gainclones single chip vs parallel config - Page 3 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Amplifiers > Chip Amps

Chip Amps Amplifiers based on integrated circuits

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 24th June 2009, 10:11 PM   #21
Minion is offline Minion  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Cowican Bay , vancouver island
Couldn"t you also just use a Lower Gain on the Tweeter chipamp to get less output power ??
  Reply With Quote
Old 24th June 2009, 11:44 PM   #22
kscharf is offline kscharf  United States
diyAudio Member
 
kscharf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Quote:
Originally posted by Minion
Couldn"t you also just use a Lower Gain on the Tweeter chipamp to get less output power ??
BION these chips are unstable at low gain settings.
  Reply With Quote
Old 25th June 2009, 01:12 AM   #23
Minion is offline Minion  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Cowican Bay , vancouver island
They are unstable at gains under 10 I think but you could run the Tweeters at 15x and the woofer at 30x for example .....
  Reply With Quote
Old 25th June 2009, 05:58 AM   #24
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
..or attenuate the tweeter in an active crossover with a potentiometer/trimmer, which makes it easy to adjust later on. On the other hand there seems to be only a capacitor in front of the tweeter, so maybe the two drivers are already of similar sensitivity. Then they would need the same gain and level.
__________________
If you've always done it like that, then it's probably wrong. (Henry Ford)
  Reply With Quote
Old 25th June 2009, 12:36 PM   #25
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Today I woke up with a thought in my mind.. Try what AndrewT said..
So I remembered my father's 20-year Rising Hi-fi system (mine also ) wich has 4 ouputs..

So I listened both configurations for a while..
And, the first impression is:

Paralelled: Good sound. Very good bass. Treble could be a little more clean, though...

Sperated inputs: The bass is a little less loud but the treble is way way better! Of course the treble is, as Redshift187 mentioned, a little overpowered but I compensated that with equalization just to have a better idea.
(I found this speakers quite impressive for they size )

Have not decided quite yet but I think the bi-amplified config is a good choice.. I'd have to make a crossover though...

RJ
  Reply With Quote
Old 25th June 2009, 12:50 PM   #26
AndrewT is offline AndrewT  Scotland
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Scottish Borders
Exclamation bi-amplify does not equate to active speaker

Hi,
there's a first conclusion:
bi-amplifying a bi-wireable speaker makes the sound output different.

Many builders and listeners on this Forum say this conclusion is either impossible or a waste of resources.

How does one amplifier (non parallel) compare to two amplifiers driving the separated terminals?
__________________
regards Andrew T.
  Reply With Quote
Old 25th June 2009, 04:07 PM   #27
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Quote:
Many builders and listeners on this Forum say this conclusion is either impossible or a waste of resources.
Well, they are - not intending to offend anyone - completely wrong!
Maybe it's just my constant search for sound perfectness..Or at least anything close to it!
I'm sure bi-amplifying is quite more expensive and laborious, but in my opinion, it's definitly worth it!!
Anyway, let's think: We guys make what? an amp per year, perhaps! Technics/Panasonic engineers make - just guessing here - some dozens/year ?! I really don't think those guys would make bi-amplified systems just for fun!! It's only my guess though...


Quote:
How does one amplifier (non parallel) compare to two amplifiers driving the separated terminals?
What do you mean? Bi-amplifying comparing to amplifying the seperated terminals with only one amp? Is this what you mean? I'm sorry, Portuguese guy here!! :

RJ.
  Reply With Quote
Old 25th June 2009, 04:54 PM   #28
AndrewT is offline AndrewT  Scotland
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Scottish Borders
Quote:
Originally posted by ruijorgemoreno
What do you mean? Bi-amplifying comparing to amplifying the seperated terminals with only one amp? Is this what you mean?
yes, use one amplifier (non parallel) to drive both sets of terminals (Treble + Mid/bass) compared to using two amplifiers, one to each pair of terminals (amp to Mid/base, separate amp to Treble).
__________________
regards Andrew T.
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th June 2009, 08:22 PM   #29
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
But that's precisely what I've done!!
Sorry if I didn't express my self in a better way..

RJ.
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Tripath TA2024/20 Bridge/Parallel Config john65b Class D 17 15th May 2014 03:08 PM
How many Gainclones can be powered off a single rectifier? AJ Bertelson Chip Amps 13 4th December 2008 08:19 PM
why are bridged gainclones less popular than parallel ones ionomolo Chip Amps 4 16th November 2007 07:32 PM
2 Woofers in Parallel Config - 4 Options HiFiNutNut Multi-Way 16 23rd November 2006 03:23 PM
Nice simple parallel bridge config vortech Chip Amps 0 5th August 2005 01:08 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 02:11 PM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2