are in this hobby because we look for the perfect sound. So you can probably hear a lot more than you think :)
I remember your example from Colombo.
I also like Andrew Jones’s explanation that everything is determined to be flawed from the source to the speaker and what engineers do is fixing errors along the way. (Paraphrasing)
|
I think I have a compromised system
I am also a member of that club.
it’s a glass with dirt on it, an extra layer of dirt won’t make a huge difference
That is absolutely one way to look at it. Of course, the other way to look at it is. . . .
And despite my limitations, I love listening to my rig,
And that’s a healthy attitude and one I try live by myself. If there is something I think that I can easily and affordably correct, I will give it a try. But sure, there are always compromises and certain sacrifices to be made in an imperfect world. I think that ’Y’ connectors out of a preamp MIGHT be a degree of a compromise that MIGHT sacrifice the siganl to a degree (to what degree I won’t venture, and "might" was an operative word), but what you get for that compromise is the ability to hook your subs up with RCAs and go straight to your speakers from the amp. That might be worth the compromise, and I guess the only way to know for sure would be to try both ways and compare. And I, personally, hate making audio comparisons, although some members seem to literally thrive on it.
As far as my analogy . . . that applies to the way I believe that my hearing works and not necessarily yours or anyone else’s. After I was thinking about it for a while, I actually thought of a better analogy for myself. Do you remember quite a long time ago hearing about when movie theaters were doing something to the effect of slipping in a quick frame of a cheese burger or something delicious every so many frames of the movie they were showing? The frame of the cheeseburger (or whatever it was) came and went so quickly that no one in the audience actually realized that they saw it. But, cheeseburger sales at the concessions counter increased dramatically. Or something like that--I don’t remember the exact details. But where I am going with that is that I believe my own hearing works kind of like that. I may not think I hear something that incrementally improves or degrades the performance of my system, but over time I start to realize that I am experiencing an increased level of comfort in my listening experiences (note the plural form) or, on the other hand, an increased level of listening fatigue and less desire to go back to my room and listen.
Just my own personal theory on my own personal hearing is all.
Not long ago I posted a question about power cords, and what one of the respondents replied with was mind blowing to me. Mind blowing in the differences he said he heard with different cords. That ability to hear (and identify what I hear) is wayyyyy beyond me.
|
Step one is to determine if the output of your amp is balanced or single end. If it is balanced the negative is not ground. If you don’t know the. The safest thing to do is connect the black to the chassis. If you have REL line subs then you need to combine the two positive wire to the right sub s x connect if to the right positive terminal. Then repeat this for the left. Black goes to chassis. This should work.
|
thank you @carlsbad2, I am a big fan of Erik but I had a lot of good advice and options so far including yours. Once my coffee kicks in, I will try and compare them. Wiring-wise yours is the least stressful.
|
Too bad @erik_squires has left the forum. This is an area where he could answer in his sleep.
I believe the correct way to wire it is not in parallel but in series.
Take the left speaker wire to the left input of your sub "speaker level input’ and then go from "speaker level output" to your speaker. same on the right.
Do not hook anything to the right speaker on the left sub and vice versa.
And I don't think you need a high pass filter, The sub has all it needs between the speaker level input and output.
Jerry
|
@immatthewj
The short answer is I don’t know. I follow your train of thought and I believe in the shortest path and signal purity too. Electricity is a mystery to me though so I just believe what I read.
I think I have a compromised system (a nice way of saying "crappy") and using your analogy, it’s a glass with dirt on it, an extra layer of dirt won’t make a huge difference.
These passive components are essentially cables/cable connectors. The signal will degrade for sure, but maybe not much. In my system, the amp and the speakers make 90% of the difference (assuming my records are clean). I can hear the difference in the turntable but preamps, amps and speakers are 30% each. Cables, interconnects, electricity, vibration control, barely noticeable.
Having said that, everything counts, still:
inclined not to put in that switching box
I agree with that and you significantly reduced my desire for it, thank you!
Long story short, I enjoy and learn a lot from your comments. And despite my limitations, I love listening to my rig, it sounds awesome. It’s all relative....
|
@immatthewj
I also thought of this. I know it’s lame but fairly cheap and maybe by Christmas I can budget for it; it could be nice visuals and a speaker "multiplier". If it could handle it.
