I recently bought harrison labs in line rca crossovers and biamped my satellites , taking out the crossovers , I have ordered more to double up on each to create a 24 db Octave slope , I was really hesitant to try this but it has worked out great for my old M&K sats I own .
6:55 the main idea of passive bi amping is sound quality, not more power. its to gain sq and control for the upper freq drivers with its own amp. and mitigate feedback between drivers
@@7966016 Since the tweeter is said to not use much power, could I use these 2 amps I have to bi amp just the woofer of my floor standing? It can take 200 watts and I have 2 amps that both give about 50 each. I was going to biamp to get 100 watts into the speaker but I guess that would be wasted on the tweeter. idk
More and more streaming systems, particularly one-box things, are doing this in software now for the same reason. You can manually apply a high-pass filter at whatever frequency you like (within reason) to cut the current load for the main speakers and give it to your subwoofer. It just makes sense, but even more so now I've watched this.
Thats what I have done via my Bluesound node, could not believe my ears as the workload to the front left and right was eased by the sub and everything got so much clearer.
I have never heard any appreciable difference between any decent to good quality cable. The only night and day upgrade in sound that everybody talks about that I have heard is with bi-amping. The gain in not in the electrical load; the gain is within the division of frequency division. This is why electronic cross overs yield superior results.
I did managed to get two identical amplifiers some years back (Ashly FET-1500M) and used them for my stereo setup. It does have the easy to use function to use both amp in the same chassis as either BTL or parallel mode. Tried that for biamping and really didn't felt that much difference, but had a lot of fun running it in BTL mode at full blast for a short while. I thank my neighbors for not noticing the noise (or really good apartment insulation), and since I do not need the BTL power most of the time, I went back to old fashioned bi-amping. I "think" it sounds slightly better at normal listening volume when not in BTL, but haven't spend any time really testing that out. I did hear much better bass after I tossed the speaker spike and replaced them with sound care spikes, and replacing tin-plated speaker wire with copper ones really improved sound too... I'm not touching any tin plated wires after that...\
Those Ashly Audio amps are a well kept secret. They used to use them in movie theaters. I powered Infinity Kappa 8's with those while everyone else was spending 1000's. I still have mine somewhere ?
Really interesting and informative video! Thanks for the first common sense I’ve encountered on this controversial subject. After much dithering I did bi-wire my Wharfedale floorstanders and I THINK there was a slight improvement but I reckon it’s purely down to doubling the copper area of the cables and so slightly reducing the resistance of the cabling. So there might be a perceptible beneficial effect with my particular Audiolab amp but I think there might just as easily be a slight disbenefit with another setup. Hifi is so full of snake oil, snobbery and incredible ignorance and I really appreciate your “engineer’s” viewpoint.
A point about biwiring - while the amp is still seeing the same load - the conditions in each wire *are* different. The split of frequencies does mean that each wire has different parts of the signal along it. So the effects of the back EMF from the woofer, for example, does interact with the signal to the tweeter, as well as different inductance and capacitance of the wires possibly being reduced, etc. So, possible differences in the resulting sound is conceivable.
@@dannyrichie9743 Right - I have some 8 wire braid similar to your cables, and they sound great. The bundle of 4 wires a side on mine are not small, and I can't imagine getting 12 into a tube connector is very easy.
With respect, the load the amplifier sees when connected to a speaker is a combination of the amp connectors, the cable itself and the speaker terminals in addition to any induced electrical interference picked up en route. By adding a second cable from the same amplifier source you are doubling up the effects that the amplifier sees before it even gets to the speaker which must, therefore, adversely effect the purity of the source signal and hence the sound from the speaker.
Back EMF from the speaker is a reaction to the EMF from the amplifier. Back EMF is opposition to the EMF. The back EMF is the why speaker impedance is higher than the DC resistance. The back EMF does not exceed the EMF and does not affect the parallel high frequency speaker circuit. The impedance of the high pass filter attenuates signals in the low frequency range of the back EMF. However, I don't think there are any bad affects to prevent biwiring. I would probably biwire if I had biamp capable speakers and an amplifier with parallel A B speaker switching. The only bad effect to biwiring would be two lengths of expensive speaker wire rather than one.
