I have few systems with biamping and one with triamping. I had mini dsp, but gave it to a friend. Simple active crossover (there is thread) sounded better, so i made a dozen simple active crossovers.
There are many benefits of biamping, and it has been previously discussed, but its worth repeating.
Typically in passive 3way speaker, mid and tweeter have higher sensitivity than woofer. This means more lpads or resistors in crossover. Resulting sensitivity is lower, requires much more power. Power is wasted. Small classA amps may fail to drive complex loads of passive crossover.
However, in biamp, where most of the power goes to woofer, this can be powered by big classAB amp with ease. No big inductors needed. Now mid and tweeter will require miniscule power even for overal loud listening, so nice classA amp will be just fine. No passive crossover parts waste no power. Well, i still use cap before the expensive tweeter, but no more lpads. Each section sensitivity is eassily balance by volume pot on amps. Speaker sensitivity imbalance is no issue. Overall clarity goes up, because no matter what distortion is generated on woofer amp, it does not polute mid and tweeter. I use 150 Hz active crossover as justfied here. I am surprised as op can still ask if anyone is 'still' using biamping. Like he already tried it and it did not work, or we all moved to something better. Still this 'still' bothers me. Like most of the threads from this op.
http://edsaudiopages.blogspot.com/2021/06/subwoofer-and-satellites.html
There are many benefits of biamping, and it has been previously discussed, but its worth repeating.
Typically in passive 3way speaker, mid and tweeter have higher sensitivity than woofer. This means more lpads or resistors in crossover. Resulting sensitivity is lower, requires much more power. Power is wasted. Small classA amps may fail to drive complex loads of passive crossover.
However, in biamp, where most of the power goes to woofer, this can be powered by big classAB amp with ease. No big inductors needed. Now mid and tweeter will require miniscule power even for overal loud listening, so nice classA amp will be just fine. No passive crossover parts waste no power. Well, i still use cap before the expensive tweeter, but no more lpads. Each section sensitivity is eassily balance by volume pot on amps. Speaker sensitivity imbalance is no issue. Overall clarity goes up, because no matter what distortion is generated on woofer amp, it does not polute mid and tweeter. I use 150 Hz active crossover as justfied here. I am surprised as op can still ask if anyone is 'still' using biamping. Like he already tried it and it did not work, or we all moved to something better. Still this 'still' bothers me. Like most of the threads from this op.
http://edsaudiopages.blogspot.com/2021/06/subwoofer-and-satellites.html
The idea that using class A for the mid and tweeter is an advantage forgets than using class B for the woofer is where most of the audible crossover artifacts are going to appear if that class B isn't good enough. Use sufficiently good amp for the woofer, you might as well use the same amp for the other drivers and waste less heat. The story works better with class D for the woofer and B for the others.
BTW I use the more logical definition of class B, each output doing 180 degrees of driving, averaged, which some call class AB for unfathomable reasons, and is the lowest crossover distortion setup.
BTW I use the more logical definition of class B, each output doing 180 degrees of driving, averaged, which some call class AB for unfathomable reasons, and is the lowest crossover distortion setup.
I am noob DIY and about to start a biamping project for my DIY 2-way that exceeded the power limits of my Schiit Aegir amp. I have an old classic Arcam Delta 290 that I can use for woofer. However it seems most people here recommend only biamping a sub in 3-way, so the separation between 2 amps is in 100 Hz region. For me, I am biamping out of necessity and will cross at 3 kHz. Will it still sound better than just using an Arcam from 1995 vs modern Aegir?
Don't underestimate an Arcam from 1995 😉 maybe some capacitor updates may be a good idea. You can easily compare the two amps and pick one, I'd say. That is when you want a passive crossover, for bi amping you need both obviously..
Last edited:
Just thought I would add a little history to my earlier post since I already included pictures. These were not a diy audio project but meant to sell. The reason I tri-amped is that the satellites are about 60 lbs and the woofers are about 170 lbs. Each side of the woofer cabinet has 1 1/2" of MDF on 6 sides. I'll get more speaker paperwork but the amps are Quicksilver V-4's @ 120 W a side for the satellites. The woofers 10 1/2" with same size passive radiator.
I am not a strict believer in having the exact same amps on one channel for bi-amping, I would use whatever you have laying around.
20 Hz to 3 kHz covers at more than 7 octaves of the 10 octaves from 20 Hz to 20 kHz. The choice of amp for the lower frequencies will greatly affect the sound quality.
I biamp with the crossover frequency of around 900 Hz and I have noticed the differences when using different amplifiers for the lower frequencies.
That is the case in general, not related to bi-amping per se. Different amps may handle the lower frequencies differently. It is wise to use the more powerful amp for the lower registers, though.
Yes, power is good. I have gone from commercially made amplifiers to my own designed and built amps and have found an increase in sound quality. I have a quite efficient speaker for the lower frequencies so my power requirements for that is not too high.
I think if the low frequency amp is confined to the lower 3 octaves or so, the quality of the amp may not be as noticeable. But a lot of musical instruments have their fundamental frequencies starting below 300 Hz, and by about 5 kHz, there are not many fundamentals left.
I think if the low frequency amp is confined to the lower 3 octaves or so, the quality of the amp may not be as noticeable. But a lot of musical instruments have their fundamental frequencies starting below 300 Hz, and by about 5 kHz, there are not many fundamentals left.
As the last few posters have said music counts and room size. LS3/5A and Quad ESL, those glories from the 60's would shrink from the Saint-Saens Sym. No 3 in a large room. Of course their transparency and lack mof fatigue were huge points in their favor. That makes them superb for chamber music and voice.