Douk Audio VU3 Dual Analog VU Meter, 2-Way Amplifier/Speaker Switch
Welllll, @griz . . . unless I am missing something, it appears as if it’s main function (besides providing the meters) is to give one the option of quickly switching between two amps and between two sets of speakers (simply by flipping a switch)? I suppose if that function would make your life easier. . . .
A lot of my preconceived notions (which I do keep an open mind about, and which are frequently debunked here) were formed when I started buying "better" gear back in ’94, and at that time I did not have a PC (and even after I did get a PC I didn’t start checking out audio forums until maybe around ’20), so these notions that I am referring to came from telephone conversations with manufacturer’s tech support people and . . . (wait for it) . . . reading Stereophile (Yuk). As I typed a few sentences ago, I do keep an open mind and I do read a lot of threads/posts here on A’gon and I try to digest and consider seriously a lot of what I read.
But that was a lot of typing to say that my notion about "purity of signal" was formed way back when, and after reading the arguments (for example) about speaker wire and interconnects (which I had always in the past thought that the benefits of were accepted and a given, and you can see that I was wrong--not universally accepted OR a given) I have no doubt that the "purity of signal" notion is wide open to debate. So wide open, in fact, that if it ever came up, I’d stay out of it--I’d read for a while, but I’d stay clear.
However, my theory has always been I’d rather keep stuff out of the signal path unless its benefits (whatever they might be) outweighed what I felt was the risk of degrading the signal.
I am going to type a bit more than I planned when I started: so I know that there is going to be an argument--"Put in in the signal path, and if you hear degradation then remove it; if you don’t hear degradation, you were wrong and it didn’t have an effect on anything." But I have never bragged about my hearing and I don’t think I hear stuff that way. For example, put a teeny tiny scratch or pit, one that may be nearly invisible, in my glasses and then give me a pair of identical glasses with flawless lens and ask me to do a blind (no pun intended) test. It would probably be a guessing game. But that doesn’t mean that there is no affect on my visibility that might become just a teeny bit noticeable on, for example, a ten hour road trip. Not so much noticeable that at the end of ten hour drive I’d be like, "OMG!! My left eye hurts and everything is blurry!" but just enough that my visual fatigue was a tiny bit worse than in might have been otherwise. And then throw in another tiny scratch and another tiny pit. . . .
Generally I hate analogies, but that was the best I way I could think of to illustrate part of my theory on listening and hearing. And someone will probably read this and comment on what a pile of crap my theories are, but that doesn’t usually bother me.
So back to putting stuff in the signal path: if it makes your life easier and being easier is not obvious audible degradation, I wouldn’t find fault in someone doing it.
The ’Y’ splitters, for example, make hooking your sub up way way easier and also allow you to go straight from your amp with your speaker wires, which in itself may outweigh any blemish they add to the signal. I honestly don’t know, but if it was me, I’d certainly be willing to try it.
As far as the high pass filter I went on and on ad nauseam about, a tech support guy suggested I try that. He explained the benefits of cleaning up the point where the sub integrates with the speaker, and also how the amp would appreciate not having to drive anything below 80 hZ and how the speakers would appreciate not being fed a signal below 80 hZ. I don’t remember being instantly amazed by the sub/speaker integration (it’s quite possible I didn’t know all what I was listening to back then) but what did strike me IMMEDIATELY was how much more dynamic things instantly became.
But then a dealer and also a different tech support guy (at different times) infected me with the "purity of signal" notion, and I had bought bigger amps that were more dynamic without the filter, and I had equipment with truly balanced circuits and using those precluded RCAs in the high pass filter . . . anyway, I went another route. But at the time I was using it, I believe that the benefits truly out weighed the possible degradation caused in the path by a "crappy box" with its poteniometers and extra pair of interconnects.
That took me way too many words to say that if it was me I’d be inclined not to put in that switching box that I started this reply out talking about . . . but it comes down to whether the possible negatives are outweighed by what it does to your own personal enjoyment of your system.
Oh well . . . Ramble On. . . .
|
|
@immatthewj I have the same feeling about Y splitters, not very audiophile-ish. But - also cheaper than a box.