I heard Kevin Voelks (sp) from Revel speakers. He wrote the white paper on bi-wiring. He said it was his biggest mistake, and regrets it. This video did a good job explaining it.
Back in the day when I did car stereo installs for my fiends, I would always tell them once they get a sub, put bass blockers on your mids-highs before you go and replace them. 9 out of 10 would not end up replacing them cause they sounded so much better with just the HPF and they could now keep up with their subs.
Most speakers have pretty high distortion under 100 hz, so putting a high pass active filter on them is a no brainer. With most systems it's 80Hz which is a reasonable number without knowing the specifics of the room.
Voice- and look-wise, you're like Alex Jones, Frank Kern, Dave Pensado and Leo Laporte... in one person! 😃 AND, even better: you share extremely interesting info! Thank you Danny! I just found your channel today, and your videos are like crack cocaine! I can't get enough of them! 🤗🙏🔥
I recently acquired a new pair of Paradigm Founder Series 100F loudspeakers. They're the first pair of speakers I've ever owned that have two sets of binding posts and I was looking at biwire speaker cables for the first time in my audio geek career. But I don't think so any more. This is the first rational, well-reasoned explanation I've heard for NOT biwiring.
Well all I can say is you finally made me decide to switch my front JBL 590 speakers that I play thru my Denon AVR. It's a80 Herz cut off I believe set to small. I assumed the large at 49 inches tall JBL would ususlly be set to large. I don't know if I hear the difference but your explanation made me feel a little bit better that it doesn't hurt. I have two subs in between the speakers that are matching from the line. It already sounded good.🤔🤫😋 The compression horn that cuts off at 1.5k Hertz is the star of the show anyway!😝
Very logical explanations but i tried biwiring on a integrated amp with a and b chanels and the sound was more open on bass, mids and highs, that was may experience.
Where can I find the inline RCA filter you had in your hand. Also how to you calculate the capacitance needed for the speakers to get the proper rolloff?
That filter is a good idea when using a stereo preamp/amp/sub. If you have a home theater receiver with sub ( even if your using its preouts to a seperate stereo amp for the main channels), setting the crossover frequency in the receiver to 80hz will have the same effect as that filter. Now the amp will never see any frequency below 80hz.
Never believe in the 80hz crap for home cinema my speakers are full range and go down to 40hz i leave it to that after audessy room correction and have notice your are missing so much bass in all the other channels if you set it to 80hz and leave the rest to your subwoofer to deal with. Example at 40hz i got a punch in my chest when a character slammed the beer glass on the table in the movie brave at the start. But at 80hz nothing and same can be said with all movies 80hz in my honest opinion is over rated and a bad idea. Try for your self and feel the difference
@@harpalchauhan428 NO - that is your system and setup. I know for a fact my system has more bass/punch when I filter my mains as high as possible. I settle for 120hz to blend them and I have FAR more bass there then 40hz - even 80hz.
@@harpalchauhan428 cmn is correct. Your sub / seat placement and room acoustics may have a dip in that 40~80Hz range so when the sub plays those frequencies, it's reduced versus when it plays from the mains where you get more power. If you get the Audyssey app for your phone, you can view the response graphs and get a visual of what's going on. You might benefit from moving your sub, or getting a second one to smooth out the frequency response.
...except that Danny says the current increases as the cone excursion increases. The cone excursion doubles as frequency halves (or excursion halves as frequency doubles) without a change in current. Also, part of the reason you can't see the motion of the cone at 80Hz is 80Hz is nearly faster motion than the eye can see and probably faster than the refresh rate of the video.
Awesome video, the principles are so clearly laid out, I still don't fully understand application. Do we need 4 filters as in one per channel for each amp? I'm assuming these filters go between pre and power?
Is better to use speaker cables very short ones (or is particular length and wire gauge) instead of using brackets? is there noticeable difference in sound doing this?
