WOULD U CARE TO EXPLAIN BIAMPING?

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the What HiFi community: the world's leading independent guide to buying and owning hi-fi and home entertainment products.
A

Anonymous

Guest
I don't anybody is doing that, but if others hadn't done all the measurements etc you wouldn't be enjoying as good a sound as you have now. In fact we'd be without almost all modern technology.

Andrew is in a different position to you because what he says may affect how you spend your money. If he makes mistakes a lot of people's money may be wasted.

Ash
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
professorhat:I don't understand why people keep trying to force us to just read graphs and technical measurements instead of just listening and enjoying the sound. The moment you try and insist something sounds better because a graph says so rather than because I can actually hear it is the moment I lose interest in your opinions I'm afraid.

Deary me! Prof, You yourself have expressed an interest in technical data/evidence to back up cable arguments (eddy current??) MANY times. NO ONE is insisting you substitute your own hearing /judgement for what a graph says but anyone with an interest in HOW things work would find it interesting to see how/ why it things happen. Of course any measurements ONLY ADD weight to any differences heard - I would never state something sounds better (despite what any graph says) if my ears didn't back that up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 

professorhat

Well-known member
Dec 28, 2007
992
22
18,895
Okay, I see where you're coming from with manufacturers using them to prove their designs etc. but I was referring to hi-fi enthusiasts using their ears - this seemed to be something you were criticizing as well which I disagree with.
I also disagree with your statement that things which "have no basis in science ... cannot possibly make a difference". Are you claiming science has found out all the answers to everything in this field then and cannot be proved wrong from this point forth? I would be surprised at this as I don't think any scientist in any other field can make any such claim.
 

professorhat

Well-known member
Dec 28, 2007
992
22
18,895
JAXON5:Deary me! Prof, You yourself have expressed an interest in technical data/evidence to back up cable arguments (eddy current??) MANY times.
In those cases, this was purely to highlight that that person in question didn't actually have any evidence. I think my above viewpoint came across a little more strongly than it was intended to, but it does seem to me there are a certain number of people who insist science is foolproof when it clearly isn't.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Fair enough ;-) Have a look at the article i linked though - Let me know what you think?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
The Article appear to refer to 3 way loudspeakers that I believe I've already covered, but here roughly half the work is done by the mid and tweeter and the other half by the bass driver, which might make a difference, although we're not convinced. The idea is that if you have amplifiers that have enough volts but not amps, you'd be better off sharing the work between two. If you are buying big three way speakers it'd be better to start with a suitable single amplifier.

With Two-Way speakers, the tweeter does so little, that you're not making the bass amps life any easier by adding another, so there won't be a benefit.

Ash
 

Andrew Everard

New member
May 30, 2007
1,878
1
0
cs:
If you were at all technically literate, you would understand why that statement is utter garbage.

There is no need to be so aggressive. Banned, not for disagreeing, but for being abusive.
 

Andrew Everard

New member
May 30, 2007
1,878
1
0
Ashley James:

Andrew is in a different position to you because what he says may affect how you spend your money. If he makes mistakes a lot of people's money may be wasted.

I would be grateful if you would curtail the personal abuse, Mr James - it does neither you nor this Forum any favours.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Ashley James: Andrew is in a different position to you because what he says may affect how you spend your money. If he makes mistakes a lot of people's money may be wasted. Ash

As might the readers of this forum if they listen to you Mr James. What if after being taken in by your spiel on here, someone is massively dissapointed in their new active set up (ie once the initial novelty of being blasted against their rear wall wears off)? This forum is for balanced debate and there is nothing wrong with personal opinion from those who trust their ears and not scientific data.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Andrew - I'm very sorry but I don't accept that what I've said is personal abuse, I believe it's fair comment. You're in a powerful position and power comes with responsibility.

EDITED: Please do not discuss moderation.

As for me, I think readers will be aware of my bias towards my company's products and therefore seek other opinions.

I apologise for being so forthright but I feel maligned.

Sincerely

Ashley
 

Clare Newsome

New member
Jun 4, 2007
1,657
0
0
Ashley, I feel we're incredibly accommodating to you and your posts - many of which come very close to breaking our House Rules re advertising.

For you to therefore consider yourself 'maligned', when we're giving you the opportunity to air your views, seems puzzling to me.

Let's all carry on in the spirit of robust debate, and realise that however dearly opinions are held, they are just that - opinions.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Dearest Claire

I wish it were that simple! I stated the facts and how to prove them and I was contradicted (censored even) by someone who "believes" that he knows different.