Of the Quad ESL:
"Its usable frequency response is from 40 Hz to well past 20 kHz, and is occasionally criticised for being bass light."
Of the Quad ESL:
"Its usable frequency response is from 40 Hz to well past 20 kHz, and is occasionally criticised for being bass light."
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
Are there class B amps out there? I don't think they have enough to offer when compared with AB.
I do use AB on the woofers and A on the top horns.
Aside from the semantics of “optimally biased class B” vs. AB, many old-school very high power amps ran with actual zero-bias output stages. Old Crown, BGW, Flame Linear. Some cheap modern(ish) subwoofer plate amps, too.
Yeah, those old amps can be improved by biasing them up to 26 mV across the emitter resistors (or even as little as 2.6 mV), if modern transistors are used and necessary adjustment to the stability. No, I wouldn’t use them for tweeter amps as stock.
Yeah, those old amps can be improved by biasing them up to 26 mV across the emitter resistors (or even as little as 2.6 mV), if modern transistors are used and necessary adjustment to the stability. No, I wouldn’t use them for tweeter amps as stock.
Bi-amping is the best and if you use some DIY might be the cheapest way to get a 'full bodied' sound system. It is often often used in simple PA.
You can have in a home system:
If you are not overly concerned about perfect frequency and phase response, you can get away with much cheaper and commonly found sub and mid bass drivers and have an impressive home system with a lot of low bass and dynamic range.
You can use general purpose mid bass speakers with higher Fs and not suitable for ported enclosure, thus getting a larger speaker. F.ex. get 8'' or 10'' for the price of 6.5'' with low Fs and you will have much better dynamic range and spl.
The lower and louder you want to play, the more expensive.
You can get cheaper automotive sub speaker and you don't need very powerful one. Fs 30-35 hz could be made to play a bit lower. In general 20 hz f3 of a cabinet is better (I still believe in the 20hz-20kHz standard) but 25 hz is not bad at all.
A 20 w chip amp for the top speaker cabinets is good for home use.
A 80-100w 4 ohm amp with high damping factor (f.ex chip or transistors in parallel) for the sub cabinets might do very very well at home. Unless you want to play very low and push some driver with linkwitz transform in a sealed cabinet, but then you will also need a more expensive driver.
You don't really need DSP crossover nor time/ phase delays for a home system. An Op-amp active crossover will do excelent.
All you can/ need to do is correct placement of the speaker cabinets, and the sub cabinets if they are in a separate enclosure.
This way, at the trade of closer to perfect frequency and phase response (you probably won't notice the difference) of some more expensive speaker drivers, you can have MUCH MUCH more impressive and full bodied sound system with a solid low bass for let's say the same price.
You can have in a home system:
- 4 channel amp (or 2 x 2)
- 2x 'top' two way speakers in a sealed cabinet, with a passive crossover tweeter playing somewhere from 60-90 hz to 18-20k
- 2x 'sub' ported speakers playing somewhere from 15-30 hz to the 'top' crossover.
If you are not overly concerned about perfect frequency and phase response, you can get away with much cheaper and commonly found sub and mid bass drivers and have an impressive home system with a lot of low bass and dynamic range.
You can use general purpose mid bass speakers with higher Fs and not suitable for ported enclosure, thus getting a larger speaker. F.ex. get 8'' or 10'' for the price of 6.5'' with low Fs and you will have much better dynamic range and spl.
The lower and louder you want to play, the more expensive.
You can get cheaper automotive sub speaker and you don't need very powerful one. Fs 30-35 hz could be made to play a bit lower. In general 20 hz f3 of a cabinet is better (I still believe in the 20hz-20kHz standard) but 25 hz is not bad at all.
A 20 w chip amp for the top speaker cabinets is good for home use.
A 80-100w 4 ohm amp with high damping factor (f.ex chip or transistors in parallel) for the sub cabinets might do very very well at home. Unless you want to play very low and push some driver with linkwitz transform in a sealed cabinet, but then you will also need a more expensive driver.
You don't really need DSP crossover nor time/ phase delays for a home system. An Op-amp active crossover will do excelent.
All you can/ need to do is correct placement of the speaker cabinets, and the sub cabinets if they are in a separate enclosure.
This way, at the trade of closer to perfect frequency and phase response (you probably won't notice the difference) of some more expensive speaker drivers, you can have MUCH MUCH more impressive and full bodied sound system with a solid low bass for let's say the same price.
Last edited:
My actives use 3 or 4 ICEPower or NCore class D amps with dsp-xo. I haven't bothered to try bi-amping for the cheap Infinity A20 (only ones that give possibility).
One day several years ago I tested if I could hear or measure a difference between ICEPower to a good Class A semiconductor amp, but no difference. Upper mid and tweeter are magnetoplanar with flat impedance, perhaps that was the reason? Music was CD from Sony CDX-707ES, through Minidsp 4x10HD. I don't use HD formats. Looks like I didn't even save measurements.
I understand that with difficult load and high spl passives bi-amping can be wise. Just be sure that both amps have same gain!
One day several years ago I tested if I could hear or measure a difference between ICEPower to a good Class A semiconductor amp, but no difference. Upper mid and tweeter are magnetoplanar with flat impedance, perhaps that was the reason? Music was CD from Sony CDX-707ES, through Minidsp 4x10HD. I don't use HD formats. Looks like I didn't even save measurements.
I understand that with difficult load and high spl passives bi-amping can be wise. Just be sure that both amps have same gain!
Do you mean bi-amping, but without an active crossover, so all amplifiers get the full/same signal, and the passive crossover handles the frequency split? In that case, you throw away part of the benefits of bi-amping, but it may still be better compared to a single amp. No experience here, though.