So what I understand is freeing up your full range drivers on a two way speaker to only reproduce mids will give it a better Fidelity and volume because it will not be moving in the lower ranges but will be functioning in the mid range only so the bass can reproduce lows or in more non-directional Bass? And if so I have a pair of yumi fives made by Kanto a powered main speaker output to the right channel and low level sub output is there a crossover that I can put inline that is low voltage to not use the internal cross over because the main speakers when connected my subs is still producing lower lows then I think they should. And possibly affecting the mid range sound since meds are produced through them also. Thanks
Bi-amping or tri-amping using active crossover could do wonders, but, and that is a big BUT, configuring such thing is not for the faint harted and takes a lot of experimentation and trial and error. Then you can get a parametric EQ into that equasion, and you are down the rabbit hole. What most people do not realise before going into bi/three amping/wiring is that sorting out room acoustics first will have much better results. Just my 2p worth....
If I remove the passive crossover from the speakers and duplicate the passive crossover frequencies with an active crossover, it doesn't change the room acoustics, but it removes the impedance of passive filters between the speakers and the amplifiers that produces dynamic compression distortion. The active crossover isn't sensitive to speaker impedance like the passive crossover is. Conceivably, I could duplicate the crossover frequencies and increase the slopes to 4th order Linkwitz-Riley and get better filter damping (better transient response, lower energy storage, less ringing), better speaker damping by the amplifier, lower dynamic compression, and reduce destructive interference between speakers. The only difficult part is matching the levels, which I should be able to do easily by ear.
That was not my experience, but then I'm using a DSP active crossover. It really is very easy with the mini-DSP system, and I played a bit with the Hypex GUI but I don't yet have their plate amps. I haven't tried the Dayton GUI. But even with camilladsp (no gui - say what you mean in config) it is trivial to make changes and test with REW. Where's the difficulty? After all, to design a passive crossover you have to understand target curves and addition of signals etc and achieving them is going to be harder - and as for aligning phase - its a nightmare. After all, with DSP I can just delay the tweeter to match the mid, then choose a textbook crossover without having to fudge delay with phase, and then if the tonal balance isn't to my liking I can add shelving, notching etc before the XO.
@@paulsebring6930 wouldn`t bi amping(with identical power amps) on passive xovers also have a good effect. the common argument against it is that the amps receive the full signal, but does this really matter? the amp(say for the tweeter) as far as I understand it.. won`t work with any of the signal that is restricted by the passive xovers anyway. so one end up with more control/power to each driver. especially the upper freq drivers who don`t have to compete with the woofer for current. then you also have the issue with feedback from the drivers that probably affect the sq of each other..with a regular single amp setup. with two amps wouldn`t the feedback/ringing between drivers be mitigated. ive tried vertical(one integrated power amp per speaker) bi amp myself with what seemed like a good positive effect. not blind tested though
Technically, unless you have low and high pass filters at the pre-amp (adding more processing to the signal) the cables will have all frequencies going through them anyway. If you bi-amp, with the correct filters, then you can maybe get more benefit, but I have always found it more plecebo effect than real world effect with those smaller speakers. Maybe I am just old, or haven't heard it done quite right :) Some amps have an LFE out with a built in cross-over, sometimes adjustable (even some two channel amps) . Anyone sending that LFE to a powered sub-woofer is really running "bi amp" as the LFE is being amplified by the sub, and the main speakers amplified by your main amp. Like you mentioned in the video, this is where it really has the best effect. Having a subwoofer and main speakers
Interesting video Danny. I like how you explain everything. Interesting, Transparent makes very expensive speaker cables and none of them are bi-wire cables. I think Focal and Dynaudio doesn't have the option to bi-wire. Keep up the good work! I use to think it was super cool when speakers had two sets of binding post...lol..
Great tip! Really help improve the sound of my system. What I did is set my tower speakers to small in my AV receiver, and then adjust the crossover frequency to the front speaker. This really help open up the midrange, so much clearer and coherent....... almost 3D like!
I did so by installing the free SONEQ VST plugin for Audirvana player. I set Hipass to 50 Hz and I have new Elac 203.2 speakers. Thank you and greetings from Poland.
To bi-amp speakers, you really need to put electronic crossovers in between the preamp and power amp stages. Years ago I had some big Altec Lansings that could be be bi-amped. Altec support gave me the appropriate crossover frequencies and I had a custom dual electronic crossover made especially for the Altecs. The internal crossover was disconnected. The crossover for the woofer rolled-off the high frequencies(not the low ones), and the crossover for the tweeter rolled-off the low frequencies. You definitely don't want low frequencies going to the tweeter. It sounded great. Simply just hooking up two power amps - one to the woofer and one to the tweeter is not true bi-amping and you will hear no real benefit.
I’ve been using LINN systems since 1986 and fully active since 1988. They have dedicated electronic filters for each speaker model and amplifier type, typically a pair of cards fitted into a power amp. My Keltik speakers have eight input sockets on the back because of the dual Isobarik bass drivers (so four channels of amplification per speaker) I’m currently running them with two four channel amps. But have moved up to the klimax EXAKTBOX (with the new ORGANIK DAC) which performs the DAC and crossover functions and has XLR line outs to the power amps for 0:04 treble mid and bass.
You can still bi-amp with a passive crossover on each of the tweeter and woofer. Many speakers have the crossover separated. Use two amplifiers. It's still bi-amping.
@@David_Span That's true but for reasons I no longer remember it was said that it is better to use active electronic crossovers between the preamp and amp stage than passive crossovers after the amp stage.
@@donaldwilson5693 Yes, it could be better, avoiding the losses in inductors in particular -- just saying that it is still bi-amping with passive crossovers, and possibly more accessible for many audiophiles.
@@David_Span I think they also reduce IM distortion more compared to passive ones. Active crossovers will obviously cost more and they must be designed to the speaker manufacture's specifications.
would adding a subwoofer essentially work the same way in terms of taking the work out of the amplifier for the lows? At a certain point I assume buying a subwoofer is cheaper than buying an extra amp.
Makes me feel really good about myself when I did the research and did this before Danny confirmed it's effectiveness. :) I have a high pass filter at 250hz on my 7wpc tube amp; it just made sense to not feed it the lower frequencies and make the amp work harder than it needed to.
Figuring out the crossover was always the reason I never was happy with a sub/sat setup and always went with 3 way tower speakers instead. I always thought you'd lose some sound quality with a high pass filter. Also trying to blend the sub with the sats seemed challenging. Some preamps were intriguing that had built in high pass and low pass filters but in the end I always just let the speaker handle crossing over instead of essentially an external crossover. Maybe your little in line filter would make it easy and it's worth revisiting.
You are right! If we use a low pass filter with a woofer, we absolutely damage a front ridge of a “punch”, and this leads to a jelly sound. The more bands we use with a traditional crossover, the slower bass we get. For me a woofer with a heavy cone works well without a low pass filter. But it’s hard to find a good one which does not pollute to a HF band at the same time. A high pass filter for a tweeter is fine. And the most interesting thing is that measurement will continue to say that everything is fine. Because they use a nice clear swiping tone.
@@sc0or I'm using 3-way full range tower speakers w/15" woofers. They originally had a single pair of binding posts. After having the crossovers rebuilt, I added a second pair of binding posts. One set for the woofer, the other for mid and tweeter. I'm using a single 220 watt amp to drive them. In your opinion, would you add the LPF/HPF, replace the crossovers with LPF/HPF, or just use the existing crossover? I was under the impression that the speaker manufacturer built all necessary filters into the crossover, so I guess I find this discussion a bit confusing. Also, with this single amp, I would be better off using a good jumper wire rather than running an additional speaker wire (Biwire)?
Hi Danny, I only just discovered these videos of yours from over here in South Australia. They’re superb!!! Thank you for such incredibly informative material. What made my ears *really* stand up is that you described an ever-so-slightly more complete version of an idea that I had a couple of days ago. I run a recapped and tweaked NAD3020A amp into an array of Krix speakers (they’re the little amp that can). They only have one stereo pair of speaker outputs, and no ‘sub out’ BUT the preamp and power amp can be separated via a pair of RCA jumpers in the rear. I want to split that signal into low-pass filtered signal to a powered subwoofer, and let the high pass filtered signal into the power amp. Which of your other videos details the inline filter that you have in this one?