It isn't something that can be debated because "science doesn't know everything" is always used in Hi Fi circles to shout down engineers who can prove the points they make and instance experiments that show flaws in the way we all hear things.

It's a tragedy and it's been like it in Hi Fi for far too long. None of it could have existed without engineers or scientific proof, so why should people who don't understand engineering censor those that do, far better to let them have their say and respect their knowledge. There will still be two opposing camps, but at least visitors to the Forum will have a more balanced perspective from which to judge.

I respect your points regarding advertising and I've no wish to get deeply embroiled in direct discussions regarding AVI's products.

Again sincere apologies, but I do feel very strongly about this.

Ashley
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Ashley James:

I respect your points regarding advertising and I've no wish to get deeply embroiled in direct discussions regarding AVI's products.

Again sincere apologies, but I do feel very strongly about this.

Ashley

Nice product placement before the apology Ash. I do have sympathy with your argument and I will do some reading into some of the points. As a hifi novice that ain't no bad thing
 

Andrew Everard

New member
May 30, 2007
1,878
1
0
Ashley James:Dearest Claire

I wish it were that simple! I stated the facts and how to prove them and I was contradicted (censored even) by someone who "believes" that he knows different.

You were not censored for your views - the post was edited for discussing the moderation of the Forum, which is in contravention of house rules.
 

professorhat

Well-known member
Dec 28, 2007
992
22
18,895
Ashley James:None of it could have existed without engineers or scientific proof, so why should people who don't understand engineering censor those that do, far better to let them have their say and respect their knowledge.
I never said I didn't respect your knowledge, I was merely pointing out that science indeed doesn't know everything. This very discussion begun because someone with scientific proof on their side was attempting to shout down a very well respected opinion in this forum which, in this case, states science doesn't seem to hold well with what well-respected people have heard and experienced. I would therefore expect the same courtesy from you i.e. let them have their say and respect their knowledge in their field.
 

chebby

Well-known member
Jun 2, 2008
1,246
14
19,195
It can be a bit jarring when someone tells you that your own enjoyment of 'Product X' is technically flawed (or even scientifically proven to be wrong) and that 'Product Y' sounds better despite your ears not agreeing.

When it comes down to spending my money, and my enjoyment, I let my ears be the ultimate arbiter in such disputes. I don't care how many scientists groan or how many electronic engineers scoff.

To be fair, I also don't care how many rabid 'flat earthers' like or dislike what I enjoy either.

The job of a good dealer (and to some extent the hifi press) is to guide us and our wallets through this minefield with unbiased advice based on extensive experience the average punter has not the time or will to accumulate. But this type of unbiased advice is impossible because of a whole raft of vested interests.

Those who flutter their scientific and engineering credentials are just as capable of having vested interests and capable of just as much dogmatism and bias as the worst kind of rabid 'flat earth' hifi pundit.

We must just use our own ears to guide us ultimately. If it sounds right, it IS right. So long as you like it, can afford it (and the product is safe and of legally merchantable quality) then buy it.
 

JoelSim

New member
Aug 24, 2007
767
1
0
cs:
Andrew Everard:I'd have to disagree with Mr James, which I'm sure will come as no surprise to him. I think biamping is well worth trying with your speakers, and for the cost of a couple of Y-adapters - a couple of quid here - it's not an expensive experiment.

And for the sake of balance, I disagree with Andrew, but agree fully with Ashley.

Biamping is nonsense, unless you have very thin (and hence resistive) speaker leads.ÿ If you use a single amplifier, thin speaker leads, and passive crossover, there may be some undesired crosstalk between the net signals applied to the bass/mid and tweeter units.ÿ Biampng solves this, but it is a sledgehammer to crack a nut !ÿ A much more logical and economic solution is to use much thicker low resistance speaker leads with your existing amp.

As Ashley points out, if you are going to use a multi-amplifier solution, it only really makes any sense if you also use active crossovers.

Chris.

(PS. For the record, I work in the professional electronics industry, as an analogue circuit designer).

ÿ

Unfortunately I don't agree with you. At all. I do agree with my ears though.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
I think we should all take care not to crossover the line
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
chebby:It can be a bit jarring when someone tells you that your own enjoyment of 'Product X' is technically flawed (or even scientifically proven to be wrong) and that 'Product Y' sounds better despite your ears not agreeing.

When it comes down to spending my money, and my enjoyment, I let my ears be the ultimate arbiter in such disputes. I don't care how many scientists groan or how many electronic engineers scoff.

We must just use our own ears to guide us ultimately. If it sounds right, it IS right. So long as you like it, can afford it (and the product is safe and of lr egally merchantable quality) then buy it.

