[RoadTripper]

Here's a simple question: Do people ever bi-amp with integrated amps? For a two-way speaker, you could have an amp for the bottom and one for the top. Each with separate volume controls. You could even use such a method to boost the bottoms to taste. Any thoughts?

[kernelbob]

Sure. No reason that you couldn't.  This would at least let you find out if the benefits of biamping are something you want to pursue further.

[RoadTripper]

Thx. So the next question is a general bi-amping one. How do you feed the signal to both amps? Is this a simple matter of having a DAC with more than one "out"?

[RoadTripper]

Or do the two amps get chained somehow? (Told you it was a noob question).

[JLM]

Does one of your integrated amps have a "preamp output/power amp input" loop on the back?  In that case use a "Y" cable to spilt the signal at the preamp output to the power section section of that integrated and one of the line-in (CD/tuner/aux) inputs of the other amp:

preamp out > "Y" cable > power in (of same integrated) & line-in input of the other integrated

If one of the amps is louder than the other add attenuators at the input to louder amp to dial it down until they match.


The simpler method would be to add a preamp with 2 pairs of outputs and cable to line-in inputs of each integrated. 


With either of these setups you'd have one volume control serving both amps. 

Dual source (like a DAC) analog outputs would require manual tracking of two volume controls (all but impossible to pull off). 

[RoadTripper]

To answer the question about my integrated amps, the answer is no. And at this point these questions are all theoretical. Also, I don't have a second set of integrateds to do any bi-amping with.

So, having run off to do some googling I think this is at least one of the ways to do it. The following applies to a two-way speaker system.

1) Have speakers that are capable of being bi-amped (Mine are since I can see a second pair of binding posts on the back)
2) Put some kind of separate crossover (such as what????) between the DAC output and the pair of integrated amps
3) Hook everything up
4) Fiddle with the crossover settings.
5) Fiddle with the volume knobs trying to get a balance between the lower register and the upper register.

How does that sound?

[srb]

1) Have speakers that are capable of being bi-amped (Mine are since I can see a second pair of binding posts on the back)
2) Put some kind of separate crossover (such as what????) between the DAC output and the pair of integrated amps

If you're going to use a crossover between the DAC and the amps, then you don't want to feed the crossover's outputs into the passive crossovers inside the speaker.  You would need to rewire the speaker, connecting the drivers directly to the binding posts, bypassing the internal crossovers.

Steve

[RoadTripper]

Right. That was exactly my next question. How do you disable the already built in crossovers all two-ways have? This is starting to sound a bit like a science project. What gets me is that some speaker companies blithely recommend that some of their products should be bi-amped. Thus making it sound like it's as easy as falling off a log.

Is there, in fact, some easy way to bi-amp that gets around all this?

[kernelbob]

Unless the internal crossoves in the speakers have specific problems that you want to try to correct, I would refrain from taking the path to external crossovers, passive or active.

You can try biwiring easily enough.  Only one channel output on the amp is needed for each left/right speaker.  Just attach a second set of speaker cables to isolate the bass and the mid/tweeter paths.  I've found that it's best to use the same type of speaker cables for the top and bottom connections.  My experience has been that different brands or types of cables always cause an audible discontinuity between the two frequency ranges, making the result sound more artificial and less well integrated.

If you hear a significant improvement with biwiring, then biamping may well be worthwhile to try.  A beefy solid state amp on the bottom and a tube amp with modest power can work well on the mid/tweeters.  The key here is that the amps need to mate well together.  A good match can give you the deep, tight, controlled bass of solid state and the sweet, detailed, sound of a tube amp-- maybe even a SET tube amp on top since the mid/tweeter crossover should have high bass impedance allowing a low powered amp to play louder in the mid/tweeter range that it's covering.

You could try biamping using your integrated amp on the bottom and another amp on the top.  Since you don't have pre-out/power-in connections on your existing amp, you could look for an integrated amp with that feature and use a Y-connector to feed both amps.  The volume control on your existing amp would then be used to match the volume on the bass amp to that of the mid/tweeter amp.  Of course,a separate preamp with two sets of outputs would be the typical solution.

It's really tough and usually expensive to try to find a single amp that does all things well throughout the frequency range and biamping lets you match "horses for courses".