I have not tried "serializing" subs and speakers. I want the signal to go from my amp directly to the speakers to somehow justify my semi-decent Morrow Audio speaker cables. (In the same time, at my level, speaker cables don’t matter)
I will not argue the impressions of audiophiles but I don’t believe there is any electrical difference between preamps with two rca outputs and what is accomplished by the splitter.
@grislybutter , not only are they cheaper than a box, they may well provide a less blemished signal than a box with poteniometers, and a box that also requires an extra pair of RCA cables to connect it between the preamp and the amp.. And I would feel the same way as you do about the speaker wires--I’d prefer to have them going directly from my amp to the speakers. Which I guess is why I always ran my sub with RCA cables.
@mitch2 , I really don’t know the answer to that. I have no doubt that if a thread was started on the subject, there would be a lot stating just that POV. And that may well be the case. I will say this, however, at one time I was running a Muse Model Two dac, and that particular dac was set up with a BNC input for the digital cable. Which I had to have made, because the digital out on the component that was feeding it were NOT BNC. Anyway, after years of use, my custom made digital cable started going bad and the dac would come unlocked from the incoming signal. BUT: in their infinite wisdom, Muse had provided a BNC to RCA adapter that could be inserted into the BNC port of the dac and then could be connected to the component in front of it with a cable that was RCA on both ends (which I just happened to have a couple of). So I was thinking, "Great," and that’s what I did. Even with my ears I could hear that it didn’t sound as good that way.
But, I am in no way saying that a ’Y’ splitter out of a preamp is the same as a BNC to RCA adapter for a digital cable.
|
@mitch2 I was just splitting hairs. My system is very low-fi so I was just making a side note, I have no objections.
|
I have the same feeling about Y splitters, not very audiophile-ish.
I will not argue the impressions of audiophiles but I don’t believe there is any electrical difference between preamps with two rca outputs and what is accomplished by the splitter. If it feels more audiophile-ish, order the fancier AudioQuest splitters I linked in my first post here. 😎
Consider that you might be over-thinking this.
|
@akgwhiz that’s interesting? It would be much easier for because the speakers’ bindings are modern - easy to access.
thanks @mashif - that's a good price. (And then I clicked on the 77K speaker cable)
|
https://www.transparentcable.com/products/rca-y
https://soundapproach.com/wireworld-luna-8-luiy-audio-y-adapter-cable-single.html
|
Oh, I forgot to mention that it's electrically equivalent (per sub company chief product guy) to do the same wiring from the speaker terminals to the subs if that's logistically easier. Less wire, less clutter in rack.
|
@immatthewj I have the same feeling about Y splitters, not very audiophile-ish. But - also cheaper than a box.
I have not tried "serializing" subs and speakers. I want the signal to go from my amp directly to the speakers to somehow justify my semi-decent Morrow Audio speaker cables. (In the same time, at my level, speaker cables don't matter)
|
@immatthewj thanks for the clarification. It wasn't your fault, I am easily confused. Your explanations are always very thorough.
I am looking up Y splitters now on Amazon.
@grislybutter , I've actually used 'Y' splitters for something I was doing with my HT setup (way back in the days of Dolby Prologic when I had a HT set up) and I don't know why I didn't mention that before. Something about 'Y' splitters from preamp seems intrinsically impure to me, but thinking about it, it cannot be as impure as "another crappy box" (with a pair of pots) and an extra pair of interconnects that were not there before.
And also, just out of curiosity I feel compelled to ask, did you try speaker wire out to sub and then out to speaker on both the left and right side? (In other words, treating each sub/speaker as an extension of each other?) Just wondering if you did and how it went. . . .
|
@mashif my bad - I do have an out from my preamp. I call preamp out from integrated amps - but you are right. So yes, that’s a good suggestion
@immatthewj thanks for the clarification. It wasn't your fault, I am easily confused. Your explanations are always very thorough.
I am looking up Y splitters now on Amazon.
|
@immatthewj I am sufficiently confused as I try to visualize it with my limited options but at least I am positive you know how it works on your end. My setup - if my Outlaw had worked I think it would be
Sorry, @grislybutter , for the confusion. Although I understand and respect that this is not an option you presently want to consider, I still feel compelled to do a better job of explaining it.