I was told by a very experienced speaker designer that there was an actual technical difference when bi-wiring but it is very likely that the speaker designer would have single wired when voicing the speaker anyway, so if biwiring sounded any different it would likely be less as it was supposed to sound.
Danny, what is the difference between putting in an analog high/low pass filter versus a digital AVR filter from your processor or a AVR? Is there a difference? Thanks for the great video
Maybe I'll go back to using the Iotavx stack as mono blocks instead of bi-amping. Also, might put the sub in line with the main speaker output; wouldn't this absorb the low frequency signal to mains ?
Great information and explanation. I am getting back into the audio again but more budget friendly (small room helps). I was trying to get my head around how bi-amping speakers when you are sending the same signal to both posts and the crossovers just make heat out of what it doesn't use. If you wanted a very simple system, what do people think about a set up like the following: source with volume (and maybe tone) control ( bluesound Node or similar. A phone or tablet may even work) - into - a sub with an active crossover (like SVS pro-100 or similar) - sub out - into an amp (or two mono) - into your speakers. With this setup, I'd try tubes on the mains. Any way you could test the sensitivity on some speakers full range and then with the 100Hz or so bypass? It should jump quite a bit. Thanks for the great work - only found your channel about a month ago. Lots of catching up to do!
I found Bi wiring on my speakers did make a difference, I was surprised, I wasn't expecting it. Did it only to try it . I'm leaving it Bi wired, I like it.
This happened with me too. JBL Studio 590’s running off a Rogue Cronus Magnum. Used some cheap biwiring cables and was shocked at the difference in bass response. I’m usually a doubter and I was really surprised
Hi and thanks. I have high end powered active tops (adr eona) with 2x passive subs ( growlers) driven by a crown amp . The full xlr signal enters the amp and exits the amp onto the passive tops. I think my amp is filtering to drive the subs but definitely I'm sending full signal to the tops so yes, I'm wasting signal . From your video I see I need a high pass filter for my tops. What brand do you reccomend and is it as simple as putting it in line woth my current XLR cables feeding the tops ?
I only use 83 stranded 99 percent gold wire with a silver 10 gage silver center, coated in a sapphire/Diamond composite insulator. Feeding my 1982 vintage Sansui full range plywood box speakers with the metal clip inputs, all powered by a Chinese Bluetooth amp streamed from pandora app on a 2011 iPhone. Freaking amazing sound! I only use wind power energy because it’s green that way.
Hey Danny, how about covering how to make that RCA highpass filter box? I'd love to have one of those for a ported DIY sub I'm working on. Also, a single video on 1st through 4th order highpass and Linkwitz-Riley, Butterworth, etc and the differences between them.
My initial experience of bi-wring was splitting the crossovers in a pair of Rogers LS3/5A speakers -- the improvement in midrange clarity (the first test was the opening track of Cat Stevens' The for the Tillerman) was, to me, phenomenal. Maybe it was the complexity of the crossover that helped with the improvement -- but it was definitely there.
I can relate to your positive experience. On my british 2-ways with 2nd order x-overs I went quickly to biwiring, and went back only briefly as clarity was reduced with single wiring, and a strange dependency of SQ on the jumper cable used was noticed, some jumper cables had terrible emphasis on sibilance. I wouldn’t generalize though to say ALL speakers positively respond to biwiring but i disagree if someone suggest the exact opposite was true.
Thank you for one more great and informative video Danny! I just have one more thing i need to clarify: if i use my amp's A/B speaker outputs to bi-amp my speakers is it silly since it comes from the same transformer internally, right?
I would think that eliminating the high current woofer signal from the wire feeding the tweeter including the voice coil kickback from large inductance woofers would improve the sound at least with lower guage speaker wire.
Indeed, the separation of current paths is a main candidate for there being a possible difference in the resultant sound, as this does deliver greater isolation between the low and high frequency circuits (it can't fully eliminate interaction, bi-amping goes the extra step there). It's less clear though whether any change should necessarily be an improvement in the perceived sound quality. People don't always hear it as such, some have said the speaker sounds less cohesive. A plausible cause is the likelihood that the speaker has been designed from both technical and listening test perspective to be performing its best in the way the majority of owners will use it, that is, not in bi-wire configuration. The most likely candidate I see there is a change in phase behavior in the crossover band between bi-wiring and single wire. Bi-wiring does small but potentially significant rearrangement of some of the possible electrical interaction of reactive components, and this can alter phase. If the crossover is already ideal with single wire configuration, and degrades with bi-wiring, that might outweigh other factors that theoretically should be good. If the crossover behavior is unchanged or tidied up a little, then that would either not affect or add to other potential benefits of bi-wiring like reduced cable and terminal contact resistance losses.
Well, that helps, but is a bit of a baby step. You could simply wire all to one set of binding posts internally. Or replace all of them with a set of tube connectors.
For those of us that have systems that vibrate everything off our tables , we use mega watts to our woofers and sub woofer's , the lower the thd the amp is the more it costs so we can run class a,ab amps to the highs and mids and use a separate less expensive class D for the low stuff , ✌️
Hi Danny, great vids again. I agree with limited improvements with biamping like presented BUT how much SQ benefits with active crossover bypassing caps and resistors? Whats the best way to do it? 🍻
True bi/multi amping involves removing the speaker level crossover from the signal path, and using a separate filtered amplifier channel for each driver. This is how most self powered speakers work.
One situation that biwiring is valid is with Sunfire amps running the 'voltage source' to the bass drivers and the 'current source' to the mids/tweeter.
@@DescartesRenegade In the words of Bob Carver who designed the Sunfire amp: "Now, back to the Sunfire amplifier. There are two sets of output terminals on the back. One is a voltage source output, with a very low impedance (about 0.01 Ohm). The other is a current source output with a higher impedance (1 Ohm) current source output characteristic. The choice of which to use is up to the listener. If you want a solid state kind of sound, use the voltage source output terminals. If you want the vacuum tube sound, use the current source output terminals. Or - and this is the best part - you can bi-wire your speakers. Use the voltage source to the woofer, and wire the current source to the upper range of the system. That way you have the tight slam impact bass that a solid state amplifier can deliver, and you have the glow to the mid-range, the sumptuous sound stage, and soft, delicately detailed highs that current source amplifiers, i.e., vacuum tube amplifiers, typically deliver. This is the best of both worlds."
makes sense to me… utilize a quality passive crossover and connection media and all you need is one channel on a quality amp to drive it. Bi-amping only benefits you when you are relying on an external system like a dsp to deliver crossover and time delay to each individual speaker. Even then this results in an overly complicated system that can be solved with a simple passive design. Ps, most of those cheesy dual binding posts connect to the same single passive crossover input, so you literally gain nothing by bi-wiring. Learned a lot watching your vids, so thank you for that!
If dual binding posts connected to the same internal crossover input, when you bi-amp, the outputs of two amps would be connected together and the amps would be driving each other, resulting in distortion, shutdown or damage to the amplifiers. The separate frequency band inputs have to be completely separate electrically in order to be able to bi-amp the speaker.
Off topic but I wanted to ask in the latest video in hopes that maybe it fosters a response…. I am wondering if and for those that want a little more low end extension can the XLS Encore be fitted with a transmission line enclosure. I guess I could look at the Q of the woofer and see if it’s conducive for that environment. There’s a simple formula a lot of us DIY’ers use for the line length and pertinent dimensions. I’d like to try it.
Thank you Danny! because of your video I just tried using all the binding post with the metal connector in between. It gave me both detail and bass. I hear subtle difference between single wire (using bottom binding post) or bi-wiring with multi-strand cable. Single wire gave me good bass / less detail and bi wiring less bass / good detail. I preferred the bi-wiring first because I chose detail Dover bass response. But now I have both! Many thanks! :D
Hi If you have redundancy in a multi amp av system then the bi amp may be cost free in an ab amplifier the tweeter would run pure class a the mid/bass unit wouldn't see any difference . If I was buying extra power amps it would only be for an active crossover
I am another EE and I agree, especially the point on picking up RF. Better is having a matching size wire to the power of the amp. Modern amp also has sub out and user can adjust the X-over frequency at the amp or the sub or both. Just let the sub do its job and get better sound
The sub amp only filters the highs from the sub. The inline filter filters the lows from your main speakers. If you subwoofer plate amp has a high pass filter then it is just an electrolytic capacitor added to the signal path of your entire signal. That's bad. That's really bad.
Re: >I agree, especially the point on picking up RF.< Well, it's kind of baloney. If we're talking about RF then those frequencies are not even in the range of human hearing. Second, decent amp can easily put tens of amperes while inducted RF goes in mA or less. How can it be audible?
Fantastic review, I am new on this channel and I become a fan! Hi didn’t understand…. Because my amplifier has a sub RCA outlet… Does the amplifier is bypassing the low frequency dedicated to the speakers and redirecting it to the subwoofer? Thanks for helping me to understand.
The very low RF voltage in the speaker circuit is loaded by the very low output impedance of the amplifier, so it is shorted by the very low output impedance of the amplifier and does not affect the much higher impedance of the amplifier negative feedback circuit. RF in the speaker circuit is effectively shorted out by the very low impedance of the amplifier output. The very low RF voltage in the speaker circuit is much lower than the output voltage of the amplifier. Apply basic circuits analysis superposition theorem.
He simply doesn't understand impedance, and load with respect to the output amplifier and speaker impedance. He sales this as if he thinks the low output impedance of the amplifier and the low impedance of the speakers will support RF and EMI. He doesn't seem to understand that inducing voltage into low impedance becomes more difficult as the impedance goes lower.
@@dannyrichie9743 Just more BS marketing from another company that thinks you should over pay for an amp that you could not distinguish from a any other good quality amp. So if you don't believe it is just marketing hype watch the same guy talk about damping factor and the importance of low output impendence in this video were he claims this is the most critical feature. Start it at 2 minutes in. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-iq_Z4YUsGGo.html. You know, to control the Back EMF from the woofer he is say is effecting the feedback loop in the other video. But in this video it not problem because of the low output impedance. Go figure. And also, in school it was very simple, any amplifier that did not incorporate negative feedback was simply an oscillator. A straight wire is not going to provide any input into low impedance load unless the wire is miles long. I'm sure your not using mile long wires are you?
Does something like that box that you were talking about using as a high pass filter exist with speaker wire inputs and outputs instead of rca? My integrated amp does not have pre outs. The only way for me to use something like that would be to use it between the output of my streamer and the input of the amp, but my amp would not control the volume of the subwoofer. Edit: just to give more context. I’m not even currently running a sub and I currently have towers, so something like that could actually work for me set to around 40hz. But I’m considering moving to bookshelves plus a sub in the near future. Because of my lack of pre outs the sub would be connected via speaker wire (probably rel) in which this device would not work for me because the input to the amp would not have the low frequencies to send to the sub.
how about using speaker output a for the highs and use speaker output b for the lows of a receicer or integrated amp having multiple speaker outputs to connect to a bi wire capable speaker
I don't understand why I'd use a passive high pass filter (like the example he showed) when I have the active high pass filter on my preamp. Is this for setups without active filters?
Thanx ,cleared that crazy shit up for me I think. So split the signal from amp to main speakers with a high band pass filter run the lows to an amped sub, right? Do some amps have controls integrated to do this internally, maybe split or filter rather then send through channel 2?
@@cockyplopsnigga You need a full range signal to the subs and a high pass filter to your main speakers, ideally, or use the natural roll off of your main speakers.
So a multi amped active 3 way tower speaker I have utilizes normal passive x-overs with an opamp/Pot in front of it. Sort of a sem-active x-over I suppose. When you see dual binding post sets on bookies, its likely for bi-wiring and not bi-amping cuz Dannys right. It be dumb to bi-amp a bookie!