OK. However there's no disadvantage I can think of, if somone with an informed professional opinion advises us of his/her views. Their knowledge of the subject has to count for something, and when its thrown back in their faces, I can see the source of their frustration. For me, objectivity trumps subjectivity every time but objectivity backed up by subjective views, is of course even better. Ashley's absolutely right when he says arguments based on 'hearing' differences/improvements in sound carry less weight, as peoples ability to hear varies enormously, especially the ability to hear differences which relies on 'memory'. People can shout all day about whether they can hear a difference or not, fact is, for the reasons above the arguments carry much less weight than those which are measurable. Of course there are deficiencies in scientific method, which sometimes can be plain wrong, but until we improve those methods it's the best we have, so I think imho it deserves far more respect. We didn't get to the moon willy nilly etc etc. As far as biampings concerned I think the assertion that having an active crossover between the pre and power amps would be better than biamping via a passive crossover seems logical given the explanations from numerous professional sources - So why all the fuss??
 

JoelSim

New member
Aug 24, 2007
767
1
0
JAXON5:chebby:It can be a bit jarring when someone tells you that your own enjoyment of 'Product X' is technically flawed (or even scientifically proven to be wrong) and that 'Product Y' sounds better despite your ears not agreeing.When it comes down to spending my money, and my enjoyment, I let my ears be the ultimate arbiter in such disputes. I don't care how many scientists groan or how many electronic engineers scoff.We must just use our own ears to guide us ultimately. If it sounds right, it IS right. So long as you like it, can afford it (and the product is safe and of lr egally merchantable quality) then buy it.OK. However there's no disadvantage I can think of, if somone with an informed professional opinion advises us of his/her views. Their knowledge of the subject has to count for something, and when its thrown back in their faces, I can see the source of their frustration. For me, objectivity trumps subjectivity every time but objectivity backed up by subjective views, is of course even better. Ashley's absolutely right when he says arguments based on 'hearing' differences/improvements in sound carry less weight, as peoples ability to hear varies enormously, especially the ability to hear differences which relies on 'memory'. People can shout all day about whether they can hear a difference or not, fact is, for the reasons above the arguments carry much less weight than those which are measurable. Of course there are deficiencies in scientific method, which sometimes can be plain wrong, but until we improve those methods it's the best we have, so I think imho it deserves far more respect. We didn't get to the moon willy nilly etc etc. As far as biampings concerned I think the assertion that having an active crossover between the pre and power amps would be better than biamping via a passive crossover seems logical given the explanations from numerous professional sources - So why all the fuss??

ÿ

Subtle differences can be difficult to hear, but mine was a big difference. No question.ÿ
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
the preamp is a sugden masterclass , which feeds a quad 405 s situated under each speaker via 3 pin xlrs. the speakers are wired from the quad amps via 5 pin xlrs one channel supplying the tweeter and one channel supplyng the base driver.. the rogers do not have crossovers as the amps where re designed for the BBC with what were called frequency splitting boards.. the amps are dedicated re designs for the rogers LS5/8 and will not drive any other speaker succesfully and vice versa..but the sound is truly amazing. there is a good article on the net by mark hennessy regarding the conversion of the amps.
kindest regards
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
JoelSim:
JAXON5:chebby:It can be a bit jarring when someone tells you that your own enjoyment of 'Product X' is technically flawed (or even scientifically proven to be wrong) and that 'Product Y' sounds better despite your ears not agreeing.When it comes down to spending my money, and my enjoyment, I let my ears be the ultimate arbiter in such disputes. I don't care how many scientists groan or how many electronic engineers scoff.We must just use our own ears to guide us ultimately. If it sounds right, it IS right. So long as you like it, can afford it (and the product is safe and of lr egally merchantable quality) then buy it.OK. However there's no disadvantage I can think of, if somone with an informed professional opinion advises us of his/her views. Their knowledge of the subject has to count for something, and when its thrown back in their faces, I can see the source of their frustration. For me, objectivity trumps subjectivity every time but objectivity backed up by subjective views, is of course even better. Ashley's absolutely right when he says arguments based on 'hearing' differences/improvements in sound carry less weight, as peoples ability to hear varies enormously, especially the ability to hear differences which relies on 'memory'. People can shout all day about whether they can hear a difference or not, fact is, for the reasons above the arguments carry much less weight than those which are measurable. Of course there are deficiencies in scientific method, which sometimes can be plain wrong, but until we improve those methods it's the best we have, so I think imho it deserves far more respect. We didn't get to the moon willy nilly etc etc. As far as biampings concerned I think the assertion that having an active crossover between the pre and power amps would be better than biamping via a passive crossover seems logical given the explanations from numerous professional sources - So why all the fuss??