[srb]

Yes, you can passively bi-amp using the speaker's internal crossovers.  It's not as good as active bi-amping, and the results can vary.

I haven't seen anyone do it with two integrated amps, most commonly if an integrated amp is used, a separate power amp is added from pre-outs on the integrated.  If the amplifiers don't have the same gain, the power amp will need to have a level control and it's gain, if not equal, needs to be higher so the gain control can attenuate it to the proper level (very few gain controls will boost gain).

In a two-way speaker, the midbass driver might be using up to ten times the power of the tweeter.  For that reason, most two-way passive bi-amp setups are vertically bi-amped, using one stereo amplifier for each woofer/tweeter pair rather than horizontal bi-amping which would use one stereo amplifier for woofers and one for tweeters.

In the vertical setup, each amplifier's power supply and output devices can be dedicated to where most of the power is consumed - in the woofer - rather than share one amplifier's power supply and current output between two power hungry bass drivers.

Sometimes though, you will see horizontal bi-amp setups employed, not for the increased power so much, but because a particular type of amplifier could be used for it's sonic signature or power capability - such as a lower power tube amp for tweeter and much more powerful Class D amp for woofer control.

All that being said, in my own personal experience, I've gotten better results for example using a 200W/ch single power amp compared to two 100W/ch amps in passive bi-amp configuration.  So if I was going to add an amplifier to one I already had, or had two amps lying around, I might try to bi-amp, but if I was going to purchase all amplification, I would just get the more powerful single amplifier.

Steve

[JLM]

IME speakers under say $3000/pair don't warrant the added cost and complexity of bi-amping.  As kernelbob alludes to bi-wiring is a better first step.   

Trying to design, build, and tweak crossovers is not a job for a novice but disabling the existing crossover would be straight forward enough. 


The purist/best/easiest solution is to simply buy active speakers.  Active speakers already have a power amp for each driver.  They use a low voltage crossover ahead of the power amps.  The power amps (choosen by the speaker manufacturer) are then directly connected to each driver for better performance.  The system signal path looks like this:

source > preamp > speakers

The speaker signal path looks like this:  crossover > 1 amp per driver

[kernelbob]

To say that "the purist/best/easiest solution is to simply buy active speakers" is a pretty broad statement.  There are a many paths to get the sound you want.  I wouldn't assume to state that any single implementation is The way to best sound.

[ctviggen]

My Denon has the ability to biamp using two amps per channel.  I haven't done that, though.  I have biamped in the past, though.  In fact, I had a 5 channel amp that couldn't drive my VMPS RM30C center channel with a single channel and had to biamp it using two channels of the 5 channel amp (which was OK, as I was only using 3 of the 5 channels at the time).

[JLM]

To say that "the purist/best/easiest solution is to simply buy active speakers" is a pretty broad statement.  There are a many paths to get the sound you want.  I wouldn't assume to state that any single implementation is The way to best sound.

You're right, I should have qualified the statement to say, "the purist/best/easiest solution for using multiple amps (that the original poster was asking about) is to simply buy active speakers".  This IMO is quite true.  Active designs are more dynamic, have flatter frequency response, and provide much deeper/fuller bass.  Active speakers are used almost exclusively in professional recording, mixing, and master studios simply because they're more accurate.  Low voltage crossovers are easier to design and can incorporate DSP.  The power amps partner better with the simple single driver load and are selected by the speaker designer who should know best what amp would be ideal.  Audiophiles love their pile of impressive boxes, yet owners of single driver speakers, subwoofers, and separately powered woofers have already bought into the concept.

Years ago I auditioned Paradigm Studio 20 ($800/pair 2-way stand-mounts) versus Active 20 ($1,600/pair, same drivers/cabinet).  It was no contest.  Passersby thought the Active 20 were the Studio 100 ($2,000/pair large passive floor-standers).  Those who stepped in were gobsmacked when they realized what speaker was being played and that it imaged much more accurately than the Studio 100.  It was one of only a few epiphanies I've experienced in 40 years of stereo/audio.  Unfortunately most active monitors are intended for near-field professional work (can be dry/very detailed/extremely revealing of all the warts), not in-room home entertainment (to make an emotional connection) that the vast majority of audiophiles want (in all its varieties). 