I'm bi-amping a 3-way speaker with one amp to the 15-inch woofers and a smaller amp to the mid and highs. There are 2 separate passive cross-overs ( one for the lows and one for the mid-highs). Am I doing things right ?
I thought part of the job of the crossover was to cutoff the low's that get in the way of good speaker performance, limit the lows that the speaker is not capable of.
Hey, great video!! Thanks!! I have a pair of subs and I want to try an RCA filter to release some load from my main speakers and valve amp. That's a great idea. I believe I would need a crossover with RCA inputs and outputs with variable crossover frequency to try the best result. Could you recomend one for me? Thank you again!
The weave of the speaker wire obviously reduces the RF pickup. Doesn't the additional dielectric (the insulation) between strands of wire also increase the parallel capacitance of the wire and shunt the RF and some of the high frequency music signal to ground? What is the measured capacitance per foot of your speaker wire compared to standard speaker wire?
I don’t think that would come into play at such a nominal distance . Electric current runs at about 90% of the speed of light so our ears will not hear a difference. Weaved speaker wire will be shielded better yes but that’s about it .
Danny, don't want to sound like I'm correcting or anything, but what about bi-amping a 2-way or 3-way with a low-powered high quality tube amp for the tweeter and a high-powered solid-state amp for the woofers? I think it can be a great way to go, with legitimate benefits both technically and in sound quality. Also, it can be beneficial if the speakers have less than perfect impedance variation, especially if you want to use a triode tube amp. What do you think?
Yeah are you going to go through the pain match gain settings compitently between the 2 amps. sure you can do it but 3 way would be a pain and I'd rather kill my self Iv done it with bw802 and a 180w solid state for the lows and coincident 18w 300b set amp for the mids and the highs... Not enough of a benefit misbehaved at high output levels. If I had a digital crossover and direct wireing maybe but even then.
I see your thinking, I tried it but valve and transistor amplifiers respond differently to input signals and react differently to speaker loads. It was fun but hardly high fidelity. It was significantly worse than either used in the normal way.
@@mikebaltiman4844 Hmm, that’s interesting. Maybe that was some sort of a matching issue? Just saying, because there are amps designed specifically for the application I described, like the MC901 dual mono amp from McIntosh, which has a tube section for mids and highs and a SS section for the woofers.
@@LevonArakelian yes, matching was the problem and it wasn't the volume (I matched the gains), possibly slightly out of phase with each other at least. Those McIntosh's do look nice, designed to work together properly no doubt. Best way to go if you have the $$$!
@@LevonArakelian it's a gimik for ppl who buy mac gear with more fanboy glee then brains if you can hear the difference go ahead but it's asperetional at best. Lots of better solid only or tube only amps. And again Any gains are lost in unessicary complexity. Better to take an existing speaker and rebuild the crossovers then ANY gains from that amp. I hate mac gear as it is for pure lack of price to performance and only for idiots... Well current options anyway.
I just got a new set of Magnepan LRS + and I decided to put a 80 hz high pass filter ( harrison lab rca) before the amp and added a powered sub at 80hz . It seems like it opened up the Resolution. Is this what you were saying here? I saw this video afterwards and it seems like it I got it right.
I was just talking about this in my BIC DV62-CLR-S review. My JBL Studio 590's and 570's are better when they're bi-amped. Because it does remove the crappy jumpers from the signal path at least. I was gon get a pair of Datyon DTA-1's (Powered with AA batteries) and use 1 amp per crappy Polk MTM speaker, so I can get 2x more power to the speakers in my abandoned house(s) with no wall electricity. It should help the speakers to play a little bit louder. Those Polks are super cheezy, using dual battery amps is the only real use for the bi-amp terminals. We'll see if it helps when I do the review of the Polks. A/B ing one amp vs two amps is gon be a pain.
@@dilbyjones Correct. The Dayton DTA-1 runs off of 8AA batteries. It gets pretty loud too. See my traphouse reviews where I use it. Use my playlist tab to watch my reviews.
