1. Home
  2. tech-talk
  3. 1119852501

Idiotic Vertical Biamping Question

I've read a couple of detailed articles on the various kinds of biamping.

I understand vertical biamping to be: amp1 uses left and right outputs to speaker1 (we'll say that's the right speaker); one channel to woofer and one to tweeter; and amp2 does the same, but to the left speaker.

We're assuming a two-way speaker.

Now, I assume that each amp still "thinks" it is sending full-range signals out of both channels. So for amp1, let's say the right output channel feeds the woofer while the left output channel feeds the tweeter. The amp is sending information meant for the left speaker to the tweeter of the right speaker. Same problem occurs in amp2 (but possibly with reversed content going to woofer instead of tweeter, depending on whether the channels are wired identically or in reverse of amp1).

It seems to me this would cause tremendous problems in imaging. So there *must* be something I'm missing; can anyone help me out?

Also, every article I've read discourages bridging stereo amps to make them monoblocks, though the reasons vary. What are your experiences with such a setup? I was specifically thinking of getting another McCormack DNA-.0.5 and having Steve convert both amps to monoblocks, thinking this would be the best performance I could get, but maybe that is not the case?

Thanks for the insight, all.

HC
aggielaw
creeper
251 posts
 
Eldartford

"dualamping"? Come on...

The term biamping is an industry standard. Any speaker with two sets of binding posts and a truly divided internal passive crossover is "biampable", no? In this situation, far more common than "actively" biamped systems, no external electronic crossover is involved. The term "actively" is what distinguishes the two.
aggielaw OP
264 posts
 
Dan,

Interestingly, when I asked Steve yesterday about biamping vs. monoblocking (or monobridging, since his monblock conversion bridges the channels of the amp, which he describes on his website at www.smcaudio.com), he stated that he finds better performance with the monoblocks because the amps (his amps, anyway) control the speakers better in that configuration than they do in a biamping setup. He said this results in even better imaging. He is absolutely not a fan of active biamping, because the active XO before the amps inserts its own "personality" on the sound. Steve did say some people have reported not liking biamping or monoblocking, and he didn't really understand why.

I was almost ready to sell my current DNA-0.5 Rev. A to buy the monoblocks that came up for sale last night, but now I'm not so sure - the number of comments of experienced users who say monoblocking or monobridging is a step backward seems to outnumber those who hear the benefits. I don't think I want to fork out the money to find out for myself quite yet. Of course, the negative comments I've heard about monoblocking have not been directed at McCormack amps, either. Might be time to email Swampwalker...
eldartford
4,262 posts
 
Jeffreybehr...I always heard that connecting two power amp outputs in parallel was a NO-NO. Frankly, I never tried it, as the caution seems reasonable.

Creeper...The "industry standard" when I started biamping in the mid 50's always involved a low level crossover, and I think this terminology remained for many years. Only lately have I heard about using two power amps with passive crosovers. Indeed, until fairly recently loudspeakers did not come with separate terminals for woofer and tweeter (a feature intended to facilitate bi-wiring).

Aggielaw...A low level electronic crossover has far less "personality" than a passive crossover. Of course, the "personality" of the passive crossover may be deliberate, to overcome certain known deficiencies of the drivers.
creeper
251 posts
 
Eldartford

Yes, dual sets of posts facilitate bi-wiring, as well as biamping. Do a search at Audio Asylum under the amp/preamp section and you'll instantly find 200 examples of an industry standard term. There are 88 examples of it in discussions here too.

I've come to realize that you like to stir things up just for the sake of stirring. This is the last time I will ever fall victim to your muck rucking.

Happy listening.
eldartford
4,262 posts
 
Creeper...If everyone agreed about everything all the time the discussion would become very boring. How can you get so worked up about semantics? Resort to personal insults usually results from a weak argument.
More to discover