[RoadTripper]

So, pursuing this further and since bi-amping appears to be a pain in the ass, I'm now thinking more about active speakers as a way to get where I'm trying to go. I have two questions. Is there any reason that active speakers should be inherently lacking in "emotion"? Why should studio monitors used for mixing somehow not be a great fit for living room audio?

Secondly, how are most active speakers meant to be driven - volume control wise? Pre-amp? Volume knobs on the speaker boxes?

[abernardi]

I've been bi-amping my system for a few years now and if I were starting over, I'd think twice about doing it.  But I think you got that message from the posts so far.  I will say though that when you hit the sweet spot, it's glorious!  The music is so direct. 

Powered speakers are a great way to go, IMHO.  Often real studio monitors seem to lack emotion because they're tuned for accuracy first and musicality second.  If anything they'll err on the side of "clinical" or lean, because you need to hear everything that's going into that recording.  Most monitors usually end up giving me ear fatigue sooner than too.  Like anything else, audition, audition, audition...

[JLM]

Powered or active speakers are intended to volume controlled by a preamp.  Most have a volume (gain) control on the back (take the hint) just to set levels.

Note the big difference between powered and active designs.  Powered use manufacturer selected amplifiers (one channel per cabinet) with the crossover between the amp and the drivers.  Schematically this is just like a typical home audio design, except that the speaker manufacturer has picked out the amp.  Actives also use manufacturer selected amplifiers but use one per driver with the amps between the crossover and the drivers.  Schematically this is like a bi-amped or try-amped home speaker, except that again the manufacturer has picked out the amps. 

Other advantages of active design include:  less power loss (up to 30%); the power loss creates heat that affects crossover and driver performance; the relatively massive passive crossovers are subject to phase shifts and poor damping factors; amps can be tailored to the driver easier than the driver to an unknown amp; simpler loads impose avoid impedance swings on the crossovers; power amps can be optimized for the given driver; much more cost effective as amplifier power isn't wasted and you're not shopping or paying for speaker cables.  On the other hand active designs are harder to tweak and lock you into drivers, amps, and crossovers.  And low cost active speakers will unavoidably use cheap/off the shelf amps, the real quality of which is hard to discern.  Active designs lock you out of tube power amplification.  Plus you'll be required to plug the speakers into wall outlets for power.

Studio monitors are designed to be work horses, to quickly reveal all the warts with extreme accuracy in a near-field setting (that minimizes room effects).  Home speakers (and home systems in general) are designed to be emotionally satisfying which normally means addressing individual tastes by not being highly accurate and to be used in a far-field (in-room setting). 

So to wisely shop for active home speakers you must search for in-room (not just desktop) performance, audition (for personal enjoyment), and account for the fact that quality cost (and that you're buying both speakers and power amps).  My research indicates that Adam, DynAudio, Focal, Genelec, and Neuman offer some of the best active options for home use.  But realize that their roots are in the studio more than comfortable/relaxing sound.

[Syrah]

Hi,

One thing to be careful with is the length of interconnects if you're not going to use balanced interconnects (like in a professional environment) for active speakers.  That could be an issue with active monitors if you plan to use RCA (i.e. unbalanced) interconnects that are longer than 5 or so feet.  I've had problems with this when I decided to move my system to the side of my room - even with well shielded interconnects.

BTW, my old speakers were Martin Logan SL3s, and I could not believe how much better they sounded biamped.  One theory is that the big woofer spits out distortion that infects the clarity of the panel.  I've found less of a difference with other speakers.  According to Danny (GR Research) the difference probably has to do with the bass driver.  His light snappy small drivers don't spit out the distortion that the big woofers do so they don't benefit from bi-amping as much.

I think most people, dealing with most speakers, say that you're better off with one good amp over two less good ones - I've found the opposite to be true of subwoofers.

Some things to consider.

 

[JLM]

Yes, nearly all active speakers have XLR connections, most also have TRS or RCA as well.  In the professional setting you can expect dozens/hundreds of interconnects, so shielded cables (XLR interconnects) is a must.  But at home the system is much simpler.  And cable lengths typically are less than 10 feet (within the reach of many RCA interconnects).  Professionals don't buy exotic cables, so XLR cables are cheap (and they latch into place).  More and more gear (like nearly all the DAC/preamps - even my $400 Emotiva DAC/preamp) comes with both RCA and XLR outputs.