Okay, your L & R RCAs outs FROM preamp would go TO the L & R RCA ins in the high pass filter.
The high pass filter would have TWO PAIRS of RCA OUTs.
The high pass filter would send the full frequency signal to the subwoofer via the pair of RCAs designated subwoofer,
however, the high pass would only send an 80 hZ and up signal out of the pair of RCAs designated speakers, and these RCAs would connect to your amp. So if you think about it, now your amp is only reproducing 80 and up, and therefore your speakers are only trying to reproduce 80 and up.
Back at the sub, which is getting a full frequency signal from the high pass filter, the user would probably set the adjustment (and this would be the low pass filter that one would adjust on the sub) to 80 or 85 hZ to start with. So what one would be doing, in theory if it was a clean chop off of frequencies, is having the sub reproduce everything exactly under 80 hZ and having the speakers reproduce everything exactly above 80 hZ. In a perfect world, there would be no overlap between the sub and the speakers. (And also, even in a less than perfect world, both the amp and the speakers are now free of the work of trying to reproduce frequency below 80 hZ which should free them up to do a better job on the higher frequencies.)
But they tell me it is not a perfect world, and it is not a clean EXACT cut off at 80 hZ and therefore the adjustment at the sub (the low pass filter) needs to be played with and tweaked a bit, usually starting at around 85 hZ.
Hopefully I was able to clarify that & clear up any confusion I may have created.
However, much simpler, as @mitch2 just said, would be an RCA ’Y’ splitter at each RCA out of your preamp (L & R). From left one RCA would go to left RCA IN of your amp and also to the RAC IN of your left subwoofer/and then the same for the right.
|
I thought from your earlier posts you had a preamp output to your power amp, and could use a Y cable to split into outputs for amp and subs.
|
|
@grislybutter
Yes or, if you prefer, left preamp out to left amplifier input and left subwoofer line-level input, and right preamp out to right amp input and right sub line-level input. Good luck.
|
@deep_333
beautiful! thank you! smooth and buttery :) I owe you a beer.
And you can actually write with a pen nicely, I give up after three words, it just looks like I had a stroke.
|
|
@mitch2 ok so in dummy terms, red to red, white to white from the preamp?
A single line to each sub?
|
How many splitters would I need for two subs?
You need a splitter for each channel, so two in your case. I linked AudioQuest splitters but if you check lower down the linked Amazon page, you will find no-name brands for about half the AQ version.
The splitter plugs into your rca output and then you run one rca cable per channel to the amplifier powering your main speakers and one rca cable to the low level input of each powered sub. This approach would give you stereo imaging for your subs, i.e., one sub for each channel, which is a common approach when running two subs. In that case I would position one sub somewhat near each main speaker.
Summing the sub signal is a typical approach used when running only one sub, and sometimes when running a swarm of subs (more that two) throughout the room.
|
@audio_guy_uofw
yes it helps thank you. I have about 5 millimeters between the speaker binders and my speaker wires are thick. I could look for thinner speaker wires.
I sold my beloved Marantz amp for this reason, impossible speaker binders, swapping speakers was an afternoon long activity.
I am giving it one last try, hopefully it will leave the fuse alone.
|
The purpose of having both channel inputs on the sub is so that they can be summed to mono. If you are using the two subs adjacent to your left and right main speakers, you could consider left channel to left sub and right channel to right sub. If they are not adjacent to the mains, you should run both channels to the subs and sum to mono.
Regarding blowing fuses, I suspect the fiddly insertion of all those wires into your power amp resulted in a loose strand that was shorting to the adjacent connector. Have a close look. You might be better to make a y connector, assuming you are using standard speaker wire. A short length of wire, then solder the mains and sub leads pos to pos and neg to neg, using shrink wrap or electrical tape to insulate the connections. There is very little current flow into the high level sub inputs, soyou are not overloading the single y connector wire to the amp. Hope this helps.
|
@mashif
I don't have preamp outs as I wrote many times
|
@mitch2 yes I did mention the splitter. How many splitters would I need for two subs?
|