Subtle differences can be difficult to hear, but mine was a big difference. No question.

I have to say, me too. I used to have an Arcam Alpha 8i and 8p used for biamping. Of course, being an enthusiast I spent hours trying different cables and configs. I found that the biamping option made a huge difference but I don't know why on a technical level. I'm inclined towards Ashley's views and it's not the first time I've heard them from the engineering community but my experience speaks (shouts?) differently. Curious.

Biwiring I'm less convinced on. In fact, I've binned the idea totally. I guess it's a tidy way to pack in a lot of metal.
 

timwileman

Well-known member
Mar 19, 2008
296
0
18,890
my 2p worth, not on bi amping but on science, i will use thalidomide as my example.....

way back in the 50's grunthal (and others!) could and did argue that thalidomide was quite safe, so safe in fact that pregnant women could take it to calm morning sickness....

not long after that it was withdrawn from market as the scientists had quite shocking proof of the opposite, now all the scientists told you that thalidmide was evil and had no place on this planet...

guess what thalidomide is licenced in the EU, USA and many other places to treat multiple myleoma...

perhaps not quite appropiate example, but please question scientists and engineers as much as you would a politician...as they can be wrong too!
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
igglebert:JoelSim:
JAXON5:chebby:It can be a bit jarring when someone tells you that your own enjoyment of 'Product X' is technically flawed (or even scientifically proven to be wrong) and that 'Product Y' sounds better despite your ears not agreeing.When it comes down to spending my money, and my enjoyment, I let my ears be the ultimate arbiter in such disputes. I don't care how many scientists groan or how many electronic engineers scoff.We must just use our own ears to guide us ultimately. If it sounds right, it IS right. So long as you like it, can afford it (and the product is safe and of lr egally merchantable quality) then buy it.OK. However there's no disadvantage I can think of, if somone with an informed professional opinion advises us of his/her views. Their knowledge of the subject has to count for something, and when its thrown back in their faces, I can see the source of their frustration. For me, objectivity trumps subjectivity every time but objectivity backed up by subjective views, is of course even better. Ashley's absolutely right when he says arguments based on 'hearing' differences/improvements in sound carry less weight, as peoples ability to hear varies enormously, especially the ability to hear differences which relies on 'memory'. People can shout all day about whether they can hear a difference or not, fact is, for the reasons above the arguments carry much less weight than those which are measurable. Of course there are deficiencies in scientific method, which sometimes can be plain wrong, but until we improve those methods it's the best we have, so I think imho it deserves far more respect. We didn't get to the moon willy nilly etc etc. As far as biampings concerned I think the assertion that having an active crossover between the pre and power amps would be better than biamping via a passive crossover seems logical given the explanations from numerous professional sources - So why all the fuss??

Subtle differences can be difficult to hear, but mine was a big difference. No question.

I have to say, me too. I used to have an Arcam Alpha 8i and 8p used for biamping. Of course, being an enthusiast I spent hours trying different cables and configs. I found that the biamping option made a huge difference but I don't know why on a technical level. I'm inclined towards Ashley's views and it's not the first time I've heard them from the engineering community but my experience speaks (shouts?) differently. Curious.

Biwiring I'm less convinced on. In fact, I've binned the idea totally. I guess it's a tidy way to pack in a lot of metal.

Hey Ig. I'm sure there is a big difference. I'm going to try (passive) biamping myself but from the article I linked and others it would seem that disabling the xover and substituting an active would yield even greater benefits. I'd still want to hear it myself though ;-).

Tim - You're right we should question scientists and engineers and of course that's why there are regulatory bodies that do just that. As with any profession, mistakes will be made, progress can be painfully difficult, but where progress is necessary, the endeavour to advance our knowledge must continue. By the way, as i'm sure you know, Thalidomide is licensed for the treatment of MM because there is good evidence that it works.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
just a thought from an old man who ,who was taught a lot about sound fron another old man before the advent of computing ,,Would any of the hifi designers and engineers of today put a product straight onto the market because the data, graphs and computer said it was the bees knees without listening to it first..i doubt any would be in buisnes today if they did..our ears along with our brains have been honed over the last 10 million years to be probably the most sensitive transducer outside that of a bat (but for different reasons) man in all his wisdom and knowledge cannot even come close to building a transducer that can respond to the quitest whisper ,the sound of a jet, or the rumble of thunder and make sense of it..and yet the ear drum is less than 0.5cm across and less than the thickness of a human hair .
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS