WOULD U CARE TO EXPLAIN BIAMPING?

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the What HiFi community: the world's leading independent guide to buying and owning hi-fi and home entertainment products.

Clare Newsome

New member
Jun 4, 2007
1,657
0
0
JAXON5:

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.

Absolutely - and advancement is dependent on us accepting that there's still so much to discover.
 

gpi

New member
Mar 29, 2008
23
0
0
This thread has got very philosophical.


What is bi-amping then? (swims away rapidly.)
 

Pike900fish

New member
Jun 23, 2008
20
0
0
Gosh!!!! I've been enjoying my vertically bi amped system for a couple of days and when I return to this thread on the forum it's like world war three has broken out!!!!

I only resurrected this thread as, like most of you enthusiasts out there we love to tinker/tweek...It's part of the fun..After all, isn't HIFi a hobby?

Anyhow, during yet another tweak today...This time fitting new more robust shelving to my rack, I managed to snap a binding post link that connects to the main PCB resulting in a loss of one channel!..So I reverted back to normal stereo with one power amp and single Van Damme cabling with a link(of the same cable) connecting HF & LF at the speaker end.

Was there a difference in sound?..Well to me, most definitely yes. There was nowhere near the same scale of power and attack. I know in the exchanges within this thread there has been debate over what can and cant be herd but what about what can and cant be felt?..especially in the LF region.

Now I've repaired second amp I will most definitely be returning to my Vertical passive bi amp set up without delay!!!(If I understood what all that meant!)

Guys, chill and listen to some sounds!

Take care all.
 

gpi

New member
Mar 29, 2008
23
0
0
Pike900fish:
Gosh!!!! I've been enjoying my vertically bi amped system for a couple of days and when I return to this thread on the forum it's like world war three has broken out!!!!

I only resurrected this thread as, like most of you enthusiasts out there we love to tinker/tweek...It's part of the fun..After all, isn't HIFi a hobby?

Anyhow, during yet another tweak today...This time fitting new more robust shelving to my rack, I managed to snap a binding post link that connects to the main PCB resulting in a loss of one channel!..So I reverted back to normal stereo with one power amp and single Van Damme cabling with a link(of the same cable) connecting HF & LF at the speaker end.

Was there a difference in sound?..Well to me, most definitely yes. There was nowhere near the same scale of power and attack. I know in the exchanges within this thread there has been debate over what can and cant be herd but what about what can and cant be felt?..especially in the LF region.

Now I've repaired second amp I will most definitely be returning to my Vertical passive bi amp set up without delay!!!(If I understood what all that meant!)

Guys, chill and listen to some sounds!

Take care all.

This reminds me of what Lemmy was talking about in the recently aired Hawkwind documentary. Apparently the band had electronic equipment that could go so high it would make someone pass out, and so low they would, er... you can guess.
 

professorhat

Well-known member
Dec 28, 2007
991
21
18,895
Pike900fish:Guys, chill and listen to some sounds!
I couldn't agree more and admit I kind of started this whole thing. I think I made my point pretty clear though and, while I'm sure cs, Ashley and the like will continue to tut and shake their heads at my opinions, the fact is, there are things out there still that we can't explain and I don't really see why this is any different. Everyone assumes science has the answer for everything, but I'm afraid this really isn't true and when, you look into it, it's actually quite funny how little we understand, even now! And this is at the very basic (i.e. read extremely small rather than easy to understand) level of physics which has the ability to shake up everything above it. I really think people need to get a grip on just believing science as told - it doesn't matter how many measurements you take, you are still relying essentially on an unproven theory eventually.
Of course that doesn't mean that what you say is wrong, but a healthy understanding of the fact you might be wrong doesn't go amiss with any scientific theory, especially when there is evidence to the contrary all around you.
 

SHAXOS

New member
Feb 11, 2008
90
0
0
just out of curiosity (i know it killed the cat but im hoping it wont kill my speakers)....
Would the following be classed as biamping - or do anything to change the performance of a speaker (or will it just blow the lot up!).

Some speakers cannot be biwired as they only have single binding posts on each speaker.

If you were to get two stereo amplifiers and have two runs of cable going from each channel to one of the binding posts ( i hope im makinging sense). Ie the high frequency binding post on the speaker will have 2 wires attatched to it - These would then go into the two separate hi frequency channels on the amp. This means that the high frequency binding post is being fed power from two channels as opposed to one on the amp. So each speaker will have 4 wires attatched to it - 2 on each post. Would this increase power going to the speaker and increase performance in anyway?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
bigrod: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 .

Just for info. A towed Sonar array as used by the US Navy on their current Trident submarine fleet, can identify any surface vessel from its' unique sound signature at a range of over 5,000 kms. So, they can "hear" a Scottish fishing vessel leaving its' harbour, from the other side of the Atlantic and know that it is a Scottish fishing boat. I'd say that's a pretty good transducer.
 

timwileman

Well-known member
Mar 19, 2008
296
0
18,890
doc42:
bigrod: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 .

Just for info. A towed Sonar array as used by the US Navy on their current Trident submarine fleet, can identify any surface vessel from its' unique sound signature at a range of over 5,000 kms. So, they can "hear" a Scottish fishing vessel leaving its' harbour, from the other side of the Atlantic and know that it is a Scottish fishing boat. I'd say that's a pretty good transducer.

not sure of the physics but isnt water a much much better conductor of sound than air....

also it helps that its an array of many many transducers strung out over up 2 km in length, allied to some very sophistated computers... might help a bit??
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Ashley James:The answer is that there would not be any benefit at all. You get no more headroom and since the tweeter does only about 5% of the work, the amp is wasted.

There have been lots of debates about bi-wiring and bi-amping and science says it doesn't help. Going active does.

In a two-way speaker system about 95% of the energy comes from the bass driver and 5% from the tweeter, so it's not really making life much harder for a single amplifier. In a big three way speaker about half the work is done by the Mid and tweeter and the other half by the bass driver so, if you had amps that were struggling to produce enough current but not volts, then there may be a benefit in using one to drive the bass and the other for the mid and treble. They would have to identical gain so best to use two the same.

I hope this helps

Ash

You say that there is NO BENEFIT to bi-amping.....but you just said the tweeter uses as little as 5% of the energy. To me, that sounds the same as saying bi-amping will make your speakers sound at least 5% better. Having dedicated amp for the bass driver (100% of the energy) would be better then having an amp drive that same woofer at 95%.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Also....depending on what amps you use to bi-amp, it may be a lot more tunable...like it is in my case.
 

JoelSim

New member
Aug 24, 2007
767
1
0
If it was just about science, then everything would be the same. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

ÿ
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
but does the array with all its electronics weigh less than 1 tenth of a gram as does the ear drum ,......
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
bigrod:but does the array with all its electronics weigh less than 1 tenth of a gram as does the ear drum ,......

Ear we go again.
 

JoelSim

New member
Aug 24, 2007
767
1
0
Hence why robots can still only vacuum or mow the lawn. To my knowledge chemical reactions are still animal based and the effects thos have as opposed to market-leading kit

ÿ
 

Andrew Everard

New member
May 30, 2007
1,878
1
0
JoelSim:Hence why robots can still only vacuum or mow the lawn. To my knowledge chemical reactions are still animal based and the effects thos have as opposed to market-leading kit

You are Robert Calvert AICM £5
 

JoelSim

New member
Aug 24, 2007
767
1
0
Andrew Everard:
JoelSim:Hence why robots can still only vacuum or mow the lawn. To my knowledge chemical reactions are still animal based and the effects thos have as opposed to market-leading kit

You are Robert Calvert AICM £5

Que?

ÿ
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Andrew Everard:
JoelSim:Hence why robots can still only vacuum or mow the lawn. To my knowledge chemical reactions are still animal based and the effects thos have as opposed to market-leading kit

You are Robert Calvert AICM £5

as in completely mental?
 

JoelSim

New member
Aug 24, 2007
767
1
0
JAXON5:Andrew Everard:
JoelSim:Hence why robots can still only vacuum or mow the lawn. To my knowledge chemical reactions are still animal based and the effects thos have as opposed to market-leading kit

You are Robert Calvert AICM £5

as in completely mental?

Is Everard being rude to me? I shall be on the blower to Ashley in no time...

ÿ
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Bobby Calvert, there's your man - makes Any Crackhouse and Pete Doherty look like lightweights. they don't make them like they used to.
 

gpi

New member
Mar 29, 2008
23
0
0
doc42:
bigrod: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 .

Just for info. A towed Sonar array as used by the US Navy on their current Trident submarine fleet, can identify any surface vessel from its' unique sound signature at a range of over 5,000 kms. So, they can "hear" a Scottish fishing vessel leaving its' harbour, from the other side of the Atlantic and know that it is a Scottish fishing boat. I'd say that's a pretty good transducer.

Why don't they just phone the boat via satellite, or even better, get an aerial picture via satellite? As long as the captain isn't named Roger and his chief navigator, Over.

Besides, how would they know it was Scottish?
A galley full of deep-fried mars bars?
 

Pike900fish

New member
Jun 23, 2008
20
0
0
gpi:doc42:

bigrod: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 .

Just for info. A towed Sonar array as used by the US Navy on their current Trident submarine fleet, can identify any surface vessel from its' unique sound signature at a range of over 5,000 kms. So, they can "hear" a Scottish fishing vessel leaving its' harbour, from the other side of the Atlantic and know that it is a Scottish fishing boat. I'd say that's a pretty good transducer.
Why don't they just phone the boat via satellite, or even better, get an aerial picture via satellite? As long as the captain isn't named Roger and his chief navigator, Over.

Besides, how would they know it was Scottish?
[/b]
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts